Kate Slate – March 5, 2024

Posted: February 14th, 2024 | Author: | Filed under: Elections, Kate Slate | Comments Off on Kate Slate – March 5, 2024

Hello Voter!

This is the Kate Slate for the March 5, 2024, Consolidated Presidential Primary Election in San Francisco. The goal of the Kate Slate is to encourage others to vote.

I share my personal cheat sheet with you to help others navigate their own ballot. I write the Kate Slate myself, race-by-race, issue-by-issue, and share why I am voting the way I am. I tell you how I voted, and what impacted my decisions. 

Sometimes I end up voting against something that seems right up my alley if there is a fatal flaw. (Definitely true this election!) You probably won’t agree with me on everything, and that is okay! If you’d like to learn more about the Kate Slate, scroll down to the end.

Just please vote on or before Tuesday, March 5, 2024. In fact, bonus points if you vote early. San Francisco polls are open and I already received my ballot! 

Here is how you can vote this year:

  • Vote by mail. All registered voters were to be mailed a ballot for this election. You must return your ballot on time to be counted. If you return your ballot by mail, make sure it’s postmarked by March 5 (check collection times if you use a USPS mailbox). You can also return your ballot at your polling place on Election Day, March 5. You may also authorize another person to drop off your ballot for you. Follow the directions in your ballot package.
  • Vote using a Voter Drop Box. San Francisco provides 37 drop boxes across San Francisco where you can return your ballot. These boxes are available 24/7 through 8 p.m. on Election Day, March 5.
  • Vote at the Voting Center. The Voting Center is open as of February 5 to provide ballots and services to all city residents who wish to pick up or drop off vote-by-mail ballots, register to vote (before or after the registration deadline), obtain personal assistance, use accessible voting equipment, obtain replacement ballots, and cast their ballots in person. This is a great resource if you make an error on your ballot and need to get a new one (as is your polling place on election day), or if you are not registered for a party but want to vote in a party’s primary election and you still need to swap your ballot.
  • Vote in person at your polling place. Your polling place is open March 5, 7am to 8pm. They will also assist you if you make an error on your ballot and need a new one.

Even if you miss the February 20 deadline to register to vote in this election, you can still vote provisionally at all polling places in San Francisco, as well as the City Hall Voting Center. Provided you are eligible to vote in San Francisco and have not cast another ballot, your ballot will be counted. 

Go vote. Make sure you, and the voters you know, have a plan to vote. Once you vote, you can track your ballot using the voter portal, no matter how you plan to vote. But make a plan to vote. My plan is to drop my ballot off in a Voter Drop Box in my neighborhood. 

Feel free to forward the Kate Slate to friends (and friends, if someone other than me–Kate–sent this to you feel free to drop me a line if you end up reading it, I like to hear who this made its way to, and I can add you to the email list for the next Kate Slate).

Grab and go! (The short version you can take with you to the polls. See below for the details.)

  • President of the United States – abstain
  • Member, County Central Committee (District 17) – Peter Gallota, John Avalos, Vick Chung, Gloria Berry, Adolfo Velasquez, Michael Nguyen, Sydney Simpson, Jane Kim, Anita Martinez
  • Member, County Central Committee (District 19) – Natalie Gee, Frances Hsieh, Leah LaCroix, Queena Chen, Sandra Lee Fewer, Mano Raju, Gordon Mar
  • United States Senator (term ending January 3, 2031) – Barbara Lee
  • United States Senator (term ending January 3, 2025) – Barbara Lee
  • United States Representative, District 11 – abstain
  • State Senator, District 11 – Scott Wiener
  • State Assembly Member, District 17 – Matt Haney
  • Judge of the Superior Court, Seat #1 – Michael Isaku Begert
  • Judge of the Superior Court, Seat #13 – Patrick Thompson
  • Proposition 1: Authorizes $6.38B in bonds to build mental health treatment facilities – YES
  • Proposition A: San Francisco affordable housing bonds – YES
  • Proposition B: Amend City Charter with minimum police officer staffing levels – NOOOOOO
  • Proposition C: Exempt the Real Estate Transfer Tax after property converts from commercial to residential – NO
  • Proposition D: Enhance city ethics laws – YES
  • Proposition E: Allow police department to make several changes to policing policies without further approval – NOOOOOO
  • Proposition F: Require those receiving city public assistance participate in drug screening and treatment to receive benefits – NOOOOOO
  • Proposition G: Encourage SFUSD to offer Algebra 1 to 8th Grade students – abstain

