Connect with us

San Francisco, CA

San Francisco voters to decide on dueling measures on Top Executive Pay Tax changes

Published

on

San Francisco voters to decide on dueling measures on Top Executive Pay Tax changes


San Francisco voters weighed in Tuesday on two competing measures that seek to change the Top Executive Pay Tax, with one of the measures also including a change to the Gross Receipts Tax.

Should both measures pass, the one with the most votes will take effect, according to the propositions’ legal text.

Currently, the measures state that most businesses with San Francisco gross receipts up to $5 million are exempt from the Gross Receipts Tax. And businesses that use more than half of their city payroll for in-house administrative and management services pay an Administrative Office Tax instead of a Gross Receipts Tax.

The Top Executive Pay Tax is a tax some large businesses pay if their highest-paid managerial employee earns more than 100 times the median pay of their San Francisco employees. Businesses that have city gross receipts up to $5 million and are not subject to the Administrative Office Tax are exempt.

Advertisement

Proposition C

Proposition C states it would increase the number of businesses that could be exempt from the Gross Receipts Tax and would stop any further increases to the “Top Executive Pay Tax” after a final rate bump.

The proposed measure says it would raise the Gross Receipts Tax exemption ceiling to $7.5 million. The $7.5 million ceiling would also apply to the Top Executive Pay Tax exemption.

As for changes to the Top Executive Pay Tax, Proposition C states it would implement the 2028 tax rate increase in 2027, but then stop any future increases.

Supporting Proposition C are Rodney Fong, CEO of the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, and Chris Wright, senior vice president of Advance SF, an organization of companies, which includes Bank of America, OpenAI, Waymo, the SF Giants CEO and others.

Fong and Wright, in their argument for the measure, say giving businesses more tax breaks would help keep more employees on payroll and would give companies the ability to “contribute to city services in a predictable and balanced way.”

Advertisement

Critics of Proposition C, such as the San Francisco Tenants Union, slam the measure as “billionaire-backed” and argue it would kill the Top Executive Pay Tax and would hand out more tax breaks to businesses at a time when the city is in a budget deficit and faces cuts to essential services.

Proposition D

Proposition D also seeks to change the Top Executive Pay Tax, which is collected from some large businesses where the highest-paid managerial employee earns more than 100 times the median compensation paid to other employees.

If approved, the measure would change the calculation of the tax using the compensation of all employees, not just employees based in San Francisco. Top Executive Pay Tax rates would also be increased for San Francisco gross receipts and payroll.

Supporters have billed the measure as a way to counteract federal cuts to Medicaid. A report by the City Controller’s Office said the measure could result in $250 million to $300 million in additional revenue.

“Proposition D is the solution to our budget deficit. It asks large corporations — not small businesses, not working families — to contribute a little more,” supporters said in the city’s official voter guide.

Advertisement

The measure has the backing of most of the Board of Supervisors, along with labor unions and Rep. Nancy Pelosi.

Opponents, including Mayor Daniel Lurie and state Sen. Scott Wiener, have argued Proposition D would negatively impact the city’s recovery following the COVID-19 pandemic. 

“San Francisco is already one of the most expensive cities in the country to live and do business. Adding extreme and unpredictable tax increases risks driving employers away just as we are trying to bring jobs, workers, and foot traffic back downtown,” said Supervisor Matt Dorsey in the city’s voter guide.



Source link

San Francisco, CA

Where to watch Athletics vs San Francisco Giants: TV channel, start time, streaming for June 23

Published

on

Where to watch Athletics vs San Francisco Giants: TV channel, start time, streaming for June 23


play

The 2026 MLB season has surpassed the quarter mark, and after each team’s first 40 games, there’s plenty of reasons to tune in all summer long.

Chicago White Sox slugger Munetaka Murakami has already proven doubters wrong by launching 17 home runs, Pittsburgh’s Paul Skenes consistently looks like the best version of himself on the mound and Milwaukee ace Jacob Misiorowski is throwing harder than any starter in the majors.

Advertisement

The MLB action continues on Tuesday as the Athletics visit the San Francisco Giants.

Here’s everything you need to know to tune in for the first pitch.

See USA TODAY’s sortable MLB schedule to filter by team or division.

What time is Athletics vs San Francisco Giants?

First pitch between the San Francisco Giants and Athletics is scheduled for 9:45 p.m. (ET) on Tuesday, June 23.

How to watch Athletics vs San Francisco Giants on Tuesday

All times Eastern and accurate as of Tuesday, June 23, 2026, at 6:33 a.m.

Advertisement

Watch MLB all season long with Fubo

MLB regional blackout restrictions apply

MLB scores, results

MLB scores for June 23 games are available on usatoday.com . Here’s how to access today’s results:

See scores, results for all of today’s games.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

San Francisco, CA

San Francisco home with a history of squatters hits the market for $1.3 million

Published

on

San Francisco home with a history of squatters hits the market for .3 million


An abandoned house near San Francisco’s Castro neighborhood that has been popular with squatters for years is now for sale.

