The HANC Board wanted to include its endorsements in last month’s issue of the Voice, as voting began the same day we mailed our May issue. We did not dig deeply enough into Proposition D, “Office of Victim and Witness Rights.” The only opposition in the voter guide was from one individual. We should have paid more attention: “This measure would do absolutely nothing to reduce crime . . . Nothing prevents City departments that already provide victim and witness services from coordinating better. . . . We don’t need new City Departments, unnecessary spending . . . We should be using existing resources and oversight mechanisms more effectively.”
According to the League of Pissed Off Voters, “This proposition looks suspiciously like an attempt to wrest power from the District Attorney’s office by placing some vaguely “law and order” sounding measure on the same ballot as the DA recall. Unsurprisingly, the DA’s office has had a similar and well-functioning domestic violence victim support program for years. Also unsurprisingly, this measure was put on the ballot with no hearing or input from family courts by Supervisor Catherine Stefani - who is openly angling for the DA appointment should the Chesa Boudin recall prove successful. Can’t we just fund the existing free legal aid program for domestic violence victims- why does this need to be a charter amendment? “
The Ballot Simplification Committee Digest in the Voter Guide states that “The Office [of Victim and Witness Rights] would introduce an ordinance . . .” to establish a pilot program to provide free legal services, and “The Office would seek to establish” a permanent program to provide free legal services. Any supervisor can introduce an ordinance. There is no need for a department to be set up to do so.
The Controller’s Statement in the Voter Guide states, “The cost of the proposed ordinance, should it be approved by the voters, is dependent on decisions that will be made through the budget process, as an ordinance cannot bind future Mayors and Boards of Supervisors to provide funding for this or any other purpose.” The Controller found that the department head (to be appointed by the Mayor) will cost the City $340,000 annually, and the minimum cost of staffing will be $700,000 each year.
The text of Proposition D leaves the duties of the newly created department up to the Board of Supervisors: “The Board of Supervisors may modify the duties of the Office set forth in subsections (b)(1) through (b)(5) [these are the sections that describe the duties and functions of the department], and may add to those duties or transfer any of those duties to other City departments, by ordinance approved by a majority of the Board.”
Proposition D sets up an unfunded department, whose duties can be entirely transferred to other departments by a vote of the Board of Supervisors. There is no reason to support this, and we urge you to vote “No” on Proposition D