San Francisco
Prop ACharter Changes Affecting Various City Departments and Commissions
What your vote does
A YES vote means
The City updates its Charter, cuts or reorganizes some commissions, lets the Board approve legal settlements by resolution, and must amend some voter-approved laws. 3
A NO vote means
The Charter stays as it is. Current commissions and processes stay, and most voter-approved laws still need voter approval to change. 3
Both ovals are empty on purpose. The choice is yours.
Shall the City amend the Charter to align it with how some City departments currently operate, change some processes, eliminate or reorganize certain commissions and advisory bodies, and require the Board of Supervisors to amend voter-approved laws to enact some of these changes?
This is the exact wording from the official voter guide.
If it fails
Nothing changes if it fails
If Prop A fails, current City Charter rules stay in place: the commissions and advisory bodies it would end or change keep their present form. Changes to the Charter need voter approval. 3
Why it’s on the ballot now
The Charter is the City’s constitution. Over time, some of its rules and other voter-approved laws have become out of date. The Charter, and most laws passed by voters, can be changed only by voters. 3
The Commission Streamlining Task Force met in 2025 to advise City leaders on ways to cut or combine commissions. Prop A would require it to meet every ten years. 843
Under the Charter, Public Works was to take over the Department of Sanitation and Streets’ duties on January 1, 2023. Today the Sanitation and Streets Commission and the Public Works Commission both oversee parts of Public Works’ work. Prop A would eliminate both commissions. 84
Most voter-approved laws can be changed only by voters. Supporters say even small updates to some commissions, such as how often they meet, must go to the ballot. 63
Prop A also deletes a Charter section that bars strikes by City workers other than Police and Fire and sets discipline for those who strike, and lets the City change or end 2018 Prop C’s oversight committee by ordinance. 486
The money
The Controller estimates Prop A would save the City $365,000 to $450,000 a year by eliminating three commissions and advisory bodies, and may free staff time. Convening the streamlining task force every ten years would need staff. For context, the 2025 task force took about 5,900 staff hours. Paying Youth Commission members, if leaders choose, could cost $5,000 to $85,000 a year. 4
- Amount
- Saves $365,000–$450,000 a year (Controller)
- How long
- Ongoing (permanent Charter change)
- Who pays
- The Controller estimates Prop A would save the City money, and says other costs and savings depend on choices the Mayor and Board make in the normal budget process. Any new spending, such as paying Youth Commission members, would be decided there. 4
- Vote needed to pass
- Needs a simple majority (50% + 1) to passSome measures need 55% or two-thirds of votes to pass. This one needs only a simple majority.
Prop A needs a simple majority (50% plus one) of yes votes to pass. 2
Who bears the cost
City governmentNo new cost
What they already pay
- The Controller says two commissions, for streets and for public works, now share two full-time staff. They cost $336,000 a year. 4
If it passes
- The Controller says Prop A would save the City $365,000 to $450,000 a year by eliminating some bodies. Other costs and savings depend on future budget decisions. 4
- The Controller says some costs could come later. Paying Youth Commission members would likely cost $5,000 to $85,000 a year, if leaders choose it. A review task force every ten years would need staff. 4
Who’s behind it
How it got on the ballot: Board of Supervisors
On July 14, 2026, the Board of Supervisors voted 9 to 2 to put Prop A on the ballot. Supervisors Chan and Fielder voted no. 5
Where the support comes from
Placed by who endorsed it and who funded it, not by our opinion. How we place measures
Prop A is backed by the moderate coalition groups GrowSF, TogetherSF Action (now Blueprint SF) and the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, and by SPUR and YIMBY Action. It is opposed by the progressive coalition groups San Francisco League of Pissed Off Voters and Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club, and by the League of Women Voters of San Francisco and Small Business Forward. Both the San Francisco Democratic Party and the San Francisco Republican Party recommend Yes. The largest donors to the committee supporting Prop A are Michael Moritz and Christian Larsen, and no committee opposing Prop A has reported contributions. 161214131517
Endorsements
| Group | YES | NO | Neutral |
|---|---|---|---|
| Progressive slate | |||
| San Francisco League of Pissed Off Voters | No | ||
| Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club | No | ||
| Moderate slate | |||
| GrowSF | Yes | ||
| TogetherSF Action (now Blueprint SF) | Yes | ||
| San Francisco Chamber of Commerce | Yes | ||
| Political parties | |||
| San Francisco Democratic Party | Yes | ||
| San Francisco Republican Party | Yes | ||
| San Francisco Green Party | No | ||
| Business | |||
| Small Business Forward | No | ||
| Other groups | |||
| SPUR | Yes | ||
| League of Women Voters of San Francisco | No | ||
| YIMBY Action | Yes | ||
| San Francisco Women's Political Committee | Yes | ||
| Alice B. Toklas LGBTQ Democratic Club | Yes | ||
| Edwin M. Lee Asian Pacific Democratic Club | Yes | ||
| Coalition on Homelessness | No | ||
Follow the money
YESTop donors
- Michael Moritz$150K
- Christian Larsen$100K
Who is this?
