支持生育權利
市府的政策和法律是否應該支持、保護以及擴大生育權利和服務?
本提案需要有50%+1的贊成票才能獲得通過。
摘要由選票簡釋委員會撰寫
現況:
本市的公共衛生局(DPH)提供生育醫療保健服務。公共衛生局支持獲得全方位生育醫療保健服務的權利,包括墮胎。
「有限服務懷孕中心」(limited services pregnancy center)主要為懷孕者提供服務,但不會提供墮胎或緊急避孕服務或轉介這些服務。市法律禁止這些中心散播有關其所提供服務的不實或誤導性資訊。
市法律允許有限服務懷孕中心和提供墮胎的診所在三藩市指定的區域內主要在地面層營運。
州法律禁止本市與別的州份或聯邦政府的任何執法機構就有關在加州進行的合法墮胎一事進行合作或提供資訊。
建議:
提案O將宣佈以下的市府政策:
- 為尋求生育保健(包括墮胎)的人提供一個安全的場所;
- 保護懷孕者掌控自己的醫療決定權;
- 保障生育健康資訊的保密性;
提案O也會:
- 設立一項生育自由基金,該基金可接受補助金和捐贈用以支持生育權利與服務;
- 要求公共衛生局維護一個公共網站,網站上列出提供墮胎或緊急避孕或提供轉介這些服務的設施,以及列出三藩市的有限服務懷孕中心;
- 授權公共衛生局在有限服務懷孕中心外面張貼告示,告知公眾這些設施不提供墮胎或緊急避孕服務,也不會轉介這些服務;這些告示還將會指出在何處可獲得這些服務;
- 限制由市府資助,提供墮胎服務的機構要求提供者具備法律要求之外的額外醫療資格;
- 禁止市府官員向別的州份或聯邦政府的執法機構提供有關某人使用或擁有避孕藥具、使用人工受孕、懷孕狀況或墮胎選擇等資訊;以及
- 修訂本市分區法律,以便生育健康診所可以在三藩市更多地區營運,包括非住宅區的所有樓層和住宅區的街角地段。
投「贊成」票的意思是:如果您投「贊成」票,即表示您同意市府的政策和法律應該支持、保護以及擴大生育權利和服務。
投「反對」票的意思是:如果您投「反對」票,即表示您不同意進行這些變更。
市主計官對提案「O」的意見書
市主計官Greg Wagner就提案O對本市財政的影響發表以下聲明:
如果建議的法令獲得選民批准,其成本將取決於市長和市議會在預算程序中做出的決定,因為法令不能硬性規定未來的市長和市議會對此以及其他任何用途提供資金。我認為,如果未來的政策制定者實施這項建議提案設立的計劃,其年度行政支出可能極小,最多大約8,000美元用於告示牌的維護。
建議的法令將會修訂《行政法》,設立一項生育自由基金,該基金可以接受私人資金和市府撥款,用以支持生育權利和服務(基金)。法令會要求公共衛生局維持一個網站向公眾提供有關生育保健資訊,並會授權公共衛生局在有限服務懷孕中心外設置告示牌。
鑒於將來市府的資金會撥入該基金,因此可能會影響政府的支出,但目前無法確定其影響程度。根據市長和市議會在未來預算中做出的決定以及公共衛生局所做的營運決定,可能會有在本市兩家有限服務懷孕中心設置告示牌的費用,約為4,000美元,以及每年最多大約8,000美元的維護費用。
提案「O」如何被列入選票
2024年7月18日,選務處收到市長Breed簽署的一項擬議法令。
《市政選舉法》允許市長以此種方式將一項法令列入選票。
以上陳述是本提案的中立分析。贊成和反對本提案的論據在本文後刊登。所登載論據為作者意見,其準確性未經任何官方機構校核。英文原文的拼寫及文法錯誤均未經改正。中文譯文與英文原文儘可能保持一致。
Proponent’s Argument in Favor of Proposition O
保護生育自由——投票贊成提案O!
