This is an archive of a past election.
See for current information.
LWV League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
Smart Voter
San Francisco County, CA November 7, 2006 Election
Proposition D
Disclosure of Private Information
City of San Francisco

Majority Approval Required

Pass: 143,020 / 64.35% Yes votes ...... 79,230 / 35.65% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures

Information shown below: Summary | Fiscal Impact | Yes/No Meaning | Arguments | Full Text

Shall the City and the City's contractors be prohibited from disclosing private information about individuals except under limited circumstances?

Summary Prepared by Ballot Simplification Committee:
THE WAY IT IS NOW: Local law prohibits City contractors from disclosing private information they obtain about individuals while performing work for the City. City contractors may disclose private information if:
  • the contract authorizes disclosure of the information;

  • the contractor first obtains the City's written approval to disclose the information; or

  • the disclosure is authorized or required by law.

Private information is information that could be used to identify an individual or information that the law forbids any person from disclosing.

THE PROPOSAL: Proposition D is an ordinance that would prohibit both the City and the City's contractors from disclosing private information about individuals.

The City could only disclose private information if:

  • the individual whose information would be disclosed authorizes the disclosure;

  • a contract authorizes the disclosure of private information; or

  • disclosure is required by federal or state law or by a court.

A City contractor could only disclose private information if:
  • a contract authorized such disclosure;

  • the contractor has obtained written approval from the City to disclose the information; or

  • the disclosure is expressly ordered by a court.

The Board of Supervisors could amend this ordinance by a twothirds vote.

A "YES" VOTE MEANS: If you vote "yes," you want to amend local law to prohibit both the City and the City's contractors from disclosing private information about individuals.

A "NO" VOTE MEANS: If you vote "no," you do not want to change local law regarding the disclosure of private information about individuals.

Fiscal Impact from City Controller:
City Controller Edward Harrington has issued the following statement on the fiscal impact of Proposition D:

Should the proposed ordinance be approved by the voters, in my opinion, it would not increase the cost of government.

Meaning of Voting Yes/No
A YES vote on this measure means:
If you vote "yes," you want to amend local law to prohibit both the City and the City's contractors from disclosing private information about individuals.

A NO vote on this measure means:
If you vote "no," you do not want to change local law regarding the disclosure of private information about individuals.

This election is archived. Any links to sources outside of Smart Voter may no longer be active. No further links will be added to this page.
Links to sources outside of Smart Voter are provided for information only and do not imply endorsement.

Arguments For Proposition D Arguments Against Proposition D

Prevent City Departments and Contractors from Selling or Disclosing Private, Personal Information.

Through early December 2005, the San Francisco Police Department reported 1,300 individual cases of identity theft. A Civil Grand Jury report issued in May 2006 says the City is doing a decent job, but much more remains to be done to protect private information such as social security numbers, financial information or medical information. Some departments have failed to take adequate steps to ensure the information is protected. The City has a responsibility to safeguard information it collects from San Franciscans.

This measure updates City law to make it clear:

City government shouldn't disclose or trade private information without an individual's consent.

City government shouldn't sell this information under any circumstances.

The same rules would apply to contractors who accept City funds. Violation of these rules could result in the City terminating the contract or debarring the contractor.

Together, we can ensure that San Franciscans' privacy is protected. With voter approval, these precautions will prevent identity theft and protect San Francisco's values.

Supervisor Aaron Peskin, President, Board of Supervisors Supervisor Tom Ammiano Supervisor Chris Daly Supervisor Fiona Ma Supervisor Jake McGoldrick Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi

Rebuttal to Arguments For
Preserving the future for patriotic Americans takes precedence!

I am an advocate for privacy protection, but exterminating the suspected culprits from jeopardizing the safety and security of our nation is paramount. Unfortunately, political greed, self-serving agendas and incompetence from Democrats, also Republicans, plus other political leaderships, have facilitated increased betrayals of our nation. Patriotism, outside our military, has almost trickled down to superficial ceremonies, a factor not ignored worldwide.

