Election law changes? Our legislation tracker’s got you. Check it out!

San Francisco, California, Housing and Development Commission Establishment Amendment, Proposition M (November 2016)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Local ballot measure elections in 2016

Proposition M: San Francisco Housing and Development Commission Establishment Amendment
San Francisco City and County Seal.png
The basics
Election date:
November 8, 2016
Status:
Defeatedd Defeated
Topic:
Local housing
Related articles
Local housing on the ballot
November 8, 2016 ballot measures in California
San Francisco County, California ballot measures
Local charter amendments on the ballot
See also
San Francisco, California

A charter amendment to establish a Housing and Development Commission was on the ballot for San Francisco voters in San Francisco County, California, on November 8, 2016. It was defeated.

A yes vote was a vote in favor of amending the city's charter to create a Housing and Development Commission—with board members appointed by the mayor, the board of supervisors, and the controller—to oversee two new departments that would replace two offices controlled solely by the mayor.
A no vote was a vote against this proposition, thereby leaving the city's economic and housing development strategies overseen by offices controlled solely by the mayor.

Election results

Proposition M
ResultVotesPercentage
Defeatedd No196,89555.8%
Yes 155,993 44.2%
Election results from San Francisco Department of Elections

Text of measure

Ballot question

The following question appeared on the ballot:[1]

“

Shall the City amend the Charter to create the Housing and Development Commission to oversee two new departments (the Department of Economic and Workforce Development and the Department of Housing and Community Development) that would take over the duties of the Office of Economic and Workforce Development and the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development, which would cease to exist?[2]

”

Simplification digest

The following summary of Proposition M was provided by San Francisco's Ballot Simplification Committee:[1]

“

The Way It Is Now: The Office of Economic and Workforce Development (OEWD) administers:

• programs related to job training and placement, and attracting and retaining businesses in the City;

• public-private real estate development agreements and projects; and

• programs for revitalizing commercial streets in economically disadvantaged neighborhoods.

The Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD) develops a strategic plan that is required by federal law and administers:

• programs to finance the development and rehabilitation of affordable housing;

• the City’s below-market-rate inclusionary housing program, governed by the Planning Code, that generally requires developers of market-rate housing to pay a fee or to build affordable housing units;

• first-time homeowner loans and grants; and

• grants to support community development, nonprofit organizations and small businesses.

The Mayor appoints the heads of OEWD and MOHCD and has the authority to remove them.

No City commission directly oversees the entire scope of operations of MOHCD and OEWD. These agencies must seek approval from various City commissions and the Board of Supervisors for certain proposed policy changes. The Board approves their budgets and some of their agreements, programs and grants.

MOHCD and OEWD follow a grant and loan selection process for neighborhood improvement, small business assistance, job training and development of affordable housing on City-owned property.

The Proposal: Proposition M is a Charter amendment that would create the Housing and Development Commission. The Commission would have seven members, three nominated by the Mayor, three appointed by the Board, and one appointed by the Controller. The Mayor’s nominees would be subject to approval by the Board. Commissioners could serve up to two consecutive four-year terms. Commissioners could be removed from office only for official misconduct.

Proposition M would create the Department of Economic and Workforce Development (DOEWD) and the Department of Housing and Community Development (DOHCD) to replace OEWD and MOHCD. These two offices would cease to exist. The Commission, instead of the Mayor, would have the power to appoint and remove the heads of these two new departments.

The Commission’s responsibilities would include:

• assuming oversight and adoption of the five-year strategic plan specifying the City’s goals for affordable housing and community development projects, which must be approved by the Board of Supervisors;

• establishing new rules for the competitive selection process for the development of affordable housing on City-owned property. These would replace any rules that the Board adopts or ballot measures that the voters approve before March 1, 2017, relating to a competitive bidding process for the City’s development of affordable housing. These rules would be subject to rejection by a two-thirds vote of the Board;

• reviewing and making recommendations to the Board before the Board approves any ordinance setting or changing the City’s below-market-rate inclusionary housing requirements. Any such ordinance would replace any conflicting provisions in ordinances that the Board adopted or the voters approved before March 1, 2017;

• reviewing and making recommendations to the Board on approval of development agreements that DOEWD administers; and

• overseeing the spending of the City’s affordable housing funds.

