San Francisco November 2020 Nonpartisan Voter Guide
The November 2020 San Francisco Voter Guide, a nonpartisan comprehensive analysis of local propositions and candidate races on the ballot in San Francisco for the Nov. 3, 2020, election, was compiled by Laura Wenus with additional reporting by Liana Wilcox, Mel Baker and Max Pringle.
S.F. Ballot Measures | S.F. Local Races | CA Races | CA Measures
Other resources:
- Listen to an overview from “Civic,” our daily radio show: “What to Expect in California’s Vote-by-Mail November Election”
- Watch “Civic” host Laura Wenus and Mission Local Managing Editor Joe Eskenazi break down the ballot in a recent Public Press Live webinar: “Election 2020: Whats on the Line in San Francisco?”
If you appreciate the nonpartisan voter guides we produce for every local election and want to help us continue this work, consider becoming a monthly member. Thank you.
Proposition A: Health and Homelessness, Parks and Streets Bond
Listen to a brief audio summary:
The “Health and Recovery” proposition is a bond measure put on the ballot in part in response to the devastation wreaked by the coronavirus pandemic. This is a $487.5 million bond aiming to fund a wide range of projects, including supportive housing, homeless shelters, the development of parks and repairs to roads and curb ramps. Read our full analysis of Proposition A.
Proposition B: Department of Sanitation and Streets, Sanitation and Streets Commission and Public Works Commission
Listen to a brief audio summary:
This charter amendment would split the Department of Public Works in two by creating the Department of Sanitation and Streets. Street cleaning and trash removal are currently managed by Public Works, but would become a new department under the measure, with the goal of improving sanitation citywide. The other part of the amendment is an attempt to improve oversight: Both departments would be overseen by commissions. The measure would also require the controller’s office to do a performance audit and cost and waste analysis for both departments every year. Read our full analysis of Proposition B.
Proposition C: Removing Citizenship Requirements for Members of City Bodies
Listen to a brief audio summary:
If this charter amendment passes, San Francisco residents of voting age — which could also change this year (see Proposition G) — could be appointed to city policy bodies even if they aren’t citizens. Proponents say people on the city’s oversight boards don’t represent the city demographically, as 62% of the local population consists of people of color, whereas boards are 50% white. Noncitizens are currently barred from serving on city commissions and boards. Read our full analysis of Proposition C.
Proposition D: Sheriff Oversight
Listen to a brief audio summary:
The San Francisco Police Department is overseen by the Police Commission, while the Sheriff’s Department does not have a local oversight body. Sheriff’s departments are established by state law, and deputies’ responsibilities are set forth by the state, too. The city’s Board of Supervisors doesn’t have the power to directly control the sheriff. This charter amendment would create a city body, the Sheriff’s Department Oversight Board, which would include an inspector general. Neither would have disciplinary power over deputies or staff, nor could they set policy or issue directives. The board would have the power to hold hearings and issue subpoenas, force deputies or other sheriff’s staff to appear at hearings, access facilities — including jails — and refer cases to the district attorney for criminal prosecution. Read our full analysis of Proposition D.
Proposition E: Police Staffing
Listen to a brief audio summary:
In 1994, San Francisco voters passed a charter amendment requiring the Police Department to always keep 1,971 full-duty officers on the force. This amendment would eliminate the mandatory minimum and instead assign the Police Department the task of evaluating its staffing needs based on workload. The police chief would submit that report to the Police Commission every two years, which in turn would hold a public meeting on that assessment and make the final determination about what the staffing level should be. Read our full analysis of Proposition E.
Proposition F: Business Tax Overhaul
Listen to a brief audio summary:
This combined charter amendment and ordinance would change the city’s business tax code in an effort to shift the tax burden away from small businesses and more toward larger ones, with the biggest relief going to restaurants, retail, arts and other businesses that have suffered during the pandemic. The authors of this measure also designed it to create a mechanism for the city to spend funds from previously voter-approved taxes that are tied up in litigation. The city controller estimates Proposition F could generate $97 million every year, once fully implemented in 2024, and would allow the city to spend the $1.5 billion generated by previous taxes tied up by litigation. If the measure doesn’t pass, the city would have to cut an estimated $150 million from its budget. Read our full analysis of Proposition F.