Now onto the full enchilada…

President of the United States – abstain

This is the primary and California voters are very likely to nominate the incumbent, Joe Biden, for president. And, I won’t waste my ink on a world leader who won’t stand up to end senseless genocide, and worse, is personally responsible for enabling it.

Member, County Central Committees Districts 17 and 19

You have to be registered to vote as a member of the Democratic Party to vote in this race; if you aren’t you won’t have this on your ballot. And, there are two slates depending on what part of SF you live in. You can elect up to 14, and these VIPs have the privilege of nominating the official Democratic Party Slate. This means mayor, Board of Supervisors, etc. If one set of names aren’t on your ballot, check the other district. And, if neither are on your ballot but you want to vote in this race, head over to the Voting Center at City Hall where you can exchange your ballot for one with this race and vote in person. And now, the candidates…

District 17 – Peter Gallota, John Avalos, Vick Chung, Gloria Berry, Adolfo Velasquez, Michael Nguyen, Sydney Simpson, Jane Kim, Anita Martinez

Peter Gallota is a clean energy and queer rights advocate who is the current chair of the DCCC; John Avalos fought for working families when he was Supervisor; Vick Chung and Anita Martinez fought to stop cuts to classes at City College and are elected members of its Trustees; Gloria Berry is on the SF Reparations Committee where she is fighting for…reparations; Adolfo Velasquez is an SF State educator who fights for low-income students; Michael Nguyen is Juicy Liu, a drag performer and API activist attorney; Sydney Simpson is a union nurse who fights for evidence-based health initiatives and strong worker protections; and Jane Kim is my favorite progressive San Francisco politician who stands up for working class families and queer rights.

District 19 – Natalie Gee, Frances Hsieh, Leah LaCroix, Queena Chen, Sandra Lee Fewer, Mano Raju, Gordon Mar

Here’s who I recommend and why for D19: Natalie Gee is a legislative aide and Chinatown community organizer working on language access; Frances Hsieh is a labor leader who has supported AAPI, women, and immigrants in city government; Leah LaCroix helped in the fight for free Muni for Youth when she was chair of the SF Youth Commission; Queena Chen is a Chinatown transportation organizer and cofounder of the Rose Pak Democratic Club who serves on the SFMTA’s Citizen Advisory Committee; Sandra Lee Fewer is a former progressive Supervisor who is a strong coalition builder; Mano Raju is a badass elected Public Defender whose efforts are reforming our justice system; and, Gordon Mar is a former progressive Supervisor who fought for low income and immigrant families.

United States Senator (term ending January 3, 2031) – Barbara Lee

United States Senator (term ending January 3, 2025) – Barbara Lee

This is the primary for two races for the same seat in the US senate, but for different terms. The first is finishing the remaining term vacated by Dianne Feinstein when she passed. The second is the following six-year senate term. You’ll vote on these two same seats come November with the two top vote getters in this primary. 

And, I emphatically endorse Barbara Lee for both now and in November. Barbara Lee has a phenomenal voting record as an assemblymember where she is famous for being the only legislator to vote against the retaliatory Gulf War after September 11. Beyond that she constantly defends rights for the working class, immigrants, women, and queers. And, as we know how much representation matters, I am proud to be voting for a Black woman for senate. Vote for Barbara Lee. 

United States Representative, District 11 – abstain

The truth is that Nancy Pelosi will easily be reelected as one of the Democratic Party’s biggest fundraisers. I wish she had ended her service in the House at the end of her term, passing the torch onto the next generation of Democrats. Instead she has been embarrassing herself with ridiculous gaslit accusations about those begging our federal leadership for an end to the genocide in Gaza. Gross, Nancy. Save your ink.