On Yukon Street at the edge of Kite Hill in the Eureka Valley neighborhood, the house with arched windows over the garage, including one that’s broken, is listed for $1.3 million.

Listing agent Zara Rowbotham and her brother, James, put together a promotional video highlighting the home’s fixer-upper potential.

There is no running water or power at the house. Neighbors have reported to the city that squatters relieve themselves at the top floor atrium.

Advertisement

“They needed a place to do it, so they had the nice manners to do it in one basket,” Rowbotham said. “Unfortunately it was an outside basket right in front of one of the neighbors’ houses.”

With the nature of San Francisco’s red-hot housing market, Rowbothom said they already have a potential buyer.

Rowbothom added the city is swirling with money right now and there are few places to buy, so properties like the one on Yukon Street – even with a history of squatters – are being snapped up quickly. Rowbothom said they’re going for millions of dollars, with people paying cash a lot of the time.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

San Francisco, CA

The U.S. Government Secretly Tested Biological Weapons. The Citizens of San Francisco Paid the Price.

Published

on

The U.S. Government Secretly Tested Biological Weapons. The Citizens of San Francisco Paid the Price.


Here’s what you’ll learn when you read this story:

  • During the early decades of the Cold War, the U.S. government conducted 239 open-air germ warfare tests around the country to assess to dangers of a possible chemical attack on civilian populations.
  • One of the most infamous, known as Operation Sea-Spray, purposefully pumped aerosols of the bacteria Serratia marcescens and Bacillus globigii—both believed to be harmless to humans—over the San Francisco Bay Area.
  • While the operation itself was a success, it’s likely that the test resulted in the death of one man and the sickening of at least 10 others.

San Francisco is known for its fog. Sitting at the intersection of warm air flowing from California’s interior and cool air moving in from the Pacific, low-lying fog and clouds are a common sight. But in 1950, from September 20 until September 27, a different kind of cloud descended on the city of some 800,000 people—a cloud that had been purposefully released by the U.S. government as a secret bioweapons test.

No, this wasn’t some dastardly plan by the government to conduct a macabre experiment on its own citizens. Rather, it was a measure intended to safeguard against other rival nations trying to poison an American city. The government selected San Francisco for its ideal dispersal conditions, tall buildings, and large population, and to pull this off safely, the government relied on the bacteria Serratia marcescens and Bacillus globigii—both believed to be harmless to humans.

“They needed something that was, first of all, thought to be harmless,” Matthew Meselson, a molecular biologist from Harvard, told KQED last year, “because they certainly didn’t want to kill everybody in San Francisco or Oakland. And [they also needed something] that could easily be detected by simple methods.”

Since the Second Battle of Ypres during World War I, when the German army killed thousands of French Algerian colonial troops by unleashing chlorine gas on April 22, 1915, followed by a second gas attack on Canadian troops two days later, nations had been grappling with the threat of unconventional weapons. With its illusion of geographic imperviousness shattered by the attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, the United States moved to address its own vulnerabilities. In 1942, President Franklin Roosevelt authorized the creation of the first U.S. biological weapons program. Part of the mission of this program was to determine just how vulnerable U.S. cities could be to a biological attack.

Advertisement

In 1948, the Committee on Biological Warfare—led by University of Wisconsin bacteriologist Ida Balwin—suggested simulating chemical attacks through air, water, and infrastructure (such as subway systems) with non-harmful organisms to understand the threat under real environmental conditions. So, two years later, the stage was set for Operation Sea-Spray, and the entire operation almost went without a hitch. Almost.

Serratia marcescens is found naturally in water and soils, and it’s known to be harmless to humans. But it isn’t typically sprayed in the air in large quantities, and unfortunately, one of those bacteria-filled clouds descended on Stanford University Hospital on Clay Street in San Francisco. There, eleven patients developed inexplicable Serratia marcescens infections. In the case of a 75-year-old Irish American named Edward Nevin, who was recovering from prostate surgery, the bacteria found its way to his heart, killing him. Doctors at the hospital were so puzzled that they even published a scientific paper regarding the infections in October of the following year.

President Richard Nixon ended U.S. research into bioweapons in 1969, and a treasure trove of information about that research was declassified in the 1970s. It revealed that the U.S. had performed 239 open-air germ warfare tests around the country, including in the subway in New York City, on the Pennsylvania turnpike, and in the national airport in Washington D.C. According to KQED, Edward Nevin III—the grandson of the man who died during the faux attack—read these reports and decided to sue the U.S. government, even though he accurately foresaw that he’d eventually lose.

“But we still had to tell the story,” he told KQED. “To have a citizen submitted to that kind of risk is awful.”

Advertisement

Darren lives in Portland, has a cat, and writes/edits about sci-fi and how our world works. You can find his previous stuff at Gizmodo and Paste if you look hard enough. 



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending