市府是否應成立一個受害者和證人權利辦公室，以提供或協調現有的市府服務， 並尋求建立為家庭暴力受害者提供免費法律服務的項目？
摘要 由選票簡釋委員會撰寫
現況：三藩市通過許多機構和部門向暴力和非暴力犯罪的受害者、性暴力的倖存者以及基於性別的暴力和歧視受害者提供服務。
建議：提案D將建立一個新的市府部門，稱為受害者和證人權利辦公室（辦公室）。該辦公室將為各種犯罪的受害者和證人提供或協調現有服務。
辦公室將提出一項法令，建立一個為期一年的試點項目，從2023年7月1日開始為家庭暴力受害者提供免費的法律服務。
辦公室將尋求建立一個永久性的項目，為家庭暴力受害者提供免費法律服務，但此項目有待進一步立法。家庭暴力受害者必須住在本市，或是發生在本市的家庭暴力事件的受害者。
投「贊成」票的意思是：如果您投「贊成」票，即表示您同意成立一個受害者和證人權利辦公室，以提供或協調現有的市府服務，並尋求建立為家庭暴力受害者提供免費法律服務的項目。
投「反對」票的意思是：如果您投「反對」票，即表示您反對成立這個辦公室。
市主計官對提案「D」的意見書
市主計官Ben Rosenfield就提案D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通過，該法令的支出取決於在預算程序中做出的決定，因為法令無法硬性規定未來的市長和市議會為此用途或其他任何用途提供資金。在我看來，如果未來的政策制定者這麼做，那麼依建議的提案對所設立的項目提供完全資助，其支出可能相當可觀。
根據擬議的法令，需要建立一個新的市府部門，即受害者和證人權利辦公室（辦公室）。辦公室將被授權向犯罪受害者和證人提供各種服務，並協調其他市府機構提供的類似服務。法令規定，辦公室應調查和報告為客戶提供服務的質量和範圍，進行這方面的需求分析，並就如何解決未滿足的需求提出建議。該辦公室成立一年後，將需要提出一項法令，將所有為受害者和證人提供的服務合併到其指導下。
擬議的法令將為三藩市的家庭暴力受害者確立民事法律代表的權利，並建立一個試點項目來提供這種代表。受害者和證人權利辦公室將為此目的協調免費的法律服務，管理試點項目，在一年後評估其有效性，並根據評估結果提出一項法令，確定該項目的未來走向。
法令規定了新辦公室的部門負責人，每年的費用可能約為34萬元。法令規定的項目和協調工作將需要配備人員，估計最低費用約為70萬元。法令規定，在為家庭暴力受害者提供法律諮詢的試行期間，只會使用免費的法律服務；但在未來年度，如果市政府為該項目提供資金，成本可能會很高。如上所述，法令無法硬性規定未來市長和市議會為此用途或任何其他用途提供資金。根據市憲章，本提案最終支出取決於市府年度預算程序中的決定。
提案「D」如何被列入選票
2022年1月14日，選務處收到下列市議員簽署的一項擬議法令：Haney、Mandelman、Safai、Stefani。
根據《市政選舉法》，凡有四名以上市議員簽署，即可透過此種方式將一項法令列入選票。
本提案需要有50%+1的贊成票才能獲得通過。
贊成提案 D 的論據提案D將幫助三藩市的所有受害者。
去年，超過75,000名三藩市人報告自己是犯罪受害者。我們不僅看到整體犯罪率上升，也看到家庭暴力事件明顯增加。僅於2021年，三藩市911就接到了7,241通的家庭暴力求助電話。然而，幾乎90%的家庭暴力案件都沒有被起訴，使受害者和他們的孩子處於弱勢。
本市的現行制度迫使受害者和證人在遭受了情緒、身體和經濟方面的後果之餘，還要在多個部門組成的複雜官僚系統中摸索。最終，許多人被拒之門外，得不到任何支持。我們必須讓所有受害者發聲，讓他們有機會恢復身體和情感上被奪走的東西。
提案D將為所有犯罪受害者提供關鍵的服務和支援，確保他們能夠瞭解和獲得他們的合法權利。它將通過建立受害者和證人權利辦公室以及家庭暴力受害者獲得民事律師的權利來提供全面服務。它將使犯罪受害者能夠聯繫財務協助、醫療報銷和心理健康幫助，並整合所有公共安全機構現有的受害者服務，以減少官僚主義。
家庭暴力的受害者面臨複雜的法律需求，特別是那些來自低收入家庭的受害者。在許多情況下，肇事者並沒有被起訴，而是回到受害者的家中，而與受害者同住的孩子往往是虐待行為的證人和受害者。讓家庭暴力受害者有獲得民事律師的權利，將確保有需要的人可以獲得保護令、兒童贍養費或監護權，以及住房。
幫助三藩市的所有犯罪受害者。投票贊成提案D。
SFVictimsRights.com
市議員Catherine Stefani
市議員Rafael Mandelman
市議員Myrna Melgar
市議員Matt Haney
市議員Ahsha Safai
市議員Gordon Mar
市議員Aaron Peskin
反駁贊成提案 D 的論據投票反對提案D。
毫無疑問犯罪是一個問題，而且受害者和證人並不一定能得到他們需要的幫助和支援。這裡的分歧點在於提案D是否是最好的解決方案。