State Senator, District 11 – Scott Wiener

Scott Wiener is so often on the wrong side of issues for me, except transportation funding and transgender rights. But, those who are running against him don’t meet the muster either, so I am endorsing Wiener here.

State Assembly Member, District 17 – Matt Haney

Matt Haney is another candidate who has not impressed in the state assembly but is running against candidates who would be even less likely to do so. He talks a good game for affordable housing but hasn’t delivered any solid outcomes yet. C’mon Matt. San Francisco needs you to deliver!

Judge of the Superior Court, Seat #1 – Michael Isaku Begert

Begert is known as “one of the good guys” working in SF courts diverting those charged with minor crimes into drug and mental health treatment and job counseling instead of jail.

Judge of the Superior Court, Seat #13 – Patrick Thompson

Thompson has also had success on the bench working in the pretrial system where he stands up for what’s right and fair, and is outside the victim blaming doom-cycle that has others in the justice system pointing fingers instead of addressing the fentanyl crisis that is fueling SF crime.

Proposition 1: Authorizes $6.38B in bonds to build mental health treatment facilities – YES

If you care about addressing the drug epidemic that is impacting just about every quality of life issue in the state, then you will vote yes on State Proposition 1. 

It both modifies an existing state tax and also includes a $6.38B bond supported by the governor and majorities both in the state assembly and senate to be used for substance abuse, housing, and supportive services. 

The new money would go to county health departments and grants to organizations that treat behavioral health, including permanent supporting housing and creating more inpatient and residential treatment beds. 

Prop 1 is the right direction to address this issue, unlike SF’s prop F (see below) that does the complete opposite. Vote YES. Let’s get 11,000 more treatment beds and services for more than 27,000 people who so desperately need it to finally turn the tide on this crisis.

Proposition A: San Francisco affordable housing bonds – YES

Speaking of needing to vote yes on an initiative to turn the tide on a crisis…a yes vote on Prop A would fund 1,500 affordable housing units in San Francisco that are currently stalled in the housing pipeline due to lack of funding! Also, this requires a two-thirds majority to pass, and city leaders are afraid if it doesn’t pass that it will sound a death knell for future progressive measures. We’ve seen it before in San Francisco. I can’t vote YES on this one fast enough.

Proposition B: Amend City Charter with minimum police officer staffing levels – NOOOOOO

If we need more officers, the mayor or the Board of Supervisors can do so right now without this garbage legislation. 

The San Francisco Controller’s Statement on this proposition is that if this were to pass, it would have a “significant impact on the cost of government.” This sets up a situation where the city’s general fund could be depleted to meet this policy when the city has more vital needs. And, as the city is faced with a budget crisis, belts are going to get tighter and tough funding decisions are going to be made. We can’t have our budget tied up by unnecessary policy. 

It is ballot box budgeting at its absolute worst and does not reflect San Francisco values. This is just a bad government move spurred by the doom cycle media frenzy. Vote NO!

Proposition C: Exempt the Real Estate Transfer Tax after property converts from commercial to residential – NO

This prop would provide an unnecessary benefit to wealthy real estate developers in an effort to encourage them to convert offices into housing. Not to be a downer but a realist, this proposition builds on the unlikely and idealistic premise that the housing crisis could be addressed by repurposing underused commercial real estate for housing. 

The San Francisco Controller’s statement on this proposition is that it would significantly decrease the City’s transfer taxes revenues. Unfortunately, this hopeful but not realistic initiative would cost the city more money during our continuing financial crisis spurred by the pandemic. 

Worse, the proposition also has a poison pill that allows the Board of Supervisors to overturn the real estate transfer taxes on properties worth $5+ million that fund affordable housing and City College that voters approved. Vote NO.

Proposition D: Enhance city ethics laws – yes

Here’s my disclosure that I am a city official so this would impact me directly. In the shadow of rampant corruption in San Francisco, I support the Ethics Commission’s effort to provide firmer policy for employees on gift-giving and professional relationships while providing city officials a clearer definition for bribery. 

I know from personal experience that these ethics rules can feel cumbersome. And, they are difficult to get right. But, I also know that corruption in city government is slowing down and even undermining the good efforts of some of our smartest and hardest working city staffers. Let’s make it clearer that conflicts of interest are not tolerated in good government. Vote yes.

