Proposition E is a part of Mayor Daniel Lurie’s triplet of proposed changes to City Hall governance headed to voters this November. Titled Extending the City Administrator’s Duties and Changing City Contracting, the ballot measure significantly alters how city departments adopt technology, raises the threshold on contracts needing Board of Supervisors approval by millions of dollars and doubles the city administrator’s term to 10 years. And in a little-noticed change, it empowers the city administrator to propose ordinances in a way that limits the power of the Board of Supervisors to object, essentially delegating some legislative authority to a position appointed by the mayor.
This measure has received less political criticism than Lurie’s other proposals, but it involves significant shifts in accountability over multimillion-dollar contracts and their renewals.
Currently, the Board of Supervisors is required to approve contracts for public works, commodities and services when:
- Contracts are expected to generate more than $1 million in revenue for the city, and any amendments are made to those contracts.
- Contracts would cost the city more than $10 million, or would span more than 10 years, and amendments to those contracts are priced at half a million dollars or more.
- A proposal to lease a property is for 10 or more years, or is expected to generate at least $1 million, and any amendments are made to those contracts.
Proposition E would significantly raise those thresholds. Additionally, starting in 2032, the city administrator would increase these rates every five years to account for inflation. Under these proposed rules, the board would only need to approve contracts if revenue generated from the contract exceeds $4.5 million (more than quadruple the current amount) or the contract costs the city at least $25 million (more than double the current amount).
The measure also only requires board approval on amendments to contracts if those amendments are half or more than the original cost of the contract or time of the lease.
Also under Proposition E, the city administrator would be granted “exclusive authority” to propose ordinances that govern how the city handles these contracts. The office would not have authority over personnel matters like wages, labor agreements, or health and safety standards. But other changes would pass automatically if the board did not vote against them, or the mayor did not disapprove of them in writing within 60 days of their proposal. The board would not be able to amend these ordinances.
The proposed measure would also bring more city department contracts and technology decisions under the authority of the city administrator. Right now, the city administrator acquires commodities and services for all city departments, except for the Municipal Transportation Agency, Public Utilities Commission, Airport Commission, Port Commission and some arts departments. If voters approve Proposition E, the city administrator will oversee the contracts for these agencies, as well as establish and implement a citywide policy for technology use.
Lastly, the city administrator currently has authority to appoint and remove certain city department heads. This measure would give the office hiring and firing powers across all city departments.
The current city administrator is Carmen Chu. She was appointed in February 2021, and reappointed in 2025 for another five-year term. She oversees more than 25 departments and more than 1,000 city employees.
Supporters tout efficiency
Proposition E’s supporters say that the change would streamline contract approvals and unify technology use across the city. They assert that the process for city contracts is lengthy and costly, with San Francisco managing more than $5 billion annually in contracts. Proponents say that it costs the city about $25,000 to navigate the contracting process for a typical contract, which often takes six to 12 months to complete and may require the participation of multiple departments. Streamlining the process under the city administrator, they argue, would reduce delays, restore professionalism and ensure taxpayer dollars are spent efficiently.
This measure is a part of Lurie’s legislative trio in his “Clean Up City Hall” agenda, which has reaped support from politically involved billionaires, including venture capitalist and The San Francisco Standard owner Michael Moritz, hotel mogul John Pritzker and Ripple co-founder Chris Larsen. Clean Up City Hall has amassed more than $8.8 million in donations and has spent more than $5.4 million so far, primarily on signature gathering. Moritz previously spent millions of dollars in a 2024 effort to reform the City Charter, but those measures failed. Lurie’s current proposals follow in that same vein.
Opposition focuses energy elsewhere
Proposition E so far has received less organized pushback than its sibling proposal, Proposition D, which seeks to make it more difficult to place items on the ballot. The laundry list of groups against Proposition D, including the San Francisco Labor Council and Indivisible SF — which have warned of a wealthy, tech billionaire takeover of local politics — have not come out publicly against Lurie’s other proposals.
Proposition E has just a single adversary on the ballot as of mid-September: Larry S. Marso, an attorney and frequent ballot-measure opponent. Marso argues that this change is unnecessary, since it is within the board’s power to make such decisions. He goes on to blame “far-left” Democrats for the lack of cooperation within the Board of Supervisors and decries punting matters like these to voters.
Proposition E requires a simple majority of “yes” votes to pass.