讓我們把話說清楚。這項措施對減少犯罪完全沒有幫助。它不會加強預防犯罪、鄰里巡邏或計劃，或起訴。它不會減少累犯或以其他方式阻止慣犯。
它將成立一個新的辦公室，以「協調本市向各種犯罪的受害者和證人提供的服務」，包括年度調查、評估計劃和合併計劃。這是很多官僚主義，沒有很多新服務。提案D不是解決這個問題的最佳方法。
這個法令應該由市議會聽證和審議。如果需要調查、評估和合併，現在就去做。犯罪受害者和證人需要幫助，而不是更多的官僚主義。
沒有什麼能阻止目前已在提供受害者和證人服務的市府部門進行更好的協調。這聽起來是個好主意。
我們不需要新的市政部門、不必要的開支，或在疫情期間或其他任何時候的其他噱頭。我們應該更有效地利用現有資源和監督機制。
請投票反對提案D，謝謝您。
David Pilpel
反對提案 D 的論據
請投票反對提案D。
提案D是一項法令，將建立一個新的受害者和證人權利辦公室。雖然這可能是一個有意義而且受歡迎的概念，但並不是選民需要批准的事情。懇請建議，提案D 不是解決這個問題的最佳方法。
類似這樣的法令可以由市議會通過，並由市長批准， 然後舉行一次或多次聽證會來調整提案。立法過程很重要，需要考慮所有的觀點，採用最好的想法和語言，使一個概念變得真實有意義。
據我所知，這個提案從未作為聽證會或條例在市議會提出過。它直接進入了投票程序，建議設立一個新的辦公室，並配備工作人員來協調現有的服務，這將增加更多的官僚主義，而非直接改善受害者和證人的權利。
一個更好的方法是在市議會考慮這個問題，舉行聽證會，制定一個提案，並切實增加資源或重新分配該領域的職能。對於一個可能真實但是沒有明確定義的問題，像這樣的選票提案不是良好的解決方案。
同時，市府各部門已經提供了一些受害者和證人服務。更多關於他們所做工作的資訊會有用處，我相信市長和部門負責人可以指示對該領域進行更好的協調。
我們不需要新的市府部門、不必要的開支，或在疫情期間或其他任何時候的其他噱頭。我們應該更有效地利用現有資源和監督機制。
請投票反對提案D，謝謝您。
David Pilpel
反駁反對提案 D 的論據一封來自家庭暴力倖存者Karen Miron的信：
「我的名字是Karen Miron。我是一位母親、女兒和家庭暴力的倖存者。我想告訴您，為什麼提案D對每一個有我這樣遭遇的人來說是有必要的。
我的前男友有虐待行為。他生氣時會打我；我的鼻樑骨被打斷，多次被打成眼周瘀黑，全身傷痕累累。 2015年，我誕下我們的女兒Avi。有一天，他又開始推我，我抱起Avi就走。我看到女兒眼中的恐懼，意識到我不想再繼續我經歷的虐待循環。
我爭取完全監護權，但是我的前男友濫用這個系統。像許多家庭暴力的倖存者一樣，我感到迷失和困頓。如果我的前男友擁有監護權，我知道Avi一定會處於危險。但是我沒有錢來保護她。許多像我一樣的婦女沒有資源或幫助。所以她們留下來，認為這是她們唯一的選擇。
我很幸運得到了Open Door Legal 的幫助。他們與我並肩作戰爭取完全監護權，而且我們贏了。但不是每個家庭暴力的倖存者都像我一樣幸運。聽到本市想要保護像我和我女兒這樣的倖存者，我感到非常興奮。法律服務幫助我保護我的家庭，並建立我們的未來。
請投票贊成提案D，以便為像我這樣的家庭暴力倖存者提供獲得法律諮詢的權利。」
執行董事Adrian Tirtanadi，非營利法律服務機構Open Door Legal
贊成提案 D 的付費論據贊成提案D的付費論據
女性領袖支持提案D
投票贊成提案D，以便向犯罪受害者提供關鍵的服務和支援，並為所有家庭暴力的受害者提供法律諮詢以保護其權益。
僅在2021年，三藩市911就接到了7,241通與家庭暴力有關的電話。在許多情況下，肇事者並沒有被起訴，而是回到受害者的家中，而與受害者同住的孩子往往是虐待行為的證人和受害者。
提案D將建立受害者和證人權利辦公室，並為家庭暴力受害者提供民事律師服務，以便為所有受害者提供急需的支援和全面的服務。它將使犯罪受害者能夠聯繫財務協助、醫療報銷和心理健康支援。
作為三藩市的婦女領袖，我們敦促您支持提案D，以幫助犯罪受害者。
前三藩市市議會主席Malia Cohen*
市議員Catherine Stefani
市議員Myrna Melgar
前地方檢察官Suzy Loftus*
市立大學董事Thea Selby*
市立大學董事Shanell Williams*
市立大學董事Aliya Chisti*
民主黨主席Honey Mahogany*
民主黨縣中央委員會成員Nancy Tung*
前三藩市聯合學區董事會成員Rachel Norton
*僅供識別身份；作者以個人名義簽名，並非代表某一組織。
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是：三藩市受害者權利倡議。
委員會真實受款來源的三大貢獻者是：1. Luis Belmonte，2. Natasha Dolby，3. Anne Long。
贊成提案D的付費論據
