Today’s Headlines

  • $248 Million Streets Bond Measure Headed to Ballot (SF Examiner, BCN via SF Appeal)
  • SF Supervisors Approve Treasure Island Development in 11-0 Vote (SF Gate)
  • SFBG Editorial: “Mayor Lee Should Veto Park Merced Development Agreement”
  • SFMTA Looking at More Projects to Better Market Street, Restrict Autos (SF Gate)
  • Parking Permits for Nannies Approved by SFMTA Board (SF Examiner)
  • Caltrain “Likely to Get” $5 Million to Help Fill Budget Hole (SF Examiner)
  • BART to Consider Budget That Includes $35 Million in Improvements (SF Examiner)
  • Environmental Group Sues to Block Widening of Niles Canyon Road (SF Gate)
  • Interim SMART Manager to Get 10-Percent Pay Raise (Marin IJ)
  • Chicago Gets Cracking on Building 100 Miles of Protected Bikeways (Sun-Times)
  • Janette Sadik-Kahn has Advice for L.A. on Building Quality Open Space (Streetsblog LA)

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • Christopher

    I will be voting against the bond measure. If the city were really hurting for cash it wouldn’t be handing over taxpayer dollars to Twitter.

  • @5ee706548e31908ebf7e76aed39a1919:disqus
     Steve Jobs testified in Cupertino yesterday, they want to build a new building. Someone asked “What’s in this for Cupertino” He said “we pay a lot of taxes”.
    The City isn’t handing taxpayer dollars to Twitter, we are going to collect less from them than if they stayed and we did not give them a tax break, but if they leave we get nothing.

    ?

  • Jamison

    Twitter is excempt from paying payroll taxes for six years. This is the only tax the City collects on them, so the City will make an estimated $20 M less, but is not handing over any tax-payer dollars.

    It is more like a subsidy. Twitter will get all the services and benefit from being in San Francisco without contributing their fair share to the cost.

    There are other valid reasons to vote against the bond measure, but Twitter’s tax excemption shouldn’t be one of them. Cutting City services and benefits while giving up $20 M in revenue to make a multibillion dollar company just a little richer is reason to vote against the mayor and possibly your supervisor.

  • Anonymous

    “This is the only tax the City collects on them”

    Property taxes? Sales taxes? Sales taxes paid by employees patronizing Market street instead of some cafeteria in a Brisbane building? When they IPO and the employees all buy houses in the city and turn over the assessment, and pay more property taxes on those buildings?

  • Jamison

    OK, the only tax the City exclusively collects and keeps as opposed to going into regional, state and federal budgets or goes directly into something as per a voter approved mandate. Twitter doesn’t have a traditional retail model so it’s not paying sales tax the way a store selling merchandise would and  property taxes would be paid for by the buildings owner. 

    The trickle down argument that surrounding businesses would benefit from the money spent by employees (there is also the taxes and business generated by the services Twitter will need like paying for cleaners) is debatable. Yes, Twitter will generate some secondary revenue, but so would another company that wasn’t exempt from paying taxes.

  • Anonymous

    There is something in California called “Business Property Tax”. I just filed all sorts of paperwork in Sonoma and it looks like we actually have to pay property tax on couches, salad spinners, lawnmower, etc… for our vacation rental up there. If Sonoma County is going after this $, I have to believe that SF is dinging Twitter for their office chairs. As for the “real” property tax, in theory Twitter’s building is worth more with them as a locked in tenant, of course thanks to Prop 13 that and a quarter will get you a cup of coffee.

    If there was another company of Twitter’s power lining up to fill the building, we wouldn’t be giving them a break.

    This goes beyond Twitter itself, we want those employees living in the City because sooner or later the 2nd/3rd generation Twitter people who aren’t going to retire the day after the lockout ends, will go on to incubate other companies in SF, instead of San Bruno. And the ones that do cash in big will produce a LOT of secondary revenue. The purchases and remodels in Noe Valley by the Google mafia are doing wonders for the re-assessed property values there not to mention trickle down tax money – but most Google people do not live in SF. Twitter employees will have far more incentive to stay here.

  • Jamison

    I stand corrected on the tax issue murphstahoe.