SF finalizes plan to save Muni with parcel tax amid budget deficit: Here's how it would work

San Francisco officials have finalized a plan to save Muni service by implementing a parcel tax, which would charge most homeowners at least $129 annually if approved by voters. The updated proposal is an attempt to address the city's budget deficit of over $300 million, caused in part by the pandemic's impact on ridership and funding sources.

The proposed parcel tax would target property owners based on their home size. Single-family homes up to 3,000 square feet would pay $129 per year, while multifamily homes up to 5,000 square feet would be charged $249 annually. Non-residential property owners, such as businesses or landlords, would face a higher annual tax of $799 for properties up to 5,000 square feet.

However, the plan has received criticism from some community members who argue that it would unfairly burden renters and small business owners. The city's proposal initially included a cap of 250,000 square feet for multifamily parcels, but it was reduced to 50,000 square feet as part of ongoing negotiations with transit advocates.

The parcel tax is seen by many as a necessary measure to prevent further cuts to Muni services. If approved, the plan would raise approximately $183 million annually to help close the budget gap. However, officials acknowledge that additional measures, such as a regional sales tax or cost-cutting efforts, are still needed to address the full deficit.

The proposal will now move forward with drafting the ballot language and gathering signatures for voter approval in November. While some residents express concerns about the plan's impact on local businesses and renters, many recognize the importance of maintaining public transportation services in the city.

I feel like this parcel tax thing is gonna be a big deal... I get why the city needs to close that $300 million budget gap, but do we really need to hit homeowners with an extra $129 on top? Some people say it's fair since they own properties and can afford it, but what about all the renters who are already stretching their budgets thin? And what about small business owners who might get squeezed too? I think it's great that many folks see public transportation as essential, but we should be looking for other ways to make up for the deficit too... like a regional sales tax or cost-cutting efforts. Let's try to find a balance here and not just slap an extra fee on everyone

Ugh, this parcel tax thing is just a headache . I get that Muni is struggling but come on, $129+ per year for homeowners? That's like, almost as much as my monthly Netflix subscription ! And what about renters who are already paying way too much rent? They're gonna be hit with an even bigger tax bill, thanks to property owners passing it on . I'm all for saving public transportation, but is this really the best way to do it? Maybe they should explore other options like, idk, a tiny tax hike on people who can afford it or something .

I mean, I get why they wanna save Muni, but $129 a year is pretty steep, you know? Small business owners are already struggling as it is, so adding on this parcel tax just seems like another thing to worry about . And what about the renters who can't exactly vote themselves a lower rent, you feel me? It's all good intentions, but do they really think it'll make a difference in the end?

this parcel tax thingy is a perfect example of how governments gotta get creative with finances . i mean, who would've thought that charging home owners extra for their properties would be the answer to saving muni service? but honestly, it's all about finding that sweet spot between making up for lost revenue and not hurting small businesses or renters too much .

i'm kinda torn on this one, tbh. on one hand, i get that muni services are important, especially for people who can't afford a car . but on the other hand, doesn't this just sound like another tax on already struggling individuals? it's all about priorities, right?

I'm not sure how I feel about this parcel tax thingy . On one hand, Muni is super important for getting around SF, especially with all the tech giants moving in . But on the other hand, I get that it's gonna hurt some people, like renters and small businesses. It's like trying to balance a scale where everyone's weight is different .

I think the city should try to find more ways to make this work, like maybe not just relying on a parcel tax . They could also look into other funding sources or try to reduce costs in some areas . It's all about finding that sweet spot where everyone wins... or at least doesn't lose too much .

Here's a quick diagram to help visualize it:
```
+---------------+
| Muni Budget |
| Problem: $300M |
+---------------+
|
|
v
+---------------+
| Parcel Tax |
| (Homeowners) |
| - Single homes: |
| $129/year |
| - Multifamily: |
| $249/year |
+---------------+
|
|
v
+---------------+
| Alternative |
| Funding Sources |
| (Regional sales tax, |
| cost-cutting efforts) |
+---------------+
```
Let's see what happens next!