加入Willie L. Brown, Jr.市長的行列，支持提案D
我們的城市在對待犯罪受害者方面必須做得更好。這是建設一個更安全、更公正城市的關鍵。
提案D將通過整合和改善城市服務來消除繁文縟節，以便為三藩市的犯罪受害者提供更多幫助。 它將保護家庭暴力的受害者，這些人往往面臨了複雜的法律需求。
請跟我一起投票贊成提案D。
前任市長Willie L. Brown Jr.*
*僅供識別身份；作者以個人名義簽名，並非代表某一組織。
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是：三藩市受害者權利倡議。
委員會真實受款來源的三大貢獻者是：1. Luis Belmonte，2. Natasha Dolby，3. Anne Long。
贊成提案D的付費論據
支持提案D的受害者家屬
2021年1月28日，我84歲的父親在Anza Vista社區被殘忍地推倒在地而導致死亡。泰語口譯服務對我瞭解這個刑事案件的細節至關重要，但是我在接受口譯服務方面經歷了長時間的拖延。憑藉本市亞裔社區的力量，我終於得到了這些服務。然而，整個調查過程依然缺乏透明度。隨著犯罪率上升，市府必須更加努力來支持受害者。這項提案是保護所有三藩市市民和像我一樣的受害者家屬的安全。請投票贊成。
Monthanus Ratanapakdee
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是：三藩市受害者權利倡議。
委員會真實受款來源的三大貢獻者是：1. Luis Belmonte，2. Natasha Dolby，3. Anne Long。
贊成提案D的付費論據
保護LGBTQ的受害者：投票贊成提案D
男女同性戀、雙性戀、變性人、酷兒和非常規性別的人成為犯罪受害者的可能性幾乎是四倍。我們必須幫助LGBTQ倖存者獲得財務協助、醫療報銷和心理健康支持，以便他們能夠儘快恢復身心健康。
提案D將有助於為LGBTQ受害者提供關鍵的服務和支援，確保他們能夠瞭解並獲得他們的合法權利。 合併後的受害者和證人權利辦公室將為所有受害者提供一個集中的保護場所，消除獲得服務的繁瑣手續。
加入我們，支持LGBTQ受害者，投票贊成提案D。
州參議員Scott Wiener
市議員Rafael Mandelman
市立大學董事Shanell Williams*
民主黨主席Honey Mahogany*
三藩市交通局董事會董事Manny Yekutiel*
前Alice B. Toklas民主黨俱樂部聯席主席Lou Fischer*
*僅供識別身份；作者以個人名義簽名，並非代表某一組織。
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是：三藩市受害者權利倡議。
委員會真實受款來源的三大貢獻者是：1. Luis Belmonte，2. Natasha Dolby，3. Anne Long。
贊成提案D的付費論據
停止對亞裔的仇恨
可悲的現實是，我們城市中的許多亞裔居民是犯罪受害者。隨著針對亞裔的仇恨犯罪不斷增加，我們必須更加努力來支持犯罪受害者和證人。這是創造一個更安全的三藩市的關鍵所在。請和我們一起投票贊成提案D。
前民主黨縣中央委員會主席Mary Jung
民主黨縣中央委員會成員Nancy Tung*
商會主席Rodney Fong*
United Playaz創辦人Rudy Corpuz, Jr.*
Edwin M. Lee民主黨俱樂部
*僅供識別身份；作者以個人名義簽名，並非代表某一組織。
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是：三藩市受害者權利倡議。
委員會真實受款來源的三大貢獻者是：1. Luis Belmonte，2. Natasha Dolby，3. Anne Long。
贊成提案D的付費論據
非裔美國人領導人敦促投票贊成提案D
與其他種族相比，非裔美國人更有可能成為殺人案的受害者，也更有可能經歷暴力犯罪。然而，當非裔美國人成為受害者時，這些罪行不太可能被警方破案，也不太可能獲得新聞報導。我們需要更加努力來支持三藩市的非裔犯罪受害者，幫助他們伸張正義。
提案D將建立受害者和證人權利辦公室，將三藩市的所有犯罪受害者與他們需要的支援性服務聯繫起來。它將幫助受害者通過賠償和判決為自己伸張正義，並使他們聯繫直接的財務、醫療和心理健康協助。
請和我們一起投票贊成提案D。
前三藩市市議會主席Malia Cohen*
市立大學董事Shanell Williams*
民主黨主席Honey Mahogany*
醫治我們的家庭和國家創辦人Mattie Scott*
*僅供識別身份；作者以個人名義簽名，並非代表某一組織。
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是：三藩市受害者權利倡議。
