AdviceNew YorkSan Francisco

The 2016 Broke-Ass Stuart Voter Guide

voter guide

Major thanks to Stephen Torres for doing the research and putting all this together!

Boo!  Chilling October greetings, dear broke-asses.  As the veil between the two worlds begins to lift, frights abound: stirrings in the shadows, shrieks and cackles, blondes sipping pumpkin spice in Uggs, and just as the departed pull back the slabs of their tombs… the November 8th General Election! <cue thunder/ lighting>

Not only does this election loom as bleak as a Lovecraft nightmare, due to it’s potential outcomes on a federal level, but also because of the daunting telephone book we’ve been presented with.

On the latter we got you covered.  As far as who we wake up with on November 9th, though?  Well, we can coach you, but it’s ultimately up to you.  So, for the love of Clthulu, put that mule down and listen up, for without further ado……

THE 2016 BROKE-ASS STUART VOTER GUIDE

Quick Guide

Federal

President: Hillary Clinton

United States Senate

US Senator: Kamala Harris

United States House of Representatives 

12th Congressional District: Preston Picus

14th Congressional District: Jackie Speier

State

California State Senate, District 11: Jane Kim

California State Assembly, District 17: No Endorsement

California State Assembly, District 19: Phil Ting

San Francisco

District 1: Sandra Lee Fewer

District 3: Aaron Peskin

District 5: Dean Preston

District 7: Norman Yee

District 9: #1 Hillary Ronen, #2 Melissa San Miguel

District 11: #1 Kimberly Alvarenga, #2 Francisco Herrera

Board of Education: Stevon Cook, Matt Haney, Mark Sanchez

City College Board: Tom Temprano, Rafael Mandelman, Shanell Williams, Alex Randolph

Superior Court Judge, Office Number 7: Victor Hwang

BART Board, District 7: Lateefah Simon

BART Board, District 9: Bevan Dufty

Statewide Initiatives 

Prop 51 (School Bonds): Yes.
Prop 52 (Medi-Cal Reimbursement): Yes.
Prop 53 (Voter Approval for Revenue Bonds): No.
Prop 54 (Legislature Transparency Act): Yes.
Prop 55 (Tax Extension to Fund Education): Yes.
Prop 56 (Cigarette Tax): No position.
Prop 57 (Criminal Sentences and Juvenile Sentencing): Yes.
Prop 58 (Multilingual Education Act): Yes.
Prop 59 (Overturn Citizens United Act): Yes, duh.
Prop 60 (Condoms in Adult Films): No.
Prop 61 (State Prescription Drug Purchases Standards): No.
Prop 62 (Death Penalty Abolition): Yes.
Prop 63 (Firearms and Ammunition Sales): Yes.
Prop 64 (Marijuana Legalization): Yes.  Fucking finally!
Prop 65 (Charges for Carry-out Bags): No.
Prop 66 (Death Penalty Procedures): No.
Prop 67 (Uphold Ban on Single-Use Plastic Bags): Yes.

Local Initiatives 

Prop A (School Bond): Yes.
Prop B (City College Parcel Tax): Yes.
Prop C (Loan to Finance Acquisition of Affordable Housing): Yes.
Prop D (Let’s Elect our Elected Officials): Yes.
Prop E (City Maintenance of Street Trees): Yes.
Prop F (Youth Voting in Local Elections): Yes.
Prop G (Department of Police Accountability): Yes.
Prop H (Public Advocate): Yes.
Prop I (Dignity Fund for Seniors and Adults with Disabilities): Yes.
Prop J (Funding for Homelessness and Transportation): Yes.
Prop K (General Sales Tax): Yes.
Prop L (SFMTA Appointments and Budget): Yes.
Prop M (Housing and Development Commission): Yes.
Prop N (Non-Citizens Voting in School Board Elections): Yes.
Prop O (Office Development in Candlestick & Hunters Point): No.
Prop P (Competitive Bidding for Affordable Housing Projects): No.
Prop Q (Prohibiting Tents on Public Sidewalks): No.
Prop R (Neighborhood Crime Unit): No.
Prop S (Allocation of Hotel Tax Funds): Yes.
Prop T (Restricting Gifts and Campaign Contributions from Lobbyists): Yes.
Prop U (Affordable Housing Requirements for Market-Rate Projects): No.
Prop V (Tax on Sugar-Sweetened Beverages): No position.
Prop W (Real Estate Transfer Tax on Properties over $5 Million): Yes, duh.
Prop X (Production, Distribution & Repair Preservation): Yes.
Measure RR (BART Safety, Reliability and Traffic Relief Bond): Yes.

