Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey

San Francisco, California, Proposition D, Sheriff's Department Oversight Board Charter Amendment (November 2020)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
San Francisco Proposition D
LocalBallotMeasures Final.png
Election date
November 3, 2020
Topic
Local law enforcement and Local charter amendments
Status
Approveda Approved
Type
Referral		Origin
Lawmakers

San Francisco Proposition D was on the ballot as a referral in San Francisco on November 3, 2020. It was approved.

A "yes" vote supported amending the city and county charter to create the Sheriff's Department Oversight Board authorized to report findings and recommendations on department operations to the board of supervisors and to create the Sheriff's Department Office of Inspector General to investigate non-criminal misconduct by employees and in-custody deaths and recommend policy changes to the sheriff and board of supervisors.

A "no" vote opposed amending the city and county charter to create the Sheriff's Department Oversight Board and the Sheriff's Department Office of Inspector General.


A simple majority was required for the approval of Proposition D.

Election results

San Francisco Proposition D

Result Votes Percentage

Approved Yes

276,685 66.90%
No 136,896 33.10%
Results are officially certified.
Source



Measure design

The measure would amend the city and county charter to create the Sheriff's Department Oversight Board (SDOB) and the Sheriff's Department Office of Inspector General (OIG) as a department under the SDOB. Four of the seats on the SDOB would be appointed by the board of supervisors and three would be appointed by the mayor. One of the seven seats would have to be held by a person with experience in labor representation.[1]

The SDOB would be required to report quarterly on OIG investigations and recommendations to the board of supervisors. The OIG would be responsible for reviewing complaints made against the sheriff's department, investigating in-custody deaths, and making policy recommendations on police use of force. The OIG would also audit the sheriff's department treatment of incarcerated individuals. Both the SDOB and OIG would have the authority to subpoena witnesses and documents and require city departments to cooperate with investigations. The amendment requires that the OIG have one investigator for every 100 sworn sheriff's department employee. Members of the SDOB and OIG cannot have previously been employed by law enforcement agencies or entities representing law enforcement personnel.[1]

Currently, the sheriff's department is allowed to investigate and discipline any of its employees. This law would not restrict that power.[1]

Text of measure

Ballot question

The ballot question was as follows:[1]

“ Shall the City amend the Charter to create a Sheriff’s Department Office of Inspector General and a Sheriff’s Department Oversight Board that would make recommendations to the Sheriff and the Board of Supervisors about the operations of the Sheriff’s Department?[2] ”

Ballot simplification digest

The following summary of the measure was prepared by the office of the Ballot Simplification Committee:

“ The Way It Is Now: The Sheriff is elected by San Francisco voters. In San Francisco, the Sheriff’s primary duties are managing and operating City jails, being responsible for people in custody, and preserving the peace.

The San Francisco Sheriff directs about 800 sworn employees. The Sheriff’s Bureau of Internal Affairs investigates employee misconduct in the Sheriff’s Department. The District Attorney investigates and prosecutes criminal misconduct by the Sheriff and Sheriff’s Department employees. The City Ethics Commission investigates violations of ethics laws. The Sheriff’s Department also has a policy that governs the use of force by its sworn employees.

There is no City department, board or commission dedicated to the oversight of the Sheriff or Sheriff’s Department.

The Proposal: Proposition D is a Charter amendment that would create the Sheriff’s Department Office of Inspector General (OIG) and the Sheriff’s Department Oversight Board (Oversight Board).

The OIG would be a City department independent of the Sheriff’s Department. An Inspector General would head the OIG. The OIG would have at least one investigator for every 100 sworn employees of the Sheriff’s Department. The OIG would report to the Oversight Board and provide information and recommendations to the Sheriff.

Subject to certain limitations, the OIG would have the power to:

• Investigate certain complaints regarding Sheriff’s Department employees and contractors;

• Investigate in-custody deaths, unless that investigation would interfere with a criminal investigation;

• Recommend the Sheriff take disciplinary action when the OIG determines an employee violated law or Sheriff’s Department policy;

• Make recommendations regarding the Sheriff’s Department use of force policy;

• Monitor Sheriff’s Department operations; and

• Refer cases to the District Attorney or the City Ethics Commission.

The Sheriff’s Bureau of Internal Affairs would maintain its ability to investigate in-custody deaths, employee misconduct and violations of department policies. Criminal misconduct could still be referred to the District Attorney.

The Oversight Board would consist of seven members, four appointed by the Board of Supervisors and three appointed by the Mayor. One of the Board of Supervisors’ appointees must be a person with experience representing labor unions.