Proposition G: Youth Voting in Local Elections
Listen to a brief audio summary:
This charter amendment would lower the voting age in San Francisco to 16, allowing residents who are 16 and 17 years old to vote in local elections for local candidates and measures, though they would still be barred from voting on state measures or in state races, or in federal races. This will be San Francisco’s second time voting on such an expansion of voting rights; a similar 2016 measure was unsuccessful. Nationally, only a few municipalities have extended voting rights to youth, but in other countries where youth can vote, their turnout rates tend to be higher. Read our full analysis of Proposition G.
Proposition H: Neighborhood Commercial Districts and City Permitting
Listen to a brief audio summary:
This is an ordinance intended to help small businesses weather the coronavirus pandemic by making it easier to get permits for certain uses of public space, and to streamline permitting in general. It would make changes to the city’s planning and tax code to speed up the process for new businesses to open in commercial corridors and for existing businesses to get new permits. It also would give the Board of Supervisors the ability to make certain changes to the code. Read our full analysis of Proposition H.
Proposition I: Real Estate Transfer Tax
Listen to a brief audio summary:
This measure would double the transfer tax levied on properties worth $10 million or more. A transfer tax is charged by the city when a property is sold. Currently, a 2.75% tax is levied on buildings worth $10 million to $25 million, and a 3% tax is levied on buildings worth more than $25 million. If voters were to approve this proposition, both of these taxes would double, with a few exceptions. The Board of Supervisors has resolved to earmark these transfer tax revenues for a fund that would pay landlords who forgive the back rents owed by coronavirus-affected tenants. The revenues could also fund the development of social housing, which could be permitted in the city if voters were to approve Proposition K. Read our full analysis of Proposition I.
Proposition J: Parcel Tax for San Francisco Unified School District
Listen to a brief audio summary:
This tax measure would repeal a 2018 parcel tax to fund schools and replace it with a lower tax, and add exemptions, which proponents hope will result in voters approving it by a higher margin. The 2018 tax passed with a majority, but not a supermajority, and a lawsuit brought against the old measure for that reason is keeping the money tied up in court. While appeals courts have ruled that such taxes require only a simple majority, the city cannot spend the money until the case is resolved. Read our full analysis of Proposition J.
Proposition K: Affordable Housing Authorization
Listen to a brief audio summary:
This measure is an attempt to allow the city to create low-rent housing units. While the city manages several types of affordable housing, this measure would allow the city to own and build the units rather than depend on nonprofits or private developers, who are obligated to contribute to below-market-rent housing in the city. The concept is known as social housing. The reason it needs to go to the voters is an article in the California Constitution from 1950 that housing advocates and public officials have described as racist because it bars communities from constructing low-rent housing without voter approval and was backed by segregationists. Read our full analysis of Proposition K.
Proposition L: Business Tax Based on Comparison of Top Executive’s Pay to Employees’ Pay
Listen to a brief audio summary:
Executive pay has been on the rise, growing faster than the stock market and the pay of typical workers and college graduates, according to the Economic Policy Institute. That contributes to rising inequality, the institute finds. This measure proposes a business tax increase intended to encourage businesses to equalize their pay structure or pay higher tax rates. The tax rate would increase in step with the ratio of CEO pay to median worker compensation. Revenue from the measure is expected to range from $60 million to $140 million a year. The Board of Supervisors intends to direct revenue from this tax toward hiring doctors, nurses and first responders during the coronavirus pandemic. Read our full analysis of Proposition L.
Regional Measure RR: Caltrain Sales Tax
Listen to a brief audio summary:
Three Bay Area counties — San Francisco, San Mateo and Santa Clara — will be voting on Measure RR. This is a one-eighth-cent sales tax meant to provide critical funding for Caltrain. Though transit advocates have warned the rail service may shut down if the measure is not approved, it is not an emergency measure brought on by the coronavirus pandemic. Read our full analysis of Regional Measure RR.
