SF Props Target Mayor's Power

Several measures on San Francisco's November ballot will ask voters to reduce the powers of the city's mayor, from filling vacancies on the Board of Supervisors to appointing people to the board that oversees Muni.

The city's residents will also decide whether there should be a public advocate's office.

Here's a look at those propositions.

Proposition D - Board Vacancies

Under Proposition D, a charter amendment, when a Board of Supervisors seat becomes vacant, the mayor would appoint an interim supervisor to fill the office until the city holds a special election to permanently fill the spot, unless there's a regularly scheduled election within 180 days of the vacancy.

The interim supervisor wouldn't be eligible to run during the special election to permanently fill the vacancy, but could run for the office in a subsequent election.

Currently, the mayor can appoint a successor to fill a supervisor's spot until an election is held.

In response to an email asking why people should support Prop D, Supervisor John Avalos, the proposed charter amendment's chief sponsor, said, "San Francisco's city charter gives the mayor extraordinary powers to appoint members of the Board of Supervisors when there's a vacancy, bestowing the power of incumbency and taking away local democracy. Instead of a single person selecting who should represent a district, the district voters should be able to elect representatives."

Avalos pointed to Supervisors Jane Kim and Scott Wiener competing to win the state Senate seat being vacated by Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), who's being termed out.

"Under the current conditions," Avalos said, with either Kim or Wiener "going to the Senate, the mayor's appointee will not have to run for two years. Because the power of incumbency is so great, by that time their victory could be all but assured."

It's unclear if being a mayoral appointee is as big an advantage as Avalos contends. Mayor Ed Lee has twice appointed people to fill board vacancies, neither of whom went on to win election in their own right.

Proposition L - MTA Board

Under Prop L, another charter amendment, the Board of Supervisors would have more say in the Municipal Transportation Agency.

Currently, the mayor appoints the seven directors on MTA's board. The Board of Supervisors usually only needs six votes to act, but it takes seven supervisors to reject an MTA budget.

Prop L would allow the Board of Supervisors to nominate three of the MTA board's members, and it would only need six votes to reject the transit agency's budget.

Supervisor Norman Yee, the proposed charter amendment's chief sponsor, didn't respond to an emailed request for comment.

In a phone interview, Wiener said he opposes Prop L.

"This measure will undermine public transportation," he said. "It makes it much easier for the Board of Supervisors to meddle in Muni's budget."

Until 1999, Wiener said, the city's supervisors "controlled Muni's budget, and the Board of Supervisors basically drove Muni into the ground. Muni was falling apart in the 1990s," but in November 1999, voters took the transit operation away from the supervisors and created the Municipal Transportation Agency so that system "could be handled in a professional manner and not based on the politics of the Board of Supervisors."

Proposition M - Housing and Development

Prop M, another charter amendment, would create the Housing and Development Commission to oversee two newly formed departments: the Department of Housing and Community Development and the Department of Economic and Workforce Development.

Currently, economic and workforce development, along with housing and community development, are agencies within the mayor's office.

The commission would have seven members. Three would be appointed by the mayor, three would be appointed by the Board of Supervisors, and one would be appointed by the city's controller.

Supervisor Aaron Peskin, the proposal's chief sponsor, said, "City government runs better when everybody can see what it is doing in the light of day and have the opportunity to participate in it. ... Right now, all the housing and economic development functions happen behind closed doors. There's no forum for public input or participation."

Wiener's opposed to Prop M, calling it "a terrible idea."

He said it takes "two incredibly important functions" - affordable housing and economic development - away from Lee and future mayors.

"This goes well beyond that and almost eliminates the mayor's role in affordable housing and economic development," he said.

Peskin said his proposal isn't "about taking power away from anybody." Instead, he said, it's about "empowering our communities and our neighborhoods and our housing activists."

Proposition H - Public Advocate

One of the most discussed proposals on the ballot is Prop H, which would create the Office of the Public Advocate. The office, proposed by gay Supervisor David Campos, would have the authority to review the administration of city programs, and investigate and try to resolve people's complaints about city services.

Jon Golinger, a spokesman for Prop H supporters, said it would create "one investigatory watchdog of city agencies" that would "have the ability to do more than just ask questions."

Golinger said the city's supervisors "are prohibited under penalty of official misconduct from doing more than asking city departments and agencies about problems or wasteful spending. ... This is a very substantive job that is about digging deep into the mechanisms of city government and solving complaints and problems that are not being addressed by other parts of city government."

Wiener, who's also gay, said the public advocate's office would be "a waste of public resources."

"It's not going to improve anything or make anyone's lives better," he said. "We elect 11 public advocates. They're called members of the Board of Supervisors."

The supervisors are supposed to be "responsive and accountable to our constituents," Wiener said. "If a supervisor is not doing that, then the voters should toss that supervisor out of that office."

Supervisor Malia Cohen is also opposed to Prop H.

"I don't see the merit in the public advocate position at all," Cohen said, and she has "many" problems with the public advocate proposal.

She cited analysis by the city controller's office that said the office could cost up to $3.5 million a year, and said the department would be "providing duplicative services" that the board's already charged with.

"I don't think we need more government," Cohen said. "I think we need better management of the resources we have. The last thing we need is more government."

Asked about the potential cost of Prop H, Golinger referred to the controller's office saying in a letter that the proposal "mandates a minimum staffing requirement of four positions ... at a likely cost of between $600,000 and $800,000 annually."

He said if the public advocate's office were fully funded "some day through the budget process, it could have two additional staff per supervisor district."

If it were "fully staffed under that decision, that would be 22 people," he said.

The controller's office said, "The additional cost to meet this staffing policy would likely cost between $2.8 million and $3.5 million annually, although this policy is not binding on the city and would be subject to decisions made during the annual budget process."

Proposition G - Police Accountability

Prop G would change the name of the Office of Citizen Complaints to the Department of Police Accountability.

Currently, the budget for the OCC, which investigates complaints of police misconduct, is part of the police department's budget, and it must by be approved by the Police Commission.

If voters approve Prop G, the Police Commission would still oversee the renamed agency, but the department would have direct authority over its own budget.

Cohen, who introduced Prop G, said she wants a department that won't be subject to "political whims."

The agency "needs to be as far away from politics as possible," Cohen said. "It is my hope that we will continue to move in that direction," and that voters will support it "so it can be independent and transparent when it comes to reviewing officer misconduct cases."

In a piece published in July in the San Francisco Chronicle, former Mayors Willie Brown, Dianne Feinstein, Frank Jordan, and Gavin Newsom expressed opposition to proposals like Props H and M.

"Clear accountability of the mayor's office is essential for our city and county government to work," they said. "As a result, San Franciscans know to hold the mayor responsible for he efficient and effective delivery of government services."

Deirdre Hussy, a spokeswoman for Lee, declined to comment on the propositions, saying in an email, "The mayor's press office does not handle press inquiries about the November election."

She referred questions to Tony Winnicker, a senior adviser to Lee. Winnicker didn't respond to an email from the Bay Area Reporter .

The city's progressive Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club has endorsed Props D, G, H, L, and M.

The moderate Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club has endorsed Prop G but opposes D, H, L, and M.