Supervisors vote 7-2 to put police staffing and deferred-retirement charter amendment on November ballot

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors voted 7-2 on July 23 to call from the rules committee and send a proposed charter amendment (File No. 240544) on police staffing and a voluntary deferred-retirement option program to the November ballot.

The measure was called from committee so it can be considered by the full board at a second special meeting at 9:05 a.m. later the same morning. Supporters said following board rules was appropriate; opponents said the item was rushed and described broader concerns about committee process.

Supervisor Hillary Ronen, who said she resigned as rules committee chair over the issue, said she had initially signed on to the proposal but reversed course after reviewing it more closely. "When I first got the proposal, like many of you who signed your name onto it, I wasn't against it. ... As I dug deeper and deeper into the proposal ... I realized that this is a very mistaken policy that will be highly unpopular among the people," Ronen said, and told colleagues she would vote no on the motion.

Several supervisors defended the board's procedures and the rules that allow measures to be called from committee. Supervisor Connie Chan said committee chairs and board rules exist for a purpose and supported calling the item from committee so the full board could consider it.

Deputy City Attorney Anne Pearson was asked about alternatives such as tabling the item in committee. "I cannot speak to the full history of what's happened at this board. I can think of at least one instance when a ballot measure was tabled in committee," Pearson said, and added that bringing an item back in time to meet the calendar for the November ballot would likely be difficult.

Members of the public also weighed in during the public-comment period. Leah McGeever, who identified herself as a city resident, criticized the board's priorities, saying in part: "The most pathetic, heartbreaking, frustrating part is that no amount of testimony from oppressed communities or data will sway you to stop increasing police funding and power ... Shame on everyone who votes yes on this." Another public commenter described the proposal as "a rip off by the cops," saying opponents planned to push back at the ballot box.

On the roll call for the motion to call the charter amendment from committee and modify the rules timing, the board recorded seven votes in favor and two opposed. The board clerk announced 7 ayes and 2 noes; Supervisors Dean Preston and Hillary Ronen voted no. The motion passed and the board adjourned the first of its special meetings; the charter amendment will be considered at the scheduled 9:05 a.m. special session.

The motion's text as read into the record referred to File No. 240544 and to board rules 2.22.7 and 3.38 governing the timing and calling of items from committee. The clerk read that, if approved, the charter amendment would be submitted to the electorate for the November ballot and would be considered at the next meeting of the board.