Join the July 3rd Rally to Uphold “Early Care and Education for All”

Join a Rally the Morning of July 3rd at the Civic Center Courthouse to Uphold “Early Care and Education for All” Proposition Passed by Voters Last June

Quick Facts:

  • A summary judgment hearing is scheduled in the case of Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. v. City and County of San Francisco on Wednesday, July 3  in Room 302, 400 McAllister Street at 9:30AM. This hearing could decide the fate of the measure.

  • Early Care Educators of San Francisco will be hosting a rally starting at 8:45AM, before and during the upcoming hearing in order to fill the court with supporters for Prop C. They encourage “Come in July 4th attire and defend citizens'
    democracy.” For more information, check their Facebook page here. 

  • Prop C was a commercial rent tax for childcare and early education that passed in June 2018. The proposition would tax warehouse space and other commercial properties to fund childcare and early education programs 

  • The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the Building Owners and Managers Association of California, the California Business Properties Association, and the California Business Roundtable challenged Proposition C, stating that it should have required a ⅔ supermajority to be passed

What is Prop C?

Prop C was a San Francisco ballot measure that created a new tax on commercial property for landlords with annual gross receipts over $1 million. The tax would be 1% of gross receipts for warehouse space and 3.5% for other commercial properties. It was estimated that these taxes would bring in $146 million a year and 85% of those funds would go to childcare and education for students aged 0-5. It narrowly passed 50.87%-49.13%

Why is there a controversy? 

The passage of Prop C has been challenged by a number of business groups which point to the rule stating that a ⅔ supermajority of voters is required to pass a special tax with funds designated to specific projects. However, supporters argue that a simple majority was all that was needed, and point to a unique California Supreme Court case as justification. 

What does California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland have to do with anything?

According to California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland, citizen initiatives differ from those created and sponsored by the local government. While this case specifically dealt with what kind of elections citizen initiatives were allowed to be put up to vote, it raises the question if citizen initiatives should have different voting requirements. Sponsors of Proposition C claim it does mean this, while the plaintiffs claim that Prop C is not even a true citizen initiative, given that it was drafted and promoted by the office of Supervisor Norman Yee.

In the meantime, has any work been done on the issues?

According to a recent OECE newsletter, despite the fact that funds already collected cannot yet be spent, progress is being made in efforts to improve childcare and early education in San Francisco. “Ideas and strategies generated from the planning process will help identify how San Francisco’s early care and education systems can improve to better meet the needs of families and professionals, with whatever resources are available,” the newsletter reads.

What is PPSSF’s position on the measure?

When Prop C was first on the ballot, PPSSF endorsed the proposition. We still believe that providing high-quality early childhood care and education is imperative, and believe the lawsuit should be defeated. We encourage supporters to attend ECE’s event next week in order to assure Prop C is passed.  


Roman PeregrinoComment