I'm totally down with the parcel tax idea, as long as it's structured properly . The way they're breaking it down by home size is super clear and easy to understand. And let's be real, $183 million for Muni services is a drop in the bucket compared to the city's overall budget . But what really gets me is the layout of their proposal - it's like they took all these different factors (renters, small businesses, homeowners) and organized them into neat little sections . It's so refreshing to see a plan that's not just a mess of numbers and stats! The only thing I'd suggest is adding some extra bullet points to explain the benefits of public transportation for commuters and locals - it would really help drive home the importance of this initiative

I'm kinda surprised it took this long for them to come up with a plan . 300 million is no joke, I get why they need to find ways to close that gap. But the parcel tax could still be super unfair, especially for small businesses and renters who already struggle to afford rent . The 50k sq ft limit seems like a good compromise though, hoping it's enough to make everyone happy . Can't wait to see how this all plays out in Nov

im not sure about this parcel tax idea... i mean, $129 a year is a lot for a single-family home up to 3k sq ft . it feels like they're passing the buck to homeowners instead of finding other ways to cut costs or increase funding. and what about all the renters who already pay enough in rent? are they gonna be hit with this extra tax too?

at the same time, i get why they need to do something - muni services have been struggling for ages. but is a parcel tax really the best solution? couldn't they explore other options like increasing funding from corporations or finding ways to reduce waste? it feels like this plan is just kicking the can down the road

anyway, i guess we'll just have to wait and see how it plays out in november. fingers crossed that it works out for everyone

omg cant believe san francisco is having to think of a parcel tax its like theyre gonna hit all homeowners with that $129 bill lol what if people just put it on their taxes like normal?

anyway, gotta feel for muni riders who are gonna have to deal with this. at least the city's trying to find a way to save the service... maybe they coulda done that without hitting up property owners tho? still, $183 million isnt bad im sure its better than nothing

OMG u guys i just read this news about San Francisco trying to save Muni service thru a parcel tax it's like they're gonna charge homeowners some serious cash tho $129 a year for single family homes and $249 for multifamily homes...idk how people with smaller homes are supposed to afford that and what about the renters and small biz owners who are already struggling? but at the same time i get why they gotta do it since Muni services are literally on life support rn and we all know how hard it is 2 navigate the city without public transport anyway, apparently they'll be raising like $183 million a year if it passes...but let's be real, thats still not enough to cover the full budget deficit so yeah, fingers crossed that ppl will get on board with this plan

I'm not a fan of this parcel tax idea . I mean, sure, Muni services are super important for San Francisco, but charging homeowners more isn't exactly the best solution. It's gonna hit renters and small businesses hard, you know? They're already struggling to make ends meet, and now they'd have to shell out extra cash just to keep their homes in the city. And what about all the seniors living on fixed incomes? Wouldn't it be better to look for other ways to cut costs, like finding more efficient routes or exploring public-private partnerships? It's not like we haven't seen cities find creative solutions before!

I gotta say, I'm all for saving Muni service, we need that metro system to get around SF! The parcel tax is a good idea, it's not too shabby at $129/year. I mean, you'd rather pay a little extra and keep the trains rolling than lose your bus route or something . Yeah, some people might grumble about it being unfair, but we all gotta chip in somehow, right? Plus, it's just a small price to pay for having Muni around. I mean, have you seen the lines during rush hour? Not worth losing this service, imo!

omg u gotta hear this... so san francisco is tryna save muni by hitin' homeowners with a parcel tax of like 129 bucks per year lol it sounds reasonable but honestly who's gonna pay that? and what about renters and small biz owners they're already gettin stressed out just thinkin bout the rising costs in sf... plus the city's only proposed to raise like 183 million per year which is still not enough to cover the massive deficit of over 300 million... it's a tough spot but i feel for the people livin in sf who actually need muni

omg i'm so done with these annual parcel taxes in sf like who thought it was a good idea to hit ppl with even more money?? i get that muni is struggling but can't we think outside the box? maybe instead of taxing homeowners, the city could explore other revenue streams or cut costs elsewhere? anyway i guess this plan moving forward means renters & small biz owners are gonna feel the pinch again... not exactly thrilled about it

ugh, parcel tax is such a pain in the butt lol dont get me wrong, i need muni to get to work too, but $129/yr for every single homeowner? thats like, crazy talk! what about all the tiny homes and apartments out there? they can barely afford rent as it is... and small businesses? i know a bunch of friends who own shops on haight street, if that tax goes thru, they'll be like "game over" i get that muni needs to stay afloat, but cant we find other ways to close the budget gap? maybe some cost-cutting measures or even a regional sales tax like they mentioned?

I think it's gonna be a tough sell . I mean, $129 a pop just 'cause you own a house? That's a pretty steep hit to homeowners. And what about those who can't afford it? Like, are we talkin' people who make ends meet or folks who are barely scrapin' by? It seems like it'd disproportionately affect lower-income residents, which wouldn't be fair .

And yeah, I get the need for Muni services, but is this really the only solution? Can't we explore other options like increasing funding through the city budget or lookin' into more creative solutions? It feels like we're just patchin' up a hole instead of fixin' the whole thing .

"When you spend money, you don't save it." Property owners in San Francisco might not see this as a saving measure at all , especially if they're renters or small business owners who could be footing the bill for the $183 million annual parcel tax. It's like taking a hit to their wallets just to keep Muni services running .