A week after the November 2013 election, your Governmental Relations staff looks back to help you understand and analyze the ballot results.
Turnout - Only 27.91% of voters turned out to vote this year, making 2013 a historically low turnout election. The low turnout skews the results of the election towards those campaigns which were able to mobilize their base most effectively, and may make the election results less representative of the general sentiment of the city.
Assessor-Recorder - Incumbent Carmen Chu won by a landslide in her unopposed special election, winning 97.34% of all ballots. She was appointed by the Mayor earlier this year, and so she will have to run for re-election again in November 2014 for her first full term in office.
City Attorney & Treasurer - Incumbents Dennis J. Herrera and Jose Cisneros both also won by landslides in their uncontested elections, winning by 97.36% and 97.31%, respectively.
Board of Supervisors, District 4 (Sunset) - Katy Tang beat her opponent Ivan Seredni in her first-ever election, winning handily by 83.38%. Katy Tang was also appointed by the Mayor earlier this year to fill in Carmen Chu's Supervisorial seat when she moved over to become the Assessor-Recorder. She will also have to run for re-election again in November 2014.
Proposition A (Retiree Healthcare Trust Fund) - Proposition A was passed by voters, 68.59% to 31.41%. Proposition A helped reform and protect public employee healthcare funding in the city, without raising new revenue or creating new taxes. It was supported by most of the unions, business groups and elected officials in the city. It faced small opposition by the Green Party, Libertarian Party, and a local union SEIU 1021. SFAR supported the Proposition.
Proposition B & C (8 Washington Development Project) - Propositions B and C were both soundly defeated at the polls, with 62.51% and 66.72% of voters respectively voting "No." Proposition B and C would have allowed the 8 Washington development project to move forward in the City, expanding residential housing along the waterfront and creating funding for affordable housing. Opponents of the proposition claimed that it was building a "Wall on the Waterfront" and depicted it as an example of the city only building "housing for the rich." Polling as late as mid-September showed that Propositions B and C, which would have allowed the 8 Washington development project, could pass by a slim margin. However, with the continued drumbeat from the local press about evictions and housing affordability, pundits believe the electorate was nervous about the issue of housing affordability and voted accordingly. This sentiment correlates with the recent Committee on Jobs poll which found that the number one concern among San Francisco residents was the cost of living in the City. SFAR supported Propositions B and C.
Proposition D (Drug Pricing Reform) - Proposition D was passed by voters by 79.83%. Proposition D was a non-binding policy statement that encouraged the City to negotiate with large drug companies over the pricing of drugs that they purchased for use in public health clinics. It faced no large opposition. SFAR did not take a position on Proposition D.
