It’s that season again. The fourth of four elections for this year.

State Ballot Measures

As usual, the default for any proposition should be No; referendums hamstring the legislature and are very difficult to overturn. California voters have a long history of passing horrible legislation by referendum, and the process should be reformed or basically eliminated.

Prop 1: Constitutional Right to Reproductive Freedom

The measure would enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution, which would prevent future legislatures from meddling with it. Yes on Prop 1.

Prop 26: Allows In-Person Roulette, Dice Games, Sports Wagering on Tribal Lands

Prop 26 would expand gambling options on tribal land, along with a slew of other tweaks to gaming law. I don’t have a huge issue with this proposition, except that it’s being pushed as a proposition. This is an issue that should be dealt with by the legislature, not the voters, given how hard it is to reform the state constitution after a referendum has been passed. No on Prop 26.

Prop 27: Allows Online and Mobile Sports Wagering Outside Tribal Lands

This prop would expand sports betting and dedicate some portion of the tax money to fighting homelessness. I’m unconvinced that the state can’t find a better revenue stream than gambling addicts. No on Prop 27.

Prop 28: Provides Additional Funding for Arts and Music Education in Public Schools

This measure would not “provide additional funding” but rather force the legislature to allocate a greater amount of money from the general fund to arts education. This isn’t necessarily a bad prop, but the legislature should always have full discretion in education spending. No on Prop 28.

Prop 29: Requires On-Site Licensed Medical Professional at Kidney Dialysis Clinics and Establishes Other State Requirements

This recurring proposition is a tool the union is using to force healthcare companies to the negotiating table, as it has proven much more expensive to oppose a measure than to place one on the ballot. This is annoying, if understandable. Still, the actual text of the measure would harm Californians and pass on high costs to the state and federal government. No on Prop 29, again.

Prop 30: Provides Funding for Programs to Reduce Air Pollution and Prevent Wildfires by Increasing Tax on Personal Income Over $2 Million

This law would increase income taxes for high earners to provide rebate money for EV adoption and has received significant financial support from Lyft, a potential beneficiary. Although the idea of soaking the rich to fund climate programs is facially fine, this is yet another issue that the legislature should be able to decide independently. California already has the highest income taxes in the nation; voters shouldn’t dictate where our remaining tax capacity goes in such a permanent manner. No on Prop 30.

Prop 31: Referendum On 2020 Law That Would Prohibit the Retail Sale of Certain Flavored Tobacco Products

In California’s awful system, companies can effectively buy referendums on laws they dislike. In this case, Big Tobacco is attempting to overturn a ban on certain flavored tobacco products. Regardless of your opinions on legislative paternalism (it’s good, actually), a vote for Prop 31 affirms the independence of the legislature from special interest money. Yes on Prop 31.

San Francisco Ballot Measures

Prop A: Retiree Supplemental Cost of Living Adjustment; Retirement Board Contract with Executive Director

In 2011, San Francisco capped some pension increases to deal with the recession. We’re no longer in the same fiscal mess as we were ten years ago, and this measure would restore full benefits for city employees who retired before 1996. Yes on Prop A.

Prop B: Public Works Department and Commission, Sanitation and Streets Department and Commission

The 2022 Prop B would combine the Department of Sanitation and Streets with the Department of Public Works, but it requires some context. Before all of the musical chairs elections and realignments we had this year, Matt Haney was posturing himself to run against Mayor Breed and needed a signature achievement. He pushed a ballot measure to split the notoriously corrupt Public Works Department in two, which would allegedly lead to cleaner streets. Voters approved it, spending money the city didn’t have on yet another commission, but no serious figures — likely not even Haney — thought that Prop B would actually change anything. Now that Haney has pivoted Mod, his old Prog allies-turned-enemies are (rightly) pushing to reverse his win and collapse the departments back together to avoid costly and redundant administrative costs. What a way to run a city! Yes on Prop B.

Prop C: Homelessness Oversight Commission

Prop C would create a commission to oversee the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing. I'm hesitant to support yet another commission as a solution to the city's problems, but I know someone who works in the field who supports this and I'll defer to them. Yes on C.

Prop D: Affordable Homes Now

Prop D, Affordable Homes Now, would streamline the production of affordable housing while requiring prevailing wages on qualifying projects. It won’t fix our housing crisis, but it’s a start, and will be absolutely necessary if San Francisco wants to keep any degree of local control from being overruled by the state. Yes on Prop D.

Prop E: “Affordable Housing Production Act”

Supervisor Chan’s misleadingly named Prop E would actually reduce the amount of affordable housing built by undercutting SB35 and making it more difficult for mixed-income projects to pencil out. It is a spiteful reaction to Prop D, and would only make our city’s housing woes worse. No on Prop E.

