by Christin Evans
There are four so-called “Charter Reform” ballot measures on the November ballot that we should all oppose: Propositions A, D, E and F. While each measure does something slightly different, they all have the same effect: silencing the voice of everyday San Franciscans at City Hall.
The Clean Up City Hall campaign spent over $5 million from a couple of wealthy billionaires to put Propositions D, E and F on the ballot. Proposition A did have a hearing at the Board of Supervisors and wouldn’t be all that bad except that it weakens one commission in particular: the Our City, Our Home Oversight Committee that makes recommendations on proposals to fund housing and other solutions to end homelessness, such as eviction prevention, shelter and hygiene services.
These four ballot measures together give the Mayor more power at the expense of voters, the Supervisors and the citizen-run oversight commissions. They are essentially an executive power grab upsetting checks and balances that have been in place in the City for years.
Prop D (Fair Ballot Access) quadruples the threshold of signatures required to place a voter initiative on the ballot, currently approximately 10,500 signatures to over 42,000 signatures. This is anti-democratic limiting the ability of everyday San Franciscans and grassroots organizations to mount a campaign and reserved voter initiative access accessible only to the wealthiest individuals & corporate interests.
Prop F (Executive Branch measure), in a nutshell, gives the Mayor more powers by removing essential checks and balances from the board and oversight commissions.
Essentially, this favors the wealthiest San Franciscans because of who typically occupies the Mayor’s Office.
But let’s say EVEN IF you do like this Mayor and trust this Mayor to have your interests in mind, you might not like or trust the next Mayor or the one after that.
And concentrating so much power in the hands of one person can lead to disastrous effects that parallel what we’ve seen in Washington, D.C..—for example, the elimination of the Department of Education.
Simply put, the Executive Branch Measure goes too far. It allows the Mayor to remove commissioners for any reason, not just cause. Making our commissions rubber stamps with no incentive for commissioners to question the policies and spending of the departments they’re supposed to be overseeing. Similarly, it allows the Mayor to appoint department heads without commission hearings.
Even more problematic, it allows the Mayor to re-arrange departments, combining their staff – or eliminating them altogether. And the Board will then only have 60 days to object or the Mayor’s changes go into effect without a single public hearing.
Prop E, the City Administrator and Contracting measure, proposes to centralize and streamline procurement processes.
While I think we’d all agree efficiency can be a virtue unto itself, there is a tradeoff when things move too quickly, opening the door to potential waste and fraud.
This measure has one particular element that is problematic if you value transparency to city spending—specifically, this measure raises the threshold for contract approval by the Board of Supervisors from $10 million to $25 million.
A recent example of a contract that would have bypassed the Board is the RESET center. That contract with a for-profit, Phoenix-based company called Connections Health Solutions only after high scrutiny from the Board. This measure would allow the City to enter into a contract without a public hearing. Transparency of large contracts engenders greater trust among the public that taxpayer dollars are being well spent and clearly defined performance metrics will be collected and monitored.
Voters value transparency and the scrutiny of checks and balances. And the knowledge that a contract will have a greater level of public scrutiny ensures that staff have crossed their Ts and dotted their Is. Scheduling a hearing does take staff time, but it also ensures higher quality agreements are proposed, delivering greater value for each taxpayer dollar.
No on D, E and F !
The public could have had input on these three measures as well if they proceeded through Board hearings. But because a few billionaires decided to put it on the ballot by spending $4 million and signatures, the public was denied that opportunity to offer more thoughtful input. Therefore, it’s appropriate to oppose all four measures and send a message that good governance charter reform shouldn’t be done in a backroom by a select few.
Checks and balances are essential to good governance. A good system of checks and balances increases the people’s confidence and trust in City government by ensuring legislation is vetted, City services are performing, and taxpayer dollars are well spent.
A vote to support these measures condones the winner-takes-all, billionaire-backed political process that tramples on the democratic participation of everyday San Franciscans, notable working class folks and the minority groups with interests different from those occupying the Mayor’s Office.
Vote No on A, D, E and F !
