Mayor’s panda plans bogged down as supervisors question $25M fundraising ask

Mayor London Breed’s giant panda dreams are meeting some harsh political realities.



Citing concerns about potential conflicts of interest among the Mayor’s Office and major political donors, a three-person committee at the San Francisco Board of Supervisors voted 2-1 Thursday morning to postpone Breed&#8217;s request to allow “behested payments” in her nascent efforts to raise $25 million for the San Francisco Zoo to host pandas leased from China.



The panda proposal stems from Breed’s April trip to China, where she secured an agreement to bring a pair of pandas to the city’s zoo. Housing and caring for the pandas is likely to cost the zoo tens of millions of dollars. Breed introduced a resolution to the board that would clear certain city departments to fundraise for a new enclosure and other needed infrastructure upgrades to the zoo.



Among these departments are the Recreation and Park Department, which owns the zoo, and the city-operated San Francisco International Airport and its commission. Breed’s resolution would allow these departments to receive unlimited donations, or behests, from individuals, charities or private-sector companies, even if donors have contracts or do business with the city.



Such an exemption from the city&#8217;s complex behested payment rules, <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2022/06/17/how-sfs-anti-corruption-law-is-causing-fundraising-headaches-in-all-the-wrong-places-and-spurring-backlash-from-mayor-breed/">tightened in 2022</a> because of the <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/02/01/san-francisco-city-hall-corruption-scandal-nuru/">Department of Public Works corruption scandal</a>, requires the Board of Supervisors’ approval. The proposed exemption would be only for panda purposes and would last six months, with the possibility of renewal.



At the Government Audit and Oversight Committee hearing Thursday, Breed&#8217;s Chief of Staff Sean Elsbernd said that no taxpayer dollars will be used for hosting the pandas, necessitating an aggressive fundraising campaign from the city.



“That&#8217;s why we continue to ensure only philanthropic [money] will go to support the pandas,” Elsbernd said.



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="5400" height="3600" src="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/xiao-qi-ji-01.jpg?w=2500" alt="A giant panda walks through grass near wooden structures, looking toward the camera." class="wp-image-237864" srcset="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/xiao-qi-ji-01.jpg 5400w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/xiao-qi-ji-01.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/xiao-qi-ji-01.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/xiao-qi-ji-01.jpg?resize=2500,1667 2500w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/xiao-qi-ji-01.jpg?resize=1536,1024 1536w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/xiao-qi-ji-01.jpg?resize=2048,1365 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 5400px) 100vw, 5400px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">China agrees to send a pair of pandas to San Francisco. But the city still needs to fundraise tens of millions of dollars.</figcaption></figure>



However, with the city facing budget cuts, Supervisor Ahsha Safaí, who is running to replace Breed for mayor, criticized the timing and nature of her proposal as a distraction to the city’s pressing priorities.



Safaí said he supported the pandas coming to the city but questioned how leaders could justify the attention paid to such fundraising while the city is also cutting millions of dollars from the multibillion city budget and defunding many programs, which could hurt nonprofits, families and children.&nbsp;



“This is about prioritizing children over pandas,” the supervisor said. “This is about prioritizing our future.”



Some donors are already expressing interest. Elsbernd said that United Airlines has reached out about donating toward the pandas’ costs, but Breed’s office has to wait until the city passes an exemption because the airline has contracts with the airport.



Supervisors Connie Chan and Dean Preston questioned the mayor’s top aide about the potential for corruption if airport commissioners were allowed to ask for unlimited donations from airlines.&nbsp;



“Is it necessary to include airport commissioners?” Chan asked, emphasizing that the behested payment rules aim to stop potential &#8220;pay-to-play&#8221; schemes. Preston also demanded more transparency from the Mayor&#8217;s Office about which donors it plans to approach.



In a statement, Airport Commission President Malcolm Yeung, a Chinese American who went to China with Breed, said that San Francisco hosting pandas was the dream of many mayors and he’s excited to help make it a reality, but he agreed that the commission should stay out of the fundraising campaign.