A “YES” Vote Means: If you vote “yes,” you want to create the Housing and Development Commission to oversee two new departments (the Department of Economic and Workforce Development and the Department of Housing and Community Development) that will take over the duties of the Office of Economic and Workforce Development and the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development, which would cease to exist.

A “NO” Vote Means: If you vote “no,” you do not want to make these changes.[2]

”

Fiscal impact

The following fiscal impact statement about Proposition M was provided by the San Francisco Controller:[1]

“

City Controller Ben Rosenfield has issued the following statement on the fiscal impact of Proposition M:

Should the proposed charter amendment be approved by the voters, in my opinion, it would have a minimal impact on the cost of government.

The proposed amendment would increase the cost of government by approximately $210,000 annually to fund the cost of a new city commission which would have oversight over the Department of Economic and Workforce Development and the Department of Housing and Community Development. These funds would provide for a commission secretary, commissioner compensation, and costs such as preparing public materials.

The proposed amendment establishes the Housing and Development Commission consisting of seven members, three appointed by the Mayor, three by the Board of Supervisors, and one by the Controller. Commission members must have significant affordable housing development or community development experience. The commission would have the authority to appoint, evaluate, and remove the department heads of the two departments.

The commission would be required to review and make recommendations to the Board of Supervisors regarding proposed development agreements and conveyance of certain surplus City property. The commission would adopt rules to create competitive selection processes for development of affordable housing on City property and expenditure of the City’s affordable housing funds. Additionally, the commission would review any proposed ordinance that would set or change the minimum or maximum inclusionary or affordable housing obligations for housing development projects, prior to any Board of Supervisors hearings.[2]

”

Full text

The full text of the measure is available here.

Support

Supporters

The following individuals signed the official argument in favor of the measure:[1]

  • Coalition for San Francisco Neighborhoods
  • San Francisco Democratic Party
  • Affordable Housing Alliance
  • San Francisco Council of Community Housing Organizations
  • Senior and Disability Action
  • Former Assemblymember Tom Ammiano
  • Former City Attorney Louise Renne
  • Supervisor Aaron Peskin
  • Supervisor Jane Kim
  • Supervisor John Avalos
  • Supervisor Norman Yee

Arguments in favor

Official argument

The following official argument was submitted in favor of the measure:[1]

“

Some of the most important decisions about San Francisco housing and economic development are being made today behind closed doors. It’s time to open the doors to the public and let the sunshine in. Proposition M creates the long overdue Housing and Development Commission to ensure that policies and decisions impacting all of us are made in open meetings with greater community participation and public accountability. Here’s how it works:

• Independent and balanced. A 7-member, balanced and independent Commission, with term limits for commissioners.

• Open government and sunshine. All proceedings to be conducted in public meetings and subject to the open government rules of the California Brown Act and the City Sunshine Ordinance.

• Greater public oversight. Will oversee billions of dollars in activity now exclusively administered by the Mayor’s Office without regular public hearings and little public oversight.

• Accountable to citizens, not special interests. Instead of backroom negotiations, development deals and big citywide event deals will be crafted with citizen input.

• Equality and fairness for community grants. The Commission will determine a fair and open process to assure that grants and funded programs are awarded via transparent rules and effective standards.

• Independent review of developer agreements. Major development agreements that involve the City and the sale of surplus public sites will be reviewed by the Commission before being approved by the Board of Supervisors.

• Affordable housing and community development are key issues facing San Francisco. Vote Yes on M to establish the public oversight and participation our city deserves.[2]

”

Opposition

Opponents

The following individuals signed the official argument against the measure:[1]

Arguments against

Official argument

The following official argument was submitted in opposition to the measure:[1]

“

Proposition M will add more wasteful, unnecessary layers of red tape and make it even harder to build affordable housing and help small businesses in San Francisco.

Currently, the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development provides funding to build critically needed affordable housing for the neediest San Franciscans. The Office of Economic and Workforce Development helps San Franciscans get trained and connected to jobs, helps small businesses and improves our neighborhoods.

The activities and decisions of these two departments are already reviewed by the Board of Supervisors, several City commissions and dozens of community groups.

Proposition M will create an unnecessary and duplicative review body and politicize the important work of these two agencies. This proposal would delay critical help for small businesses, inject uncertainty into job training and slow down the City’s ability to get low and middle income families into housing they can afford.

