Even for San Francisco political insiders, the city’s vast network of commissions and advisory boards — estimated at over 130 — can be bewildering.
On Nov. 5, San Franciscans voted on two competing ballot measures over how to cut or consolidate those boards, committees, councils, and task forces to reduce the city’s layers of bureaucracy and boost government efficiency. It was the most expensive ballot measure fight in this year’s election.
The measure failed to pass, with less than half of voters supporting the measure.
Backed by TogetherSF Action, Prop. D aimed to dramatically reduce the number of city commissions to a hard cap of 65, while expanding mayoral powers. The measure attracted significant financial support, with its campaign committee raising approximately $6.5 million, plus an additional $2.5 million from a ballot committee tied to mayoral candidate Mark Farrell. The Standard’s chairman Michael Mortiz is a major financial supporter of TogetherSF Action and donated to Farrell’s committee supporting Prop. D.
Prop. E, a similar but competing proposal introduced by Supervisor Aaron Peskin, was put on the ballot as a “poison pill” to thwart Prop. D, according to its opponents. If both measures pass, the one with more votes will become law.
Prop. E was narrowly leading as of the latest returns.
Prop. E proposes a more gradual approach to commission reform: Rather than mandating immediate cuts, it would establish a task force to study the issue and make recommendations by early 2026.
Ed Harrington, a former city controller who’s leading the Prop. E campaign, said that Prop. D was the “wrong way” to reform because the public deserves an open process to discuss commission reform. He emphasized the importance of maintaining transparency and openness in city government by allowing citizen oversight.
“Prop. D takes a meat ax to our city government,” Harrington said, referring to the potential elimination of “essential and effective commissions” like the Arts, Library, Health, Youth, Small Business, and Environment Commissions. The campaign for Prop. E has raised approximately $62,000, much less than Prop. D’s nearly $9 million war chest.
Both measures emerged amid growing concerns about San Francisco’s bureaucratic complexity, with a seeming consensus that the city may need fewer oversight bodies, not more.
Another major difference between the two measures is mayoral authority. Prop. D sought to grant the mayor the new power to appoint and remove commissioners without Board of Supervisors approval, while also allowing direct firing of department heads. However, critics argued this concentration of power could undermine the purpose of having independent oversight commissions.
The battle lines largely followed San Francisco’s traditional political divide, with moderates generally supporting Prop. D, and progressives backing Prop. E. Mayor London Breed, despite her moderate alignment,opposed Prop. D because of TogetherSF Action’s cozy ties with Farrell’s campaign for mayor, calling the measure “tainted” in an August statement.