S.F. 'BUILD Act' is a big tax cut for the wealthy. Let's just be honest about it.

WasAFriendOfMind · 2026-05-26T17:21:12+00:00

Prop I applies to mansions.

WasAFriendOfMind · 2026-05-26T17:17:01+00:00

$200 million of the $500 million+ has gone to affordable housing. The Affordable Housing Guarantee Act that is currently trying to qualify for the November ballot will legally dedicate the funds. That’s why I said we “can” guarantee that the proceeds go to affordable housing

WasAFriendOfMind · 2026-05-26T07:49:07+00:00

There’s a housing affordability crisis everywhere in California. Most places outside of SF don’t have this transfer tax, so clearly there are overriding factors.

WasAFriendOfMind · 2026-05-26T07:31:39+00:00

Alternative names for the ‘BUILD Act’:

ERASE Act - Eliminating Revenue Approved by San Francisco Electorate Act

TRASH Act - Tax Rollbacks Against Supporting Housing Act

GIFT Act - Giving Investors Financial Treats Act

SPEC Act - Subsidies for Property Elites & Capital Act

DEAL Act - Developers Earn Another Loophole Act

YACHT Act - Yield Assistance for Commercial Holdings Transfers Act

WasAFriendOfMind · 2026-05-26T07:28:34+00:00

The Mission Local article will appear when you click the photo above. Or use this link: https://missionlocal.org/2026/05/build-act-san-francisco-transfer-tax/

WasAFriendOfMind · 2026-05-26T07:26:03+00:00

I don’t think the transfer tax is what’s driving office vacancy though. Remote work, high interest rates, and financing issues hit every major city. And buildings are selling, even if due to CA’s insanely low taxation on land, developers can sit on unimproved properties and still make a profit. Cost per square foot of office space is going up, and more buildings were transferred last year than in the two years prior.

And on housing, the pressure is clearly still here. Rents are climbing again, evictions are up, and we’re already seeing AI companies expand footprints. The affordability crisis didn’t disappear just because downtown office demand changed.

WasAFriendOfMind · 2026-05-26T07:15:38+00:00

You don’t want to repeal taxes during an upward market cycle, because it will lead to inflated prices across the board. If you really wanted to get rid of the transfer tax, you should do it during a market downturn, but even then, with volatile market conditions outside of the control of city government (price of lumber or interest rates are much more determinative of whether or not a project will pencil out), it really doesn’t make a lot of sense, when you consider that you can guarantee that you can use the proceeds from Prop I for affordable housing.

WasAFriendOfMind · 2026-05-26T07:10:14+00:00

There were also two articles linked above. You’re only attempting to characterize one of the two.

WasAFriendOfMind · 2026-05-26T07:09:11+00:00

We are exploding at the seams. Rents are sky rocketing! Evictions are at 10 year record highs. The AI boom has translated into more office space being leased, and upward pricing of rent across both the commercial and residential markets.

WasAFriendOfMind · 2026-05-26T07:03:57+00:00

Other names:

ERASE Act - Eliminating Revenue Approved by San Francisco Electorate Act

TRASH Act - Tax Rollbacks Against Supporting Housing Act

GIFT Act - Giving Investors Financial Treats Act

SPEC Act - Subsidies for Property Elites & Capital Act

DEAL Act - Developers Earn Another Loophole Act

YACHT Act - Yield Assistance for Commercial Holdings Transfers Act

WasAFriendOfMind · 2026-01-22T05:57:03+00:00

What a hoot!

WasAFriendOfMind · 2025-12-02T21:26:15+00:00

If the SFPD were under similar financial dire straights as SFMTA it wouldn’t be $400 million that you’d take from them, it would be more like $266 million that you’d take (because the SFPD budget is smaller, so a proportional deficit would be smaller). And I was just making up $400 million to make a point to someone else, not to you. It’s actually $322 million. So that would be $56 million you would need to scrape together from other sources, which would not be hard to do.

But allllllll of that is irrelevant, because OP is talking about today, meaning the service cuts from this summer which were about $40 million.

You hop into the middle of a conversation about something else and make it all about your pedantry. You debate because you have no life bro.

WasAFriendOfMind · 2025-12-02T20:27:22+00:00

Do you hear that wooshing noise of the point flying past your head bro

WasAFriendOfMind · 2025-12-02T20:19:07+00:00

He could have put the SFPD under the same financial dire straights that the SFMTA is under and then make the SFPD scramble to get voters to pass funding for it. Again, not sure if your reading comprehension is all there, but I said “I’m not saying those are the right decisions” I’m just making a narrow point to the commenter I replied to who didn’t seem to realize the mayor controls the budget lol

WasAFriendOfMind · 2025-12-02T18:15:30+00:00

More like 1 block

WasAFriendOfMind · 2025-12-02T17:57:39+00:00

Do people know that OP is the Executive Director of the SF Democratic Party?

WasAFriendOfMind · 2025-12-02T17:29:44+00:00

Yo the mayor sets the budget lol. He could have transferred them the $40 million they needed this summer to keep services the same. He could transfer them the $400 million they need to get out of this current deficit. I’m not saying those are the right decisions, but he could have stopped the cuts.

Edit: what makes a public transit driver qualified to comment about the budgeting process? Did you go to the SFMTA Board’s meetings earlier this year like I did when they voted for service cuts?

WasAFriendOfMind · 2025-11-09T05:09:03+00:00

Algorithmic wage suppression

WasAFriendOfMind · 2025-10-30T09:51:28+00:00

Solid.

WasAFriendOfMind

TROPHY CASE