This is an archive of a past election.
See http://www.smartvoter.org/ca/sf/ for current information.
San Francisco County, CA November 6, 2001 Election
Smart Voter

Public power; enforcement of the Raker Act

By Steve Williams

Candidate for City Attorney; City of San Francisco

This information is provided by the candidate
"I support the creation of a municipal utility district in San Francisco. I vow to enforce the 1913 congressional Raker Act, acting under the direction of the 1940 U.S. Supreme Court decision." - Steve Williams
I believe that San Franciscans at long last deserve an honest, open evaluation from their City Attorney as to just what the Raker Act requires. I will provide that when elected.

I believe that creation of a municipal utility district to provide San Franciscans public power, in conformance with the Raker Act, deserves serious consideration. I do not believe that the present City Attorney has provided that consideration.

As the San Francisco Bay Guardian has reported for almost 35 years, "the city attorney is one of only two public officials in the country (other is Secretary of Department of Interior) who has the standing to go to court to enforce the Raker Act, the federal law that requires San Francisco to operate a public power system (the other is the federal interior secretary)." I will so act immediately upon assuming office.

As the City Attorney I will take the following actions:

  • I intend to endorse the municipal utility district initiative on this November's ballot, and should it pass work closely with the Supervisors and newly elected MUD board to ensure its successful creation.

  • I will endorse the Charter Amendment to be proposed by Sup. Ammiano to create an independent Municipal Water and Power Authority.

  • Immediately upon assuming office, I will prepare a new legal opinion of the requirements of the Raker Act, in accordance with the findings contained within U.S. v. City and County of San Francisco.

  • I also will move aggressively to review, and renegotiate the Turlock and Modesto contracts and will review ways that the City can extend its electric lines all the way from Hetch Hetchy to San Francisco.

Here's what the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court have said about San Francisco and the Raker Act's historical non-enforcement:

"That the grantee [City and County of San Francisco] is prohibited from ever selling or letting to any corporation or individual, except a municipality or a municipal water district or irrigation district, the right to sell or sublet the water or the electric energy sold or given to it or him by the said grantee: Provided, That the rights hereby granted shall not be sold, assigned, or transferred to any private person, corporation, or association, and in case of any attempt to so sell, assign, transfer, or convey, this grant shall revert to the Government of the United States." - Hetch Hetchy Reservoir Site Act, commonly known as the "Raker Act" of 1913

"The City is availing itself of valuable rights and privileges granted by the Government and yet persists in violating the very conditions upon which those benefits were granted." - The Supreme Court of the United States: United States v. City and County of San Francisco (310 U.S. 16, April 22, 1940)

Next Page: Position Paper 3

Candidate Page || Feedback to Candidate || This Contest
November 2001 Home (Ballot Lookup) || About Smart Voter


ca/sf Created from information supplied by the candidate: October 12, 2001 18:39
Smart Voter 2000 <http://www.smartvoter.org/>
Copyright © 2000 League of Women Voters of California Education Fund.
The League of Women Voters neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office or political parties.