Proposition M would dismantle these two important city departments and put their responsibilities under the control of a seven member unelected “commission” answerable to nobody, accountable to neither the Mayor nor the Board of Supervisors. This Commission would even have the ability to waive city rules on contracting that require transparency and competitive bidding, even if such requirements are mandated by the voters.

San Francisco already has too many layers of government and red tape. Proposition M won’t result in better government or services, but it will result in less affordable housing and less help for our neighborhoods and small businesses.

Please join us, along with former Mayor and Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom, in opposing Proposition M.

VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION M![2]

”

Media editorials

Support

  • San Francisco Bay Guardian: "Prop. M would create a commission to oversee MOHCD and the Mayor’s Office of Economic and Workforce Development. Yes: This is a significant move to reduce the power of the Mayor’s Office. But the SF Mayor’s Office has far too much power, more than most city executives have. Yes on M."[3]
  • San Francisco Examiner: "Opponents contend the measure is a costly and needless increase in bureaucracy that dilutes the mayor’s power. We disagree. Proposition M would increase public oversight and transparency of how a sizable part of the budget is spent on our most pressing issues."[4]

Opposition

  • San Francisco Chronicle: "This measure would reinvent the wheel with an extra spin. The tasks would be taken over by a seven-member commission with the supervisors naming three of the posts, the mayor another three and the city controller picking the final member. The peril should be plain: Instead of the mayor plotting the economic development course, it will now be up to a commission with no one really in charge. Vote NO."[5]
  • The Bay Area Reporter recommended a no vote for Proposition M.[6]

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing local ballot measures in California

This measure was put on the ballot through a 6-5 vote of the San Francisco board of supervisors.

"Yes" votes

The following supervisors voted in favor of putting Proposition M on the ballot:[1]

"No" votes

The following supervisors voted against putting Proposition M on the ballot:[1]

San Francisco housing on the ballot in 2016

Housing has appeared on the San Francisco ballot in 2012, 2014, 2015 and 2016. Most recently one measure was approved in June 2016 calling for giving the San Francisco Board of Supervisors the authority to amend existing and impose new affordable housing requirements via ordinance, a faster method than the previously used charter amendments.

Four measures were voted on in the November 2016 election; two were approved and two were defeated. The approval of 2015's Proposition A, which approved up to $310 million in bonds to fund affordable housing programs is said to have led to the four measures appearing on the November ballot.[7] In particular, they focus on improving the availability of affordable housing in San Francisco: issuing and re-purposing $260.7 million in bonds to fund the purchase and improvement of buildings to convert them to affordable housing; amending the city's charter to create a Housing and Development Commission; requiring three competing proposals to the mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development for any affordable housing projects on city-owned property; and increasing the rental rate that qualifies a unit towards affordable housing minimum requirements to a rate affordable by a household with an income level of up to 110 percent of the median income.[8]

June 2016:

November 2016:


Recent news

The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms San Francisco housing and development commission Proposition M. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

San Francisco, California, Housing and Development Commission Establishment Amendment, Proposition M (November 2016) - Google News

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 San Francisco Elections Office, "San Francisco Voter Information Pamphlet and Sample Ballot," accessed September 26, 2016
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  3. ↑ San Francisco Bay Guardian,"ENDORSEMENTS! The case for six progressive supes, Kim for state Senate …," accessed October 6, 2016
  4. ↑ San Francisco Examiner,"Examiner Endorsements: City measures," October 13, 2016
  5. ↑ San Francisco Chronicle,"The Chronicle recommends: Vote No on S.F. Propositions D, H, L and M," September 3, 2016
  6. ↑ The Bay Area Reporter,"B.A.R. election endorsements," accessed October 9, 2016
  7. ↑ San Francisco Examiner,"Measures on November ballot seek solutions SF’s housing crisis," October 2, 2016
  8. ↑ San Francisco Voter Guide,"Local Ballot Measures," accessed October 2, 2016
v • e
Local ballot measures in California
Counties
California
Analysis
Political topics
Tax measures
Flag of California
v • e
State of California
Sacramento (capital)
Elections

What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2026 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures

Government

Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy

Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=San_Francisco,_California,_Housing_and_Development_Commission_Establishment_Amendment,_Proposition_M_(November_2016)&oldid=8471375"