Mayor Daniel Lurie is moving to increase by a factor of five the cost of putting an argument in the ballot handbook, undermining the most affordable way for grassroots campaigns to reach voters.
Under his legislation, which no local news media has covered, the cost of an argument would increase from $200 and $2 a word to $1,000 and $10 a word by 2030. That would mean a 200-word ballot argument that now costs $600 would cost $3,000.
Five ballot arguments, a modest number for a lot of campaigns, would cost $15,000—more than many community-based campaigns could afford.
That would give big-money operations even more clout in San Francisco.
The measure comes before the Budget and Appropriations Committee Wednesday/17 at 1:30 pm.
Every registered voter gets a ballot handbook, and it’s widely read. The official proponents and opponents of a ballot measure get a free argument and rebuttal, but anyone who puts up the relatively modest fee can also get an argument published.
It’s how small-money campaigns get the word out. In an era when the rich are increasingly dominating local politics, the ballot handbook is invaluable.
Now Lurie wants to make it unaffordable.
The excuse is that the price hasn’t gone up since 1997, which is true. As the League of Women Voters points out, adjusted for inflation the cost would be about double what it is today, $400 and $4 a word.
The price would go up in stages, and would reach $1,000 and $10 a word by July 1, 2030.
The Voter’s Handbook costs the city money—but it’s a public service, not a profit center.
The LWV opposes the measure, saying that
Fair elections depend on an inclusive process, one where the cost of participation does not determine who gets heard by the electorate. The Voter Information Pamphlet is a critical tool for civic participation. Paid ballot arguments allow a diverse range of voices — including concerned individuals, community-based organizations, neighborhood associations, labor groups, small business owners, and advocacy coalitions — to speak directly to San Francisco voters. … Steep fee increases don’t affect everyone equally. Well-funded campaigns and wealthy individuals will be unaffected, while less well-resourced community-based organizations and individuals will be silenced. The result is voter information that reflects only the views of those who can afford to be heard, not the full spectrum of San Francisco’s communities.
Richard Ivanhoe, a longtime activist who is also president of the Haight Ashbury Neighborhood Council, noted (speaking for himself, not HANC):
In this era of voter suppression from the Federal government, why would San Francisco reduce its voters’ voices? Why rush this through? … Increasing the cost of ballot arguments means that only the wealthiest (or those with access to independent expenditure committee funds) can have their voices heard.
This is from a mayor who wants to raise the threshold for signatures to put measures on the ballot, making grassroots politics more difficult. That Charter Amendment is gathering signatures now, and is funded by billionaires Michael Moritz and Chris Larson.
