Vote button trans.png
April's Project of the Month
It's spring time. It's primary election season!
Click here to find all the information you'll need to cast your ballot.




San Francisco Costs of Protecting Dignitaries, Proposition E (June 2010)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Voting on
State and Local
Government Budgets
Spending & Finance
State finance.jpg
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
A San Francisco Costs of Protecting Dignitaries Must be Reported, Proposition E ballot question was on the June 8, 2010 ballot in San Francisco, where it was approved.[1]

The ballot proposition allowed voters to decide whether the San Francisco Police Department will be required to provide a line item in every annual budget that shows how much the police department spends to protect city officials and so-called dignitaries.[2]

Election results

Proposition E
ResultVotesPercentage
Approveda Yes 80,364 55.82%
No63,60044.18%
These final, certified results are from the San Francisco County elections office.

Supporters

Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi sponsored the ballot measure, and supervisors John Avalos, David Campos, David Chiu, Chris Daly, Eric Mar and Sophie Maxwell joined with him in voting to put it on the June 2010 ballot.

The San Francisco Democratic Party and Richard Knee of the Sunshine Task Force supported Proposition E.[3]

Opponents

Police Chief George Gascon opposed Proposition E. He said, "It is going to handcuff the police department on a very important safety issue that has to do with the security of elected officials and other city officials."[4]

Supervisors Carmen Chu, Bevan Dufty and Sean Elsbernd voted against putting Proposition E on the ballot.

The San Francisco Chronicle's editorial board endorsed a "No" vote on Proposition E, saying: "When bodyguard bills began piling up for protecting the mayor in his political travels (and Montana wedding), several anti-Newsom supervisors led by Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi wanted to make the costs public to embarrass him. He vetoed a board request, and his foes put this measure on the ballot, a pattern found elsewhere on the ballot. It's not about fiscal probity or transparency. It's pure pique and bad policy.[5]

Text of measure

The question on the ballot:

This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributed to the original source.

Shall the City require that the Police Department’s annual budget include a line item for the cost of security provided to City officials and visiting dignitaries?[6]

External links

BallotpediaAvatar bigger.png
Suggest a link

References