Examiner Editorial: Examiner endorsements for upcoming election

San Francisco voters who have paid little attention to Tuesday’s election will lose an important chance to help improve The City’s crushing budget deficits if they do not go to the polls. The following are The Examiner’s endorsements for this year’s San Francisco races and measures.

City Attorney Dennis Herrera and Treasurer Jose Cisneros are running unopposed in the only two open offices. Both incumbents have had solid records in office and we are glad to recommend their re-election.

Our “yes” endorsements begin with Proposition A, which would streamline The City’s annual budgeting process. The Examiner also supports Proposition C, which would allow the 49ers and the Recreation and Park Department to lease naming rights for Candlestick Park, reviving a law that has expired. Half the revenue would be used for funding city recreation center directors. Even if the Niners do win Santa Clara’s commitment to helping them build a new stadium there, it’s unlikely the team could exit San Francisco until at least the 2014 season. A four- to six-year naming sponsorship would bring needed money for parks and make team owners a little happier with The City. Vote “YES” on Prop. A and Prop. C.

The Examiner recommends endorsing Proposition D to allow a mid-Market Street sign district. Around the world, flashy concentrations of the latest electronic advertising signs add to the visual excitement of renowned urban centers such as Times Square in New York City, Tokyo’s Ginza and the London theater district. Bright lights certainly couldn’t hurt those blighted Market Street blocks between Fifth and Seventh streets. This will not cost the taxpayers anything, so we have nothing to lose by giving it a try. Vote “YES” on Prop. D.

Our recommendations for propositions B and E are “no” votes. Prop. B would remove the City Charter provision that currently restricts Board of Supervisors members from having more than two full-time aides. We agree that with more than 70,000 constituents per district, it might be argued that San Francisco supervisors could use more than two aides. But the problem with Prop. B is that it leaves our spend-happy supervisors free to hire as many staffers as they wish, even when City Hall is struggling to combat major deficits. Not retaining any sort of hiring cap is just asking for big trouble.

Prop. E seeks to ban all new general-advertising signs from being placed on city-owned structures — not only buildings, but bus shelters, kiosks, benches and newspaper racks, some of which provide much-needed revenue for the Municipal Transportation Agency. During hard times like these, The City needs all the private revenue sources it can get. It would be misguided and destructive to allow the loss of municipal revenue that helps keep valuable programs alive. Vote “NO” on Prop. B and Prop. E.