Prop F: Library Preservation Fund

Prop F would extend a property tax that funds the San Francisco Public Library for the next 25 years. The city is lucky to have a world-class library system, and Prop F is key to preserving it. Yes on F.

Prop G: Student Success Fund

This prop would create a set aside that could be paid out to schools in $1 million grants. Given the devastating impacts of covid-19 (and the compounding damage inflicted by the Board of Education), schools need flexible cash more than ever. Yes on G.

Prop H: City Elections in Even-Numbered Years

Prop H would consolidate elections in even-numbered years, which seems fine to me. Unfortunately, it would also change the formula that determines the number of signatures required to place measures on the ballot, likely lowering it in the future. San Francisco does not need more ballot measures. (Also, this guide is already 3,000 words, which seems long enough.) No on H.

Prop I: Vehicles on JFK Drive in Golden Gate Park and the Great Highway

The Slow Streets program and the closure of JFK Promenade to cars were some of the few silver linings of pandemic-era governance. Today, JFK Promenade is a beloved part of Golden Gate Park to all but a few, including Board President Walton and Republican heiress Dede Wilsey. This ballot proposition would permanently allow cars on the street, which should already prompt an automatic “No” vote; what’s worse, however, is that it would also require the city to preserve the Great Highway in a practically impossible manner. The Great Highway is falling into the ocean; the only way to preserve it for car use indefinitely would be to build a seawall, a project that would cost $80 more than the current plan, have severe ramifications for the coastal environment, and would likely be illegal. This proposition is a farce. No on I.

Prop J: Recreational Use of JFK Drive in Golden Gate Park

Prop J would reaffirm the city’s commitment to an open and accessible JFK and would kill Prop I if both pass and J wins more votes. Yes on J.

Prop K: Gross Receipts Taxes for Guaranteed Income Programs, Small Business Assistance, and Homeless Services

This measure has been removed from the ballot, but its history reveals a lot about how San Francisco politics works. Prop K was placed on the ballot by John Elberling, one of the most insidious Prog power brokers in San Francisco. Elberling’s TODCO nonprofit runs a network of affordable properties, the revenue of which, instead of being reinvested into affordable housing, is used as a slush fund for various political campaigns, granting Elberling a disproportionate amount of influence. Elberling is a die-hard anti-housing advocate, and the vote to kill construction on the 469 Stevenson parking lot is widely considered to be payback for his support. Anything he proposes should be viewed with suspicion, and the gullibility of the San Francisco Democratic Central Coordinating Committee shown in their K endorsement discredits their judgement. As it turns out, Elberling didn’t do his homework, and accidentally wrote a tax that would fall exclusively on small businesses, exempting Amazon. Fortunately, a judge struck it from the ballot.

Prop L: Sales Tax for Transportation Projects

Due to Prop 13, Prop L’s essential transportation tax must be renewed by the voters with a 2/3rds majority vote this year. This is a terrible way to run a city, but it is essential that these funds be used to preserve and build upon our lagging transit infrastructure. Yes on L.

Prop M: Tax on Keeping Residential Units Vacant

This prop would impose a vacancy tax on empty multifamily homes. For some inexplicable reason, it does not include single and two-family units, and it almost certainly won’t affect the housing crisis — in either direction. Still, maybe people will stop presenting taxes like these as meaningful solutions if it passes. Yes on M.

Prop N: Golden Gate Park Underground Parking Facility; Golden Gate Park Concourse Authority

Prop N would allow the city to buy the garage in Golden Gate Park from the bureaucracy that currently manages it; this can only be accomplished by ballot proposition and will allow greater flexibility on fares for disabled and low-income visitors to the park and its museums. Yes on N.

Prop O: Additional Parcel Tax for City College

Prop O would institute a complicated parcel tax scheme to provide City College with additional funding. City College is not a well-managed institution; even if the proposition had been written well, throwing more money at it without requiring strict oversight would be dubious. As written, however, assessing the new fees will cost the city millions of dollars each year. In this case, it’s not worth spending so much to throw good money after bad. No on O.

Federal Elections

United States Representative, California House District 11

Perennial candidate Shahid Buttar split the vote with another also-ran and got himself shut out of the race. The other candidate then threatened to beat him to death with his man bun. Pelosi is running in an uncompetitive race against a Republican and will likely retire during this term. Pelosi for District 11 Representative.

U.S. Senate (Full and Partial Terms)

Alex Padilla is running in a noncompetitive race for the remainder of this term and the 6-year term starting in January 2023. Padilla for Senate.

State Elections

Governor

Gavin Newsom is running without a serious challenger. Even though he’s gross and embarrassing and will never be president, I’m still voting for Newsom for Governor.