Subject to certain limitations, the Oversight Board would have the power to:

• Appoint, evaluate, renew and remove the Inspector General;

• Evaluate the performance of the Office of Inspector General; and

• Seek input from the public and people in custody regarding the Sheriff’s Department operations and jail conditions.

Based on information from the OIG and its own processes, the Oversight Board would make at least four reports a year to the Sheriff and the Board of Supervisors. The Oversight Board would be responsible for an annual report to the Sheriff and the Board of Supervisors about the activities of the OIG and the Oversight Board.

Subject to certain limitations, both the OIG and the Oversight Board would have the power to hold hearings and subpoena witnesses.

Proposition D would not prohibit or limit the Sheriff from investigating the conduct of an employee or contractor or taking disciplinary or corrective action.

A 'YES' Vote Means: If you vote 'yes,' you want to amend the City Charter to create a Sheriff’s Department Office of Inspector General and a Sheriff’s Department Oversight Board that would make recommendations to the Sheriff and the Board of Supervisors about the operations of the Sheriff’s Department.

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

”

Full text

The full text of the measure is available here.

Support

Supporters

Officials

Political Parties

  • Libertarian Party of San Francisco
  • San Francisco Democratic Party

Unions

  • SEIU Local 1021
  • San Francisco Labor Council

Organizations

  • League Of Women Voters Of San Francisco
  • San Francisco Women's Political Committee

Arguments

  • San Francisco Public Defender Manohar Raju said, “If this ballot initiative passes, the Office of the Inspector General and the Sheriff’s Oversight Board would have real investigative power. Each could subpoena witnesses and documents, and it would be mandated in the city charter that city departments including the sheriff cooperate with internal investigations. It’s a degree of power or autonomy that doesn’t exist now. It will be critical for family members of the ones incarcerated to bring complaints forward—and don’t fear retaliation for doing such an act.”[3]

Official arguments

The official arguments in support of Proposition D were authored by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, District Attorney Chesa Boudin, Public Defender Manu Raju, the San Francisco Democratic Party, and the San Francisco Labor Council:[1]

“

Time for oversight and accountability in the Sheriff’s Department, vote Yes on D!

We must act now to join the national movement for justice reform and end the decades of discrimination and unfair treatment rampant within the Sheriff’s Department. It is time for us to work together to stop the injustices and abuse towards individuals in custody and staff and give voice to those impacted.

Yes on D will create an oversight board who will:

  • Appoint an Inspector General to evaluate the work of the Sheriff’s Department, compile and recommend best practices, and conduct community outreach to hear public input regarding operations and jail conditions.
  • Develop a use of force policy and comprehensive review process for all use of force and critical incidents.
  • Investigate the death of any individual in the custody of the Sheriff’s Department.
  • Receive, review and investigate complaints of non-criminal misconduct by employees and contractors of the Sheriff’s Department and in-custody deaths.
  • Develop policy recommendations

Lawsuits against the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department have cost the city millions in settlements excluding the staff time and resources spent on these cases. Having a Sheriff’s Department Oversight Board and an Inspector General will provide public transparency when investigating these incidences of misconduct, mistreatment, and abuse.

Yes on D: Sheriff Oversight will establish true public transparency, oversight, and accountability of the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department. This measure was submitted to the ballot by a unanimous vote of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.

Please join us and vote Yes on D: Sheriff Oversight now![2]

”

Opposition

Opponents

  • San Francisco Taxpayers Association[1]
  • San Francisco Republican Party[4]

Official arguments

The official arguments in support of Proposition D were authored by David Pilpel:[1]

“

Please vote NO on Proposition D.

You may think that more oversight of the Sheriff’s Department is needed. It's an arguable point, but I disagree. I respectfully suggest that Proposition D is not the solution that we need at this time.

The Sheriff’s Department already has an Internal Affairs Unit to conduct administrative investigations and a Training Unit to train sworn personnel. While seeing fewer people in custody, the Sheriff’s Department is expanding a relationship with the existing Department of Police Accountability (formerly the Office of Citizen Complaints), as well as referring personnel investigations to other independent outside agencies when circumstances warrant.

If you want more government services, you should vote for additional taxes (like Propositions F, I, and L on this ballot) or seek other resources to pay for them.

If you support government efficiency and oversight, there are existing tools available, including:

  • Board of Supervisors Budget and Legislative Analyst, and its power of hearing and inquiry;
  • City Attorney investigations and civil enforcement;
  • Civil Grand Jury investigations and public reports;
  • Controller's Office fiscal and performance audits;
  • District Attorney investigations and criminal enforcement; and
  • Ethics Commission investigations and administrative enforcement of ethics laws.