提案O——《三藩市生育自由法案》——確保我們城市的每一個人都有自主權去決定自己的生育健康。
三藩市是一個以其進步價值觀、包容性和對個人權利的堅定承諾而聞名的城市。提案O透過保護獲取全面的生育醫療保健,包括安全、合法的墮胎服務,來體現這些原則。
正當生育權利在全國各地遭受攻擊,加上唐納德•特朗普和J.D.萬斯提議全國性禁止墮胎之際,三藩市勢必堅持作為一座自由與憐憫的燈塔。
提案O確認,我們所有人都應當有權在不受政府干預下,對私人健康作出決定。
提案O,《三藩市生育自由法案》,將會:
- 確保持續資助生育保健服務,保證所有居民,不論收入,都能獲得必要的照護。
- 保護這些重要服務的醫療保健提供者不受政治與法律攻擊。
- 保證生育保健教育保持公正,基於事實,而且向所有人提供。
通過提案O不僅是為了維護權利;也是為了保護生命。全面的生育保健能帶來更健康的家庭與社區。提案O確保婦女和所有可以懷孕的人不會被迫陷入危險或無助的境地。
我懇請您和我一起支持提案O——《三藩市生育自由法案》。讓我們確保三藩市在堅守所有居民的尊嚴與權利上保持領先地位。
感謝您挺身支持自由與公義。投票贊成提案O。
市長London Breed
SFReproFreedom.com
Rebuttal to Proponent’s Argument in Favor of Proposition O
沒有人提交反駁贊成提案O的論據
Opponent's Argument Against Proposition O
這項提案遠超過「支持生命與支持選擇」之爭。提案O會使到維護生命的醫療保健設施受到歧視,並削減這些三藩市市民依賴的設施能向社區提供的服務。
投贊成票將會:
- 要求在三藩市支持生命的免費醫療診所外設置告示牌來為墮胎中心進行宣傳。墮胎中心外面則不會設置類似的告示牌。
- 設立一個專門的庫房,用來募集贈款、捐助和預算編列的稅金,以支付懷孕24週內選擇性墮胎的費用。
- 設立一個新網站來突出墮胎業務,以及貶低「有限服務」中心。由於市長Breed在她的提案O記者會上散播有關三藩市懷孕資源中心的謬誤資訊,我們認為這個網站會阻礙人們與這些設施的互動並獲得其優質照護。政府不是點名指出哪些物資援助中心或診所有負面評價或違反法律,而是越發地對所有懷孕資源中心一概責難。
- 限制市府資金資助那些拒絕為健康胎兒終止懷孕,或拒絕轉介人們去做這件事的保健設施。這種特殊的對待限制了支持生命的機構向公眾提供的更多服務。
- 讓新公司在任何非住宅用途的分區購買產業並在其中營運,只要他們是一家墮胎公司即可。
- 為這座城市訂定一個「墮胎提供者感謝日」。大多數以支持選擇自居的人認為,選擇性墮胎只應在懷孕初期進行,但這項提案讚揚那些傷害懷孕期較後胎兒的醫生。
我們必須齊心協力,透過投票反對提案O來拒絕墮胎極端主義。
Melanie Salazar,行政總監
三藩市Pro-Life
Rebuttal to Opponent’s Argument Against Proposition O
投票贊成提案O!
站出來對抗威脅我們生育自由的極端主義者
唐納德•特朗普和J.D.萬斯政府將為生育自由帶來有史以來最危險的威脅,因為他們將致力禁止墮胎,並且剝奪我們所有人的生育自由。目前已有22個州份禁止或嚴格限制墮胎。
三藩市民眾可以透過投票贊成提案O——《三藩市生育自由法案》,來保護生育自由。
透過保護全面的生育醫療保健,包括安全和合法的墮胎服務,提案O確認並保證三藩市的每一個人都有自主權為自己的生育健康做決定。
三藩市向來引領全國,從同性婚姻合法化,到成為疫情期間第一個關閉並挽救數千人性命的主要城市。我們不會退縮——我們要挺身而出保護每個人對自己身體做出選擇的權利。
提案O:
- 透過確保持續資助生育保健服務,保證所有居民,不論其收入如何,都能獲得必要的照護。
- 保護提供這些重要服務的醫療照護提供者不受政治與法律攻擊。
- 保證生育保健教育保持公正並且基於事實。
- 確保女性和所有具有生育能力的人都不會被迫陷入危險或無助的境地,而且享有安全、受到保護的醫療照護。
加入我們一起支持提案O,確保三藩市在捍衛所有人的尊嚴與權利方面保持領先地位。
市長London Breed
市議員Connie Chan
市議員Myrna Melgar
市議員Hillary Ronen
市議員Catherine Stefani
SFReproFreedom.com
Paid Arguments in Favor of Proposition O
1
贊成提案O的付費論據
三藩市民選婦女代表支持贊成提案O
作為代表三藩市和加州的民選婦女,我們一致堅決支持《三藩市生育自由法案》。
隨著全國對生育自由的日益攻擊,三藩市必須堅定保護所有居民的權利和健康。贊成提案O,確保我們城市的每個人都能獲得全面的生育保健服務,包括避孕、墮胎和產前服務。透過在本地實施這些保護措施,我們將為所有人建立安全並支援的環境,讓他們為自己的健康做決定。
在這場爭取生育公平的爭戰裡,地方行動是不可或缺的。雖然州政府和聯邦政府的保護措施至關重要,但是地方政府在滿足社區的特殊需求方面扮演了獨特的角色。我們的城市具有倡導進步價值觀的光榮歷史,本倡議正是這一傳統的延續。它顯示我們堅定不移地維護所有三藩市人的權利和自主權。
將墮胎定為犯罪和限制獲得生育保健服務會帶來破壞性的後果,尤其是那些已被邊緣化的群體。這些政策增加了健康風險,深化了不平等,破壞了個人自由。透過投票贊成提案O,我們將確保三藩市繼續成為希望和正義的燈塔,使每個人的選擇權都得到尊重和保護。
我們敦促您投票贊成提案O:《三藩市生育自由法案》。團結一心,我們就能在全國帶頭捍衛生育權利。
榮譽議長Nancy Pelosi
副州長Eleni Kounalakis
州審計長Malia Cohen
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是:Breed市長的生育自由委員會,贊成提案O。
委員會提供資金的真正來源的唯一貢獻者是:屬於我們所有人的三藩市。
2
贊成提案O的付費論據
三藩市男性民選領袖支持提案O
作為三藩市的男性民選領袖,我們團結一致,堅決支持提案O:《三藩市生育自由法案》。生育健康不僅是婦女的事,也是影響整個社區基本人權的福祉的事。男士在捍衛這些權利上有一個關重要的角色要扮演,因為它們影響了我們的伴侶、家庭和更廣泛的社會。
生育自由支持每一個人的健康、自主權和經濟安全。如果個人能夠獲得全面的生育保健服務,包括避孕、墮胎和產前服務,家庭就會更健康和穩定。本提案確保所有三藩市人,無論何種性別,都能獲得所需的醫療保健服務,不必擔心歧視或政治干預。
將墮胎定為犯罪和限制獲得生育保健服務會導致危險和不公正的結果,對包括LGBTQ人士在內的邊緣化群體造成不合比例的傷害。透過支持本提案,我們可以保護所有三藩市人的健康和權利,並確認市府對正義和公平的承諾。
我們敦促您投票贊成提案O:《三藩市生育自由法案》。團結起來,我們就能為所有人創造更光明、更公平的未來。
州參議員Scott Wiener
估值官Joaquín Torres
市議員Matt Dorsey
市議員Joel Engardio
市議員Rafael Mandelman
市議員Aaron Peskin
市議員Dean Preston
市議員Ahsha Safaí
市議員Shamann Walton
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是:Breed市長的生育自由委員會,贊成提案O。
委員會提供資金的真正來源的唯一貢獻者是:屬於我們所有人的三藩市。
3
贊成提案O的付費論據
三藩市公共安全領袖們支持贊成提案O
作為公共安全官員,我們的首要責任是保護社區的健康。《三藩市生育自由法案》透過保障個人的權利和自主來加強公共安全,確保每個人都能獲得所需的醫療服務。
獲得包括墮胎在內的生育健康服務是社區安全的基本。當人們無法獲得這些服務時,這會帶來不安全的程序,加劇公共衛生危機,及將額外的壓力加在我們的急救應對系統上。透過確保合法、安全地獲得這些基本服務,我們可以降低不受監管的危險手術的可能性,並減低對個人和社區造成的潛在傷害。
支持《三藩市生育自由法案》不僅是關於醫療保健,也是對所有三藩市人的安全、尊嚴和權利的承諾。作為公共安全官員,這項法案與我們保護和服務社區每位成員的使命一致。透過支持本法案,我們確認三藩市的所有居民,無論他們的情況如何,他們均有權就自己的身體和健康做出知情決定,而不必擔心暴力、騷擾或法律後果。
投票贊成《三藩市生育自由法案》。
地方檢察官Brooke Jenkins
縣警長Paul Miyamoto
Debra Walker,警察委員會委員*
*作者僅以個人身份簽名,不代表任何組織。
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是:Breed市長的生育自由委員會,贊成提案O。
委員會提供資金的真正來源的唯一貢獻者是:屬於我們所有人的三藩市。
4
贊成提案O的付費論據
ESSENTIAL ACCESS HEALTH支持贊成提案O。
