Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board votes to move mayoral and other citywide elections to even years; change to ballot signature threshold cleared
Summary
By a 7–4 vote the board agreed to submit a charter amendment shifting elections for mayor, sheriff, district attorney, city attorney and treasurer from odd years to even-numbered years and to change initiative signature thresholds; several supervisors cited turnout and cost savings while others raised timing concerns for bond measures.
Get email alerts on the Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Board of Supervisors voted 7–4 on July 19 to submit a charter amendment to move the city’s elections for the mayor, sheriff, district attorney, city attorney and treasurer from odd-numbered years into even-numbered years and to change the initiative signature threshold to 2% of registered voters.
Sponsor Supervisor Preston argued the change would increase turnout for municipal contests, citing historical turnout gaps between odd-year and even-year elections and potential cost savings identified by the controller. He and backers stressed that higher participation improves representative legitimacy.
Opposition and timing concerns - Opponents, including Supervisors Walton, Dorsey, Mandelmann and Mar, said they supported the principle but opposed the particular timeline that cancels the next odd-year election cycle and could complicate planned bond and ballot measure sequencing for 2023 and future public financing initiatives. - Supervisor Mandellmann and others raised concerns that agencies and districts had been planning timing for bond measures and that moving dates without allowances for certain revenue measures could complicate capital planning.
Vote and next steps - The motion to submit the charter amendment passed 7–4. The charter language will go before voters in November if processing and ballot deadlines are met.
Ending Sponsors said the change aligns San Francisco with many other California cities and would help increase participation among younger and historically underrepresented voters; opponents urged voters to weigh the timing effects on future bond scheduling.
