{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01557632398753894, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003115264797507788, 'mean_word_length': 5.48989898989899, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Earmarking as a Strategy Against Budgetary Constraints: San Francisco's Children's Amendment

The passage and implementation of the San Francisco Children's Amendment or Proposition J, in 1991, represents an important expansion of the increasingly common strategy of budgetary earmarking by human service organizations. The core of the initiative was a city charter amendment that earmarked a portion of existing property taxes and established a baseline budget for children's services. Of these provisions, the baseline budget has proven most important in preserving children's services and preventing any substitution effects in a time of increasing fiscal stress for the city/county of San Francisco. This case also illustrates the role of a strong political appeal in passing technical budgetary initiatives over the objections of elected officials and others. While there was concern about the reduced flexibility created by earmarking a city's budget during a period of retrenchment, this concern was overlooked because of the overwhelming political support for the children's cause. However, conflict between groups was created by the measure as groups fought to be included in the provisions of the amendment and over whether each group had obtained its fair share of funding.