Longer Explanations 

 

FEDERAL

PRESIDENT

One would think that in this purported bastion of bleeding hearts that our endorsement of Hillary Clinton would be fairly obvious.  One of the best things about San Francisco, though, is that we really are the Left Coast and thusly much debate and out and out fighting has transpired in the year up until this point. For once, the nation followed, and we got to bear witness to the gloriously earnest and cranky campaign led by Senator Bernie Sanders and how much it has shaped and changed the campaign of Clinton and perhaps even Clinton herself.  This woman, regardless of what you may think of her is not an idiot, and knows full well that should she win in November, it will not be a winning over of the American populace ala Obama.  The climb will be uphill and heavily scrutinized.  And honestly, Hillary is the best person for that sort of shitty job.  She sort of thrives on that kind of scenario, which is probably why Sanders endorsed her – he knows she can do it.  Not the way he would have done it, but by gum, it won’t be a catastrophic nightmare.  Even The Atlantic bequeathed its only third endorsement for her.  Well, bully for you, The Atlantic, but point taken.  And if you are honestly contemplating casting your vote in the direction of Donald Trump, hey it’s a free country…’til January anyway, you fuckwit.

UNITED STATES SENATE

She’s most certainly not perfect, but Kamala Harris has changed some of her problematic stances and is most definitely the stronger of the two leads here.

UNTIED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

12th  U.S. CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT

What makes Preston Picus great is that he firmly believes in getting money out of politics. And because of this, he’s only taking donations of $540 or below. He’s also a public school teacher and he’s running as an independent because he’s sick of the Democratic machine. A huge supporter of Bernie Sanders, Picus shares many of Bernie’s values and if he gets to Washington he be working towards getting those values to be part of our system.

14th  U.S. CONGRSSIONAL DISTRICT

Jackie Speier.  The woman is a badass, plain and simple.  When we live in a world where megalomaniacs advocate arming their unhinged minions, Speier knows what its like to have your body riddled with bullets as a result.  She doesn’t believe in bullshit moments of silence, but rather actual action.  Vote Speier.

STATE

CALIFORNIA STATE SENATE, DISTRICT 11

Speaking of badassery, Jane Kim.  In terms of record, Jane has just been on side of those who are currently getting trampled in San Francisco today.  Looming in the opposite corner, Scott Wiener, claims that he’s looking out for the every day San Franciscan, but always ends up voting against them. Instead of moving homeless folks around or letting developers decide how much “affordable” housing they’ll throw us, she isn’t afraid to sit down and make sure that sustainable solutions actually get hammered out.  Much is lamented on how hard it is to keep a progressive majority in San Francisco.  We can assure you, in Sacramento, they are an endangered species.  When it comes to protecting the interests of the actual, living, working San Franciscan we can’t afford to not have Jane there.

CALIFORNIA STATE ASSEMBLY, DISTRICT 17

NO ENDORSEMENT

CALIFORNIA STATE ASSEMBLY, DISTRICT 19

Phil Ting.  Not always a newsmaker, but usually doing good work behind the scenes.  He authored AB 1732 making all single use bathrooms all gender inclusive and was on the right side of the latest water battle on the delta.

SAN FRANCISCO

DISTRICT 1:

Sandra Lee Fewer.  Fourth generation in SF, Sandy raised her family in the Richmond where she grew up and eventually was elected to the School Board where she instituted or helped to institute things that seem like they should have already existed: like letting kids who had been evicted at least finish their school year, and using surplus school district land for affordable housing.

DISTRICT 3:

Aaron Peskin.  Really, more of a formality.  Vote for Aaron.  He’s just getting started and it’s just getting good.

DISTRICT 5:

Dean Preston.  He’s a good guy that was made his career fighting for the rights of tenants and if any neighbourhoods need that, surely some are in District 5.

