In 2016, in a virtual signaling measure on a grand scale, the City of San Fransisco arrogantly proclaimed it didn’t need red states. The City enacted an ordinance prohibiting contracting with companies or allowing city officials to travel to states that restrict abortion or have laws city officials decide are discriminatory against minorities or gays.
The ordinance reads, “Ordinance amending the Administrative Code to prohibit City-funded travel to states that have enacted laws after June 26, 2015, reversing anti-discrimination protections for LGBT individuals or permitting discrimination against LGBT individuals, and to prohibit City contracting with companies headquartered in states that have enacted such laws, or where work on the contract would be performed in such states.”
Since 12X became operative, the number of banned states grew from 8 states in 2017 to 30 in 2022 suggesting that the “threat” and civic tantrum doesn’t carry much weight.
It seems, based on a February 10, 2023 report from the City Administrator’s Office, it is the Red States that don’t really need San Francisco. The report reveals that the ban has raised the cost of the City’s annual contracting cost by as much as 20 percent.
The report confirms, “This increase suggests that the city’s threat of boycott may not serve as a compelling deterrent to states considering restrictive policies.”
The report reveals:
- 12X’s policy impacts are not clear; the CAO was not able to find concrete evidence suggesting 12X has influenced other states’ economies or LGBTQ, reproductive, or voting rights.
- 12X has created additional administrative burden for City staff and vendors and unintended consequences for San Francisco citizens, such as limiting enrichment and developmental opportunities.
- Few, if any, other jurisdictions implement travel or contracting bans as expansive as the City’s.
- Potential alternatives to 12X range from administrative revisions of the existing legislation to repealing the entirety of 12X.
This week, a San Francisco Board of Supervisors committee approved a repeal of the ordinance with suggested alternatives. The measure will move forward to a full board vote.
