On August 8th the PAC committee sent all candidates seeking office and approved ballot measures our endorsement questionnaire. The questionnaires were due on Tuesday, August 13, 2024 at 11:55pm. We stated in our communications that in order to be considered for an endorsement and participate in our PAC process – including participate in interviews, be considered for a PAC recommendation, and be able to be invited to present at the Sept 7th candidate forum – one must submit a questionnaire. We made all reasonable efforts to connect with every candidate and measures listed on the November 2024 ballot, and accommodated all requests to submit a questionnaire past the original deadline up until August 30th. Additionally, only candidates that are registered Democrats were considered for endorsement.
The PAC committee conducted interviews on Saturday, Aug 24, Sunday, Aug 25, and Tuesday, August 27, 2024. The District 11 Democratic Club general membership will cast their endorsement vote on the November 2024 election on September 7, 2024 following the Candidate Forum.
Per the bylaws of the District 11 Democratic Club, all ballot measures must receive a simple majority (50%+1) in order to receive an endorsement or recommendation. If the ballot measure did not reach this threshold, the recommendation will be listed as “No Position”.
Section 6 of our bylaws states that candidates must receive 60% of votes cast to receive an endorsement or recommendation. Per the authority granted in Article 8 Section 2 of our bylaws, the Executive Board voted to suspend the 60% threshold for candidates races for the November 2024 PAC recommendations only. This motion passed with 7 ayes, 0 nays, and 3 absent. Please note, this decision was made with careful consideration and after robust deliberation.
The 60% threshold remains for the SF D11 Dems endorsement vote taking place on September 7th.
Ballot Measure questionnaires and info sheets
Candidates that did not submit a questionnaire:
- Mark Farrell (Mayor), Brooke Jenkins (DA), Michael Lai (D11), Oscar Flores (D11), Paul Miyamoto (Sheriff), Michael Juan (Sheriff), Lefteris Eleftheriou (BOE), Ann Hsu (BOE), Madeline Krantz (BOE), Deldelp Medina (BOE), Min Chang (BOE), Paige Bailey (CCSF), Murrell Green (CCSF), Ben Kaplan (CCSF), Leanna Louie (CCSF), William Nocera (CCSF), John Schneider (CCSF)
Candidates who are not registered democrats, therefore cannot be considered for endorsement recommendation:
- Roger Marenco (D11), Jose Morales (D11), and Min Chang (BOE)
With all this in mind, we present to you our recommendations for the November 2024 ballot.
Democratically yours,
San Francisco District 11 Democratic Club PAC Committee
U.S. House of Representatives
Recommendation: Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi
U.S. Senate
Recommendation: Adam Schiff
State Senate
Recommendation: No Recommendation
Assembly District 17
Recommendation: Matt Haney
Assembly District 19
Recommendation: No Position
Mayor
Recommendation
Rank 1: Aaron Peskin
Rank 2: London Breed
Rank 3: No Recommendation
Supervisor, District 11
Recommendation
Rank 1: Adlah Chisti
Rank 2: Ernest “EJ” Jones
Rank 3: Chyanne Chen
Board of Education
Recommendation: Matt Alexander, Virginia Cheung, Supryia Marie Ray, John Jersin
CCSF Board of Trustees
Recommendation: Alan Wong, Aliya Chisti
Treasurer
Recommendation: José Cisneros
City Attorney
Recommendation: David Chiu
District Attorney
Recommendation: Ryan Khojasteh
BART Board of Directors (District 9)
Recommendation: Edward Wright
LOCAL PROPOSITIONS
Yes on Prop A - Bond1 - SFUSD School Improvement Bond Prop A
Pro: Authorize the School District to issue up to $790 million in general obligation bonds to improve, repair and upgrade School District sites, and to build new facilities. This country mandates a free and quality education for all children. It’s a civil right.
Yes on Prop B - Bond2 - Public Health & Shelter General Obligation Bond, Mayor London Breed Prop B
Pro: Allow the City to issue up to $390 million in general obligation bonds to fund projects related to community health and medical facilities, street safety, public spaces and interim housing to reduce family homelessness. Civilized societies approach health and shelter as a human right.
Yes on Prop C - Charter 5: Inspector General
Pro: amending the Charter to create a new position of Inspector General in the Controller’s Office to review and investigate complaints of fraud, waste and abuse.
No on Prop D - Charter 1: City Commissions and Mayoral Authority.
Con: Sole authority? Authoritarian=anti-democratic. Commissioners would become accountable to the mayor rather than the public’s interest. Increased propensity of corruption, despotism and legalized bribery.
Yes on Prop E - Charter 4: Commission Task Force
Pro: Create a Task Force with authority to make recommendations on ways the City could change, eliminate or consolidate commissions to improve the administration of City government; require a financial report on the City’s commissions; and give the Task Force authority to introduce ordinances to implement its recommendations, and if necessary, require the City Attorney to draft Charter amendments to submit to voters at a future election. Democracy at work. Coordinates the Task Force’s authority with the City Attorney’s agency to protect essential public services.
No on Prop F - Charter 2: Police Staffing and Deferred Retirement
Con: 1) At a time of sustained deficit, we should reduce expenditures. 2) Reduces program evaluation period by one year.