The City Controller says that Proposition D would have a moderate to significant impact on the cost of government. It would certainly add more administration, bureaucracy, and overhead, but no guarantee of any meaningful oversight.

We don't need new City Departments, unnecessary spending, or other gimmicks during a pandemic. We should be using existing resources and oversight mechanisms more effectively. Please vote NO on Proposition D. Thank you.[2]

”

Media editorials

See also: 2020 ballot measure media endorsements

Ballotpedia identified the following media editorial boards as taking positions on the ballot measure. If you are aware of a media editorial board position that is not listed below, please email the editorial link to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Support

  • San Francisco Chronicle: “This measure backed by Supervisor Shamann Walton would add a double dose of oversight to the sheriff’s office with an investigative panel and an independent inspector general. Deputy misconduct and inmate mistreatment are now handled by Sheriff Paul Miyamoto, who as an elected official has the final word on discipline. The panel appointed by the mayor and supervisors would investigate and make recommendations. Miyamoto says he already gives this job to a police department oversight panel and a new one is costly and unneeded. Now more than ever, the public needs reassurance on fully investigating law enforcement. A layer of outside oversight makes sense as a way to assure professional conduct. Vote Yes.”[5]
  • San Francisco Bay Guardian: “San Francisco has a civilian oversight agency for the Police Department, but complaints against sheriffs are still entirely in the control of the Sheriff’s Department Internal Affairs Unit. That didn’t work for SFPD, and in an era when almost everyone agrees on the need for more law-enforcement oversight, it doesn’t work for the Sheriff’s Office. Prop. D, sponsored by Sup. Shamann Walton, would set up a civilian board and an inspector general to look into misconduct in San Francisco’s second law-enforcement agency. Yote Yes."[6]
  • Bay Area Reporter: "The San Francisco Police Department has a strong police commission that provides oversight. Similarly, we think independent oversight is better than a city department investigating another city department. Vote YES on Prop D."[7]

Opposition

Ballotpedia had not identified media editorial boards in opposition to the ballot measure.

Background

California Assembly Bill 1185 (2020)

California Assembly Bill 1185 (AB 1185) was introduced on February 21, 2019, in the California State Legislature. AB 1185 was designed to authorize California counties to establish civilian oversight bodies over their sheriffs and authorize the oversight bodies to use the power of subpoena. The bill also authorized counties to establish an office of the inspector general.[8]

AB 1185 passed in the state Assembly on May 29, 2019, in a vote of 43 to 23. It passed the state Senate on August 28, 2020, with amendments in a vote of 27-11. The state Assembly concurred with the amendments on August 31, 2020, and Governor Gavin Newsom (D) signed the law on September 30, 2020.[8]

George Floyd death and protests

See also: Policy changes in response to the killing of and protests about George Floyd

On May 25, 2020, Minneapolis police officers arrested George Floyd, a black man, after receiving a call that he had made a purchase with a counterfeit $20 bill.[9] Floyd died after Derek Chauvin, a white officer, arrived at the scene and pressed his knee onto Floyd's neck as Floyd laid face-down on the street in handcuffs.[10] Both the Hennepin County Medical Examiner and an independent autopsy conducted by Floyd's family ruled Floyd's death as a homicide stemming from the incident.[11] The medical examiner's report, prepared by Dr. Michael Baden and Dr. Allecia Wilson, said that it was "not a legal determination of culpability or intent, and should not be used to usurp the judicial process."[11]

Floyd's death was filmed and shared widely, leading to protests and demonstrations over racism, civil rights, and police use of force. The first protests took place in Minneapolis-St. Paul on May 26. A protest in Chicago organized by Chance the Rapper and Rev. Michael Pfleger took place the same day, making it the first major city outside of Minneapolis to host a protest over Floyd's death.[12]

Click here to read more about responses to the killing of and protests about George Floyd.

Related 2020 ballot measures

See also: Local police-related ballot measures following the killing of and protests about George Floyd (November 2020)

Ballotpedia identified 18 local police-related or law enforcement measures on the ballot for November 3, 2020, that qualified following the death of George Floyd. The local ballot measures were on the ballot in nine cities and four counties within six states. The local ballot measures concerned police practices, police oversight boards and auditors, police staffing and funding levels, recordings from police body and dashboard cameras, and other policies.