Incumbent London Breed is from the district and you’d think that would form a lot of her tenure on the board, but in addition to taking money from evil billionaire Ron Conway, she’s usually voted on housing in ways that taking that kind of campaign contribution might suggest.  Although if you disagree with her, I suppose you can always take comfort in the knowledge that “she’ll pray for you”.

DISTRICT 7:

Norman Yee.  Although unassuming, Yee has provided strong leadership for D7 and his four challengers seem not all that up to the challenge of the southern neighbourhoods.

DISTRICT 9:

Yikes!  Welcome to the jungle.  Well hasn’t D9 turned into the life of the party in the supes race?  It perhaps doesn’t have the zingers of D5, but we suppose it makes up for it in vandalism and intrigue?

At any rate, we’re obviously going with Hillary Ronen on this one. As Campos’ Chief of Staff, she actually knows what it requires to run the massive district.  When it comes to housing and homelessness, she advocates for actual required affordable units and streamlining services whereas her major challenger seems to be of the “build, build!!” school of thought applied to both, regardless of what that means, because you know that’s worked so well so far.

DISTRICT 11:

Kimberly Alvarenga.  Homegirl is awesome.  She was the director of the EDC, represented low-income families in getting food and services, and was Tom Ammiano’s  District Director when he was at the Assembly.  Also, one more thing: This was once Dan White’s district.  Wouldn’t it be kinda fucking awesome if, now, it became supervised by the first lesbian elected to the board in SIXTEEN YEARS??  Vote for Kimberly.

 

BOARD OF EDUCATION

Stevon Cook, Matt Haney, & Mark Sanchez.  All three of these guys are educators who have dedicated their careers to the development of SF’s kids.  Cook has worked on the expansion of tech education, Haney has been a tireless advocate for LGBT curriculum and GSA, and Sanchez has funneled his efforts into social justice and resource building for the district.

 

CITY COLLEGE BOARD

Tom Temprano, Rafael Mandelman, Shanell Williams, Alex Randolph.  Mandelman has already served as an essential advocate through the nightmare of the accreditation process as did Williams as Student Trustee.  Temprano knows well the transformative force that community college system can provide when it is properly funded and equipped.  Randolph is incumbent as well, but was also knows the doors a college education can provide from his upbringing.

 

SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE, OFFICE NUMBER 7

Victor Hwang.  When it comes to someone presiding, you want them to have a strong background in advocacy.  He’s a co-founder of the SF Coalition on Hate Violence and worked with SF Collaborative Against Human Trafficking.  Plus, when the SFBG calls you a “Local Hero” that’s usually a good sign.

 

BART Board, District 7

Lateefah Simon. Running to represent the very oddly drawn but extremely important district that runs from the North Bay down to Hunter’s Point, Simon knows what she’s talking about.  If you want to get blown away on a transpo-social justice level, read the transcripts of the forum she did with Jane Kim and Antonio Villaraigosa.  Jesus, Lateefah Simon is brilliant.

BART Board, District 9

Bevan Dufty. Admittedly, transpo isn’t exactly what Dufty is known for, but in the past few years he has proven to be an ally especially in terms of low-income public services.  If anything needs that kind of perspective, it’s the collapsing, yet economically out of reach BART.

 

