 | This articlerelies largely or entirely on asingle source. Relevant discussion may be found on thetalk page. Please helpimprove this article byintroducing citations to additional sources. Find sources: "November 2010 San Francisco general election" – news ·newspapers ·books ·scholar ·JSTOR(March 2025) |
TheNovember 2010 San Francisco general elections was held on November 2, 2010, inSan Francisco,California. The elections included five seats to theSan Francisco Board of Supervisors, a runoff election for a seat on theSan Francisco County Superior Court, assessor-recorder, public defender, and fifteenSan Francisco ballot measures.[1]
As no candidate had more than 50% of the votes in theJune 2010 election, a runoff election was held between the two highest vote-getting candidates.
| 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 | |
| Turnout | {{{votes}}} | 59.16% | |
Incumbent assessor-recorderPhil Ting ran for reelection against James Pan.
| 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 | |
| Turnout | {{{votes}}} | 59.58% | |
Incumbent public defenderJeff Adachi ran for reelection unopposed.
| 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 | |
| Turnout | {{{votes}}} | 59.58% | |
| Propositions:AA •A •B •C •D •E •F •G •H •I •J •K •L •M •N |
Proposition AA would increase the annual vehicle registration fee by $10 to fund congestion and pollution mitigation programs.
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
 Yes | 156,016 | 58.77 |
| No | 109,434 | 41.23 |
| Valid votes | 265,450 | 94.10 |
| Invalid or blank votes | 16,631 | 5.90 |
| Total votes | 282,081 | 100.00 |
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.
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
 No | 94,324 | 36.76 |
| Yes | 162,266 | 63.24 |
| Required majority | 66.67 | |
| Valid votes | 256,590 | 90.96 |
| Invalid or blank votes | 25,491 | 9.04 |
| Total votes | 282,081 | 100.00 |
Proposition B would require city employees to contribute additional amounts to their pensions and health benefits, and changedarbitration rules regarding City collective bargaining agreements.
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
| No | 150,734 | 56.96 |
| Yes | 113,894 | 43.04 |
| Valid votes | 264,628 | 93.81 |
| Invalid or blank votes | 17,453 | 6.19 |
| Total votes | 282,081 | 100.00 |
Proposition C would require the Mayor to appear before the Board of Supervisors monthly for formal policy discussions.
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 154,776 | 59.89 |
| No | 103,673 | 40.11 |
| Valid votes | 258,449 | 91.62 |
| Invalid or blank votes | 23,632 | 8.38 |
| Total votes | 282,081 | 100.00 |
Proposition D would allow adult noncitizen parents, guardians, and caregivers with children in theSan Francisco Unified School District to vote inSan Francisco Board of Education elections.
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
| No | 144,418 | 54.91 |
| Yes | 118,608 | 45.09 |
| Valid votes | 263,026 | 93.24 |
| Invalid or blank votes | 19,055 | 6.76 |
| Total votes | 282,081 | 100.00 |
Proposition E would allow for Election Day voter registration for municipal elections.
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
| No | 132,189 | 52.79 |
| Yes | 118,217 | 47.21 |
| Valid votes | 250,406 | 88.77 |
| Invalid or blank votes | 31,675 | 11.23 |
| Total votes | 282,081 | 100.00 |
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.
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 130,415 | 53.32 |
| No | 114,178 | 46.68 |
| Valid votes | 244,593 | 86.71 |
| Invalid or blank votes | 37,488 | 13.29 |
| Total votes | 282,081 | 100.00 |
Proposition G would remove the wage formula impactingSan 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 forSan Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency employees.
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 164,234 | 64.94 |
| No | 88,671 | 35.06 |
| Valid votes | 252,905 | 89.66 |
| Invalid or blank votes | 29,176 | 10.34 |
| Total votes | 282,081 | 100.00 |
Proposition H would prohibit local elected officials from holding a position on a political party county central committee.
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
| No | 139,178 | 57.56 |
| Yes | 103,141 | 42.44 |
| Valid votes | 242,319 | 85.90 |
| Invalid or blank votes | 39,762 | 14.10 |
| Total votes | 282,081 | 100.00 |
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.
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 150,701 | 59.29 |
| No | 103,486 | 40.71 |
| Valid votes | 254,187 | 90.11 |
| Invalid or blank votes | 27,894 | 9.89 |
| Total votes | 282,081 | 100.00 |
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."
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
| No | 139,206 | 54.48 |
| Yes | 116,313 | 45.52 |
| Valid votes | 255,519 | 90.58 |
| Invalid or blank votes | 26,562 | 9.42 |
| Total votes | 282,081 | 100.00 |
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.
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
| No | 152,159 | 61.47 |
| Yes | 95,357 | 38.53 |
| Valid votes | 247,516 | 87.75 |
| Invalid or blank votes | 34,565 | 12.25 |
| Total votes | 282,081 | 100.00 |
Proposition L would prohibit sitting or lying on sidewalks between 7 am and 11 pm with certain exceptions.
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 142,601 | 54.30 |
| No | 120,023 | 45.70 |
| Valid votes | 262,624 | 93.10 |
| Invalid or blank votes | 19,457 | 6.90 |
| Total votes | 282,081 | 100.00 |
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.
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
| No | 134,808 | 53.41 |
| Yes | 117,608 | 46.49 |
| Valid votes | 252,416 | 89.48 |
| Invalid or blank votes | 29,665 | 10.52 |
| Total votes | 282,081 | 100.00 |
Proposition N would increase the real property transfer tax on certain properties.
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 149,350 | 58.49 |
| No | 105,979 | 41.51 |
| Valid votes | 255,329 | 90.52 |
| Invalid or blank votes | 26,752 | 9.48 |
| Total votes | 282,081 | 100.00 |