委員會真實受款來源的三大貢獻者是：1. Luis Belmonte，2. Natasha Dolby，3. Anne Long。
贊成提案D的付費論據
商業領袖支持提案D
三藩市的企業因犯罪的增加而陷入困境。市政府必須更加努力來服務所有的犯罪受害者，這正是提案D的精髓。
提案D將整合和協調所有公共安全機構的現有受害者服務，並使犯罪受害者聯繫財務協助、醫療報銷和心理健康支持。它將通過建立受害者和證人權利辦公室以及為家庭暴力受害者提供民事律師的權利，為所有受害者提供急需的支援和綜合服務。
我們代表整個三藩市的企業，敦促您投票贊成提案D。
商會主席Rodney Fong
小企業委員會主席Sharky Laguana*
小企業業主Manny Yekutiel
酒吧老闆Ben Bleiman
*僅供識別身份；作者以個人名義簽名，並非代表某一組織。
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是：三藩市受害者權利倡議。
委員會真實受款來源的三大貢獻者是：1. Luis Belmonte，2. Natasha Dolby，3. Anne Long。
贊成提案D的付費論據
受害者權利宣導者支持提案D
我們必須讓所有受害者發聲，使他們能夠挽回身體和情感方面的損失。這項提案將有助於為所有犯罪受害者提供關鍵的服務和支援，確保他們能夠瞭解和獲得他們的合法權利。
投票贊成提案D
醫治我們的家庭和國家創辦人Mattie Scott*
United Playaz 創辦人Rudy Corpuz*
Open Door Legal執行董事Adrian Tirtanadi*
*僅供識別身份；作者以個人名義簽名，並非代表某一組織。
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是：三藩市受害者權利倡議。
向委員會提供資金的真正來源的三大貢獻者是：1. Luis Belmonte，2. Natasha Dolby，3. Anne Long。
贊成提案D的付費論據
鄰里社區領袖支持提案D
三藩市犯罪率的上升正在影響每個社區的每一個人。在過去一年裡，超過75,000名三藩市人報告自己是犯罪受害者。我們必須保護犯罪受害者，並給予他們康復所需的支持。
我們支持提案D，因為它將為所有犯罪受害者提供關鍵服務和支援。它將減少繁文縟節，使受害者更容易獲得財務、醫療和心理健康計畫。投票贊成提案D。
Joel Engardio，制止三藩市犯罪*
Jason Pellegrini，Marina社區協會*
Greg Scott，前太平洋高地居民協會主席*
Eleanor Carpenter，Union Street協會副主席*
SOAR-D1
*僅供識別身份；作者以個人名義簽名，並非代表某一組織。
這項論據的刊登費用的資金真正來源是：三藩市受害者權利倡議。
委員會真實受款來源的三大貢獻者是：1. Luis Belmonte，2. Natasha Dolby，3. Anne Long。
贊成提案D的付費論據結束
反對提案 D 的付費論據無人提交反對提案D的付費論據
法律文本Ordinance amending the Administrative Code to establish the Office of Victim and Witness Rights, and to establish a right to counsel for domestic violence victims in civil proceedings related to limiting the economic, familial, and other harms resulting from domestic violence, and a pilot program to provide civil counsel in such domestic violence-related proceedings through legal services and pro bono attorneys.
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. Findings.
(a) In the fourth quarter of 2020, the San Francisco Police Department reported 19,892 crimes with victims in San Francisco. During this same timeframe, 2,051 arrests across all categories of crimes were presented to the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office, and the District Attorney filed 980 new cases in total.
