Unions Call Jeff Adachi a Tax Dodger
Battle over pension reform continues to escalate
San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi is finding out just how unpleasant it can be to take on the city’s powerful labor unions.
Adachi is behind a pension-reform measure that was officially certified on Monday by the Department of Elections as qualifying for the November ballot. If Adachi’s plan is passed, city employees, including elected officials, will be required to contribute more toward their pension and benefit costs. Adachi says that the plan will save the cash-strapped city about $170 million a year.
The public-employee unions and many San Francisco elected officials are vehemently opposed to Adachi’s plan.
On Monday, Stand Up for Working Families, a new public-employee union group formed to oppose the Adachi measure, sent a letter to José Cisneros, the city treasurer, charging that Adachi “dodges” what the group argues is his obligation to pay city business taxes. The group had sent an initial complaint to Cisneros about the business-tax issue on July 29. “According to public disclosures, Mr. Adachi has made at least $130,000 in his publishing businesses in the last three years, yet has failed to pay business taxes to the City as required by law,” the union group alleges. “We simply cannot countenance politicians — especially politicians who profess to be concerned about the financial stability of the City — to be tax dodgers.”
Adachi says he has a company that published five legal tomes he has written, and that he outsourced the distribution to Los Angeles beginning in 2006. He says that his venture is not “a [local] business within the meaning of San Francisco law” and therefore not subject to city business taxes.
Bob Muscat, the leader of the union effort, could not be reached Monday evening.
This recent effort is only the latest pressure Adachi has faced. The union group last month asked City Attorney Dennis Herrera, District Attorney Kamala D. Harris and the city ethics commission to investigate the accountant who served on a recent civil grand jury that issued a June report warning of a pension crisis. That juror, Craig Weber, volunteered to act as treasurer of Adachi’s group in the waning weeks of the grand jury session. Weber claims that his role was not an ethical breach, and that he had asked the city attorney and the presiding judge for permission before assuming the dual role.
Last Tuesday, a proposal titled “Directing the Budget and Legislative Analyst to Audit the Office of the Public Defender” was voted down at a meeting of the Board of Supervisors. It was sponsored by Supervisor Chris Daly. John Avalos was the only other supervisor who voted to approve the audit.
Does Adachi feel targeted at this point? He is resolute about not engaging on that topic. “I’ll let other people decide,” he says. “I’m looking forward to continue making our case about pension reform to San Franciscans.”








Douglas Greenberg
I did some searching around and they may be confusing him with another Jeff Adachi. It looks like there is a (DJ) Jeff Adachi in Huntington Beach with a number of county tax liens filed from 2004-2008.
There are no tax liens filed against this Jeff Adachi, and he appears to be in good standing with the bar, with no disciplinary record.
What tax are they talking about? If it's the SF business payroll and expense tax, section 904 of the city's tax code makes it clear that this only applies to compensation paid to SF employees. If he's hiring subcontractors in LA, this clearly wouldn't apply.
Jamie Whitaker
Thanks for the coverage ... The labor unions are proving they can be just as petty and disgusting in their personal attacks on someone with whom they have a disagreement as the Republican Karl Rove wannabes. How degrading to the good people of the labor movement from other parts.
Seej Cane
Organized Labor in SF is pretty much embarrassing itself right now...Employee benefit costs are already over $1 billion in the current budget and will increase another $1 billion by 2015- no amount of smears can undo the math.
Mr. G
Looks like the labor unions are running scared, trying to play hardball, but it is too late to be attacking Adachi, the ball is rolling and the labor unions are gonna lose. They better start working on Plan B...
John Smith
"The $170 Million Fallacy"
"the projected savings does not account for the costs of dependents forced to use SF General Hospital because their parent or spouse cannot afford the over $3500 annual premium increase.
Second, the projected savings does not account for the loss of local tax revenue. Employees forced to pay over $5000 more in increased pension and health care costs will spend less in San Francisco restaurants, bars, clothing stores and other businesses. This reduces the city’s business revenue, and hurts small businesses already under stress from the recession.
Third, the initiative does not require that a single dollar of savings be spent to improve MUNI or any other public service. Why not? "
http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=8373#more
Mr. G
The measure states that employee's share of dependent premium costs would increase by $3500, from 25% to 50%. How in the world can this be? Are annual premiums $14,000? if that is so, then the City needs to renegotiate their health care options, something is not adding up...
Jim Corrigan
Here's 2300 reasons why Police & Fire want to call Adachi a tax dodger:
http://vvoice.vo.llnwd.net/e15/5513955.0.pdf