letter to the editor

Letter to the Editor: Against Proposition C


While so much attention is being devoted to Proposition H, the Boudin recall, another important proposition with long-lasting impact is tucked away as Proposition C.  It’s a city charter amendment that would do two harmful things — restrict our right to recall and make it impossible to vote on the person the mayor appoints to replace a recalled official.  

Recalls are an extraordinary but essential part of our democracy.  They are rare. San Franciscans know the difference between a good recall and a bad one.  Until the School Board recall, we hadn’t had a successful one in SF in over a century.  Back in the 1980s, the San Francisco Democratic Club and Haight Ashbury Neighborhood Council wrote in the voter handbook, “The Recall Process is a vital part of our electoral system. It ensures that public officials are held accountable.”  In 2018, the San Jose judge who gave out a six-month sentence in the Stanford swimmer sexual assault case was recalled — with the active leadership of Democratic party, feminist, labor and other progressive groups.  And in the 1950s, fed up voters in Little Rock, Arkansas recalled School Board members who were blocking integration.  

On the same day that 80% of Richmond and Sunset voters supported the School Board recall, Supervisors Mar and Chan put Proposition C on the ballot. Proposition C would have prohibited the School Board recall despite all that support. If voters approve Proposition C and DA Boudin is recalled, it will force Mayor Breed to appoint a caretaker to the office who will not be allowed to run in November.  Just like the School Board, a Boudin recall would be a clear message for real change, not a caretaker.  

I’ve written more against Proposition C at https://medium.com/p/38b7e1e15f02.   I urge a No vote on Proposition C. 


John Trasvina

2 replies »

  1. RECALLS should be BANNED and only permitted if the office holder commits an actual FELONY an is convicted. The anti-Democratic voters of San Francisco. Yes, I am talking about each and everyone of YOU will rue the day that you engaged in this treacherous defilement and abasement of Democracy. Trust me. San Francisco is going to reap a Whirlwind for its selfish, self serving, myopic and Totalitarian behavior. It plays right into the worse insurrectionist increasingly prevalent in America.


  2. What you say here Mr. John Trasvina is misleading. I am frankly shocked that you don’t get basic math.

    Namely 80% of 25% of Richmond and Sunset district registered voters. 0.80 times 25 is actually only 20% of the registered voters. Hopefully you enjoyed that word play from GrowSF.

    Off-elections rarely get more than 30% of the registered voters to vote, something that is known by the millionaires who fund recalls for political reasons. That is the whole entire strategy. It’s not for removing corrupt officials, which what motivated the recall process in California back when the state legislature was owned by the railroad magnates. Being a law dude, it seems you should understand the difference.

    Instead the recall process is now paid for by special interests in order to circumnavigate democratic elections. Hiram Johnson would have never supported this recall. Boudin is not corrupt. Crime was worse or at least equivalent 10 years ago but there wasn’t all this hollering about recalling the district attorney.

    You folks are hijacking some moral equivalence and acting like you are the saviors of democracy, when in reality you are being hood-winked by special interests with money producing a constant stream of dishonesty. If the truth was on your side, why put out political ads that are not speaking the truth.

    Personally I am offended that you think recalling Arkansas school board members (in 1950) who resisted integration equivalent to the two recent recalls in San Francisco that are politically motivated. You might disagree with the policies or the personalities, but nothing Boudin has done (or not done) and nothing the recent recalled school board members have done is ANY WAY REMOTELY CLOSE TO DENYING BLACK SCHOOL CHILDREN THE RIGHT TO GO TO SCHOOL.

    Your swarthy moral crusading is nothing but a disguise or some kind of self-inflated justification for what is nothing more than a paid for political action. Some folks simply refuse to wait until a regular election because they can buy political ads and get signatures on papers in order to hijack democracy so they can take advantage of a 25% voter turn out.

    Wake up man.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s