Lieutenant Governor

This race will not be competitive. Kounalakis for Lt. Governor.

State Assembly District 17

This will be the fourth election in which Haney defeats Campos this year (Campos is not contesting the election, but his name will still remain on the ballot). His new job hasn’t stopped him from tweeting, but Haney seems to be a much better assemblyman than he was a supervisor. Haney for AD 17.

State Assembly District 19

Phil Ting is running with no serious challengers. Ting for AD 19.

Attorney General

Rob Bonta has been effective in enforcing state law against municipalities trying to shirk their housing obligations (as in the case of Woodside, which tried to declare itself a mountain lion preserve to avoid building duplexes). The race will not be competitive. Bonta for Attorney General.

Secretary of State

Weber for Secretary of State.

State Controller

Cohen for State Controller.

Treasurer

Fiona Ma has been embroiled in many serious ethical breaches, and her vote to endorse Prop K shows a serious lack of attention to detail. That said, her opponent is an activist Republican. Ma is clearly the better candidate (her performance on the job hasn’t been grossly disqualifying), but as she is expected to sail to victory, feel no obligation to boost her margin. No endorsement.

Insurance Commissioner

Lara has a myriad of ethics violations to his name, while his opponent is a Republican. As in Ma’s race, he should win handily; no need to run up his margin. No endorsement.

Superintendent of Public Instruction

Thurmond for Superintendent.

Board of Equalization, District Two

This job is effectively a salary with no responsibilities and should be abolished.

Judges

All incumbents are running unopposed.

San Francisco Elections

District Attorney

I think John Hamasaki has a pretty low chance of defeating appointed DA Jenkins, and I’m a little confused why he was tapped to run a revanchist campaign this year. He’s kind of an asshole and far from an ideal standard-bearer for progressive prosecution. That said, I think he’s pretty clearly the better candidate — despite his bad take on gun control, he won’t pursue Jenkins’ policies of seeking adult charges for children and he doesn’t have her ethical baggage. The Boudin recall was a mistake — people overrated the influence of the DA (marginal at best) and underrated the fact that SFPD is both incompetent and belligerent — and both candidates are worse than he was. If Boudin were on the ballot, I would vote for him, but as the lesser evil, I’m voting for Hamasaki for DA.

Assessor-Recorder

Torres for Assessor-Recorder. He is running uncontested.

Public Defender

Raju for Public Defender.

Community College Board (4-year term) and Community College Board (2-year term)

I don’t know enough about these races to make an authoritative endorsement, but the Chronicle endorses incumbents Brigitte Davila, John Rizzo and Thea Selby for the 4-year term, and Murrell Green for the 2-year term.

Board of Education Elections

It’s clear that our current system isn’t working; San Francisco should try to transition its elected BoE into a mayoral control-style model, as in NYC or DC. That said, for this election: Lainie Motamedi and Lisa Weissman-Ward for Board of Education (no third endorsement).

BART Director District 8

Vote for Janice Li! She’s great and running unopposed. Li for BART Director District 8.

Board of Supervisors Elections

No challenger has ever defeated an elected supervisor, although Engardio has a chance to change that this year (given his track record, he probably won’t). Most of the candidates are bad; this is a lesser evil election. Keep in mind that even if Mod candidates sweep, winning in both D4 and D6, the Board will still keep a 7–4 Prog majority.

Board of Supervisors, District 2

Stefani in D2. She is running uncontested.

Board of Supervisors, District 4

Mar has proven himself beholden to the interests of conservative Sunset homeowners; he’s not the worst member of the Board, but he’s certainly below replacement level. Perennial candidate and carpetbagger Engardio is a true-blue Mod, who has embraced the reactionary energy of the two recalls. Neither are great options, but Engardio has at least been willing to pivot to supporting the liberalization of westside zoning since his last campaign. Engardio in D4.

Board of Supervisors, District 6

Mahogany will likely be a Prog in the Haney mold and friendlier with the nonprofit industrial complex, while Dorsey will continue to be a mayoral stooge. That’s a plus for housing, especially given that SF’s Housing Element is due in January. That said, housing is not the only issue that supervisors will address this term, and the former SFPD spokesman will almost certainly continue to enable the mayor’s tough-on-crime heel turn. I don’t know if there’s an obviously better candidate in this race, but I would probably vote for Dorsey in D6, as the guaranteed Prog majority will still have veto power over mayoral overreaches.

Board of Supervisors, District 8

Mandelman has been marginally better than the median supervisor on housing, and he’s running effectively unopposed. Mandelman in D8.