Essential Access Health很榮幸得以支持《三藩市生育自由法案》。Essential Access Health透過提供資金、倡議、研究、培訓供應者和醫療保健專業人員,以及賦予青年權力,為所有人提供優質的性與生育保健服務。
隨著全國各州不斷頒佈冷酷無情和殘忍的墮胎禁令和限制措施,加州和三藩市有機會及責任使用一切可能的工具來保護和擴大基本保健服務的獲取。《生育自由法案》建立在三藩市採取大膽行動支持公平和正義的悠久歷史之上,並為其他城市提供了一個可以採用和適用的模範。
這項提案確保任何在三藩市尋求生育健康護理的人都能獲得準確的資訊,瞭解他們可以在那裡獲得全面、醫學上準確和不偏不倚的護理。它加強了州政府的保護措施,以確保沒有人會因為獲得生育保健服務而被定罪,力求保證所有人都能獲得可以負擔的生育服務,反制拖延獲得時間性敏感的護理操縱手段,並使生育保健中心更容易在三藩市開門營業。
每個人無論他們身處何地都應該能在有尊嚴和受尊重的情況下,獲得他們想要和需要的基本墮胎護理。我們敦促三藩市市民支持這項提案。
Shannon Olivieri Hovis,Essential Access Health公共事務副總裁
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是:Breed市長的生育自由委員會,贊成提案O。
委員會提供資金的真正來源的唯一貢獻者是:屬於我們所有人的三藩市。
5
贊成提案O的付費論據
LGBTQ+領導人支持提案O
將墮胎定為犯罪並限制獲取生育保健服務,對被邊緣化的群體造成不合比例的傷害,包括有色人種、低收入人士和LGBTQ+人士。
提案O《三藩市生育自由法案》確保每個人,無論背景或身份,都能獲得全面的生育保健服務。當生育權利在全國受到攻擊時,在不受政府干預的情況下做出私人健康決定的權利比以往更重要。
提案O透過保證獲得基本醫療服務,包括避孕、墮胎和產前護理,賦權予個人對自己的身體和未來做決定。
三藩市一直是進步價值觀的領導者,現在我們比以往任何時候都更需要採取地方行動來保護生育權利。通過提案O,我們可以確保我們的城市繼續成為希望和正義的燈塔,為全州和全國的其他城市樹立榜樣。
我們敦促您支持提案O,以便共同保護我們熱愛的城市中每個人的權利和健康。
Honey Mahogany,三藩市民主黨榮譽議長
Alice B. Toklas LGBTQ民主黨俱樂部
Harvey Milk LGBTQ民主黨俱樂部
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是:Breed市長的生育自由委員會,贊成提案O。
委員會提供資金的真正來源的唯一貢獻者是:屬於我們所有人的三藩市。
6
贊成提案O的付費論據
三藩市民主黨的女士支持贊成提案O
作為三藩市民主黨的民選成員,我們團結一致,堅定不移地支持《三藩市生育自由法案》。這項提案對於確保所有人(無論性別)都有權獲得全面的生育健康護理至關重要。
生育自由賦權予每個人對自己的身體和未來做出知情的決定。這項提案表徵著我們作為民主黨的一員所倡導的包容性價值觀,保證三藩市的所有居民都能獲得重要的健康服務,包括避孕、墮胎和產前護理。
地方領導在保障這些權利方面扮演了至關重要的角色。儘管州政府和聯邦政府的保護措施至關重要,但是地方政府有獨特的能力直接回應社區的需求。透過這項提案,三藩市可以帶頭保護生育自由,並成為其他城市的榜樣。
我們敦促您投票贊成《三藩市生育自由選票提案》。我們可以共同維護正義和平等的原則,確保我們的城市在保護所有居民的生育權利和健康方面作領袖。讓我們繼續為今天及將來的世代鋪平道路,創造更光明、更包容的未來。
Nancy Tung,三藩市民主黨主席
Carrie Barnes,三藩市民主黨副主席
Emma Heiken Hare,三藩市民主黨副主席
Michela Alioto-Pier,三藩市民主黨成員
Connie Chan,三藩市民主黨成員
Lanier Coles,三藩市民主黨總監
Lily Ho,三藩市民主黨成員
Marjan Philhour,三藩市民主黨成員
Catherine Stefani,三藩市民主黨成員
Jade Tu,三藩市民主黨成員
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是:Breed市長的生育自由委員會,贊成提案O。
委員會提供資金的真正來源的唯一貢獻者是:屬於我們所有人的三藩市。
7
贊成提案O的付費論據
婦女組織支持提案O!
