Elections to be Held in March

On March 5, 2024, San Francisco voters will be asked to decide whether to remove two Superior Court judges from the bench, elect generally behind-the-scenes but influential Democratic (and Republican) party officials, and weigh in on proposals to combat drug addiction and manage the police department, among other contentious issues. Below is an early taste of what’s at stake, a sneak peek at voters’ future homework assignments.

Proposition A: Affordable Housing Bond
Local elected officials widely support issuing a $300 million general obligation bond to subsidize affordable residences. The bulk of the taxpayer funds — $240 million — would go towards helping to finance 1,500 units already in the housing pipeline. Another $30 million would be dedicated to preserving aging sites, accounting for more than 60 units, with the last $30 million investing in adding 120 supportive housing beds for domestic violence survivors. A few hundred million doesn’t buy much housing in San Francisco. The bond needs to be approved by two-thirds of voters.

Proposition B: Police Officer Staffing Conditioned on Future Funding
Supervisor Matt Dorsey drafted a measure to mandate new police hiring and retention. Supervisor and mayoral candidate, Ahsha Safaí, amended it to condition increased hiring on new funding, most likely a tax. Dorsey and the present mayor argue that the City should staff the police department with existing funds. Safaí and organized labor counter that the proposition could help boost public safety hiring, not just police. Ultimately, the measure is mostly atmospheric, as it’d only produce something tangible if a funding mechanism is separately adopted.

Proposition C: Real Estate Transfer Tax Exemption and Office Space Allocation
This measure would waive the tax for transferring properties from office to residential uses, as a means to avoid the dreaded “doom loop,” and contribute to revitalizing Downtown.

Proposition D: Changes to Local Ethics Laws
Sponsored by the Ethics Commission, this measure would reform conflict-of-interest laws to place more explicit prohibitions on gifts to public officials, and mandate more ethics training, since officials apparently are insufficiently educated on the topic, as evidenced by recent scandals.  

Proposition E: Police Department Policies and Procedures
This measure would allow police to install security cameras on public property and use drones to monitor certain crimes, expedite reporting procedures for officers’ use of force, and require the Police Commission to gather more feedback from the public. 

Proposition F: Illegal Substance Dependence Screening and Treatment for Recipients of Public Assistance
This measure would require people receiving county welfare who are suspected of being addicted to illegal drugs to undergo testing and obtain treatment. 

Proposition G: Offering Algebra 1 to Eighth Graders
This nonbinding statement urges the San Francisco Unified School District to offer Algebra 1 to students by the eighth grade. The district already plans to undo its 2014 policy, which removed the course from middle schools, mostly for equity reasons, but was met with outrage from those who thought their eighth grader should be able to continue to advance in math if that’s what they wanted to do. This measure gives voters a chance to wield their ballot pencils in support of reform of the reform.

County Central Committees
The Democratic County Central Committee is the governing board of the San Francisco Democratic Party and—in addition to making influential endorsements—is perceived as a farm team for future candidates. Moderate Democrats want to take control of the committee, which has historically been captured by “progressives,” proffering a 24-person slate that includes Board of Supervisor candidates Trevor Chandler and Marjan Philhour. There’s also a push by the Briones Society, which describes itself as a “center-right” Republican group, to elect a slate to the Republican County Central Committee. Yes, there are Republicans in San Francisco.

Local Offices: Superior Court Judge, Seats 1 and 13
Superior Court judges are often appointed by the governor but must stand for election during their terms if another lawyer runs against them. With frustrations over vehicle break-ins and errant street behavior running high, two incumbent judges are being challenged. Michael Begert, who occupies Seat 1, is facing corporate lawyer Albert “Chip” Zecher. Patrick Thompson, who holds Seat 13, is up against prosecutor Jean Myungjin Roland.