November 2010 San Francisco general elections was held on November 2, 2010, in San Francisco, California. The elections included five seats to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, a runoff election for a seat on the San Francisco County Superior Court, assessor-recorder, public defender, and fifteen San Francisco ballot measures.
Board of Supervisors [ edit ] Superior Court [ edit ] Seat 15 [ edit ]
As no candidate had more than 50% of the votes in the
June 2010 election, a runoff election was held between the two highest vote-getting candidates.
San Francisco County Superior Court Seat 15 election, 2010 Candidate Votes % Richard B. Ulmer, Jr. ( incumbent) 99,342 53.17 Michael Nava 87,511 46.83 Valid votes 186,853 67.72% Invalid or blank votes 89,058 32.28% Total votes 275,911 100.00 Voter turnout 59.16% Assessor-Recorder [ edit ]
Phil Ting ran for reelection against James Pan.
San Francisco assessor-recorder election, 2010 Candidate Votes % Phil Ting ( incumbent) 175,388 79.68 James Pan 43,961 19.97 Write-in 756 0.34 Valid votes 220,105 79.20% Invalid or blank votes 57,802 20.80% Total votes 277,907 100.00 Voter turnout 59.58% Public defender [ edit ]
Incumbent public defender
Jeff Adachi ran for reelection unopposed.
San Francisco public defender election, 2010 Candidate Votes % Jeff Adachi ( incumbent) 199,502 98.85 Write-in 2,328 1.15 Valid votes 201,830 72.63% Invalid or blank votes 76,077 27.37% Total votes 277,907 100.00 Voter turnout 59.58% Propositions [ edit ] Note: "City" refers to the San Francisco municipal government. Proposition AA [ edit ]
Proposition AA would increase the annual vehicle registration fee by $10 to fund congestion and pollution mitigation programs.
Proposition AA Choice Votes % Yes 156,016 58.77 No 109,434 41.23 Proposition A [ edit ]
Proposition A would authorize the City to issue $46.15 million in bonds for the seismic retrofitting of multi-story wood structures. This measure required a two-thirds majority to pass.
Proposition A Choice Votes % No 94,324 36.76 Yes 162,266 63.24 Proposition B [ edit ]
Proposition B would require city employees to contribute additional amounts to their pensions and health benefits, and changed
arbitration rules regarding City collective bargaining agreements.
Proposition B Choice Votes % No 150,734 56.96 Yes 113,894 43.04 Proposition C [ edit ]
Proposition C would require the Mayor to appear before the Board of Supervisors monthly for formal policy discussions.
Proposition C Choice Votes % Yes 154,776 59.89 No 103,673 40.11 Proposition D [ edit ]
Proposition D would allow adult noncitizen parents, guardians, and caregivers with children in the
San Francisco Unified School District to vote in San Francisco Board of Education elections.
Proposition D Choice Votes % No 144,418 54.91 Yes 118,608 45.09 Proposition E [ edit ]
Proposition E would allow for Election Day voter registration for municipal elections.
Proposition E Choice Votes % No 132,189 52.79 Yes 118,217 47.21 Proposition F [ edit ]
Proposition F would shorten, for one time only, the term of one Health Service Board member from five to three years and of another from five to two years, so that terms will expire in pairs and can be filled in the same Board election.
Proposition F Choice Votes % Yes 130,415 53.32 No 114,178 46.68 Proposition G [ edit ]
Proposition G would remove the wage formula impacting
San Francisco Municipal Railway operators from the City Charter in favor of collective bargaining and binding arbitration, and modify rules regarding binding arbitration and terms of employment for San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency employees.
Proposition G Choice Votes % Yes 164,234 64.94 No 88,671 35.06 Proposition H [ edit ]
Proposition H would prohibit local elected officials from holding a position on a political party county central committee.
Proposition H Choice Votes % No 139,178 57.56 Yes 103,141 42.44 Proposition I [ edit ]
Proposition I would allow early voting on the Saturday before the 2011 municipal elections, paid for by individual and group donors, followed by a study of the efficacy of Saturday elections in the future.
Proposition I Choice Votes % Yes 150,701 59.29 No 103,486 40.71 Proposition J [ edit ]
Proposition J would impose a temporary 2% increase on the hotel room tax, clarified who is responsible for collecting and remitting third-party taxes, consolidated definitions, and amended the definition of "Permanent Resident."
Proposition J Choice Votes % No 139,206 54.48 Yes 116,313 45.52 Proposition K [ edit ]
Proposition K would clarify who is responsible for collecting and remitting third-party taxes, consolidate definitions, and amend the definition of "Permanent Resident." It would override the tax increase portion of Proposition J if both propositions passed and Proposition K received more votes.
Proposition K Choice Votes % No 152,159 61.47 Yes 95,357 38.53 Proposition L [ edit ]
Proposition L would prohibit sitting or lying on sidewalks between 7 am and 11 pm with certain exceptions.
Proposition L Choice Votes % Yes 142,601 54.30 No 120,023 45.70 Proposition M [ edit ]
Proposition M would establish community policing and foot patrols. It would override Proposition L if both propositions had passed and Proposition M received more votes.
Proposition M Choice Votes % No 134,808 53.41 Yes 117,608 46.49 Proposition N [ edit ]
Proposition N would increase the real property transfer tax on certain properties.
Proposition N Choice Votes % Yes 149,350 58.49 No 105,979 41.51 External links [ edit ]