<
div class=”field field–name-body field–type-text-with-summary field–label-hidden”>
<
div class=”field__items”>
<
div class=”field__item even”>
Proposition E, which San Franciscans will be asked to vote on in the March 5 election, is so dangerous that last weekend we chartered a plane to inform our neighbors about what the ballot measure does and urge them to vote NO on it. If you were in Dolores Park, Golden Gate Park, Chinatown, or anywhere in between on Saturday, there’s a chance you saw it, with a huge banner flying through the sky: “No Surveillance State! No on Prop E.”
Despite the fact that the San Francisco Chronicle has endorsed a NO vote on Prop E, and even quoted some police who don’t find its changes useful to keeping the public safe, proponents of Prop E have raised over $1 million to push this unnecessary, ill-thought out, and downright dangerous ballot measure.
San Francisco, Say NOPE: Vote NO on Prop E on March 5
What Does Prop E Do?
Prop E is a haphazard mess of proposals that tries to capitalize on residents’ fear of crime in an attempt to gut commonsense democratic oversight of the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD). In addition to removing certain police oversight authority from the civilian-staffed Police Commission and expanding the circumstances under which police may conduct high-speed vehicle chases, Prop E would also amend existing law passed in 2019 to protect San Franciscans from invasive, untested, or biased police surveillance technologies. Currently, if the SFPD wants to acquire a new technology, they must provide a detailed use policy to the democratically-elected Board of Supervisors, in a process that allows for public comment. The Board then votes on whether and how the police can use the technology.
Prop E guts these protective measures designed to bring communities into the conversation about public safety. If Prop E passes on March 5, then the SFPD can unilaterally use any technology they want for a
[…]
Content was cut in order to protect the source.Please visit the source for the rest of the article.
Read the original article: