[Kalium]

You're absolutely right. That is a significant difference.

My point was that O($10m) isn't even enough to reliably land something on the ballot, much less get whatever crazy thing you want passed.

This of course being distinct from undoing Prop 13.

[rcpt]

Let's say $200M then. That's more than Uber's Prop 22 had and that was bad for just about everyone who voted for it.

In a state that's nearly majority renters it should be possible to outspend HJTA and win.

[Apocryphon]

I wonder when will tech companies will wise up and put some serious money towards lobbying for more housing for their employees.

Probably never because management don't care, highly-compensated workers will find a way, and many are moving to at least hybrid-remote anyway. But imagine what if big SF corporate money finally got sick of their headquarters being surrounded by homeless suffering and public sanitation problems and put some money towards systematically fixing it.

[Kalium]

That's such a good idea that tech companies already agree with you and have done precisely that. You might look at Mountain View for an example of tech companies lobbying for more housing in action.

[Apocryphon]

It's a good start that should've been pursued earlier the past decade, but really they should dream bigger and band together to take on Prop 13. They alone have the money to do so.

[Kalium]

In theory I agree that prop 13 is a plague.

At the same time, I can think of few things with worse optics than big, fat, cash-rich tech companies full of big, fat, rich techies banding together to raise taxes on regular homeowners.

[rcpt]

I think it's arguably worse optics that white landowning families get preferential treatment under tax law at the expense of minorities.

Prop 13 is possibly illegal: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3012949