Yes on Prop G - Charter 6: Affordable Housing Fund
Pro: amend the Charter to appropriate at least $8.25 million a year to pay for rental subsidies for affordable housing developments serving ELI households of seniors, families and persons with disabilities.
Yes on Prop H - Charter 8: Firefighter Retirement Benefits
Pro: Take care of public servants and support pension benefits for Firefighters hired on or after January 7, 2012, by lowering the age from 58 to 55, and aligning their benefits with members hired before that date.
Yes on Prop I - Charter 7: Nurse / Public Safety Retirement Benefits
Pro: This will allow a retirement buy-in for Per Diem Nurses and 911 Operators in SF.
Yes on Prop J - Charter 3: Clarifying Uses of the Student Success Fund
Pro: This will designate who is responsible for what by when, allow departments to work together to align and coordinate the City’s services for children, youth, and disconnected transitional-aged youth. The Initiative will review City funding that is attributed to the Children & Youth and PEEF (Public Education Enrichment Fund) baseline to assess whether they align and deliver upon goals identified in the Citywide Plan and Outcomes Framework.
No on Prop K - Ordinance 2: Parkway at Upper Great Highway
Con: We are against permanently closing the Upper Great Highway to Private Vehicles to Establish a Public Open Recreation Space; it will make vehicles have to detour away from the direct route; more congestion on Sunset.
Yes on Prop L - Ordinance 3: ComMUNIty Transit Act
Pro: Equitable for the common good. Reduce carbon emissions.
No Position on Prop M - Ordinance 1: Changes to Business Tax
Pro: Small, local, independently-owned businesses.
Con: Tax break for some insanely rich people.
No Position on Prop N - Ordinance 5: First Responder Fund
Pro: Fund to cover student loan payments and education costs of city first responders-paramedics, registered nurses, 911 dispatchers, police, fire and sheriff depts.
Funding by Mayor and Supervisors once made available or by private donors to provide better, faster services with the goal of complete staffing. Needs only 50%+ 1 majority of election votes.
Con: No defined known limits of cost or how it would be distributed or when funding would begin, then would need $1 million before distribution begins. Administration costs for one or two persons, once established is estimated at $125,000 to $315,000.
Yes on Prop O - Ordinance 4: San Francisco Reproductive Freedom Act
Pro: Policy to protect reproduction and abortion rights, protect identity of patients, expanded access to doctors and facilities with that expansion made easier-to include signage if not all care is provided and where complete care can be found in San Francisco. Creates a fund that accepts funding to support reproductive rights and services. Planning code change to enable more areas to build clinics.
STATE PROPOSITIONS
Proposition 2: Kindergarten Through Grade 12 Schools and Local Community College Public Education Facilities Modernization, Repair, and Safety Bond Act of 2024.
Recommendation: Yes
Proposition 3: Marriage Equality
Recommendation: Yes
Proposition 4: Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparedness, and Clean Air Bond Act of 2024
Pro: This Bond would authorize 10 billion in debt to spend on environmental and
climate projects, with the biggest chunk, 1.9 billion, for drinking water improvements. The bond
prioritizes lower income communities, and those most vulnerable to climate change, and requires annual audits.
Recommendation: Yes
Proposition 5: 55% Majority Approval for Public Infrastructure & Affordable Housing
Pro: This will lower the vote threshold from 66.67% to 55% for local bond measures to fund housing projects and public infrastructure. It would also require the local jurisdiction (city, county, or special district) to conduct an annual audit to ensure that the funds are being used according to their intended purposes until all the proceeds have been expended.
Recommendation: Yes
Proposition 6: Complete Ban on Slavery
Recommendation: Yes
Proposition 32: $18 Minimum Wage
Recommendation: Yes
Proposition 33: Justice for Renters Act; Repeal of Costa-Hawkins (Leah)
Pro: Repealing the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act (1995), thereby allowing cities and counties to limit rent on any housing and limit the rent for first-time tenants and adding language to state law to prohibit the state from limiting "the right of any city, county, or city and county to maintain, enact or expand residential rent control."
Recommendation: Yes
Proposition 34: Restricts Spending By Health Care Providers Meeting Specified Criteria
Pro:Protect Patients Now, which is sponsored by the California Apartment Association, is leading the campaign in support of the initiative.
Con:"The proposed Initiative is a poorly veiled attempt by the California Apartment Association to silence a political adversary. If it is allowed to be put to the voters, no organization in the future will be safe from similar retribution by monied opponents."
Recommendation: No Position
Proposition 35: Provides Permanent Funding For Medi-Cal Health Care Services
Pro:supports permanently authorizing a tax on managed care organizations based on monthly enrollees, which is set to expire in 2026, and requiring revenues to be used for increased Medi-Cal programs.
Recommendation: Yes
Proposition 36: Homelessness, Drug Addiction, and Theft Reduction Act
Con: Adds more funding for prisons while cutting funds for rehab and recovery programs
Increases Incarceration numbers that has a much higher proportion of those of color
then found in civilian population
More felony convictions, making rejoining society after release more difficult
Prison system more like archaic punishment & torture rather than rehab so
detrimental to human spirit & rehab in an industrial prison complex, especially
with longer sentences
Wastes millions on an out of date system that begs for reform
Removes essential services
Recommendation: No
Quick to Access Links:
Showing 1 reaction
Sign in with