Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ballot Measures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public forum at Fire Commission meeting features arguments for and against Propositions A (seawall) and B (privacy)
Summary
At the Oct. 10 meeting, League of Women Voters hosted proponents and opponents for Proposition A (Embarcadero Seawall bond) and Proposition B (city privacy charter amendment); proponents warned of infrastructure and privacy risks, opponents raised cost, scope and legal-preemption concerns.
The League of Women Voters and SF GovTV presented a public-information forum on Oct. 10 covering two ballot measures.
On Proposition A (a bond measure to begin financing Embarcadero Seawall work), David Aldridge, a backer of the measure, said the 100-year-old seawall supports critical infrastructure and must be strengthened to protect transit and utilities from earthquakes and sea-level rise. "We know we need to fix the seawall," Aldridge said, and called the measure a down payment that would enable the city to tap federal and statewide funding.
An opponent calling himself Starchild questioned the project's scale, potential for cost overruns and the fairness of using general-obligation bonds. He said the beachfront promenade "is not clearly protecting" all parts of the city and warned that costs could ultimately fall to property owners and renters.
On Proposition B (a charter amendment to require the city administrator to propose a privacy ordinance and set nonbinding guidelines), proponents said the city lacks a comprehensive privacy policy and cited recent incidents involving data use and third-party surveillance. Opponents, including San Franciscans for Sunshine, argued Prop B is unnecessary, could be preempted by the California Consumer Privacy Act and might weaken local transparency protections if misapplied.
Speakers urged voters to consult the San Francisco Elections website for details; no action was required by the commission on either measure.