(b) In 2020, the District Attorney’s Office’s Victim Services Division served 8,212 individuals.
(c) A number of categories of serious crime in San Francisco increased from 2019 to 2020; burglary by 52%, arson by 40%, motor vehicle theft by 37%, and homicide by 17%.
(d) Crime is threatening all parts of our community, but minority communities are particularly hard-hit. In 2020, people of color were 73% of aggravated assault victims, 70% of battery victims, 83% of robbery victims, 63% of burglary victims, 88% of homicide victims, and 67% of sexual assault victims.
(e) During the COVID-19 pandemic, San Francisco has seen an increase in domestic violence service needs. For example:
The number of calls to the five San Francisco supported crisis lines was 8,647 in Fiscal Year 2019 and 11,829 in Fiscal Year 2020.
There was a 166% increase in calls to W.O.M.A.N., Inc. Cooperative Restraining Order Clinic from April to June of 2020.
From Fiscal Year 2019 to Fiscal Year 2020, there was a 78% decrease in cases resolved through jury trial for domestic violence, stalking, and elder abuse.
(f) From Fiscal Year 2015 to Fiscal Year 2020, police arrests in response to reported incidents of domestic violence in San Francisco have remained steady at a rate of between 53%-57%. In FY 2020, only 28% of cases presented were prosecuted by the District Attorney’s Office.
(g) Domestic violence survivors with legal representation in child custody cases generally receive more favorable outcomes than those who are not represented.
(h) As of August 2016, the state of California had approximately 40,000,000 inhabitants, including almost 260,000 lawyers. Of those, only 960 were funded by IOLTA (Interest on Lawyer Trust Accounts) to represent people who cannot afford to pay for legal representation.
Section 2. The Administrative Code is hereby amended by adding Article XXVII in Chapter 2A, consisting of Section 2A.430, to read as follows:
ARTICLE XXVII: OFFICE OF VICTIM AND WITNESS RIGHTS
SEC. 2A.430. OFFICE OF VICTIM AND WITNESS RIGHTS.