Dozens of candidates are vying for local offices, including seats in six supervisorial districts — although Hillary Ronen is running unopposed to retain her position as District 9 supervisor — two seats on the BART Board of Directors, and four seats each on the boards for City College of San Francisco and the San Francisco Unified School District. In lieu of interviewing each candidate, “Civic” reached out to candidates in each race with a specific question pertinent to their contest. Click through each race to hear their responses.
Supervisor District 1
In this race, we asked candidates: “The coronavirus pandemic has led to economic recession and has overwhelmed some city resources, like financial assistance for small businesses, while others, like public transportation, are cut back. With all this in mind, what do you think City Hall should prioritize to support small business owners?” Listen to the candidate responses for District 1.
Supervisor District 3
In this race, we asked candidates: “San Francisco’s permitting process for both new development, like housing, and new uses of existing space, like new businesses, is complex and lengthy. What opportunities for reforming that process do you see, and what parts of the process do you think are important and should be preserved?” Listen to the candidate responses for District 3.
Supervisor District 5
In this race, we asked candidates: “Opinions in this district have been deeply divided on the topic of city-approved encampments for people experiencing homelessness and whether or how the city should provide tents, hotel rooms or other accommodations for homeless people. How should City Hall respond to the need for shelter in this district and the concerns of business owners and housed residents?” Listen to the candidate responses for District 5.
Supervisor District 7
In this race, we asked candidates: “This district has one of the highest proportions of housing units that are owner occupied in the city, according to 2012-2016 Census Bureau data. It is also among the higher-income districts in the city. To what extent is protecting homeowners who live in their properties a priority for you in the city’s response to the coronavirus pandemic, and how will you ensure they stay safe in their homes?” Listen to the candidate responses for District 7.
Supervisor District 9
Supervisor Hillary Ronen is running unopposed to maintain her seat on the board in this race. We submitted a question to her legislative aides and did not receive a response.
Supervisor District 11
In this race, we asked candidates: “According to data from the 2012-2016 American Communities Survey, this district has the highest proportion of residents whose language spoken at home is not English, and the second-highest proportions of Asian and Latino residents, among all the supervisorial districts. How will you advocate for these communities at City Hall?” Listen to the candidate responses for District 11.
BART Board Districts 7 and 9
We asked candidates: “What are your top priorities for BART as the pandemic continues and after shelter-in-place orders are lifted?” Listen to the candidate responses for BART Board Districts 7 and 9.
City College Board
We asked candidates: “What have you learned, six months into the pandemic, that will help you govern City College and help guide it out of this crisis?” Listen to the candidate responses for the City College Board.
Board of Education
We asked candidates: “What is your plan for students who have fallen behind or struggled in school as a result of distance learning and other effects of the pandemic?” Listen to the candidate responses for the Board of Education.
“Civic” spoke with San Francisco candidates running for the state Legislature before the primary election on March 3. Since then, a great deal has happened, including the COVID-19 pandemic, the subsequent recession and the massive wildfires that have at times turned our skies orange. We are offering those original interviews as part of our election coverage, but wanted to give the candidates a chance to address what has happened since the primary. Click through below to find these original conversations and the candidates’ written updates.
State Senate
Jackie Fielder and Sen. Scott Wiener — see “State Senate Candidates Cite Fire, COVID-19 Recovery, Housing Among Priorities”
State Assembly District 17
Assemblyman David Chiu and Starchild — see “State Assembly Candidates, District 17”
State Assembly District 19
John McDonnell and Assemblyman Phil Ting — see “State Assembly Candidates, District 19”
Our “Civic” team produced several episodes about statewide propositions on the ballot for this election:
On Proposition 14: “California Voters to Weigh Billions in Funding for Stem Cell Research, Again”
Historical perspective for Proposition 15: “‘The First Angry Man’ Chronicles Rise of Tax Revolt, Legacy of Howard Jarvis”
On Proposition 22: “Taxi Workers Wait Out Fate of Uber and Lyft in California” and “As Uber, Lyft Get Reprieve on Reclassification, Some Drivers Rally for Employee Status”
For summaries of all the statewide ballot measures, we recommend the following reporting from our friends at CalMatters: