What San Francisco voter wouldn't like to have more say over what gets built along a big chunk of the city's waterfront? The appeal of Proposition B on the June ballot is obvious, even its critics acknowledge, but that doesn't mean it's without consequence.

Funding for transit, affordable housing and $1.6 billion in needed repairs to Port of San Francisco facilities - repairs like fixing the seawall that holds back the bay - could all be diminished if voters next month approve the measure to limit tall waterfront projects. That's the conclusion of a series of reports the city released Tuesday.

Prop. B, backed by the local chapter of the Sierra Club and limited-growth activists from the city's progressive left, would also add cost and uncertainty to planned developments and "could enable developers to bypass otherwise mandatory environmental review" and other safeguards, say the reports, which were prepared by seven city departments at the direction of Mayor Ed Lee, who has not taken a public position on Prop. B.

The reports showed that the port is relying on joint projects with private developers to contribute $322 million to its infrastructure needs and that the city is projected to get $93.6 million in development fees for affordable housing from two major development proposals - the San Francisco Giants' new urban village on their main parking lot and a two-part development plan for the industrial Pier 70 area.

The Giants now plan to modify their proposal, and Forest City, the developer on the main Pier 70 proposal, has been getting community input and tweaking its plan for months.

With Prop. B in the mix, it's unclear what the final products will mean in terms of affordable housing fees and other revenue.

"As with any important ballot measure, there are pluses and minuses," said Supervisor Scott Wiener, who first proposed the idea of having city departments produce impartial analyses of Prop. B's possible impact. "Ultimately we want voters to know what the pluses and minuses are. The voters will make an informed decision, and that will be the law of the land."

The findings were presented as impartial analyses but quickly discounted by Prop. B supporters as politically tainted.

Those supporters, including former Mayor Art Agnos, said the reports were skewed against the measure, and came from the same administration that supported a luxury condominium development across from the Ferry Building known as 8 Washington. That development was soundly defeated in a low-turnout election in November by the group of activists now behind Prop. B.

Prop. B would require voter approval for any new building on port property to exceed the existing height limit. Opponents call it ballot-box planning at its worst that will muck up the planning process, replacing professional analysis and public hearings with punchy campaign slogans.

Prop. B backers say it doesn't change the current planning process, but adds an extra layer of protection.

"I sleep better at night knowing that voters, rather than politicians and bureaucrats, have the final say on height limit waivers on port waterfront property," Agnos said.