How to vote today

Wondering how to vote today? My friend Michael has some great advice:

Democratic Central Committee - If you are registered Democrat, you may vote for members of the Democratic Central Committee. I used to serve on this board when I was much younger, and the board wields a considerable amount of power in deciding the Democratic platform, and spending priorities. There is one candidate for this board that I'm actively campaigning for, and that is David Chiu. He is a friend and coworker of mine for whom I have a great deal of respect. David is originally from Boston, a Harvard trained lawyer, former prosecutor, congressional aid, former head of the Asian American Bar Association, former civil rights attorney and has served the community in a number of other ways. David is also running for Supervisor in District 3 (Aaron Peskin's current district) - but we can't vote on that.

Prop 98 - NO : This is the one that I care most about. It does a few things: Eliminates rent control, reduces eminent domain, and overall it reduces the say a community has about how a property is used. The rent control provision is the one that I dislike the most because I believe rent control is a necessary device to promote stability in communities and counteract the effects of a bubble prone housing market.

Prop 99 - YES: This is an alternate anti-eminent domain proposition. I'm somewhat ambivalent on this - but I do believe that there should be limits on how and when eminent domain can be used.

Local Measures:

A - YES: A $198 parcel tax to fund local school initiatives. I'm voting for it because I believe this will help attract good teachers to blighted schools.

B - YES: I generally don't think these types of measures should have to be on a ballot - but since it is here, I'll vote on it. This measure extends the amount of time a city employee will work before they become eligible for subsidized retiree health care, which I think makes sense.

C - YES: Eliminates employer funded retirement benefits for public employees who commit crimes of "moral turpitude". Though ambiguously defined, this usually will cover fraud, embezzlement, other felonies and certain misdemeanors. I'm voting yes because I believe that a criminal violation of the trust invested in public servants merits a divestment of public subsidy.

D - NO: Amends the city charter to make it official city policy that membership of City boards and commissions "reflect the interests and contributions of both mean and woman of all races, ethnicity, sexual orientations and types of disabilities". I am voting no because I believe this end is better served by watch dog groups and public pressure groups, external to the city government.

E - NO: Proscribes a mix of arbitrary qualifications for the City Public Utilities Commission for each seat:
Seat 1 - must have environmental policy experience
Seat 2 - must have experience in rate payer or consumer advocacy
..etc.
This seems to be very poor legislation because it narrowly defines competency in a way that does not necessarily promote good governance. I believe the mayor should be allowed to promote commission members in a more holistic fashion.

F & G: These two initiatives deal with redevelopment of Candlestick point and Hunters Point Shipyard. Prop G serves to be a public endorsement of the current redevelopment plan for the area. The current plan stipulates an interesting mix of housing, commercial and light industry. F mandates that 50% of all new housing units be "affordable" proscribes certain rules for determining affordability. My ambivalence is that I generally like to have the mandates in place for affordability, but my fear is that F goes so far that it would cause the developer to walk away, thus the area would remain blighted (and abandoned). I'm probably going to vote yes on G and no on F - but I do have reservations because G doesn't have an mechanisms to guarantee its promises.

H - YES: Prohibits elected officials from receiving contributions from city contractors. This is an anti conflict of interest ordinance that prohibits donations from groups that have action before any legislative body or commission in the city. This is a no brainer to me - I believe that this type of law is the answer to many of our campaign finance issues. If only we had a federal version of this ordinance...