STATEWIDE INITIATIVES

Prop 51 (School Bonds): Yes.  Funding for school facility repair.
Prop 52 (Medi-Cal Reimbursement): Yes.  Keeps hospitals in check to make sure people are covered.
Prop 53 (Voter Approval for Revenue Bonds): No.  ties things up for no reason.
Prop 54 (Legislature Transparency Act): Yes.  More transparency.
Prop 55 (Tax Extension to Fund Education): Yes.  This taxes the right folks to help fund the right things.
Prop 56 (Cigarette Tax): No position.  This is a punitive tax.  Cigarettes are pretty fucking gross.  They are some peoples drug of choice (or not).  They also have secondary hazards.  Your call.
Prop 57 (Criminal Sentences and Juvenile Sentencing): Yes.  Parole reform.
Prop 58 (Multilingual Education Act): Yes.  This kind of stuff should have happened a long time ago.
Prop 59 (Overturn Citizens United Act): Yes, duh.
Prop 60 (Condoms in Adult Films): No.  This is the equivalent of Sister Mary Lucy coming up to you at the St. Valentine’s dance and reminding you to make room for the Holy Ghost.  Do onscreen sex workers need protection?  Yes.  Which is why they should have a hand in what that looks like, especially in a world in which prevention is no longer relegated to condoms.  It should not be authored and carried out by the equivalent of morality police who can sue whomever they wish.
Prop 61 (State Prescription Drug Purchases Standards): No. The main concern here is that, because it is poorly written, this measure has the potential to do more harm than good. The legislation was written in a way that directly helps AHF pharmacies, but leaves a ton of others out in the cold: teachers, state employees, private insurance holders, and maybe even Medi-Cal holders. Also, because there is very little in the way of enforcement and drug companies aren’t exactly known for their largesse, this could backfire through the many loopholes they have open to them. That is kind of the problem with legislation like this: the devil is in the details, which are many. The League of Pissed Off Voters does a good job of breaking this down right here.
Prop 62 (Death Penalty Abolition): Yes.  Try justifying that charming “third world” description again after you vote “no” on this.
Prop 63 (Firearms and Ammunition Sales): Yes. Do we really have to justify this one?
Prop 64 (Marijuana Legalization): Yes.  Fucking finally!
Prop 65 (Charges for Carry-out Bags): No.  Trust us, vote “no” here and “yes” on 67.
Prop 66 (Death Penalty Procedures): No.  Why would you expedite the taking of a human life, when you have anxiety over purging your closet?
Prop 67 (Uphold Ban on Single-Use Plastic Bags): Yes. (There you go.)

 

LOCAL INITIATIVES

Prop A (School Bond): Yes.  If you’ve ever attended a public school ever, you know they need money.
Prop B (City College Parcel Tax): Yes.  Again, and this time, they really need it.
Prop C (Loan to Finance Acquisition of Affordable Housing): Yes.  Part of the problem with the “build! Build!” idea is that those buildings don’t belong to us.  These would.
Prop D (Let’s Elect our Elected Officials): Yes.  Don’t you think it’s cute when the mayor just gets to pick who your supervisor is?  Neither do we.  Vote Yes.
Prop E (City Maintenance of Street Trees): Yes.  This was stupid, let’ s put it back.
Prop F (Youth Voting in Local Elections): Yes.  Want kids to be more educated on what’s going on?  Let’s try something like giving them agency for a change…for a change.
Prop G (Department of Police Accountability): Yes.  This sort of becomes something when you vote “yes” on the next one.
Prop H (Public Advocate): Yes.  This really needs to happen.
Prop I (Dignity Fund for Seniors and Adults with Disabilities): Yes.  Self-explanatory.
Prop J (Funding for Homelessness and Transportation): Yes.  Same.
Prop K (General Sales Tax): Yes. It supports Prop J.
Prop L (SFMTA Appointments and Budget): Yes.  The less appointing power, Mayor McCheese has the better, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO MUNI!!
Prop M (Housing and Development Commission): Yes.  Oversight.
Prop N (Non-Citizens Voting in School Board Elections): Yes.  Let people vote on something that hugely impacts them.
Prop O (Office Development in Candlestick & Hunters Point): No.  In the same vein, let people have say on something that hugely impacts them.  Office development in the Bayview for potential South Bay interests doesn’t need to be expedited.
Prop P (Competitive Bidding for Affordable Housing Projects): No. In a crisis, you don’t worry over colour swatches.
Prop Q (Prohibiting Tents on Public Sidewalks): No.  Just because they are no longer in front of your house doesn’t mean they magically have a studio in Vida.
Prop R (Neighborhood Crime Unit): No.  Let’s not think of “busy work” for this police force shall we?
Prop S (Allocation of Hotel Tax Funds): Yes.  Putting it to good use.
Prop T (Restricting Gifts and Campaign Contributions from Lobbyists): Yes.  If any town needs this, we do.