我們的國家正活在唐納德•特朗普可能再次當選總統的真實威脅之下。伴隨這種可怕的可能性,他將致力在全國禁止墮胎。
在三藩市,提案O是我們現在可以採取的措施,以確保無論選舉結果如何,本市都將保護婦女對自己身體的自主權。三藩市必須堅定不移地捍衛這些自由。
提案O,即《三藩市生育自由法案》:
- 確保三藩市所有婦女都能獲得安全、合法的墮胎服務
- 保護醫療服務提供者免受其他司法管轄區的起訴
- 禁止使用市府資金支持州外起訴
投票贊成提案O,以維護婦女權利、保護我們的醫療保健提供者,並促進性別平等。
Sophia Andary,三藩市婦女地位委員會副主席*
三藩市婦女政治委員會
*作者僅以個人身份簽名,不代表任何組織。
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是:Breed市長的生育自由委員會,贊成提案O。
委員會提供資金的真正來源的唯一貢獻者是:屬於我們所有人的三藩市。
8
贊成提案O的付費論據
三藩市青年民主黨人支持提案O!
年輕女士和學生在獲取生育保健時往往面臨巨大障礙,包括性教育不足和無法獲得避孕藥具。年輕人在墮胎方面可能面臨比成年人更多的限制;他們收入較低,醫療費用高昂,他們可能需要長途跋涉,或是不願意讓父母參與他們的決定。
提案O,即《三藩市生育自由法案》,保證每個人都能獲得必要的資源和支持,對自己的身體和未來做出知情的決定。
提案O規定全面性的生育健康教育,確保年輕人掌握知識做出安全的選擇。
提案O要求提供可在何處獲得服務的明確資訊。
提案O保護醫療服務提供者免受州外起訴,確保年輕人可以接受醫療服務而不必擔心法律反衝後果。
我們支持提案O以賦權予下一代,保護他們的生育權利,並確保三藩市繼續成為一個重視和支持年輕人的城市。
三藩市青年民主黨人
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是:Breed市長的生育自由委員會,贊成提案O。
委員會提供資金的真正來源的唯一貢獻者是:屬於我們所有人的三藩市。
9
贊成提案O的付費論據
猶太教領袖支持贊成提案O
作為三藩市伊瑪努-EI聖殿(Temple Emanu-EI)的資深拉比,我堅定支持《三藩市生育自由法案》。植根於我們的猶太信仰和價值觀,我們相信生命神聖不可侵犯、個人尊嚴和個人自主的重要性,包括對自己身體做出決定的權利。
猶太教傳統強調健康、幸福和個人道德力量的重要性。我們的信仰教導我們,每個人都是按照神的形象創造的,理應受到尊重,並有能力做出適合自己和家人的選擇。生育自由是這信仰的一個核心,因為它允許人在極為個人的事務中行使自己的道德和倫理判斷。
提案O《三藩市生育自由法案》將保護這些權利,並確保我們的城市持續是一個所有人(無論他們的背景或信仰)都能獲得所需護理的地方。我們有責任捍衛正義,確保每個人都有機會活得有尊嚴及自主。
我敦促您投票贊成提案O:《三藩市生育自由法案》。
Rena Singer拉比,伊曼努-EI聖殿
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是:Breed市長的生育自由委員會,贊成提案O。
委員會提供資金的真正來源的唯一貢獻者是:屬於我們所有人的三藩市。
10
贊成提案O的付費論據
民主黨領袖支持贊成提案O!
