Ballot Analysis

San Francisco’s government has become too complicated, with dozens of commissions and overlapping layers of authority that slow decision-making and reduce transparency. Prop A is a practical step toward simplifying that structure. It reduces the number of commissions written into the City Charter, consolidates or eliminates unnecessary bodies, and gives future elected leaders greater flexibility to organize City government without returning to voters every time an administrative change is needed.

San Franciscans deserve a government where residents know who is responsible for delivering results. Prop A will not solve every problem at City Hall, but it moves San Francisco toward a simpler, more accountable, and effective government. Advance SF supports Prop A.

San Francisco should focus its resources and attention on delivering the core services residents expect rather than creating a new City-owned financial institution. Prop B would establish the framework for a Municipal Finance Corporation that could eventually become a public bank. But the measure provides no funding to capitalize or operate the institution, leaving unanswered how much public money would ultimately be required, where that money would come from, and what financial risk taxpayers could be asked to assume to pay for it.

San Francisco already faces serious long-term budget challenges, and City government does not currently operate a bank. Creating one would bring substantial financial, operational, and regulatory responsibilities and would overlap with lending and financial services already provided by banks, credit unions, community lenders, and other institutions. The City has more immediate responsibilities and should not commit to a costly new financial undertaking without a clear funding plan or an assessment of risks to taxpayers. Advance SF opposes Prop B.

San Francisco’s housing shortage remains one of the greatest barriers to making the City affordable for working families. Prop C strengthens the Housing Trust Fund and creates a path to increase annual funding for affordable rental housing, homeownership assistance, housing preservation, and related investments. The measure also expands eligibility for down-payment assistance, helping more middle-income San Franciscans who earn too much to qualify for traditional affordable housing programs but still cannot afford to buy a home here.

Advance SF is generally cautious about locking spending requirements into the City Charter, particularly when San Francisco faces significant budget deficits. Prop C addresses part of that concern by allowing contributions to be frozen or reduced during serious fiscal downturns. San Francisco needs to build more housing at every income level, and Prop C provides sustained resources to help lower- and middle-income residents remain in the City. Advance SF supports Prop C.

San Francisco asks voters to decide too many issues that should be handled through normal representative government. The City’s unusually low signature requirement makes it easier to place ordinances on the ballot, where policies can become difficult to amend even when circumstances change. Prop D would raise the signature requirement for voter-initiated ordinances, end the Mayor’s unilateral ballot authority, and require a majority vote from the Board of Supervisors.

Voters should maintain the power to bring issues directly to the ballot, but proposals should demonstrate meaningful public or legislative support before reaching voters. Prop D would help reduce unnecessary ballot measures and encourage more policy decisions to go through the normal legislative process, where residents can hold elected officials accountable, and laws can be adjusted as circumstances change. Advance SF supports Prop D.

San Francisco’s contracting system is notoriously slow and complicated, costing taxpayers money and making it harder for businesses and nonprofits to work with the City. Prop E would give the City Administrator clearer responsibility for contracting rules and raise the threshold requiring Board of Supervisors approval for certain contracts from $10 million to $25 million. These changes would help reduce unnecessary delays while preserving oversight of major public expenditures.

Residents should expect City Hall to purchase goods and services efficiently and have clear accountability when the system fails. Giving the City Administrator clearer authority over procurement is a sensible management reform that can help San Francisco operate more like a functional organization and less like a collection of separate bureaucracies. Advance SF supports Prop E.

San Francisco voters elect a Mayor to run the City, but the Mayor lacks clear authority over many of the departments responsible for delivering City services. Authority is instead divided among the Mayor, commissions, department heads, and other bodies. Prop F would give the Mayor greater ability to organize the executive branch, oversee departments, and appoint or remove department leaders.

Greater authority must come with greater accountability. If the Mayor has clearer responsibility for managing City government, voters will also have a clearer understanding of whom to hold responsible for whether City government delivers results. Prop F creates a more understandable management structure and gives elected leadership better tools to improve City services. Advance SF supports Prop F.

A reliable MUNI system is essential to San Francisco’s economy and quality of life. Workers need to reach their jobs, residents need dependable transportation, and businesses need customers and employees to move throughout the City. MUNI faces a major operating shortfall that threatens service. Deep cuts would mean longer waits, less frequent service, and fewer transportation options at a time when San Francisco is working to bring more workers, residents, and visitors back to its neighborhoods and Downtown.

Prop H asks property owners to provide additional funding to maintain MUNI service and includes financial review, reporting, and oversight requirements. New taxes should come with scrutiny of how public agencies spend existing dollars, and the SFMTA must continue finding efficiencies and improving performance. But allowing MUNI service to deteriorate would carry even greater economic and quality-of-life costs. Advance SF supports Prop H.

San Francisco needs more housing, but Prop I would lock roughly $120 million a year in existing General Fund revenue into narrowly prescribed housing programs without requiring that the money produce a specific number of new homes. The City Controller estimates that redirecting these funds would increase San Francisco’s budget deficit by approximately $120 million annually, leaving fewer flexible dollars available for police, firefighters, paramedics, clean streets, public health, and other essential City services.

Prop I would also increase the transfer tax on real estate transactions of $25 million or more from 6% to a combined 9%, raising the cost of investing in San Francisco at a time when the City needs new investment in housing, offices, retail, and downtown. San Francisco should invest in affordable housing, but voters should demand accountability for results and preserve the City’s ability to fund its most pressing needs. Prop C provides a more responsible approach to increasing housing investment without the fiscal and accountability problems created by Prop I. Advance SF opposes Prop I.

San Francisco’s economy depends on a reliable regional transportation system. Hundreds of thousands of workers, residents, students, and visitors rely on BART, MUNI, Caltrain, and other transit systems to move throughout the Bay Area. These agencies face major operating shortfalls that threaten substantial service cuts. Reduced service would make commuting harder, increase congestion, and undermine San Francisco’s efforts to revitalize Downtown and attract employers and workers. The City Controller has warned that deep transit cuts would particularly harm Downtown by reducing office attendance, economic activity, and ultimately City tax revenue.

The Connect Bay Area Transit Measure would establish a 14-year regional sales tax to preserve transit service and fund rider improvements. The tax would be 1% in San Francisco and 0.5% in Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties. The measure is expected to raise approximately $980 million annually and includes independent financial-efficiency reviews and oversight requirements. Another tax is a significant ask in a region that already carries a high tax burden, and transit agencies must continue controlling costs and improving service. But the economic consequences of allowing the Bay Area’s transit network to deteriorate would be far costlier. Advance SF supports the Regional Transit Measure.