Executive chairman and co-founder of Ripple. Larsen earlier co-founded the online mortgage lender E-Loan. 1234
- Chris Larsen - Wikipedia
- SF-based crypto firm gave $5M to Trump’s controversial ballroom project | The San Francisco Standard
- Surprise, Lurie’s charter reform campaign is raking it in | The San Francisco Standard
- Lurie’s $13.5M campaign to clean up City Hall adds Newsom to its corner | The San Francisco Standard
- Robert Fisher$50K
- William Oberndorf$50K
- California Alliance of Family Owned Businesses PAC$25K
- TMG Partners R.E., LLC(Michael Covarrubias)$15K
- Operating Engineers Local 3 Issues Advocacy/
Ballot Initiative PAC$10K - Lawrence Cushman$10K
- Kilroy Realty, L.P.$10K
- San Francisco Forward Sponsored by San Francisco Chamber of Commerce$10K
Who is this?
SF Forward is the PAC of the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber's website says SF Forward supports and opposes ballot measures and issue campaigns. 1
- The top 5 donors gave 83% of this side’s money.
- 23% came from outside San Francisco.
- 0% came from outside California.
- Independent spending (not controlled by the campaign): $24K
Committees: Clean Up The Charter - Yes on A
- Clean Up The Charter - Yes on A: includes $25,000 of 24-hour late contributions (Form 497) dated after its latest Form 460 period ended 2026-10-17.
- YES side independent expenditures (Form 496) of $23,962, mostly by: GrowSF Voter Guide $18,140; SPUR - San Francisco Bay Area Planning & Urban Research Association $5,823. These are separate from, and not included in, total_raised.
- No opposing committee has filed campaign statements for this measure as of this refresh.
- Totals are contributions reported on Form 460 (Schedule A monetary, C non-monetary, loans) plus Form 497 late reports, from Jan 2025 or the committee's 2026 start; amended filings replace the original. Unitemized gifts under $100 are in totals but not in donor lists or geography shares. Outside-SF/CA shares use itemized gifts only.
- Source cutoff: the SF Ethics Commission data on DataSF was loaded 2026-10-27 and includes filings received through 2026-10-26. as_of is the latest filing from this measure's own committees, which can be earlier.
- Committees from the June 2, 2026 election (Props A–D on business taxes, term limits and the earthquake bond) are not counted. See pipeline/config/money_committees.yaml for each exclusion.
Sources: SF Ethics Commission campaign finance transactions (DataSF pitq-e56w) · SF Ethics Commission campaign finance summary totals (DataSF 9ggq-m8hp) · SF Ethics Commission campaign filers (DataSF 4c8t-ngau)
Related and competing measures
The strongest case for and against
Each side’s best argument, written as its supporters would make it. Neither is our view.
Strongest case for
Supporters, including Mayor Daniel Lurie and Board President Rafael Mandelman, call Prop A a “housekeeping” measure of 110 small fixes to an outdated Charter. They say the fixes target laws made pointless by new technology, such as requiring the City to employ a bookbinder; duplicate reports that waste staff time; and commissions that serve no purpose, such as one that oversees a department that no longer exists. They argue that small updates to commissions should not be delayed by a citywide election, and Prop A lets the Board make them by ordinary law. They say it removes none of the five commissions that oversee homeless services. 6
Strongest case against
The Coalition on Homelessness, which wrote the official argument against, says the Charter should be improved but not at the cost of transparency and checks on power. It warns that Prop A lets the Board, by majority vote, remove the oversight committee for 2018’s Prop C, a tax to fund homeless services. It credits that committee with helping house over 8,400 people. It says removing commissions that voters created weakens public participation. A paid argument by columnist Patrick Monette-Shaw says Prop A makes some required qualifications for commission members merely “desired,” which Monette-Shaw says invites patronage, and ends the rule that boards and commissions file annual reports. 687
Sources
Every fact on this page links to one of these sources.
- Official ballot question, Proposition A (en edition), SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 64
- Vote threshold for Proposition A, SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 64
- Ballot Simplification Council digest of Proposition A, SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 64
- Controller's Statement on Proposition A, SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 64-65
- How Proposition A got on the ballot (Dept. of Elections), SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 65
- Proponent's and opponent's arguments and rebuttals on Proposition A, SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 66-67
- Paid arguments on Proposition A (not checked for accuracy by any official body), SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 68-69
- Legal text of Proposition A, SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 148-181
- Legal text of Proposition D, SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 190-193
- Legal text of Proposition E, SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 193-201
- Legal text of Proposition F, SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 201-220
- SPUR: recommendations for the November 3, 2026 election
- League of Women Voters of San Francisco: recommendations for the November 3, 2026 election
- YIMBY Action: recommendations for the November 3, 2026 election
- KQED Voter Guide: Prop A (supporters and opponents listed)
- How endorsers line up on Prop A: this guide's coalition groupings (endorsement method 1.0, data as of 2026-10-27)
- Campaign finance filings as of 2026-10-26 (compiled by this guide from SF Ethics Commission campaign finance transactions (DataSF pitq-e56w); data/money/sf-2026-11-a.json, main@0dcbec8)