作為三藩市民主黨縣中央委員會的領導,我們堅定保護和擴大三藩市的生育權利。提案O代表一個勇敢且必要的步驟,以確保我們的城市仍然是所有尋求全面生育保健(包括墮胎)者的安全避風港。
贊成本提案將確認三藩市致力保障個人有權做出醫療決定,而不必擔心錯誤資訊、騷擾或法律的反衝後果。本提案將加強公共衛生局對於可用的服務提供清晰、準確資訊的能力,並確保提供有限服務的懷孕中心對所提供的護理的透明度。
提案O將促進獲取基本服務,保護病人的隱私,並擴大全市生育健康診所的服務範圍。本提案也將強化我們的城市立場,拒與外州配合,將在加州境內的生育選擇定為犯罪。
投票贊成提案O。
Trevor Chandler,DCCC成員
Mary Jung,DCCC前主席
Nancy Tung,DCCC主席
Lily Ho,DCCC成員
Michela Alioto Pier,DCCC成員
Carrie Barnes,DCCC副主席
市議員Matt Dorsey,DCCC成員
Joe Sangirardi,DCCC成員
Cedric Akbar,DCCC副主席
Marjan Philhour,DCCC成員
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是:Trevor Chandler for Supervisor 2024。
Paid Arguments Against Proposition O
無人提交反對提案提案O的付費論據
Legal Text
Initiative ordinance amending the Administrative Code to 1) declare it official City policy to safeguard comprehensive reproductive freedoms; 2) establish a fund to receive monies to support reproductive rights and health services; 3) require the City to provide public information through website and signage about where abortions and emergency contraception may be available, including signage in front of limited services pregnancy centers that do not provide those services; 4) direct the City to identify and allocate funding that supports access to abortions and emergency contraception services in San Francisco; 5) prohibit City-funded providers from requiring providers to obtain additional medical qualifications not required by state or federal law; 6) restrict City officers and employees from cooperating with state or federal prosecutions as to reproductive health care that is provided or obtained lawfully in California; and 7) direct City departments to monitor changes in state and federal law that prevent discrimination on the basis of a person’s reproductive health decisionmaking; and amending the Planning Code to establish that reproductive health care centers that provide services for abortions and emergency contraception are principally permitted in non-residential zoning districts.
NOTE: Unchanged Code text and uncodified text are in plain font.
Additions to Codes are in single-underline italics Times New Roman font.
Deletions to Codes are in strikethrough italics Times New Roman font.
Asterisks (* * * *) indicate the omission of unchanged Code
subsections or parts of tables.
Be it ordained by the People of the City and County of San Francisco:
Section 1. Title.
This measure shall be known and may be cited as the “San Francisco Reproductive Freedom Act.”
Section 2. Purpose and Findings.
(a) Comprehensive reproductive health care is a fundamental human right that should not be taken away, restricted, or denied.
(b) Access to safe and legal abortions, contraception, in vitro fertilization, and accurate information about reproductive health is a critical factor in the health, safety, and quality of life of women and people with capacity for pregnancy.
(c) According to recent studies conducted at the University of California San Francisco, people who obtained an abortion presented with fewer mental health struggles, were more financially stable, and raised children under more stable conditions, as compared to people who were unable to receive abortions.
(d) Despite the vital importance of women and people with the capacity for pregnancy maintaining bodily autonomy and access to the reproductive health care services they need, all around the country, many states and municipalities are taking away these critical services.
(e) The landmark Roe v. Wade decision protected access to abortion for nearly 50 years, and the United States Supreme Court’s decision to overturn this long-established precedent took our country backwards and dramatically reduced access to abortion for millions of people. Many jurisdictions across the country have since weaponized their newfound ability to limit abortions, by criminalizing the procedure, controlling and monitoring pregnancies, and imposing onerous conditions on providers that make it harder and legally risky for them to operate.
(f) Access to abortion is fundamental to comprehensive reproductive health care. Abortion is a critical medical procedure that is the foundation of reproductive freedom and an essential aspect of routine pregnancy care and miscarriage management. Pregnant patients in states that restrict access to abortion are being forced to endure traumatic miscarriages, carry non-viable pregnancies, and experience other complications that can be life-threatening and dramatically risk their overall health and future fertility. Patients who need abortion care also are often forced to travel hours to access that care. If San Francisco residents or visitors experience difficulty or delays in obtaining care, it can lead them to seek more invasive and expensive options, endangering their health, and costs may fall upon City health facilities that provide medical services of last resort for patients who are indigent.
(g) San Francisco recognizes First Amendment protections including the freedom of speech and religion. This measure is not intended to curtail those protections. Instead, this measure is intended to ensure that factual, comprehensive, and science-based health care services can be accessible to all San Francisco residents and visitors.
(h) San Francisco has always been and will continue to be a City that strives to protect fundamental human rights.
(i) San Francisco will continue to be a beacon of hope, care, and compassion, including by upholding the right to access unbiased, fact-based health care.
(j) The City supports the autonomy of all women and people with capacity for pregnancy, including young people and members of the LGBTQ+ community, to exercise their reproductive rights and freedoms at any point in their pregnancy.
(k) San Francisco is a welcoming place for abortion clinics and providers.
(l) People in San Francisco should always be able to access reproductive health care services free from coercion, threat, violence, or fear.
(m) No person in San Francisco should be criminalized for the reproductive health decisions they make.
(n) Governments should not be involved in a person’s reproductive health care decisions, as those decisions should be made by an individual, along with their provider and any other natural supports they choose to include in these very personal decisions.
