deceptive that the proponents are saying that this is going to not cost the city money because this election is privately funded because for all those future welcomes, the city would be on the line for coming up with that money should the board of supervisors decide that the saturday voting should continue. in terms of thismaker being unnecessary there are still right now plenty of opportunities for people to vote on saturday if they so desire. in the two weekends leading up to the election people can vote from 10:00 to 4:00 at city hall if they would like to vote on the weekends, if they like to vote early they can vote at city hall monday through friday. so there are plenty of opportunities to vote in person and you may vote absentee if you would like to do so and there are already about 40% of the voters in the city who are permanent absentee oat voters

so we think it's a bit unrealistic to talk about this community building aspect of saturday voting when so many of the people already not -- are p going to the polls and don't have a desire to go to the polling place in person. >> i see. if this measure passes how does your organization feel it will affect future elections? >> it will increase costs dramatically and also the amount of work that the department of elections is going to have to put into each election going forward so i mentioned the quarter million dollar figure of additional cost for adding an additional day of voting. that's a significant number given the fact that the stip already has a $481 million budget deficit. there's no reason to add to that deficit. also in terms of work the city has a hard enough time finding enough people willing to open up their homes to have say

polling place for one election day as it is. so this would increase the work for the department of elections too. >> ok. thank you very much. and that pretty much sums up proposition i. please peel free to go to the league of women voters web site at sfvotes.org for more physician on the -- information on the upcoming fiction -- >> currently the discharges a 14% tax on the rental of hotel rooms and related charges and the money goes to the general fund. in addition, a fee of 1% to 1.5% for improving the convention center and promoting san francisco is assessed. the hotel tax applies to the

amount a guest pays to occupy a room and related charges and the hotel operator must collect the tax when it collects the payment. proposition j. would increase the hotel tax rate from 14% to 16%. this increase would be in effect from january 1, 2011 until january 1, 2014. money collected from the increase would go to the general fund and the city could use it for any public purpose. a yes vote would increase the hotel tax rate from 14% to 16% for the next three years. a no vote would not make this change. please visit the league of women voters website at sfvotes.org to get all of your voting information. early voting is available weekdays at city hall from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. if you don't vote early, make sure to vote on

>> currently the city charges a 14% tax on the rental of hotel rooms and related charges and the money goes to the general fund. in addition, a fee of 1% to 1.5% for improving the conception center and promoting san francisco is assessed. the hotel tax applies to the amount the guest pays to occupy a room and related charges and the hotel operator must collect the tax when it collects the payment. proposition k would keep the hotel tax rate at 14%. proposition k would combine different definitions of operate in the tax code to one definition. a yes vote would keep the hotel tax rate at 14%. if the voters adopt both proposition k and proposition

j, the hotel tax rate would be generated by the proposition reaching the most votes. please assist the league of women voters at sfvotes.org to get all of the related information. if you don't vote early, make sure to vote on >> hello, this is steve mcdonald with the league of women voters of san francisco, here to discuss proposition l, a ballot measure which is going to be voted on bit citizen of san francisco on november 2. -- biting citizens of san francisco on november 2. >> proposition l is a measure that prohibits sitting or ligue on a public sidewalk in san francisco between 7m and 8 a.m.

with certain exemptions such as authorized medical visits, festivals and parades. >> i'm here with paul bowden in opposition to proposition l. paul, what is it that you find in opposition to proposition l? >> just about everything. it's a very broad, draconian, very scrim national orie piece of legislation being put before the voters at a point in time when it's really more about dividing people up to get conservative candidates elected as part of the newsome campaign than it is about the pup safety of the people that live here. that's dishonest and it's the kind of politics we're all sick of and would like to see go away. >> if passed, how do you see it

impacting the citizen of san francisco? >> if it's passed we can just assume it will get tied up in the court. as with other laws similar to this, such as the one in seattle where they said it's the example of how to do it right, it was found unconstitutional in the court. it's about ant -- aren't up all civic homeless people, aren't up intimidated by the poverty you see? which don't have enough loss -- laws to make home ms people disappear and this is the kind of scamegoting -- scapegoating poverty we've seen since the feinstein administration. until we start attacking the roots of poverty, they use police and private security guards to try to make homeless people disappear.

enough is enough. you can't tell us it's illegal to sit on the sidewalk. that's not going to be enforced against everybody of the it's p going to create a safer environment. it's going to mean another law that penalizes poor people because the cops don't want to see them around, the business groups don't want to see them around and that's why this didn't pass the board of supervisors, that's why so many clubs in this town have come out against it. it's classist, mean, racist and mean-spirited and we just need to make sure this is not what san francisco stands for. >> thank you, paul. in a moment, we'll hear from supporters of proposition l. now i'm with a small business owner who is going to speak in support of proposition l. the reasons you support proposition l had >> as a small business owner on haight street over the years