Proposition E: Allow police department to make several changes to policing policies without further approval – NOOOOOO

Here is just another piece of garbage legislation. It is just too far reaching! There are so many details to this proposition that cannot be justified as a whole with so many questionable parts.

For example: It overrides sensible policies like the current ban on high-speed chases…that saves lives. It also limits the time officers are allowed to spend reporting use-of-force incidents. (Why???) And, it allows for unchecked use of surveillance when SFPD already has considerable tools available. Vote NO.

Proposition F: Require those receiving city public assistance participate in drug screening and treatment to receive benefits – NOOOOOO

This proposition would require poor housed adults who receive $712/month and unhoused adults who receive $821/month for expenses (that include housing/shelter, food, utilities, and employment assistance) to be screened for illegal drug use. And, if the screener suspects the person receiving these funds to be a drug user, they would be required to participate in a treatment program in order to continue to receive these meager benefits. 

While many concerned with the state of the fentanyl epidemic may be inclined to vote yes, I am voting no. This plan would limit poor adults’ ability to access other opportunities, such as employment, housing, or educational opportunities to receive the meager support they currently receive. People who have limited means to make ends meet sometimes turn to illegal activities for day-to-day survival. Rather than get back on their feet, these mandatory programs continue the cycle of drug abuse. 

So, this plan would exacerbate the issue it aims to resolve. And, I can say this with confidence because this is a tried-and-failed plan here in San Francisco I know about from firsthand experience: When I first moved back to the Bay Area after college, I got a temp job doing intake at a drug treatment program in San Francisco  for people who were arrested for using drugs in public more than once. 

If these folks received public assistance when they were arrested, they were required to attend the program to receive their monthly funds. But, because the treatment program was in the middle of weekdays, the patients often were not able to address other issues like applying for housing or applying for food stamps. And, most of the customers I did intake for were not there for the first time. The program ended after it was deemed a failure.

I saw firsthand that policies such as this do not work. They are cruel and they keep people down who are already marginalized by poverty and health issues. And, many are veterans, too. Let’s find a better way to care for our poor who are struggling. Let’s not punch them while they are down. We need solutions that end the cycle of poverty and drug abuse. Vote NO.

Proposition G: Encourage SFUSD to offer Algebra 1 to 8th Grade students – abstain

This is a nonbinding policy statement that has no business being on the ballot. As I write this, Feb. 13, SFUSD is having a school board meeting where a new math sequencing plan is being considered that proposes to bring Algebra back to 8th Grade. 

For the back story here, in 2014, in an effort to address racial disparities in math education, the district reordered how students take math. It turns out the reordered sequencing didn’t have the results that were intended so the school district is addressing it. And, this policy statement passes, it would tell SFUSD that voters agree! Algebra should be taught in 8th Grade! But only after SFUSD’s binding decision would be made. Sigh.

This is just a ballot initiative to undermine SFUSD leadership, another ballot hit job on San Francisco’s schools. Save your ink and don’t validate the haters with a vote. It won’t be binding anyhow.

Okay! Now go out and vote!!

About the Kate Slate

I started writing the Kate Slate after the first time I voted. Standing in the voting booth, pen-in-hand, poised to vote, I was shocked that I didn’t understand all the issues or know all the candidates on the ballot. I was politically active in my community, and a bit of a politics and news junky. I felt like I showed up to take a test unprepared. 

The next election, I studied the ballot and shared my notes with friends, bringing about the Kate Slate, a tradition that continues for every election I’ve had the opportunity to vote in since. For the past decade plus, the Kate Slate is preceded by a Slate Party my pal Sacha Ortega co-hosts with me. The Slate Party is a big informer of the Kate Slate, as are voter guides, social media, and coffee break chatter.

And, in case you were wondering, the opinions in the Kate Slate are my own, and in no way should be thought to represent any views of anyone other than myself. I have thoughtful, engaging conversations with well-informed people who shed light on aspects I hadn’t considered; I get the tacky expensive mailers you get; and, cool people like yourself send me others’ slates. I am not affiliated with any party. Happy voting!!


Comments are closed.