Ed Lee Proposes Small Business Legislation Aimed At Killing Bills Deemed 'Job Killers'

Fulfilling a campaign promise to focus his four-year term on job growth, Mayor Ed Lee has proposed one of the most business-friendly pieces of legislation to come down the pike in quite a while.

Speaking at his monthly, voter-mandated "question time" before the Board of Supervisors, Lee outlined a plan to introduce a ballot measure amending the city's charter that would empower the Small Business Commission to put the brakes on any piece of legislation deemed a "job killer."

While the exact details of Lee's plan remain tentative, it would essentially require that a city economist review all pending legislation coming from the Board. If the economist determines that the legislation would adversely impact the city's overall number of jobs, the Small Business Commission would then hold a public hearing regarding the legislation and also have the opportunity to submit an alternative, undoubtedly more pro-business, proposal.

The law seems targeted directly at curtailing the legislative power of Board's progressive wing, which has often been accused of being inhospitable to the city's business community.

"It is City Hall's responsibility to help small businesses grow and promote job growth in the private sector," said Lee to the San Francisco Business Times.

Many of the structures implied in Lee's legislation already exist under the current system, but only serve advisory roles. Presently, the Small Business Commission reviews legislative and policy changes, however, it merely makes non-binding recommendations to the Mayor, the Board and other city agencies regarding the way that the changes would affect San Francisco's small business community.

Similarly, the Office of Economic Analysis, which was created by 2004's Proposition I, issues reports on all legislation with the potential to have an economic impact on the city--focusing on issues including business attraction and retention, tax revenues and, yes, job creation or elimination.

Supervisor David Campos argues that Lee's proposed legislation would be ineffective because of problems with the composition of the Small Business Commission. "The commission as a whole is out of touch with the small-business community," Campos told the San Francisco Examiner. "I don't think they represent the interest of many small merchants in the [city's] various neighborhoods."

The seven-member commission consists of six current or former small business owners or operators and one representative of a neighborhood economic organization or an expert in small business finance. Four of the commissioners are appointed by the mayor and three by the Board of Supervisors.

This proposal was one part of the 17-point "Jobs Roadmap" Lee rolled out during his campaign. Other campaign promises in the document included a reformation of the city's payroll tax and the implementation of a $5 million small business loan program.

The mayor hopes to obtain the six votes from the Board of Supervisors required to get this measure on next June's ballot.

Comments

[addisonsteele]

07:14 PM on 12/15/2011

This is what happens when one of Willie Brown's minions takes office.

[dbrett480]

01:40 AM on 12/15/2011

Isn't every bill passed by the People's Democratic Republic of San Francisco a job killer?

[SFRussell1963]

08:13 PM on 12/14/2011

"details of Lee's plan remain tentative". Government speak for it's never going to happen. Blah blah blah

[TeriPettit]

07:37 PM on 12/14/2011

If the commission is going to be given the power to veto any piece of legislation that it deems a "job killer", without oversight, then half of the commission should be EMPLOYEES of small businesses, such as dental technicians, retail workers, restaurant employees, etc.

When the entire (or even a majority) of the commission are owners of small businesses, then it would be too easy for them to veto legislation that actually preserves jobs.

The interests of small businesses and their employees often coincide, since employees clearly do not benefit when the business they work for fails to prosper. But they are not identical - there are many actions, such as increasing reliance on automation or outsourcing, that benefit owners but not their employees. E.g., an ordinance that made outsourcing easier would kill local jobs, but would not be likely to be opposed by business owners.

[SmallBusiness]

06:00 PM on 12/14/2011

City Hall has been killing small business for the past 10 years. Just look around and see how much empty commerical spaces and how many small business has gone under. The cost of doing small business has rising 100%. Elimination of payroll taxes has not effect for small business in the past or in the future. Any other so call program is wasted of money. Simply lower government fees would help small business a long way. Look at the water cost. It has gone out of this world. The increase in water rate is not from increase in projects. It is all to paying governement employess result in decrease in city revenues.
People cry for transparency of corporate America. It is about time for transparency for all government agencies. You think poor financial management for banks. Just look at San Francisco.

[Aaron Sankin]

04:08 PM on 12/15/2011

Actually, San Francisco has, quite possibly, the strongest commercial real estate market, particularly for office space, of anywhere in the county. Huff Post SF actually has a big story on it coming out next week.