NOVEMBER 2024 VOTER GUIDE
NO ON PROP C
Inspector General
ENDORSE-O-METER SAYS: STRONG NO
Supervisor Aaron Peskin is trying to sell his measure to create a new Inspector General position in city government as a fix to the seemingly endless corruption scandals that pop up in San Francisco seemingly every month. But the measure actually creates a political bludgeon: an unaccountable, unelected city official with no clear end to their power. It’s the equivalent of using a bazooka to light a candle. We’re voting no on Proposition C because this position consolidates far too much power in a single position, without making sure that position will effectively reduce corruption.
The Context
You’ve really gotta hand it to Supervisor Aaron Peskin—he's great at creating disastrous policy that sounds good on the surface. While his proposal to create a new Inspector General sounds like a benign solution for San Francisco’s corruption scandals, this position would have a huge amount of unchecked power, making it extremely dangerous. The Inspector General would be a political position selected by the City Controller, with the power to investigate political opponents and execute subpoenas and search warrants.
Supervisor Peskin presents the Inspector General as someone who would be able to investigate allegations of corruption and waste in San Francisco. That’s great, but these powers already exist elsewhere, in the Ethics Commission, the City Attorney’s offices, and the Controller’s offices. So this new position just adds another layer of bureaucracy in city government, one without any checks on their power. Why create such a powerful, unaccountable government position, if there’s really no direct new benefit for San Franciscans?
Politics are a dirty game in San Francisco. It’s unfortunately very easy to see a future where politicians use the Inspector General to take down political rivals with frivolous ethics complaints. The Ethics Commission agrees that this position is ripe for abuse by a savvy political operator, saying Supervisor Peskin’s proposal gives the Inspector General “an unclear but open-ended mandate.” San Francisco’s government needs structural reform to end corruption, not another unaccountable official who could abuse their considerable power.
The Money
A new Inspector General’s office wouldn’t be an excessive cost for the city, but it’s not the budgetary impact we’re worried about, it’s the political ramifications. An Inspector General and two staff positions would cost approximately $725,000 to $775,000 per year, according to the Controller’s fiscal analysis, with ongoing costs for executing subpoenas and drafting search warrants.
Additional Details
In 2020, Peskin voted down a similar proposal to create a public advocate position that sounds surprisingly close to the Inspector General position he’s proposing now. At the time, Peskin said that San Francisco already had a range of appointed and elected officials, like the Ethics Commission and the Board of Supervisors, that had the power to investigate corruption. What changed in the last four years?
Support & Opposition
Supporters include District 3 Supervisor Aaron Peskin, District 5 Supervisor Dean Preston, District 9 Supervisor Hillary Ronen, and District 11 Supervisor Ahsha Safaí, plus advocates like former Controller Ed Harrington and former federal prosecutor Jennifer Rodgers.
Supporting
SF Bay Guardian, SF League of Pissed Off Voters, Sierra Club, SF Green Party, SF Tenants Union, SEIU 1021, SF League of Conservation Voters, SF Women’s Political Committee, League of Women Voters SF, D11 Democratic Club, Potrero Hill Democratic Club, Harvey Milk, Bernal Heights Democratic Club
Opposing
GrowSF, Edwin M. Lee Asian Pacific Democratic Club, Alice B. Toklas, Eastern Neighborhoods Democratic Club, Noe Valley Democratic Club, Home Sharers Democratic Club
Other Organizations That Share Our Endorsement: The San Francisco Democratic County Central Committee and the United Democratic Club.
Paid for by TogetherSF Action. Not authorized by any candidate or a committee controlled by a candidate. Financial disclosures are available at sfethics.org.