i've experienced first hand a lot of episodes of hostility and incivility from people that choose to hang out throughout the day or night on the sidewalks. initial lynn i thought it was just confined to the haight but i found with investigations that's -- that it's a neighborhood by neighborhood citywide issue that a slot -- lot of afterans are fed up with and d san franciscans are fed up with and frustrated. the reason it's on the ballot now is the board of supervisors decided that public safety wasn't enough of an important issue to deal with directly and tried to squash it so now the mayor has put it on the ballot for the people to speak about what's best for san francisco. >> if passed what do you think are the impacts to san francisco? >> the intention is that we'll see an improvement throughout the city from block po -- to

block. for one, less people congregating on the sidewalk and more importantly a return of civility throughout san francisco. san francisco obviously is a very caring, compassionate city and the city invests tens of millions of dollars into the homeless and obviously other nonprofit issues, but there needs to be a balance and i think that's where somehow it seems that certain people in san francisco have become more entitled, at least the feeling of entitlement, i guess you would in turn say this causes these actions they do on the streets and what have you. so yes, we hope it haze very positive effect on the city, otherwise we wouldn't be putting this much effort into it. proposition l say coalition of san franciscans. people that basically care about the how the city is. it's represented obviously by merchants and residents throughout the city but as well

as that we have the elderly, the disabled. anyone that basically wants to have a return to more of a public safety kind of inspired environment in san francisco. >> thanks, ken. >> you're welcome. >> so i hope this has been interesting. if there is any other need for information go to the league of women voters web site and don't forget to vote november 2. >> hello, my name is katie with the san francisco leave women voters. i'm here today to discuss proposition m, a bat -- ballot measure san francisco citizens will be voting on november 2. >> proposition m is a measure that would require the police commission to adopt a written community policing policy and

require the chief of police to establish a comprehensive foot beat patrol program. this measure would not allow the police code to prohibit sitting or lying on sidewalks. >> i'm here with david wagoner, co-president of the harvey milk lgbt cluck and proponent of proposition m. >> i support m because m would require the police commissioner to make community policing and foot patrols the official policy of san francisco. everyone agrees community policing and foot patrols are essential to building a trust between police and the communities they serve. what prop m will do is require the chief and the commission to develop a comprehensive program of community policing and foot patrols. what it won't do is micromanage the police. it's not going to tell the

chief what to do in terms of how many officers to assign to which districts. it leaves all of that discretion up to the commission and the chief of police. i support prop m because this city needs community policing and foot patrols as the solutions, the best solution for increasing public safety and building trust between police and the communities they serve. seattle, new york city, new york -- chicago and boston already have community policing. our city deserves nothing less. we need to have the very best policing models enslinde in our laws. it simply asks the police to develop comprehensive policies around community policing and foot patrols.

>> if passed how will proposition m impact san francisco citizens? >> it's going to take what everyone already agrees is great policy and give it teeth. foot patrols are the teeth of community policing. if we have, if everyone says community policing is a great idea but officers aren't actually out on the streets walking streets, then it's effectively all bark but no bite. prop m will make sure that community policing has the foot patrol element so that in all areas of the city, not just the affluent areas, police will be walking the streets, getting to know the neighbors, the communities where they're policing. that has been shown over and over again to increase the trust between the police and communities and to slower -- lower crime. that's why i support prop m. ? great, thank you very much, david. up next, we'll be hearing from

an opponent of proposition m. i'm now here with kent, a small business owner on haight street and an opponent of proposition m. why do you oppose proposition m? >> proposition m, i think there's two solid reasons to say no. the first is that it wrestles control away from the professionals, away from the chief of police and his command staff and it brings it into the happened of the politicians, i. -- hands of the politicians, i.e. the board of supervisors. the second reason which i think is i think more obvious or actually not, more obvious and more major, is proposition m contains a poison pill. deep inside the language, i think the second to the last sentence states that by voting for proposition m the voter intends that the foot beat

patrol program overrides proposition l which prohibits hit -- sitting or lying on the sidewalk. it cancels out proposition l. so if proposition m receives one more vote than l, it can els l. one of the thing the police chief has stated for a long time now is that one of the tools the police need to deal with things on the street and the growing incivility is propition -- proposition l, the civil sidewalks legislation. >> how would proposition m impack the sis? >> biggest thing is if it passes it would nullify proposition l, the second to the last sentence in the legislation. for that very reason it's going to affect adversely all the

neighborhoods where people have been crying out for help the last few years. >> great. i hope this has been helpful. for more information go to the league of women voters web site and don't forget to vote on >> currently the city imposes a tax on the sale of real estate in san francisco. the tax rate ranges from 0.5% to 1.5%. depending on the value of the real estate. the 1.5% applies to sales of $5 million or more. the tax applies to real estate leases with a term of 35 years or more. proposition n would increase the tax rate for the sale of real estate valued at more than $5 million for real estate sales from $5 million to $10

million. it would increase to 10%. for more than 10 million, it would increase to 2.5 prt. it would relate to real estate leases with 35 years or more. a no vote would not make this change. please visit the league of women voters website at sfvotes.org to get all of your voting information. early voting is available weekdays at city hall from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. if you don't vote early, make sure to vote on