‘The Truth as I See It’

It was Adlai E. (for Ewing) Stevenson, then-governor of Illinois and the Democratic Party candidate for president of the U.S.A. for a second time who spoke via radio and television on election eve (Nov. 8, 1956) thusly: “Looking back, I am content. Win or lose, I have told you the truth as I see it. I have said what I meant and meant what I have said. I have not done as well as I should like to have done, but I have done my best, frankly and forthrightly; no man can do more, and you are entitled to no less.”

Can voters apply that dictum to Ms. Kamala Harris and Mr. Donald Trump? Heck, no. Trump continues to agitate supporters about his 2020 loss and justify the Jan. 6, 2021, effort he instigated to deny his defeat by U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden; Harris hasn’t changed her spots since she lied to the Ethics Commission about the amount of her expenditures to justify use of taxpayer money via public finance of her campaign for district attorney, which I exposed to readers in my January 2019 column.

Unknown to me until last month, thanks to Sunset resident Robert Guichard, was a Nov. 5, 2019, column by San Francisco native Terry McAteer in the Nevada-Grass Valley Union. Terry, the youngest son of late state senator and San Francisco Supervisor, J. Eugene McAteer, who died on a handball court at age 51. Terry McAteer was elected Nevada County superintendent of schools for six four-year terms. His son Gregory, then in college, was an unpaid intern in Harris’s attorney-general office and couldn’t wait to leave for then-U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s seat after only one month, reporting that Harris “vocally throws around ‘F bombs’ and other profanity constantly in her berating of the staff and others.” Harris ordered her whole staff to stand each morning upon Harris’s arrival at the office and proclaim: “Good Morning general!” Young McAteer was instructed also never to address Harris “or look her in the eye” as that could only be done by senior staff members! I’ve commented several times on her Republican opponent’s crimes and military service evasion during the 1960s. We Americans deserve better presidential candidates, while hoping the nation survives four years of Trump or Harris.

Meanwhile, I reiterate my recommendations of London Breed for mayor, Matt Boschetto for District 7 supervisor, Moe Jamil for District 3 supervisor, Marjan Philhour or Connie Chan for District 5 supervisor, Ann Hsu and Lefteris Eleftheriou for beleaguered Board of Education and Leanna Louie for City College’s governing board. A real estate lawyer whose wife and child live in Alameda County while he registers to vote on upper Montgomery Street, Richard Woon, runs against City Attorney David Chiu without knowing Chiu isn’t responsible for prosecuting City Hall’s corruption cases because our splendid district attorney, Brooke Jenkins, has that assignment – fortunately. Chiu is worthless, but Woon lacks qualifications. I’ll leave that one blank. Speaking of the city attorney, did you realize Chiu has 206 deputy city attorneys? I didn’t until Woon told me there were 180 deputies, which is inaccurate. Those deputies enjoy annual salaries of $147,917 to $325,728. The latter is even more than Chiu’s healthy stipend of $316,838 per year.

State propositions abound – 11 in number. As usual, the State Capitol taxeaters lead with a bond, Proposition 2, a $10 billion borrowing to renovate or build new public schools and community college buildings. With interest, it’ll cost $18 billion. I’m voting a loud “no!”

Proposition 3 legalizes same-sex marriages in California under our state Constitution. Naturally, S.F.’s own Scott Wiener is the measure’s lead author. Despite Wiener, I’ll vote “yes.”

Proposition 4 is yet another $10 billion bond. This one’s for natural resources and “climate activities.” Much of the $10 billion would be given to local governments, Native American tribes (?), nonprofits and private businesses over 50 years, carrying interest of $400 million annually. Jon Coupal of Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association points out that, just two years ago, California’s surplus was nearly $100 billion, which would’ve paid the entire cost of the Proposition 4 bond with only 10% of such surplus. Now, taxpayers are squeezed for horrendous taxes to repay this bond. Vote “no, no, no.”

Proposition 5 makes it easier to fleece taxpayers by reducing a state constitutional requirement that has been in effect since 1897, namely requiring 2/3rd voter approval on bonds. If Prop. 5 passes by majority vote on Nov. 5, henceforth only 55% voter approval, not 66.75%, will be mandated to pass local bonds. It is retroactive, applying to Nov. 5 local bonds, thus shifting burdens to local government which will accrue more debt from property taxes. Vote “no” on Prop. 5.

Prop. 6 amends Article I, Section 6 of our state constitution which prohibits involuntary servitude except for crime. Prop. 6 prohibits it as a punishment for crime and as punishment for inmates who refuse to work but doesn’t ban prisons from granting credits to inmates who do work of their own free will. I suppose it justifies a “yes” vote.

Prop 32 increases California’s minimum wage in 2025. For businesses with 26 or more employees the minimum increases from $16 per hour to $17. Employers with 25 or fewer employees would have a $17 per hour minimum. Inflation adjustments now in effect are suspended until 2027. I’ll vote “yes.” The unions favor it – restaurant owners, grocers and the California Chamber of Commerce urge rejection.

Proposition 33 emanates from rent control lovers. It repeals the 1995 law (for which I voted as the only Independent in the legislature and was authored by two Democrats!) which bars local rent control regarding single-family homes, housing built after Feb. 1, 1995, and on new rentals. I urge rejection of Prop. 33 if you want more rentals built in the Golden State.

Proposition 34 deserves passage. Health care businesses must be licensed and Prop. 34 applies to (1) participants in the federal drug discount program, (2) licensees operating as a health plan, pharmacy, clinic or specified contracts with Medi-Cal or Medicare, and a 10-year period spending more than $100 million on matters besides direct patient care and currently on previously owned and operated multifamily housing units and suffered at least 500 violations of law with a “high” severity level. AIDS and homosexual organizations oppose Prop 34. Adherents include a “gay” Assembly member who’s in the state legislature’s LGBT Caucus and the CEO of The ALS Association. I’ll vote “yes.”

Quentin Kopp is a former San Francisco supervisor, state senator, SF Ethics Commission member, president of the California High Speed Rail Authority governing board and retired Superior Court judge.