The San Francisco call., 1904-10-06
MAYOR OPPOSED
TO AMENDMENTS
Says They Are Illegal and
Should Not Be Allowed
on Ballot by Commission
REFERS TO HIS VETOES
Charter Tinkering Described
as Epidemic and Super
visOrs Receive Warm Rap

The Election Commission last even
ing received a communication from
Mayor Schmitz advising 1t not to give
place on the official ballot to the pro-
posed twenty-five charter amendments
the Supervisors ordered submitted to
the voters at the election next month.
The Mayor gives 1t as his opinion that
the voting on the amendments would
be illegal as well as inexpedient ana
informs the Commissioners that pro-
posed amendments to IL, inclusive,
have never received his approval.
The board deferred action one week
The following was the statement from
the Mayor:
Gentlemen: am informed that the clerk
Of the Board Of Supervisors has transmitted
to you for submission to the voters Of san
Francisco at the ensuing election twenty-five
bered respectively from 1 to %.
Your attention Is hereby called to the fact
that the so-called proposed amendments num-
bered to II inclusive being those origin
ating from the Board Of Supervisors with
the exception Of proposed amendment No ID
have never been approved by me as required
by law, and can therefore have no place upon
So-caIled proposed amendments Nos. to g
Of Supervisors for my signature and were by
me vetoed for reasons given at length in my
veto message TO the Supervisors, which vetoes
have never been overruled and have therefore
become final under the provisions OF section
16 chapter 1 Of article II OF the charter.
The proposed amendments numbered to II
have never been submitted to me, have never
received my signature and cannot legally be
submitted at the coming election
The charter OF the city and county Of San
Francisco may be amended under the pro-
visions Of section g. article XII Of the consti-
tuition OF the State Of California 'at intervals
NJ Onf haU fvra Nrnar hxyY ea1z
for submitted by the legislative authority OF
the city to the qualified electors thereof at a
The legislative authority Of the city and
county Of San Francisco under the charter is
the Board Of Supervisors and the Mayor.
Neither the Board Of Supervisors nor the May
or alone has any legislative authority.
Legislative power is vested in the Board OF
supervisors, but the exercise Of such power
is ineffective unless confirmed by the approval
Of the Mayor. or after his disapprovaI by the
Supervisors overruiing his veto; and no leg
islation is authorized nor does legislative au-
tho-ity exist except in the concurrent action
OF the Board Of Supervisors and Of the Mayor
(subject, however. to the charter provisions
relative to his veto power).
MUST HAVE MAYORS APPROVAL.
The legislative authority and legislative
power can be exercised only by legislative act.
Under section or chapter l. article H. OF the
charter, every legislative act Of the city shall
be by ordinance. Under sections 9 and 16
OF the same article every bill and every reso-
luton which shall have passed the board shall
be presented to the Mayor for his approval
and must be acted upon by him in said
There can be- in my opinion. escape from
the proposition that no valid submission of a
proposed amendment OF the charter OF San
Francisco originating from the Board OF Su-
pervisors can be made without presentation to
and action by the Mayor asdn said section Is
set forth.
1 therefore submit to you that on the fore
going grounds the so-called charter amend
ments Nos to II. inclusive. originating with
the Board Of Supervisors. not having received
my approval aud not having been presented to
me- cannot lawfully be submitted to the peo-
pie. and II so submitted to the people and by
them ratified they would be absolutely void
Proposed amendment No. 1. relating to re-
duction OF the tax limit from 81 10 s5 cents
per 500 Of assessed valuation was approved
by me and Is not open to the objection above
specified.
1t is further my opinion that no amendments
TO the charter can properly be submitted at
the election to be held on November 8, 1904.
and that any action submitting such amend
ments at this election would be unconstitution-
al and void.
Under section Of article IL Of the constt-
charter may be amended at intervals Of not
amended by amendments submitted to the vot-
ers Of San Francisc at an election held De-
eember 4, 1902 less than two years prior TO
amendments therefore, it would SEEM would
II submitted at the next election be within
the time limitation Of the constitution and
The evident intent Of the constitution In
thus limiting the amending of the charter to
two year intervals undoubtedly to pre-
serve It's integrity and 10 prevent elections at
every moment and on every conceivable pre-
text. But for this provision twenty-five sepa-
rate elections in twenty-five different weeks
might be called to pass upon the twenty two
propositions attempted to be submitted.
/ think IT clear that before December 4, 1904,
no charter amendments can properly be sub
mitted.
I conclude, therefore. that It would be an IL
legal and void act on your part to have these
propositions placed upon the ballot and rec
ommend that they be omitted therefrom.