San Francisco Voters to Decide on Term Limit Ballot Measure

Controversial proposal would limit city supervisors and mayors to two terms over a lifetime.

Feb. 3, 2026 at 5:39pm by Ben Kaplan

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A controversial ballot measure to limit San Francisco city supervisors and mayors to just two terms over the course of their lifetime will head to voters in June. Supporters say the change would help encourage fresh leadership in City Hall, while critics argue it's a solution in search of a problem and the city should focus on more pressing issues like a projected $1 billion budget deficit.

Why it matters

The term limits debate reflects a broader discussion around the value of political experience versus the need for new voices in local government. Supporters believe the measure would create more turnover, while opponents argue that limiting terms could deprive the city of talented leaders who have learned how to effectively govern.

The details

The Board of Supervisors voted 7-4 to approve the term limits initiative for the June ballot. Currently, San Francisco voters set term limit rules in the late 1990s, allowing officials to serve as many terms as they like as long as no more than two are consecutive. Only one person, former supervisor Aaron Peskin, has successfully run for and won a third and fourth term under the existing rules.

  • The Board of Supervisors voted to approve the term limits measure on Tuesday, February 3, 2026.
  • The measure will appear on the June 2026 San Francisco ballot.

The players

Adrianna Zhang

A public policy graduate student at Stanford and one of the organizers pushing the term limits measure.

Aaron Peskin

A former San Francisco supervisor who has successfully run for and won a third and fourth term under the existing rules.

Shamann Walton

A San Francisco supervisor who voted against the term limits measure, calling it "a solution in search of a problem" and arguing the city should focus on more pressing issues like a $1 billion budget deficit.

Rafael Mandelman

The president of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, who voted against the measure because he is "conflicted" about term limits in general, arguing that eight years is not enough time for lawmakers to learn how to do their jobs well and affect meaningful change.

Danny Sauter

A San Francisco supervisor whose first term will end in 2029, sparking speculation that the progressive powerbroker Aaron Peskin could run against him.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“This ballot measure is about setting clear and fair rules for everyone, now and in the future, rules that voters can understand and can trust.”

— Adrianna Zhang, Public policy graduate student at Stanford (San Francisco Chronicle)

“This is actually not an issue that exists here in San Francisco. But what we do have, though, is a $1 billion deficit projected here for the city and county of San Francisco. To me, this is just ludicrous.”

— Shamann Walton, San Francisco Supervisor (San Francisco Chronicle)

“I do think expertise matters and I do think experience matters and the voters have shown recently that they're willing to throw incumbents out. When you get someone who's talented, it's nice to be able to keep these people.”

— Rafael Mandelman, President, San Francisco Board of Supervisors (San Francisco Chronicle)

What’s next

The measure's supporters now have roughly four months to convince San Francisco voters to approve the term limits proposal before the June 2026 election.

The takeaway

The term limits debate reflects a broader tension in San Francisco politics between the value of political experience and the desire for fresh leadership. While supporters argue the measure would encourage new voices, opponents worry it could deprive the city of talented, effective lawmakers.