Proposition A offers San Francisco what supporters call “110 small fixes” for local government, with changes spanning far and wide: altering how the city approves legal settlements, restructuring departments and commissions, removing reporting requirements and giving the city administrator authority over the city’s real estate portfolio. 

Currently, commissions and boards created by the city charter can be changed only with voter approval. The charter controls 42 of the city’s 152 boards and commissions, with others under the purview of the Board of Supervisors. Proponents of the measure argue that the current wording of the charter stalls necessary changes, such as appointing or removing department heads or eliminating dormant commissions. 

The measure, proposed by board President Rafael Mandelman, would allow the supervisors to act directly on several commissions by moving them out of the charter and into the city’s municipal code, which the board can amend through its regular legislative process. Several commissions would be affected, including the Human Services Commission, Public Utility Commission’s Citizen’s Advisory Council and technical boards and committees under the Department of Building Inspection. 

This measure was placed on the ballot by the Board of Supervisors but is frequently mentioned in conjunction with Propositions D, E and F — all measures backed by Mayor Daniel Lurie that would dramatically reshape local government and significantly shift power from the board to the mayor.

Proposition A would alter the membership requirements for certain advisory groups. For example, it would add two people who have experienced homelessness to the Homelessness Oversight Commission. It seeks to loosen membership requirements for the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force so that qualifications would not be tied to particular seats. It would also remove the requirement that boards and commissions prepare annual reports and appoint an executive secretary. 

Proposition A calls for giving the city administrator authority to conduct long-term real estate planning and manage real property owned by the city. It also changes the city administrator’s reporting requirements from every three to every five years under the Privacy First Policy, which voters approved in 2018 to hold corporations accountable in how they collect and store people’s data. 

In another expansive move, the measure would permit the Board of Supervisors to approve legal settlements and dismissals by resolution, rather than by ordinance. Resolutions can be approved with just a one-time vote by the board, while ordinances require a longer process. 

More of the specifics on these proposed changes, including membership requirement changes and commissions on the chopping block, can be found in the Legislative Digest.

The controller’s analysis states that this proposed charter amendment may save the city $365,000 to $450,000 annually by eliminating the Sanitation and Streets Commission, Public Works Commission and the Street Artists and Craftsmen Examiners Advisory Committee.The analysis also states that the amendment could reduce required staff time “to work on other government functions” by eliminating requirements that certain staff be involved in supporting commissions, boards and advisory bodies.

Supporters say the charter is a mess

Eight of 11 San Francisco supervisors support Proposition A, along with state Senator and congressional candidate Scott Weiner, Assemblywoman Catherine Stefani, Assemblyman Matt Haney and Mayor Daniel Lurie. 

Lurie’s other amendments to the City Charter pervade propositions D, E and F.

Each person in support submitted the same letter, which emphasizes that the city charter is messy and needs to be simplified. They argue Proposition A supports this mission by modernizing the charter, reducing duplication of work in departments, eliminating “zombie” commissions and cleaning up legislation language.

In their opposition rebuttal, Mandelman and Lurie note that “requiring a citywide election to fix a typo or fix outdated language isn’t democracy.”

Opponents say this measure reduces transparency 

Jennifer Friedenbach, executive director of the Coalition on Homelessness, opposes the measure. Her opposition statement criticizes the recommendation to amend or eliminate the Our City Our Home Oversight Committee, pending a majority vote by the Board of Supervisors. Friedenbach helped craft the 2018 legislation that created Our City Our Home, a measure passed by voters to help fund homelessness services through a tax on corporations. Friedenbach says Proposition A “attempts to silence homeless people and their allies” while rent in San Francisco continues to rise.

Smaller campaign contributions than other measures

Proposition A has received $300,000 so far in campaign donations, a drop in the bucket compared with other measures on the ballot, including Lurie’s Propositions D, E and F, which have brought in nearly $10 million. Michael Moritz, owner of The San Francisco Standard, and crypto-currency billionaire Chris Larsen represent $250,000 cumulatively in Proposition A donations. Michael Covarrubias, co-CEO of private real estate development firm TMG Partners, is the third-highest spender on the measure, donating $15,000.

Proposition A requires a simple majority of “yes” votes to pass.