(a) Establishment. There shall be an Office of Victim and Witness Rights (the “Office”) to coordinate services provided by the City to victims and witnesses of all types of crime. The Office shall be a department of the City, and shall include such officers and employees as are authorized pursuant to the budgetary and fiscal provisions of the Charter. The Mayor shall appoint a Director of the Office (the “Director”). The Director shall be a department head, and shall have the powers and duties given to a department head under the Charter and Municipal Code.
(b) Duties and functions. Except as otherwise provided in the Charter, and in addition to any other duties assigned by ordinance or pursuant to Charter Section 4.132, the Office shall have the following duties:
(1) Services to Victims and Witnesses. The Office shall itself provide, or shall monitor and coordinate the provision of, comprehensive services to victims and witnesses (referred to, collectively, as “clients”) of all types of crimes. Such comprehensive services shall include but not be limited to translation services for non-English-speaking victims and witnesses and interpretation services for the deaf or hard of hearing; follow-up contact to determine whether a client received necessary assistance; field visits to a client’s home, place of business, or other location, whenever necessary to provide services; facilitation of volunteer participation in the provision of client services to encourage community involvement; and services for elderly clients, as appropriate to their particular needs.
(2) Consultation and coordination with public safety agencies. The Office shall consult and coordinate with all relevant City agencies, including but not limited to the Police Department, District Attorney’s Office, Sheriff’s Office, Adult Probation Department, Department of Public Health, Human Rights Commission, and Department on the Status of Women, as needed to provide effective services in the areas listed in Section 2A.430(b)(1) above.
(3) Survey. On at least an annual basis, the Office shall survey clients served by the Office for feedback regarding the quality, adequacy, and scope of services to clients provided, monitored, or coordinated by the Office. In conducting this survey, the Office shall seek input from community groups in evaluating whether the services to clients have been culturally competent and tailored to meet the priorities of marginalized groups. No later than March 1 of each year, starting in 2023, the Office shall present to the Board of Supervisors a report summarizing the results of the survey covering the prior calendar year and the Office’s plan for adapting its operations to meet the needs identified in the survey, including the priorities expressed by members of marginalized groups. At the time it submits the report, the Office shall make available to the Board of Supervisors the raw survey results used to compile the report. Such data shall be presented in deidentified form and may, at the discretion of the Office, be presented in aggregate form.
(4) City service evaluation. The Office shall, in coordination with other City departments, analyze survey results and other data reflecting the needs of clients and the degree to which specific categories of needs are being met by current City services, and shall recommend to the Board of Supervisors policies for addressing identified unmet needs. The Office’s evaluation and reporting procedures shall comply with the standards set forth in Part 4, Title 6, Chapter 4, Article 2 of the California Penal Code, as may be amended from time to time.
(5) Consolidation plan. No later than one year after appointment of a Director of the Office, the Office shall introduce at the Board of Supervisors an ordinance that describes a proposed plan for consolidating all City services for victims and witnesses under the Office.
(6) Other duties. The Board of Supervisors may modify the duties of the Office set forth in subsections (b)(1) through (b)(5), and may add to those duties or transfer any of those duties to other City departments, by ordinance approved by a majority of the Board.
Section 3. The Administrative Code is hereby amended by adding Chapter 58A, consisting of Sections 58A.1, 58A.2, 58A.3, and 58A.4, to read as follows:
CHAPTER 58A:
RIGHT TO CIVIL COUNSEL FOR VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.
SEC. 58A.1. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Chapter 58A, the following definitions apply:
“Domestic Violence” has the meaning set forth in Section 6211 of the California Family Code, as may be amended from time to time.
“Domestic Violence Victim” means a person against whom an act of Domestic Violence has been perpetrated.
SEC. 58A.2. RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING RIGHT TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CIVIL COUNSEL PILOT PROGRAM.
No later than three months after the Director of the Office of Victim and Witness Services (the “Director” of the “Office”) is appointed, or by January 1, 2023, whichever is sooner, the Office shall introduce at the Board of Supervisors an ordinance setting forth recommendations regarding the creation of a San Francisco Right to Domestic Violence Civil Counsel Pilot Program (“Pilot Program”) to be administered by the Office and to take place for one year in Fiscal Year 2023-2024.
