San Francisco
Prop DChanges to Ballot Measure Process
What your vote does
A YES vote means
Ordinance and policy petitions need 8% of registered voters, not 2%, more for special elections; withdrawals allowed. Mayor or four supervisors can't place measures alone. 3
A NO vote means
Ordinance and policy petitions still need 2% of registered voters. The Mayor or four supervisors can still place measures. Submitted petitions still cannot be withdrawn. 3
Both ovals are empty on purpose. The choice is yours.
Shall the City amend the Charter to increase the requirements for signature initiatives from 2% to 8% of registered voters in San Francisco (currently from about 10,600 to about 42,500 signatures), increase the requirements for calling special elections, allow signature initiatives to be withdrawn before an election, and remove the ability of a minority of Board of Supervisors members or the Mayor to place measures on the ballot?
This is the exact wording from the official voter guide.
If it fails
Nothing changes if it fails
If Prop D fails, current City Charter rules stay. A petition for an ordinance or declaration of policy needs signatures from at least 2% of registered voters, about 10,600 now. The Mayor, or four or more Board members, can still put a measure on the ballot. 3
Why it’s on the ballot now
Today, an ordinance or declaration of policy can reach the ballot by a Board majority vote, by four or more supervisors, by the Mayor, or by a petition signed by at least 2% of registered voters, about 10,600 signatures. Prop D, a Charter amendment, needed 10% of registered voters when its petition notice was published. 35
Prop D’s findings say San Francisco’s rules are looser than any other major California city’s. Their example: 15 measures in November 2024, versus one in San Jose and three in Oakland. 7
The two sides disagree about history. Opponents say about 10,600 signatures have been required since 1932. Supporters say the Controller found the current threshold was set in 2022. 6
Supporters present Prop D as part of a package with Props A, E and F on this ballot. 6
Today, a petition for an ordinance can call a special election with about 39,000 signatures (10% of votes cast for Mayor in the last election). Prop D would raise this to about 53,100 (10% of registered voters). 3
The money
The Controller says Prop D would have a minimal impact on government costs and would likely save money, by an amount not yet known. The Controller says a higher signature requirement could mean fewer measures and a shorter voter pamphlet, which costs about $11,400 a page, and possibly fewer special elections, which the Controller estimates cost at least $5 million each. 4
- Amount
- Minimal; likely small savings (Controller)
- How long
- Permanent Charter change
- Who pays
- The Controller says elections staff may handle fewer measures but check more signatures. Opponents say gathering 42,500 signatures would cost petition backers one million dollars or more. Supporters say the changes add no financial cost. 46
- 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 D needs a simple majority (50% plus one) of yes votes to pass. 2
Who bears the cost
City government (the Department of Elections and the General Fund)No new cost
What they already pay
- The Controller says each voter pamphlet page costs $11,400 on average. The Controller estimates the minimum cost of a citywide special election, with a one-card ballot and a pamphlet under 50 pages, at $5 million. 4
If it passes
- The Controller says Prop D would have a minimal effect on City costs. The Controller expects costs to fall, by amounts that cannot be set now. 4
- The Controller says fewer measures may qualify. That may mean fewer pamphlet pages and fewer special elections. Elections staff may check more signatures and remove withdrawn measures. 4
Groups that collect signatures for ballot initiatives
If it passes
- Prop D would raise the signatures needed for a petition on an ordinance or declaration of policy from about 10,600 to about 42,500. A petition for a special election on an ordinance would need about 53,100 signatures, up from about 39,000. 3
- Opponents say the new count means paying signature firms one million dollars or more. Supporters say the changes add no financial cost. They say the requirement stays below the state standard of 10%. 6
Who’s behind it
How it got on the ballot: Citizen petition
Voters signed a petition to put Prop D on the ballot. It needed 53,076 valid signatures, 10% of registered voters when its petition notice was published. The Department of Elections certified it on July 23, 2026. 5
Where the support comes from
Placed by who endorsed it and who funded it, not by our opinion. How we place measures
Prop D 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 San Francisco Labor Council and San Francisco Tenants Union. The San Francisco Democratic Party recommends Yes, and the San Francisco Republican Party recommends No. The largest donors to Mayor Lurie's Yes on D, E & F Committee are Michael Moritz and Christian Larsen; to the committee opposing Prop D, Tenants and Owners Development Corporation and Service Employees International Union Local 1021 PAC. 121011913
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 | No | ||
| San Francisco Green Party | No | ||
| Labor | |||
| San Francisco Labor Council | No | ||
| United Educators of San Francisco | No | ||
| Other groups | |||
| SPUR | Yes | ||
| League of Women Voters of San Francisco | No | ||
| YIMBY Action | Yes | ||
| San Francisco Women's Political Committee | No | ||
| Alice B. Toklas LGBTQ Democratic Club | Yes | ||
| Edwin M. Lee Asian Pacific Democratic Club | Yes | ||
| San Francisco Tenants Union | No | ||
Follow the money
YESTop donors
- Michael Moritz$3.1M
- Christian Larsen$1.5M
Who is this?
