​ Print Voter Guide

SF
Prop E
City Administrator Duties

Charter Amendment

City Administrator Authority and Changes to City Contracting

Expands the city administrator’s authority to oversee and set rules governing city purchasing activities, extends the administrator’s term to 10 years, and increases the dollar thresholds at which the Board of Supervisors must approve contracts.

SPUR's Recommendation

San Francisco’s procurement system has become so fragmented that no single official has the authority to ensure that purchasing processes operate efficiently, consistently, and accountably. The measure proposes changes recommended by SPUR to increase the city administrator’s responsibility for city procurement and certain other business functions. These changes would clarify accountability while maintaining reasonable oversight by elected officials. We believe they would reduce duplicative reviews, shorten contracting timelines, improve service delivery, lower administrative costs, and make it easier for businesses and nonprofits to work with the city — critical improvements as the city faces persistent fiscal pressures and growing public service demands.

Vote YES

What Prop. E Would Do

Proposition E would change how the city establishes its purchasing laws, giving the city administrator sole authority to propose changes to most purchasing rules in the city code, subject to the Board of Supervisors' rejection. Currently, the city changes these laws through its standard legislative process, which requires approval by a majority of the board and is subject to a mayoral veto.

The measure extends the city administrator’s authority to set regulations and oversee purchasing activities of several departments that currently operate independently, and it extends the city administrator’s term from 5 years to 10 years.

The measure increases the dollar thresholds that require board approval for certain contracts.

The Backstory

The City and County of San Francisco buys more than $5 billion of goods and services each year. The contracting rules and procedures for these purchases are highly decentralized and governed by a dense web of charter provisions, administrative code requirements, departmental procedures, and policy mandates.1 SPUR’s Purchasing Power and Charter for Change reports found that procurement actions often require review by multiple departments and oversight bodies and can take 8.5 months to 1.5 years to complete.2 Responsibility for oversight is divided among the city administrator, the mayor, the Board of Supervisors, commissions, and individual departments.3

San Francisco’s complex purchasing structure produces high operational and economic costs. Reports by SPUR, the Civil Grand Jury, the Board of Supervisors Budget and Legislative Analyst, the Controller’s Office, and the City Administrator’s Office have found that lengthy approval timelines, overlapping reviews, and complex compliance requirements increase administrative burdens for city staff and vendors, raise costs, and slow service delivery.4 Small businesses, nonprofits, and local firms often face particularly high barriers because they lack administrative resources needed to navigate the process. These barriers can discourage competition, increase costs, and create cash-flow challenges for contractors.

The proposed measure largely adopts recommendations presented in Purchasing Power and Charter for Change. It would change oversight, approval, and rule-making processes by

  • Giving the city administrator sole authority to propose changes to the city’s purchasing laws. Currently, the mayor or a member of the Board of Supervisors may propose changes, which become law if the board adopts them, subject to a mayoral veto. Under Prop. E, only the city administrator would have authority to propose rules, subject to board rejection. Existing policies designed to ensure participation by minority- and women-owned businesses and establish labor standards for city contractors would remain subject to the current process.
  • Increasing the city administrator’s oversight of purchases within the Public Utilities Commission, the Municipal Transportation Agency, and certain other departments and contract types, which are currently exempted by the city charter.
  • Increasing the thresholds for certain contracts that require Board of Supervisors approval. The current charter requires board approval for many contracts that exceed $10 million in spending, generate $1 million in revenue, or meet other specified thresholds. The proposed measure would increase these thresholds to $25 million in spending or $4.5 million in revenue. These increases approximate inflation since voters last adopted the thresholds in 1996.
  • Expanding the city administrator’s authority to establish policies, procedures, and standards for certain other city support functions, including technology use and multi-department capital project delivery.
  • Extending the city administrator’s term. The mayor appoints the city administrator to a five-year term, subject to Board of Supervisors approval. The proposed measure extends future terms to 10 years. The intent is to provide greater political insulation and continuity across changes in mayoral administrations and the Board of Supervisors. A 10-year term would exceed the 8-year maximum tenure of a two-term mayor, potentially creating tension between administrations, but existing checks would remain in place: the mayor and board would set the office’s budget, and the mayor could remove the city administrator with board approval.

Mayor Lurie sponsored the measure, which qualified for the ballot through a voter signature initiative. It requires a simple majority (50% plus one vote) to pass.

Equity Impacts

Equity impacts would depend on future changes adopted under the proposed rulemaking process.

If the measure improved the administration of contracted services for vulnerable communities, it would improve the effectiveness of city investments. Over time, San Francisco’s contracting system would likely become more accessible, predictable, and navigable for firms that have historically faced structural barriers to doing business with the city, including smaller businesses and minority- and women-owned firms.

The mayor and the Board of Supervisors’ ability to set laws governing small, minority-owned, and women-owned businesses would remain unchanged, preserving elected leaders’ ability to use the city’s purchasing power to address long-standing community disparities.

Pros

  • Prop. E would empower the city administrator to professionalize and rationalize the city’s byzantine purchasing rules.
  • Over time, changes to the rules would be expected to improve purchasing efficiency, reduce delays, expand access for smaller businesses, and improve city services.
  • The measure would strengthen the city administrator’s role as the city’s chief operating officer while preserving the Board of Supervisors’ policy and oversight authority and the mayor’s executive role.
  • The measure would update approval thresholds set in 1995 to account for inflation, shortening the approval process for some contracts.

Cons

  • The measure would reduce the mayor and Board of Supervisors’ ability to establish purchasing laws designed to achieve broader policy goals.
  • It would limit the independent authority of the Public Utilities Commission and Municipal Transportation Agency to manage their own purchasing activities.
Vote YES on Prop E - City Administrator Duties
Footnotes

1 Nicole Neditch, Purchasing Power, SPUR, April 2025, 6, 23–25.

2 Neditch, Purchasing Power, 4.

3 Neditch, Purchasing Power, 4.

4 Examples: San Francisco Controller’s Office, Report on Commodity Purchasing, May 2011; San Francisco Civil Grand Jury, Professional Services Contracting, 2002; Neditch, Purchasing Power; City Administrator’s Office, Improving the Process for Chapter 21 Low-Value Procurements, May 2024.