Board of Supervisors, District 10

Board President Walton has no serious challengers. He won’t lose this race, but hopefully, the BoS dynamics will shift enough after November to deny him another term as president. No Endorsement.

References

Barro, Josh. “Gavin Newsom Is Gross and Embarrassing and Will Never Be President.” Gavin Newsom Is Gross and Embarrassing and Will Never Be President. Very Serious, September 21, 2022. https://www.joshbarro.com/p/gavin-newsom-is-gross-and-embarrassing. 

Bote, Joshua. “San Francisco Police Seemingly Watch as Burglars Flee Crime Scene.” SFGATE. SFGATE, November 26, 2021. https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/San-Francisco-police-watch-burglars-16653700.php. 

Buttar, Shahid. “I Received This Threat...” Twitter. Twitter, June 15, 2022. https://twitter.com/shahidforchange/status/1536926248047452160. 

Cassidy, Megan, and Joshua Sharpe. “S.F. D.A. Brooke Jenkins Said She Volunteered in the Boudin Recall. but a Group Linked to a Recall Backer Paid Her More than $100,000.” San Francisco Chronicle, August 12, 2022. https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/D-A-Jenkins-paid-more-than-100-000-while-17363420.php. 

Cassidy, Megan. “S.F. D.A. Jenkins May Seek Charges of 16- and 17-Year-Olds as Adults in Some 'Heinous' Cases.” San Francisco Chronicle. San Francisco Chronicle, September 19, 2022. https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/S-F-D-A-Jenkins-to-seek-charges-of-16-and-17438806.php. 

Chronicle Editorial Board. “Endorsement: Tough Love for CCSF This Time around on Prop. O.” San Francisco Chronicle. San Francisco Chronicle, October 12, 2022. https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Endorsement-prop-o-ccsf-17502004.php. 

Chronicle Editorial Board. “The Chronicle Endorses Eliminating the Board of Equalization Entirely.” San Francisco Chronicle. San Francisco Chronicle, October 12, 2022. https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Endorsement-eliminate-the-board-of-equalization-17494261.php. 

Chronicle Editorial Board. “Why the Chronicle Won't Be Endorsing in the California State Treasurer Primary.” San Francisco Chronicle. San Francisco Chronicle, May 19, 2022. https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/california-state-treasurer-17182452.php. 

Chronicle Editorial Board. “Why the Chronicle Can't Endorse Ricardo Lara for California Insurance Commissioner.” San Francisco Chronicle. San Francisco Chronicle, October 14, 2022. https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/endorsement-california-ricardo-lara-insurance-17506950.php. 

Dineen, J.K. “Why Did S.F. Supervisors Vote against a Project to Turn a Parking Lot into 500 Housing Units?” San Francisco Chronicle. San Francisco Chronicle, October 28, 2021. https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/Why-did-S-F-supervisors-vote-against-a-project-16569809.php. 

Graff, Amy. “SF Police Commissioner Fends off Calls to Resign after Guns Tweet.” SFGATE. SFGATE, March 5, 2021. https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/John-Hamasaki-police-commissioner-gun-tweet-16001655.php. 

Knight, Heather. “'Caught Red-Handed': S.F. Residents Fume after Cops Let Man Sawing off Catalytic Converter Walk Away.” San Francisco Chronicle. San Francisco Chronicle, October 12, 2022. https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/bayarea/heatherknight/article/Caught-red-handed-S-F-residents-fume-17383280.php. 

Knight, Heather. “More S.F. Residents Share Stories of Police Standing Idly by as Crimes Unfold: 'They Didn't Want to Be Bothered'.” San Francisco Chronicle, February 19, 2022. https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/bayarea/heatherknight/article/SF-police-crime-16931399.php. 

Koehn, Josh. “How an SF Housing Nonprofit Blew Almost $500k on a Flawed Effort to 'Tax Jeff Bezos' Ass'.” The San Francisco Standard, September 1, 2022. https://sfstandard.com/politics/san-francisco-housing-todco-amazon-tax-prop-k-guaranteed-income/. 

Koehn, Josh. “Judge Tosses 'Amazon Tax' from Ballot after Prop. K's Flaws Exposed.” The San Francisco Standard, September 2, 2022. https://sfstandard.com/politics/judge-amazon-tax-prop-k-ballot-meaure-todco/. 

Singh, Milan. The case against legalizing gambling. Slow Boring, March 19, 2022. https://www.slowboring.com/p/gambling. 

Swartz, Angela. “Woodside Freezes SB 9 Projects, Citing an Exemption for Mountain Lion Habitats.” News, February 2, 2022. https://www.almanacnews.com/news/2022/02/02/woodside-freezes-sb-9-projects-with-town-citing-excemption-for-mountain-lion-habitats.