Religious and philosophical fanatics are capitalizing on our nation's unconditional open-door tolerance for any foreign cultural influences eroding even the basic principles and purposes of U.S. Democracy. Eliminating anti-patriotic entities operating even within our communities takes priority over temporary inconvenience of privacy invasion. Policies can be established to expediently compensate the innocent while exposing the culprits.

No free-for-all liberals should empower any U.S. citizen or foreigner to undermine our nation with ideological fanaticisms perpetuating antiquated cultural practices. U.S. based businesses profiting from any undermining of our national security also deserve to be exposed followed by severest of penalties.

Legislation for national security information should be refined, admittedly, but not to cripple accessibility as timing is often crucial. Our collective safety takes precedence over any attempts to disembowel a U.S. American strong one-nation identity. Cultural diversity can be celebrated, but not dilute our primary allegiance as U.S. American patriots.

Vote No on D.

Gail E. Neira

Native San Franciscan; the only community-diverse, openly truthful activist elected to San Francisco Republican Central Committee; San Francisco Republican Alliance president*. 415820-1430

  • For identification purposes only
Changing Times requires more urgent scrutiny for national security!

I am not willing to be a sacrificial lamb to the whims of any of our elected or politically appointed leaders applying constitutional rights to empower anyone, U.S. citizen or other philosophical ideologies intended to erode our historical objectives of Democracy.

We allow our society to pander to those entering and residing in this nation before they prove to their allegiance and patriotism. Our nation's leaders have a right to reward those of us that have. My former immigrant parents earned their citizenship by engaging in patriotic acts for this nation. Everyone else should be subjected to the same self-sacrifice for their new nation. By the same token, even long term citizens re-interpreting Democracy to further erode Democracy deserve to be scrutinized more closely.

We are pandering way too much and getting little more than an increase of betrayals. My patriotic family and friends' safety are far more important than a bunch of strangers who just happen to secure residency or citizenship in the U.S. It is my right to know whom to trust with my life and that of other citizens who are proven patriots of this nation. Also, the instabilities of government chaos, corruption and genocides in other nations, if left unchecked, can weaken our domestic Democratic climate.

Vote No on D.

Gail E. Neira

Native San Franciscan; San Francisco Republican Alliance president*; the only community-diverse compassionate elected member of S.F. Republican Party*, 415-820-1430

  • For identification purposes only

Rebuttal to Arguments Against

In March 2004, the voters approved a charter amendment to prohibit the City Departments and City Officials from providing the state and federal government with records that may contain private information. Such information can only be authorized by resolution of the Board of Supervisors. Prop D would prohibit the city and city contractors from selling or trading personal and private information to non-government commercial interests such as marketing companies and financial institutions.

With the Police Department reporting over 1,300 cases of identity theft where social security, financial information and medical information have been lost, the City can do more to ensure that residents' private information is protected.

The City of San Francisco can do more to safeguard people's privacy and financial security.


Supervisor Chris Daly Supervisor Ross Mirkarmi

Full Text of Proposition D
Ordinance replacing Chapter 12M of the Administrative Code to protect private information.

Be it ordained by the People of the City and County of San Francisco:

The current Chapter 12M of the Administrative Code is hereby repealed, and a new Chapter 12M reads as follows:

CHAPTER 12M: PROTECTION OF PRIVATE INFORMATION Sec. 12M.1. Definitions. Sec. 12M.2. Nondisclosure of Private Information. Sec. 12M.3. Enforcement. Sec. 12M.4. Contract Requirements. Sec. 12M.5. Exceptions. Sec. 12M.6. Preemption. Sec. 12M.7. Severability. Sec. 12M.8. Amendment by the Board of Supervisors

SEC. 12M.1. DEFINITIONS. For the purposes of this Chapter, the following definitions shall apply to the terms use herein.

(a) "City" shall mean the City and County of San Francisco.