(o) San Francisco will remain a safe and secure place for women to access comprehensive reproductive health care, including accurate medical information, in vitro fertilization, contraception, and abortion.
Section 3. Article XIII of Chapter 10 of the Administrative Code is hereby amended by adding Section 10.100-265, to read as follows:
SEC. 10.100-265. REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FUND.
(a) Establishment of Fund. The Reproductive Freedom Fund (the “Fund”) is established as a category eight fund to receive all private grants, gifts, and bequests of money and property which may be offered to the City and County of San Francisco to support reproductive rights and health services.
(b) Use of Fund. The City shall use the Fund for the purpose of supporting comprehensive reproductive health, consistent with the San Francisco Reproductive Rights Policy set forth in Chapter 93A of the Administrative Code.
(c) Administration of Fund. The Department of Public Health shall administer the Fund.
Section 4. The Administrative Code is hereby amended by adding Chapter 93A, consisting of Sections 93A.1, 93A.2, 93A.3, and 93A.4, to read as follows:
CHAPTER 93A: SAN FRANCISCO REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS POLICY
SEC. 93A.1. DECLARATION OF POLICY.
It shall be the official policy of the City and County of San Francisco to serve as a safe and welcoming place for patients seeking reproductive health care, to protect the rights of pregnant persons to bodily autonomy and control over their private medical decisions, and to safeguard confidential health information between patients seeking access to reproductive health care and their providers. To these ends:
(a) The City shall keep personally identifiable health information regarding reproductive health care confidential, and shall not disclose such information unless authorized or required by law. This policy does not prohibit the lawful use or disclosure of health information otherwise authorized by law for the purpose of providing medical care, social services, or similar assistance, or prohibit the lawful sharing of deidentified data for research purposes as provided by applicable law.
(b) It shall be against City policy to criminally investigate or prosecute a person for having accessed or provided reproductive health care, or to assist or cooperate with such an investigation or prosecution. This policy does not apply to cases involving the use of coercion or force against the pregnant person, or to cases based on conduct that was criminally negligent to the health of the pregnant person seeking care.
(c) The City shall ensure that City-funded reproductive health care providers provide accurate medical information as it relates to reproductive health care.
(d) March 10, or such other date approved by the Board of Supervisors by resolution, shall be known and celebrated in San Francisco as Abortion Provider Appreciation Day.
(e) The City shall endeavor to keep patients and providers safe, secure, and free from harassment or abuse when they are receiving and providing reproductive health care.
(f) The City Attorney is urged to continue supporting reproductive rights.
SEC. 93A.2. ACCESS TO REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES.
(a) For purposes of this Chapter 93A, the terms “abortion,” client,” “emergency contraception,” “health information,” “licensed medical provider,” “limited services pregnancy center,” “pregnancy services center,” “premises,” and “prenatal care” shall be defined consistent with Administrative Code Chapter 93, as it may be amended from time to time. The findings and purposes of Chapter 93 are incorporated herein by reference.
(b) The Department of Public Health (“DPH”) shall maintain a website that lists pregnancy services centers in the City that provide or offer referrals for abortions or emergency contraception, as well as limited service pregnancy centers. In addition, the City shall maintain a non-emergency telephone number where members of the public can obtain information about where to obtain abortions and emergency contraception.
SEC. 93A.3. USE OF CITY FUNDS.
(a) The City shall identify and allocate funding that supports access to abortions and emergency contraception in San Francisco. The City shall allocate revenues from the Reproductive Rights Fund in Section 10.100-265 of the Administrative Code for these purposes, and may supplement monies in the Fund with additional City funds, subject to the budgetary and fiscal provisions set forth in the Charter.
(c) California Penal Code Section 13778.2(b) restricts City officers and employees from cooperating with or providing information to any individual or agency or department from another state or to a federal law enforcement agency regarding an abortion that is lawful under California law and performed in California. City officers and employees also may not cooperate with or provide information to any individual or agency or department from another state’s law enforcement agency or a federal law enforcement agency, regarding any of the following, to the extent they do not fall under 13778.2(b) as it may be amended from time to time: (1) a person’s possession or use of contraception; (2) a person’s use of in vitro fertilization; (3) a person’s pregnancy status; and (4) a person’s choice to get an abortion. This subsection (c) does not prohibit the use of City resources to investigate criminal activity in San Francisco that may involve the performance of an abortion, or any of the numbered items in the preceding sentence, provided that information relating to a specific individual is not shared for the purpose of enforcing another state’s abortion law or a federal abortion law. This subsection (c) also shall not be construed to obstruct the constitutional and statutory powers and duties of the District Attorney, the Sheriff, the Chief Adult Probation Officer, or the Chief Juvenile Probation Officer.
