We Oppose Propositions D, E, and F
The campaign to put Mayor Lurie’s so-called virtually unprecedented “Clean Up City Hall” Charter Amendments on the November ballot has amassed over $8.8 million to influence the SF voters.Who is funding this campaign and why?Top right-wing donors include Michael Moritz (Venture Capital, Sequoia Capital), Chris Larson & Lyna Lam (Crypto billionaire; Ripple Labs and major Trump donor), John Pritzker (Investor; Pritzker Family Hyatt Hotel fortune), Emerson Collective (Laurene Powell Jobs), and John Wolthius (Tech founder; Twilio, on the board of SF YIMBY). [1]
The real goal of these Charter Amendments – and their billionaire supporters – is centralization of executive branch power in the Mayor’s office and elimination of public participation, oversight, and checks and balances. Lurie’s proposed Charter amendments would make three fundamental undemocratic changes:
Prop D: Raises the Threshold of Signatures Needed to Put a Measure on the Ballot – an Assault on Democracy
If Prop D passes, it will require 42,500 signatures to place an ordinance on the ballot, four times higher than the 10,600 required today, making San Francisco’s direct democracy provisions the most onerous in California. While billionaires – like the donors to Lurie’s Charter Amendment campaign – can hire paid signature companies at a cost of $20 per signature or more – for costs as much as $1 million to qualify a measure, ordinary citizens would need some 10,000 volunteer hours to collect the same amount. Prop D would also raise the number of supervisors needed to place a measure from 4 to a minimum of 6 while removing the mayor’s unilateral ability to place measures on the ballot.
Key Issues: These changes raise insurmountable barriers to citizen initiatives and seek to minimize participation and democracy. San Francisco voters pass or reject measures with clear margins reflecting civic engagement, direct democracy, and voter control over policy. Ballot measures are often the only way voters override City Hall. Examples have historically included: ethics reforms, rent protections, raising the minimum wage, open-government (sunshine) rules, and ensuring corporations pay their fair share of taxes. Dramatically increasing the number of signatures required to place an initiative on the ballot would make it impossible for citizen organizations to qualify a measure, a right San Franciscans have held for 125 years.
Prop D won’t stop ballot bloat – it will just let those who can write big checks put their measures on the ballot, while regular San Franciscans are left out. Protect access for everyone: Vote NO on D.
Prop E: Reduces Public Oversight of Large City Contracts
If Prop E passes, the power and authority of the City Administrator, appointed by the Mayor, would be greatly increased while the role of the elected Board of Supervisors would be further reduced. The City Administrator oversees grants, contracts, and purchases for city agencies. Prop E would extend this authority to the Municipal Transportation Authority (MTA), Public Utility Commission (PUC), Airport, Port, and the City’s charitable trust departments; and increase the City Administrator’s term from 5 to 10 years. Prop E would reduce the Board’s oversight: Only contracts of $25 million or more (up from $10 million) or agreements that bring in $4.5 million in revenue (up from $1 million) would need Board approval at a public hearing.
Key Issue: Board oversight exists precisely because city contracting has historically posed a corruption risk, with contracts based on personal relationships rather than merit. Increasing the contract threshold would mean fewer contracts require Board review and large contracts could proceed without public hearings or debate. Protect Board and public oversight: Vote NO on E.
Prop F: Empowers the Mayor to Reorganize and Consolidate City Departments and Fire Department Heads and Commissioners
Claiming that the mayor needs power to hire and fire department heads and reorganize government in the name of accountability, Prop F would give the mayor the ability to vastly reshape city government by reorganizing or even consolidating 24 city departments, including the big ones such as police, fire, public works, public health, planning, building inspection, environment, ethics, libraries, recreation and parks.
Key Issues: Under existing law, reorganization or consolidation of city departments established in the Charter would require a vote of the people. Prop F would give the mayor much greater control over departments and allow the mayor to remove commissioners for any reason, not for just cause. Independent commissions exist to prevent political interference. Reducing their independence would make these and other bodies much more political. Prop F removes checks and balances essential to good governance. Instead, this encourages an authoritarian style of governance.
Even if you do like this Mayor and trust him to have your interests in mind, you may not like or trust the next Mayor or the one after that. Concentrating so much power in the hands of one person can lead to disastrous consequences, as we’ve seen in our nation’s capital.
[1] See Lurie’s Ballot Initiatives – The Phoenix Project: https://drive.google.com/file/d/161OBVjym0rBAGMApDMJymSGzsXlFXAz-/view
