It wasn’t long ago that the City of San Francisco made a brazen proclamation, declaring that it didn’t need red states. Back in 2016, the city passed an ordinance banning the use of city funds to travel to states with laws deemed discriminatory by city officials. The ordinance also prohibited city contracting with companies headquartered in such states or where work on the contract would be performed there.

Since then, the number of banned states has grown from 8 to 30, but a recent report from the City Administrator’s Office suggests that it is actually San Francisco that needs red states. The report, released on February 10, 2023, reveals that the ban has raised the cost of the city’s annual contracting by up to 20 percent.

The report highlights several issues with the ordinance, including the lack of evidence to suggest that the ban has influenced other states’ economies or LGBTQ, reproductive, or voting rights. It also reveals that 12X, the ordinance in question, has created additional administrative burden for city staff and vendors and unintended consequences for San Francisco citizens, such as limiting enrichment and developmental opportunities. The report goes on to note that few other jurisdictions have implemented travel or contracting bans as expansive as San Francisco’s.

Given these issues, a San Francisco Board of Supervisors committee has approved a repeal of the ordinance with suggested alternatives. The measure will move forward to a full board vote.

It’s clear that San Francisco’s ban has failed to serve as a compelling deterrent to states considering restrictive policies. Instead, it has resulted in unintended consequences and raised costs for the city. It’s time for San Francisco to acknowledge its dependence on red states and find more effective and targeted ways to address discrimination and other issues.

Sources: TheGatewayPundit, DocumentCloud

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.