SEC. 58A.3. RIGHT TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CIVIL COUNSEL PILOT PROGRAM FUNDING, ADMINISTRATION, AND EVALUATION.
(a) It shall be City policy that, consistent with the legislative, budgetary, and fiscal provisions of the Charter, in Fiscal Year 2023-2024, the City’s fiscal commitment to the Pilot Program shall be limited to the cost of staff support for program coordination among the City, the Superior Court, non-profit organizations, and others involved in the Pilot Program. The legal services provided under the Pilot Program shall be provided by pro bono and legal services attorneys, under the direction of the Office.
(b) Prior to the commencement of the Pilot Program, the Director shall develop a work plan and a process for independent evaluation of the Pilot Program, and shall coordinate among all parties involved in the Pilot Program to ensure that all such parties participate in the evaluation. The Director shall submit this evaluation to the Board of Supervisors within four months of completion of the Pilot Program. The evaluation shall include the following: (a) analysis of data collected regarding the impact of the Pilot Program on demand for City services; (b) feedback from Domestic Violence Victims; (c) assessment of the effectiveness of the Pilot Program in improving outcomes for Domestic Violence Victims, and assessment of whether there is a continued need for the Pilot Program; and (d) strategies and recommendations for maximizing the benefit of civil legal services for Domestic Violence Victims in the future. If the evaluation finds that the Pilot Program is generally successful, the Office shall, within six months of completion of the Pilot Program, introduce an ordinance at the Board of Supervisors to request that the Board consider extending, expanding, and/or making permanent the work of the Pilot Program.
SEC. 58A.4. PROVISION OF CIVIL LEGAL REPRESENTATION FOR VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.
(a) Provision of legal representation. Consistent with the legislative, budgetary, and fiscal provisions of the Charter, the City shall establish and operate a program, under the direction of the Office, to provide Domestic Violence Victims with legal representation in civil legal matters addressing the impacts of Domestic Violence at no direct cost to the Domestic Violence Victims. This free legal representation shall be available to any Domestic Violence Victim (1) who resides in the City regardless of the location of the Domestic Violence incident, or (2) is the victim of a Domestic Violence incident in the City regardless of whether the Domestic Violence Victim resides in the City, provded that the victim has filed a report of Domestic Violence with the San Francisco Police Department or other law enforcement authority with jurisdiction, and at least until such time as the report or complaint is withdrawn, the prosecuting authority has made a determination not to pursue criminal charges, or the prosecuting authority has concluded its prosecution of the matter. This free legal representation shall also be available to any person who resides in the City and has either sought a restraining order based on fear of Domestic Violence within the prior year, or has obtained a restraining order based on fear of Domestic Violence that has been in effect within the prior year.
(b) Implementation. The Office shall promptly take all necessary steps to fully implement the provisions of this Section as soon as practicable, but not later than January 1, 2025. The City shall have no obligation to provide legal representation under this Section where a state or federal program already provides civil legal representation to a Domestic Violence Victim with respect to the particular Domestic Violence-related matter or matters for which the victim is seeking representation.
(c) For the purposes of this Chapter 58A, the term “legal representation” shall mean civil legal representation provided to a Domestic Violence Victim by an organization or attorney as needed to protect the Domestic Violence Victim, the victim’s minor children, and the victim’s assets and/or property from the perpetrator of a Domestic Violence incident or incidents reported as set forth in Section 58A.4(a) above, in civil legal proceedings including but not limited to securing and enforcing restraining orders against the perpetrator(s) of the reported incident(s), child custody and visitation, child support, marital dissolution, immigration, housing, and consumer rights. The Office may limit the scope and duration of legal representation provided under this Section 58A.4 as reasonably necessary based on the Office’s assessment of available resources and areas of most urgent need.
Section 4. Undertaking for the General Welfare. In enacting and implementing this ordinance, the City is assuming an 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 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this ordinance, or any application thereof to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions or applications of the ordinance. The Board of Supervisors hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, and word not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any other portion of this ordinance or application thereof would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.