Executive chairman and co-founder of Ripple. Larsen earlier co-founded the online mortgage lender E-Loan. 1234
What they’ve said
- 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
- Official ballot question, Proposition D (en edition), SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 84
- Lyna Lam$1M
Who is this?
- John Pritzker$1M
- Emerson Collective LLC(Diedra Nelson)$550K
- L. John Doerr III$500K
Who is this?
- John Wolthuis$500K
Who is this?
- Dagmar Dolby$500K
- Patrick Collison$500K
- Michael Seibel$450K
Who is this?
- The top 5 donors gave 52% of this side’s money.
- 22% came from outside San Francisco.
- 2% came from outside California.
- Independent spending (not controlled by the campaign): $20.3K
Committees: Mayor Lurie's Yes on D, E & F Committee (Clean Up City Hall, Mayor Lurie's Ballot Measure Committee)
NOTop donors
- Tenants and Owners Development Corporation$80K
Who is this?
Nonprofit that owns eight low-income apartment buildings in the South of Market neighborhood of San Francisco. 1
- Service Employees International Union Local 1021 PAC$75.1K
Who is this?
SEIU Local 1021's website says it represents over 60,000 workers. They work for local governments, nonprofits, health care and schools in Northern California. 1
Their stake
SEIU 1021 is one of four groups named on a paid argument against Prop D. The argument says big corporations could still place measures on the ballot, but working people would be shut out of the process. 2
From public records, not their own explanation.
- International Federation Professional Technical Engineers$25K
Who is this?
Labor union. Its website says it speaks for more than 80,000 workers in professional, technical and office jobs in Canada and the United States. 1
- San Francisco Labor Council$20.1K
- Alexander Maldonado$2,000
- Rishav Rout$1,000
- Dale Carlson$1,000
- Douglas Engmann$1,000
- Paul Melbostad$500
- Esther Marks$500
- The top 5 donors gave 98% of this side’s money.
- 36% came from outside San Francisco.
- 0% came from outside California.
- Independent spending (not controlled by the campaign): $11.6K
Committees: Fair Access No on D
- Mayor Lurie's Yes on D, E & F Committee (Clean Up City Hall, Mayor Lurie's Ballot Measure Committee): includes $300,000 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 $20,334, mostly by: GrowSF Voter Guide $14,512; SPUR - San Francisco Bay Area Planning & Urban Research Association $5,823. These are separate from, and not included in, total_raised.
- Fair Access No on D: includes $75 of 24-hour late contributions (Form 497) dated after its latest Form 460 period ended 2026-10-17.
- NO side independent expenditures (Form 496) of $11,594, mostly by: Build Affordable Faster California, sponsored by Tenants and Owners Development Corp. $6,960; Building a Working SF Sponsored by Labor Organizations $2,400; Council of Community Housing Organizations $2,234. These are separate from, and not included in, total_raised.
- Mayor Lurie's Yes on D, E & F Committee (Clean Up City Hall, Mayor Lurie's Ballot Measure Committee) is a multi-measure committee (also: Yes on E, Yes on F). Its filings don't divide money by measure, so its full total and donors are shown on every measure it covers; do not add the measures' totals together.
- 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, Board of Supervisors President Rafael Mandelman and former Controller Ben Rosenfield, say a minority of supervisors, 2% of voters or the Mayor alone can now put anything on the ballot without public input. They say this is why San Francisco has the longest and most confusing ballots in California. They say requiring a public vote of a Board majority, or signatures from 8% of voters, would bring more debate, compromise and community input. They say 8% is still below a state standard of 10%. Prop D’s statement of purpose says it would let backers withdraw a measure they consider flawed after it qualifies; the legal text sets the deadline at 102 days before the election. 67
Strongest case against
Opponents, including the San Francisco Labor Council, United Educators of San Francisco and the San Francisco Tenants Union, say raising the requirement from 10,600 to 42,500 signatures would mean hiring paid signature firms at a cost of one million dollars or more. They say this would price out neighborhood groups, unions and community advocates, while wealthy interests could still pay. They say San Francisco would have the highest signature requirement of any California county, over three times the 2.4% needed for statewide measures. They say citizen initiatives have raised the minimum wage, set up rent control and funded schools. 6
Sources
Every fact on this page links to one of these sources.
- Official ballot question, Proposition D (en edition), SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 84
- Vote threshold for Proposition D, SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 84
- Ballot Simplification Council digest of Proposition D, SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 84
- Controller's Statement on Proposition D, SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 85
- How Proposition D got on the ballot (Dept. of Elections), SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 85
- Proponent's and opponent's arguments and rebuttals on Proposition D, SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 86-87
- Legal text of Proposition D, SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 190-193
- Legal text of Proposition A, SF Voter Information Pamphlet, Nov 3, 2026, p. 148-181
- KQED Voter Guide: Prop D (supporters and opponents listed)
- SPUR: recommendations for the November 3, 2026 election
- YIMBY Action: recommendations for the November 3, 2026 election
- How endorsers line up on Prop D: this guide's coalition groupings (endorsement method 1.0, data as of 2026-10-27)
- Campaign finance filings as of 2026-10-23 (compiled by this guide from SF Ethics Commission campaign finance transactions (DataSF pitq-e56w); data/money/sf-2026-11-d.json, main@0dcbec8)