SEC. 93A.4. MONITORING AND PREVENTING DISCRIMINATION.
Existing law prohibits housing and employment discrimination on the basis of a person’s reproductive health decisionmaking. The Department on the Status of Women and the Department of Public Health shall monitor changes in these laws, and consider policy and legislative strategies to reinstate those protections in San Francisco if such laws are modified contrary to the San Francisco Reproductive Rights Policy in Section 93A.1.
Section 5. Articles 1 and 2 of the Planning Code are hereby amended by revising Section 102 and adding Section 202.5, to read as follows:
SEC. 102. DEFINITIONS.
* * * *
Reproductive Health Clinic. A Retail Sales and Service Use that is a clinic licensed pursuant to applicable provisions of the California Health and Safety Code that meets both of the following requirements: a) provides directly to patients medical services consisting of Abortions or Emergency Contraception as those terms are defined in Administrative Code Section 93.3; and b) primarily specializes in reproductive health services as defined in California Penal Code 423.1. A Reproductive Health Clinic that meets the foregoing requirements may also provide additional medical and allied health services by physicians or other healthcare professionals.
Required Open Space. See Open Space, Required.
* * * *
Service, Health. A Retail Sales and Service Use that provides medical and allied health services to the individual by physicians, surgeons, dentists, podiatrists, psychologists, psychiatrists, acupuncturists, chiropractors, Sole Practitioner massage therapists as defined in Section 29.5 of the Health Code, or any other health-care professionals when licensed by a State-sanctioned Board overseeing the provision of medically oriented services. It includes, without limitation, a clinic, primarily providing outpatient care in medical, psychiatric, or other health services, and not part of a Hospital or medical center, as defined by this Section of the Code, and Sole Practitioner Massage Establishments as defined in Section 29.5 of the Health Code, but does not include other Massage Establishments, which are defined elsewhere in this Code. Health Service does not include Reproductive Health Clinic, which is defined separately in this Section 102.
* * * *
SEC. 202.5. REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CLINICS.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code, a Reproductive Health Clinic is a Principally Permitted use on all stories in all use districts, except the following residential districts: Residential, House (Section 209.1); Residential, Mixed (Section 209.2); and Residential, Transit-Oriented (Section 209.4). In the aforementioned residential districts, Reproductive Health Clinics shall be permitted as a Limited Corner Commercial Use pursuant to Section 231, to the same extent such uses were permitted under Section 231 as of the effective date of this ordinance. If development of a Reproductive Health Clinic would require Residential Conversion of a Residential Unit or Unauthorized Unit under Section 317, the development shall be subject to Section 317 and may require Conditional Use authorization, or may be prohibited in the aforementioned residential districts. It shall not be deemed a change in use for a Health Services use or a use categorized as Institutional under this Code to become a Reproductive Health Clinic use. For any Reproductive Health Clinic established prior to the effective date of the ordinance adding this Section 202.5, it shall not be deemed a change in use to revert to the use in existence prior to the effective date of said ordinance, such as Health Services.
Section 6. The Planning Department shall, within 120 days of the effective date of this ordinance, submit for introduction at the Board of Supervisors an ordinance that makes all changes necessary to conform the Planning Code to the requirements of Section 202.5 adopted herein, including but not limited to, amending Zoning Control Tables to list Reproductive Health Clinics as a Principally Permitted use.
Section 7. Amendments.
The Board of Supervisors may by ordinance, with a supermajority vote of at least eight votes, amend Sections 3, 4, 5, and 6 of this Ordinance, provided that any such amendment is in furtherance of the purposes stated in Section 2 of this Ordinance.
Section 8. Promotion of the General Welfare.
In undertaking the adoption and enforcement of this Ordinance, the City is undertaking only to promote the general welfare. It is not assuming, nor is it imposing on its officers and employees, an obligation for breach of which it is liable in money damages to any person who claims that such breach proximately caused injury.
Section 9. Severability.
(a) If any part or provision of this Ordinance, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the remainder of this Ordinance, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, the People of the City and County of San Francisco declare that the provisions and applications of this Ordinance are severable.
(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), the amendment to the Planning Code Section 102 definition of Health Services in Section 5 of this Ordinance is not severable, in the event the definition of Reproductive Health Clinic added to Planning Code Section 102 is invalidated, and/or the first sentence of the new Planning Code Section 202.5 is invalidated.
* * *