(b) "Contract" shall mean an agreement for goods or services, including without limitation agreements for public works or improvements, or grant agreements (1) to be purchased or provided, at the expense of the City and County or to be paid out of moneys deposited in the treasury or out of trust moneys under the control of or collected by the City and County or (2) which grants the Contractor the right to receive revenues from sources other than the City based on its services under the agreement.

(c) "Contractor" shall mean any person or persons, associations, cooperatives, firm, partnership, corporation, trustee, trustee in bankruptcy, receiver, or combination thereof, who submits a Bid or Proposal or enters into a Contract with the City and County.

(d) "Contracting Department" shall mean the department that recommends or requests that a Contract be executed by the Office of Contract Administration, the Department of Public Works, or other department or public official authorized to execute the Contract on the department's behalf.

(e) "Private Information" shall mean any information that (1) could be used to identify an individual, including without limitation name, address, social security number, medical information, financial information, date and location of birth, and names of relative; or (2) the law forbids any person from disclosing.

(f) "Subcontractor" shall mean any person or persons, association, cooperative, firm, partnership, corporation, trustee, trustee in bankruptcy, receiver, or combination thereof, including without limitation any subcontractor, subconsultant or supplier at any tier, that has an arrangement or agreement, directly or indirectly, with a Contractor to perform any of Contractor's obligations under the Contract.

SEC. 12M.2. NONDISCLOSURE OF PRIVATE INFORMATION. (a) The City shall not disclose Private Information to any person or entity unless specifically authorized to do so by the subject individual or by Contract or where required by Federal or State law or judicial order. The City shall not enter into any Contract for the primary purpose of disclosing Private Information and shall not receive any compensation for the disclosure of Private Information.

(b) No Contractor or Subcontractor who receives Private Information from the City in the performance of a Contract may disclose that information to a Subcontractor or any other person or entity, unless the Contract authorizes the disclosure, the Contractor has first received written approval from the Contracting Department to disclose the information, or the disclosure is expressly required by judicial order. The disclosure and the use of the information shall be in accordance with any conditions or restrictions stated in the Contract or the Contracting Department's approval and shall not be used except as necessary in the performance of the obligations under the Contract. The department head or the department head's designee shall sign any approvals of the Contracting Department.

SEC. 12M.3. ENFORCEMENT. Any failure of a Contractor to comply with the requirements of Section 12M.2 of this Chapter shall be a material breach of the Contract. In such an event, in addition to any other remedies available to it under equity or law, the City may terminate the Contract, bring a false claim action against the Contractor pursuant to Chapter 6 or Chapter 21 of the Administrative Code, or debar the Contractor.

SEC. 12M.4. CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS. All Contracts and amendments to Contracts entered into after ninety days after the effective date of this Chapter shall incorporate by refer ence the provisions of Sections 12M.2 and 12M.3 of this Chapter.

SEC. 12M.5. EXCEPTIONS. This Chapter shall not apply in the following circumstances:

(a) When a Contract involves the expenditure of funds received by the City and County to the extent the application of the Chapter would violate or be inconsistent with the terms or conditions of the applicable grant agreement, subvention or agreement or the instructions of an authorized representative of any such agency with respect to any such grant agreement, subvention or agreement.

(b) When a Contract is for the purchase, sale, transfer or lease of any interest in real property or a license or permit for the use of real property.

SEC. 12M.6. PREEMPTION. Nothing in this Chapter shall be interpreted or applied so as to create any power or duty in conflict with any federal or state law.

SEC. 12M.7. SEVERABILITY. If any part or provision of this Chapter, or the application of this Chapter to any person or cir cumstance, is held invalid, the remainder of this Chapter, including the application of such part or provisions to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected by such holding and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, the provisions of this Chapter are severable.

SEC. 12M.8. AMENDMENT BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Board of Supervisors may amend this Chapter to ensure the protection of Private Information with a two-thirds vote.

San Francisco Home Page || Statewide Links || About Smart Voter || Feedback
Created: January 4, 2007 09:40 PST
Smart Voter <>
Copyright © League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
The League of Women Voters neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office or political parties.