Difference between revisions of "San Francisco Costs of Protecting Dignitaries, Proposition E (June 2010)"

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Opponents)
Line 14: Line 14:
  
 
Supervisors Carmen Chu, Bevan Dufty and Sean Elsbernd voted against putting Proposition E on the ballot.
 
Supervisors Carmen Chu, Bevan Dufty and Sean Elsbernd voted against putting Proposition E on the ballot.
 +
 +
The [[San Francisco Chronicle]]'s editorial board is endorsing 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.
 +
<Ref name=sfc>[http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/05/15/EDDH1DD0RA.DTL&type=politics ''San Francisco Chronicle'', "San Francisco's ballot measures", May 16, 2010]</ref>
  
 
==External links==
 
==External links==

Revision as of 09:13, 16 May 2010

A San Francisco Costs of Protecting Dignitaries Must be Reported ballot measure, Proposition E, is on the June 8, 2010 ballot in San Francisco.[1]

The ballot proposition will allow 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]

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 support Proposition E.[3]

Opponents

Police Chief George Gascon is opposed to Proposition E. He says, "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 is endorsing 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]

External links

References

  1. San Francisco Chronicle, "S.F. ballot measure would save pension costs", March 3, 2010
  2. San Francisco Chronicle, "Dignitary protection plan headed to the ballot", March 2, 2010
  3. Beyond Chron, "June Ballot Measures Reflect City’s Political Fault Lines", March 24, 2010
  4. KCBS, "SFPD forced to disclose bodyguard budget", February 18, 2010
  5. San Francisco Chronicle, "San Francisco's ballot measures", May 16, 2010

Flag of California.png

This California-related article is a stub. You can help people learn about California politics by expanding it.