Judge asks City to develop work plan for Proposition I implementation
June 15, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO -- A judge today instructed the San Francisco
Controller's Office to work with the San Francisco Chamber of
Commerce and Committee on Jobs to formulate a plan for implementing
In a hearing in San Francisco Superior Court Judge Ronald Evans
Quidachay took testimony from both sides; although he did not
issue a ruling, the judge instructed the City to submit a work
plan and return in 30 days with a status report.
Judge Quidachay allotted the OEA one month to prove to the court
that the designated work under Proposition I is being done on
a timely basis. If proof cannot be delivered, Judge Quidachay
may rule in favor of the Chamber of Commerce and Committee on
Jobs. Both parties will return to court in early July to review
the work plan.
At the July court hearing the judge will also offer a ruling
on the second part of the lawsuit which questions the validity
of a set of rules passed by the Board of Supervisors.
Although he has not ruled, Judge Quidachay did say at the onset
of the hearing that he was inclined to invalidate the rules adopted
by the Board.
"We see this as a major victory," said Nathan Nayman,
Executive Director of the Committee on Jobs. "Any movement
by the City to create a plan for implementation of Proposition
I represents progress. We look forward to working with the City."
Last month the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce and the Committee
on Jobs, on behalf of a diverse coalition of business organizations,
filed suit against City Controller and Board of Supervisors seeking
compliance with Proposition I.
The lawsuit asks the court to compel the OEA to immediately begin
a review of legislation pending before the San Francisco Board
of Supervisors to determine whether any of the proposed laws will
have an impact on the City's economy through loss of revenue,
job creation or other factors.
The lawsuit also asks the Court to invalidate certain rules passed
by the Board of Supervisors related to Proposition I. As passed
by the voters, the ordinance urged the Board to only waive economic
analysis in time of crises with a two-thirds majority of the Board
supporting the action.
In August 2005, the Board of Supervisors passed a set of rules
which gave the President of the Board the power to waive economic
analysis of any legislation before the board; allow the Board
to vote on a piece of legislation without an economic report;
and exempt certain kinds of legislative documents such as resolutions
from being subject to any analysis under Proposition I. The lawsuit
asks for all of these rules to be invalidated.
Proposition I was approved by the voters on November 2, 2004
and passed into law on December 17, 2004. The law requires the
City and County of San Francisco to create an Office of Economic
Analysis (OEA) and for the OEA to analyze any legislation pending
before the Board of Supervisors that might affect the overall
economic health of the City before the Board votes on it.