Support investments in S.F. housing. Vote yes for Props I and C

Regarding “Endorsement: Prop I is a cocktail of poison pills masquerading as a housing fix” (Editorials, SFChronicle.com, Oct. 5): If the editorial board doesn’t think the wealthiest property owners should contribute to the common good, it should say so plainly. 

Proposition I creates no new tax. Voters approved this real estate transfer tax in 2020, and it applies only to sales over $10 million: office towers, hotels, large commercial portfolios.

The editorial calls dedicating $120 million a year to housing a “siphon.” We call it a priority. Right now, more than 10,000 affordable homes in approximately 200 projects are in the pipeline; many are waiting on funding. The city’s own Capital Plan shows a $25.1 billion gap to meet our housing goals.

Deregulation and upzoning do not create affordable housing. Public investment does. Every permanently affordable home in San Francisco exists because someone decided to pay for it. 

In a city with staggering wealth, we have to invest in what we say we care about. Prop I does that, providing money to build, buy and preserve homes that stay affordable for good, and it keeps tenants housed. 

Prop C’s expansion of the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, which the board supports, is part of the same effort.

Vote yes on Props C and I.

Quintin Mecke, executive director, Council of Community Housing Organizations, San Francisco

Regarding “Upscale Bay Area retirement community grapples with string of disturbing incidents” (Bay Area, SFChronicle.com, Sept. 27): I am writing about hateful behavior at Rossmoor. My wife and I moved to Rossmoor in January of 2024. I am African American, and she is white. Ninety-five percent of my interactions with people here have been wonderful and welcoming. We belong to many of the over 200 clubs here. We enjoy the gym, the restaurant, the movie theater, the event center and the golf course.

I appreciate meeting amazingly accomplished authors, artists, scholars and scientists in my everyday life. I’m proud of the LGBTQ Alliance and the 17 other partners who held an anti-hate symposium that was attended by approximately 300 people. 

With nearly 10,000 people, there will be occasional friction. 

Responding to it promptly and effectively makes this an even more attractive place to live.

Christie Hardwick, Walnut Creek

Regarding “California’s Prop 45 may be the biggest reform to CEQA in decades. Critics say it goes too far” (Politics, SFChronicle.com, Oct. 2): Jason Elliott, a former adviser to Gov. Gavin Newsom, suggests that he favors Proposition 45 to prevent “a decade of public comments” on housing proposals, but fails to acknowledge that many projects face delays during the post-entitlement stage — after public comment that would be accepted under the California Environmental Quality Act. 

What’s more, since (as the story notes) many urban housing developments are already largely exempt from environmental review, Prop 45, housing-wise, could primarily clear the way for most sprawl developments in remote, high-risk areas far from jobs and services. That kind of housing will likely raise costs through higher insurance premiums, wildfire and flood exposure, longer commutes and more. 

Prop 45 is not a housing solution. It rolls back environmental protections, leaving California more vulnerable to extreme federal cuts from the Trump administration. Vote no on Prop 45.

As more and more Republican candidates try to distance themselves from the president in their respective campaign ads, Donald Trump keeps suggesting at his rallies, “Just pretend I’m running,” in a sad attempt to encourage his supporters to vote in the upcoming election. 

“Just pretend I’m running.” I can’t think of a better campaign tagline for the Democratic Party.