San Francisco Ballot Measure Election Results

Affordable housing, a ban on e-cigarettes, and campaign money transparency were all issues voted on Tuesday.

In addition to different city officials, voters decided on a variety of measures in this election, from campaign contributions to affordable housing. Some measures, like Proposition C’s proposal to overturn San Francisco’s e-cigarette ban, were hotly contested. Others, like Proposition B’s renaming of city agencies, attracted less attention. Here are the ballot measure results so far. 

To see how the candidate races are faring, click here. To get the background info for each race, check out our election guide.

Check back for live updates.

Proposition A: Affordable Housing

Prop. A would approve a $600 million bond funding measure intended to construct and acquire more affordable housing. Crafted by Mayor London Breed and Board of Supervisors President Norman Yee, the proposition needed a two-thirds majority to pass.

As of Thursday afternoon, the measure appears to have passed with 69 percent of the vote (nice). By Sunday, it crawled up to 71 percent.

$150 million would go toward public housing, $220 million for low-income housing, $60 million for middle-income housing, $150 million for senior housing, and $20 million for educator housing.

Proposition B: City Agency Rebranding

This measure to rename the Department of Aging and Adult Services as the Department of Disability and Aging Services passed easily with 78 percent of the vote — it had no official opposition. Which begs the question: who are these 41,747 people who voted against a name change that hardly anyone talked about?

Proposition C: E-cigarettes

E-cigarette maker Juul spent millions of dollars supporting this ballot measure, which would overturn e-cigarette banner San Francisco’s June prohibition on the sale of e-cigarettes.

The later the evening goes, the worse it looks for Juul. NO votes has more than 81 percent of the vote as of Sunday, sending Juul’s $11 million deeper into the void.

Proposition D: Traffic congestion mitigation tax

Prop. D institutes a 3.25 percent tax on individual ride-sharing rides and a 1.5 percent tax on shared ones, the proceeds from both of which would go toward public transit and infrastructure.

The measure, which requires a two-thirds majority, had 66.66 percent of voters saying YES as of 11 p.m — the exact percentage required. By Sunday, it ticked up to 67.65 percent in a still uneasy win for supporters.

Lyft and Uber agreed not to campaign against the measure, which would raise an estimated $32 million.  They even threw money behind the measure, which may have worked as an unintentional litmus test to vote against whatever the rideshare companies are behind.

Proposition E: Affordable housing for teachers

Known as Affordable Homes for Educators and Families Now, Prop. E would allow 100 percent affordable and educator housing to be built on public land.

Current measure results have Prop. E passing with 76 percent of the vote.

News that Proposition E had hit 71 percent was met with joy at Virgil’s, as advocates gathered to celebrate.

“This is the biggest citywide zoning effort for affordable housing in modern history,” said a jubilant Peter Cohen, co-director of the Council for Community Housing Organizations (CCHO). “That’s a very, very strong statement by San Franciscans that wish to invest in affordable housing.”

“It’s storming through right now,” said Megan Orpwood-Russell, executive director of Yes on Affordable Housing (YAH). “I feel positive right now. We’re not called ‘No to SF housing’, so it’s exciting. We need Prop. A to make it work but we’re feeling good.” 

Proposition F: Campaign contributions

This measure is designed to create greater transparency in San Francisco elections by requiring the disclosure of the largest donors of Super PACs and how much they donated.

Prop. F appears on the path to victory, with 76 percent YES votes as of Sunday.

Regarding Proposition F’s initial success, Supervisor Gordon Mar said, “The people of San Francisco know what we know: We deserve transparency in our democracy.”

Nuala Sawyer Bishari and Ida Mojadad contributed to this report.

Related Stories