State Jurisdiction Title Description Result
California Los Angeles County Measure J Requires that no less than 10% of the county's general fund be appropriated to community programs and alternatives to incarceration Approveda
California Oakland Measure S1 Changes the powers, duties, and staffing of the Oakland Police Commission and creates the Office of Inspector General Approveda
California San Diego Measure B Replaces the Community Review Board on Police Practices with the Commission on Police Practices that would be appointed by the city council to conduct investigations and subpoena witnesses and documents related to deaths resulting from police interactions and complaints made against police officers Approveda
California San Francisco Proposition D Creates the Sheriff's Department Oversight Board and the Sheriff's Department Office of Inspector General Approveda
California San Francisco Proposition E Removes the mandatory police staffing level from the city's charter Approveda
California San Jose Measure G Authorizes the independent police auditor to review reports and records related to officer-involved shootings and uses of force Approveda
California Sonoma County Measure P Makes changes to the powers and duties of the Independent Office of Law Enforcement Review and Outreach (IOLERO) Approveda/Overturnedot
Illinois DuPage County Law Enforcement Budget Advisory Referendum Advises the county to continue to consider law enforcement and public safety as its top budgeting priority Approveda
Illinois DuPage County Law Enforcement Injury Risk Training Advisory Referendum Advises the county to continue to fund and support law enforcement training methods that decrease the risk of injury to officers and suspects Approveda
Ohio Akron Release of Recordings from Police Body and Dashboard Cameras after Use of Force Charter Amendment Requires recordings from police body and dashboard cameras documenting police use of force that results in death or serious injury to be released to the public Approveda
Ohio Columbus Issue 2 Creates the Civilian Police Review Board to investigate alleged police misconduct, subpoena testimony and evidence during the investigations, make recommendations to the Division of Police, and appoint and manage the new position of Inspector General for the Division of Police Approveda
Oregon Portland Measure 26-217 Establishes a new police oversight board in the city's charter Approveda
Pennsylvania Philadelphia Question 1 Adds language to the Philadelphia City Charter calling on the police department to "eliminate the practice of unconstitutional stop and frisk, consistent with judicial precedent" Approveda
Pennsylvania Philadelphia Question 3 Creates a Citizens Police Oversight Commission to replace the Police Advisory Commission Approveda
Pennsylvania Pittsburgh Independent Citizen Police Review Board Charter Amendment Requires police officers to cooperate with investigations conducted by the Independent Citizen Police Review Board Approveda
Texas Kyle Proposition F Amends the city charter to authorize the city council to adopt procedures and a committee to review the police department Approveda
Washington King County Charter Amendment 1 Requires investigations into all police-related deaths and to provide public attorneys to represent the decedent's family in the investigation Approveda
Washington King County Charter Amendment 4 Amends the county charter to authorize the Office of Law Enforcement Oversight (OLEO) to subpoena witnesses, documents, and other evidence in its investigations of law enforcement personnel Approveda
Washington King County Charter Amendment 5 Returns the office of the sheriff from an elected position to an appointed position that is appointed by the county executive and confirmed by the county council Approveda
Washington King County Charter Amendment 6 Gives the county council the authority to specify the duties of the sheriff Approveda

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing local ballot measures in California

This measure was put on the ballot through a unanimous vote of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors on July 21, 2020.[1]

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 San Francisco Elections Office, "Qualified Local and District Measures," accessed October 12, 2020 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "BallotLanguage" defined multiple times with different content
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  3. ↑ The Davis Vanguard, "San Francisco Supporters of Proposition D: Sheriff Oversight Measure Begins Campaign," September 12, 2020
  4. ↑ California Choices, "San Francisco Ballot Endorsements," accessed October 20, 2020
  5. ↑ San Francisco Chronicle, “Editorial: San Francisco ballot recommendations cover taxes, housekeeping and social change.,” October 6, 2020
  6. ↑ San Francisco Bay Guardian, "Endorsements Fall 2020," October 1, 2020
  7. ↑ Bay Area Reporter, "Editorial: Vote yes on all SF props," September 23, 2020
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 OpenStates, "AB 1185," accessed October 15, 2020
  9. ↑ Washington Post, "The death of George Floyd: What video and other records show about his final minutes," May 30, 2020
  10. ↑ The New York Times, "8 Minutes and 46 Seconds: How George Floyd Was Killed in Police Custody," May 31, 2020
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 USA Today, "Medical examiner and family-commissioned autopsy agree: George Floyd's death was a homicide," June 1, 2020
  12. ↑ CNN, "Protests across America after George Floyd's death," accessed June 2, 2020
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 2025 | 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,_Proposition_D,_Sheriff%27s_Department_Oversight_Board_Charter_Amendment_(November_2020)&oldid=8182950"