Prop U (Affordable Housing Requirements for Market-Rate Projects): No.  Tricky language that actually does the reverse of what it sounds like.
Prop V (Tax on Sugar-Sweetened Beverages): No position.  Another punitive.  Is drinking a litre of Stars & Stripes gross?  Probably.  Is it all you can afford till you get your EBT card reloaded?  Probably.  Might you develop diabetes?  Good chance.  Is any of this tax actually gonna help buy you something better so you don’t pass out?  Probably not.  You decide
Prop W (Real Estate Transfer Tax on Properties over $5 Million): Yes, duh.
Prop X (Production, Distribution & Repair Preservation): Yes.  South of Market will one day be a giant, ugly condo otherwise.  For a city so often lauded for its retention of scenic, historic and cultural beauty, how about ensuring some safeguards to preserve that?
Measure RR (BART Safety, Reliability and Traffic Relief Bond): Yes.  Anything PLEASE!!!

Like this article? Make sure to sign up for our mailing list so you never miss a goddamn thing!
Previous post

Bay of the Living Dead: Shocktoberfest and Other Halloween Horrors Around Town

Next post

How Do You Know If It's Sexual Assault?


Stephen Torres - Threadbare-Fact Finder (Editor, San Francisco)

Stephen Torres - Threadbare-Fact Finder (Editor, San Francisco)

Stephen's early years were spent in a boxcar overlooking downtown Los Angeles. From there he moved around the state with his family before settling under the warm blanket of smog that covers suburban Southern California. Moving around led to his inability to stay in one place for very long, but San Francisco has been reeling him back in with its siren song since 1999.
By trade he pours booze, but likes to think he can write and does so occasionally for the SF Bay Guardian, Bold Italic and 7x7. He also likes to enjoy time spent in old eateries, bars and businesses that, by most standards, would have been condemned a long time ago.

  • George Davis

    If you live in California and not a battleground state, why vote for either Trump or Clinton? Your vote has already been decided for you. Vote for Trump, vote for Clinton, or stay at home: Hilary Clinton wins all of California’s Electors no matter what you do. So, why not vote for the candidate of another party that comes closer to matching your philosophy? Be it Green, Libertarian, American Independent, or Peace and Freedom. At least that sends a message that a decent percentage of the electorate can think and think that both Clinton and Trump do not really represent us.

  • Artivist

    Thank you for making the sensible choice of endorsing Clinton for President, and not a 3rd party candidate. Let’s not have another 2000 Nader/Bush debacle.

    I approve of all of these picks! 👍

  • Jay Bee

    Curious to hear why Hillary Ronen for district 9. Campos’s office has been notable in its lack of interest in tangibly addressing district-specific issues and/or improving the lives of its residents.

  • Pam Taylor

    http://connectionmagz.com/santacruz/8-reasons-why-californians-should-vote-no-on-prop-64-the-adult-marijuana-use-act-of-2016/
    A friend shared this on Facebook today and I found it illuminating. Everyone please read the WHOLE ARTICLE and share. Prop 64 would do
    everything we are afraid of happening to the industry: tax medical users
    (of which I am one) at 46%, push out small farmers from the industry
    after 5 years, negatively affect the environment (requires indoor-only
    grows), reduces home grows to 6 plants per household (medical use or not
    and must be indoors), allows the state legislature to amend the
    legislation without voter approval, has no accountability for the funds
    being raised for the taxation on sales of cannabis, AND re-criminalizes
    possession and distribution of small amounts of cannabis. That sentence
    was the TL;DR version for those who didn’t click on the article.

  • Degé Coutee

    No on Prop 64! Seven new taxes and lots of fees that ALL stay in Sacramento to fund the new bureaucracy – none of it goes to the general fund. AUMA absorbs Prop 215, forces patients to pay the same taxes as adult recreational, dismantles the new Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation and replaces it with a new Bureau of Marijuana Control. This chart shows all the new penalties an fines under ‘legalization.’ https://cannabissite.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/correction-chart2.pdf Don’t be fooled by all the rhetoric that Prop 64 is all about social justice – if you can’t afford these new fines or an attorney – you’re going to jail.

    The initiative was written by a project of George Soros, Drug Policy Alliance. Soros is at least a 10% partner of Monsanto. This is not legalization. It’s the takeover of California’s cannabis industry by mega corporations that have agreed to fund Gavin Newsom’s political aspirations for the largest piece of the pie. Here is the article where Newsom acknowledges that his office wrote Prop 64 – http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article109646157.html – which make this a ballot measure and not a voter initiative.

    Prop 64 is the longest initiative in your voter booklet and its proponents are banking on you not reading it.