Newsom might have done better to think about how to keep Twitter’s bluebird in California and prevent it from migrating to Texas, the home of the bluebonnet. Having lived in California for about two decades, Musk over the past two years has notably cooled down on the Golden State and warmed up in Texas.

Two years ago, the SpaceX owner and Tesla chief executive announced he was giving up ‘virtually all physical assets’ and began selling his seven California homes, moving into a modest home rented to SpaceX outside of Brownsville, Texas, where the company’s launch site is. Six months ago, Musk moved Tesla’s headquarters to Austin, leaving Silicon Valley behind. Telsa’s sprawling vehicle factory is also in Austin, as is Musk’s tunnel-making operation, the Boring Company. Twitter might seem stuck in San Francisco after Musk takes office.

But before Twitter can join the biggest “tech exodus” from the Bay Area and Silicon Valley, leaders in California — and those in San Francisco in particular — would do well to think about what’s keeping companies away. The most relevant question for San Francisco: Why would tech companies want to stay?

Two years ago, city voters imposed several taxes on corporations, including a gross receipts tax on companies whose top-paid executives earn more than 100 times the median employee compensation. It was two years after voters approved a ballot measure levying a gross receipts tax on companies earning more than $50 million a year (allegedly as a reason why PayPal just closed its San Francisco office. ).

Not that the city’s higher tax revenue has translated into making it a safer and more enjoyable place to live and work. Shoplifting across the city remains chronic, so much so that many retail businesses don’t bother to report shoplifting: last year, San Francisco police carried out arrests and handing over of suspects to prosecution in only 2.4% of robberies. No wonder the thieves have become so brazen.

For nearly half a century, San Francisco mayors have tried unsuccessfully to find a cure for the city’s homeless population. As mayor, Newsom promised nearly two decades ago to end chronic homelessness in 10 years. In March, the mayor of London Breed declared a 90-day emergency in the Tenderloin district, where drug use and homelessness have finally become too much for even the city’s notoriously progressive sensibilities.

But the unwelcoming atmosphere for business is not limited to San Francisco. In addition to the notoriously high taxes that hit all businesses and state employees, California has flirted in recent years with a “global wealth tax” — in its latest incarnation, a 1.5% tax imposed to any California resident with more than $1 billion. in “Global Net Worth” and 1% on those with over $50 million in “Global Net Worth”. Texas, it should be noted, has no state income tax.

Taxes are on Musk’s mind regarding one of his latest California-based ventures: Tesla Energy, a clean energy subsidiary that makes solar panels and battery systems. The state utility in December proposed a “solar levy” — also known as a “grid participation fee” — on California residential solar customers. Musk’s tweet: “Bizarre anti-environment move by the California government.”

Then again, Musk might not be eager to bring thousands of Twitter employees in Texas closer to him, given that, as The Post reported last month, many of them reacted with “shock and dismay” to his purchase of the business. But it’s not like employees who don’t quit in protest necessarily work at the San Francisco headquarters.

The company reopened its offices in mid-March, while narrative workers “decisions about where you work…should be yours”. Musk was touring the company, he suggested Twitter’s office space be converted into a “homeless shelter since nobody shows up anyway.”

This may be the solution: open Twitter’s headquarters in Austin, keep a small team on site, and let the many Twitter employees who seem to be in a permanent California state of mind work remotely – truly remotely. Call it two-step Texas.