On Thursday afternoon a group of government, labor, and civic advocates gathered outside The Women’s Building to call on San Franciscans to vote no on Proposition B next month.
Proposition B on the June 2nd ballot asks voters if San Francisco should set lifetime term limits for mayor and members of the Board of Supervisors so nobody may serve more than two four-year terms in those offices. Per the Ballot Simplification Committee, the current City Charter allows elected mayors and supervisors to serve two consecutive four-year terms; after leaving office for four years, if reelected, they may return to that office.
Proposition B would amend the City Charter to prohibit any elected official from returning to office, for life, after they have served two full terms.
In the 2026 San Francisco voter information pamphlet, proponents of B claim term limits would level the playing field, and have been shown to increase accountability and diversity, reduce corruption, save taxpayers money, and make elections more competitive.
Leah LaCroix, president of the San Francisco District 11 Democratic Club, said Prop, B would take autonomy from San Francisco voters, and cited the broad coalition of groups opposing it, including the San Francisco League of Women Voters, the San Francisco Chronicle, Bay Area policy group SPUR, SF Firefighters Local 798, and the Labor Council.
“Only two cities in California have a lifetime ban like this, and both are in deep red Orange County. San Francisco should not be taking its cues from Orange County Conservatives on how to run our local democracy,” LaCroix said. “I agree we need new voices now more than ever, but we just elected a new mayor and four new supervisors, out of six… San Francisco voters are doing already what this ballot measure claims to do. Prop B really is a solution in search of a problem.”
Kim Tavaglione said the Labor Council opposed Prop. B.
“[Prop B] assumes that voters are stupid,” Tavaglione said. “These are people who pass this are afraid to run campaigns, or don’t know how to, and are afraid of voters. That’s why they put this on the ballot. You know, there’s nothing wrong with running a hard campaign. And if voters decide that they want something, that was there before, that is ultimately the voter’s choice, and we will not side with anyone in the tries to take away voter’s rights and their choices.”
Romalyn Schmaltz read a statement from the League of Women’s Voters San Francisco; LWVSF Co-President Kate Degelau-Pierce was also in attendance:
“The loophole the proposition claims to close, a former mayor, supervisor running for office again after a mandatory four year break, has only happened once in San Francisco’s history,” Schmaltz said, referring to Supervisor Aaron Peskin — Proposition B is seen by some as a personal vendetta against Peskin for this reason.
“Women of color and LGBTQ candidates all face greater obstacles to getting elected,” said Schmaltz. “Once they break through, lifetime term limits mean they can never come back, no matter how much experience they’ve gained, how much more they still have to offer, or if their community wants them to lead again. If the goal is to truly help new and diverse candidates completely fairly, there are reforms that actually accomplish that.”
Former District 1 Supervisor Sandra Lee Fewer reiterated concern from the coalition that Proposition B is undemocratic.
“When term limits and district elections were debated 36 years ago, it was written with the direct intention to limit the advantage of incumbency while still allowing experienced leaders to return if voters wanted them to. That is not a loophole. That is democracy, and it works,” Fewer said. “As a Chinese American, I am also concerned about how eliminating voter choice will affect my community when an experienced, trusted leader in the community is prohibited from running again.”
Why is Proposition B coming to a city-wide vote now? “It actually strengthens special interest money,” answered Fewer. “I feel like Bilal [Mahmood, one of Prop B’s endorsers] is definitely a product of special interest money, if you look at how he got into office and who spent money on him … The turnover and the lack of expertise causes havoc, and it allows special interest to spend more money on elections to put their people forward.”
The coalition against Proposition B is unusually vast, also including former Mayors Willie Brown and Art Agnos, the Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club, former SFPD Commander Rich Correia, and former state Assemblymember Tom Ammiano, among others. Many with No on B share the opinion the measure exists in response to Supervisor Aaron Peskin serving another two terms as District 3 Supervisor from 2015-2024 after taking the charter-mandated four-year break when he termed out in 2008.
Peskin told 48hills he thinks Proposition B is “terrible public policy,” and adds that term limits have long been a tool of the right.
“Listen, literally in a month, I’m eligible to collect social security,” Peskin said. “I have no intention of running for supervisor or any other office… It doesn’t personally impact me at all.”
When asked why he believes this proposition exists and why Mayor Lurie and Sup. Bilal Mahmood, among others, endorse it, Peskin responded, making a bit of fun of the current US president: “I think that they suffer from PDS. Peskin Derangement Syndrome.”