“While I’m disappointed that I won’t be able to help in this way,” Yeung said. “I understand the need to remove an airport commissioner from the behesting exemption.”



Another concern centered on the zoo’s ability to care for the pandas properly, in light of investigative reports by the San Francisco Chronicle detailing incidents involving a dangerous working environment and the death of a penguin.



Elsbernd parried these questions by suggesting that zoological experts from China and federal authorities will have a chance to assess the zoo’s safety and conditions. The city is currently engaged in discussions involving multiple international partners regarding the technical requirements for the zoo to receive the pandas, he said.



The committee eventually voted to shelve the resolution temporarily, with Chan and Preston voting to postpone, while Supervisor Catherine Stefani, a Breed ally, voted against the delay. Preston, the chair of the committee, would not commit to bringing up the item in the next meeting.



After the vote, Breed&#8217;s office released a statement saying the delay of the issue is not uncommon, and the office will amend the resolution based on the supervisors&#8217; feedback.



“This is an exciting moment and opportunity for our city,” the statement said. “Mayor Breed will continue to work across city departments and with the Board of Supervisors to ensure the private funding needed can proceed.”



The city and the zoo have not yet released a timeline or specific costs for the pandas’ arrival, and the $25 million is just an estimated number, based on previous costs incurred by U.S. zoos that have hosted China’s national animal. Breed can only start the fundraising effort when the resolution passes the board.&nbsp;



Several prominent and wealthy Chinese American leaders have told The Standard that they are interested in donating to the cause but said it is still too early for them to start considering the sizes of their checks.

San Francisco airport to rename international terminal after Feinstein

Airport commissioners signed off Tuesday on a proposal to rename San Francisco’s international airport terminal in honor of the late <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/search/?query=dianne%20feinstein">Dianne Feinstein</a>, the longest-serving woman senator in U.S. history and the first woman to serve as mayor of the city.



Multiple city officials previously told The Standard that the Airport Commission’s vote Tuesday to rename San Francisco International Airport’s overseas terminal after Feinstein would sail through, although there will be more meetings to discuss what kind of displays will be installed to recognize <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/10/05/dignitaries-arrive-at-san-francisco-city-hall-for-dianne-feinstein-funeral/">her legacy</a>. The commission’s vote on renaming the terminal does not require any additional approval from the mayor or supervisors.



Talks of honoring Feinstein have been discussed for years, but those discussions ramped up after <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/09/29/san-franciscans-react-to-icon-dianne-feinstein-dying-at-90/">her death at the age of 90</a> in September. Former Mayor Willie Brown has been part of the group advocating for renaming part of the airport after Feinstein along with Jim Lazarus, who served as her deputy mayor, and Jim Gonzalez, a chief aide to Feinstein who was later elected to the <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/search/?query=board%20of%20supervisors">Board of Supervisors</a>.



Brown cited Feinstein’s work in developing San Francisco’s airport as part of her key accomplishments as mayor.&nbsp;



“The development around the airport is part of what she was most effective at, if not most effective, of all the other things that she did,” Brown told The Standard.



In 2018, San Francisco’s airport renamed Terminal 1 in honor of Supervisor Harvey Milk, an LGBTQ+ rights icon who was assassinated at City Hall in 1978 along with Mayor George Moscone. Feinstein’s legacy is closely tied to both men, as she was <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/09/29/diane-feinstein-san-francisco-mayor-senator-photos/">the person who found Milk’s body</a> and she was elevated from president of the Board of Supervisors to acting mayor as a result of Moscone’s death.



After spending more than nine years as mayor, Feinstein lost a race for governor in 1990 before winning a seat in the U.S. Senate in 1992. She went on to become one of the most powerful members of Congress, <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/06/22/the-inside-war">overseeing the Senate Intelligence Committee</a> that revealed CIA torture tactics. She had a reputation as a stern but pragmatic leader, and one of her key pieces of legislation was an assault weapons ban. That legislation sunsetted after a decade in 2004 due to lobbying by the NRA.



Declining health in her final years limited Feinstein’s ability to fulfill some of her duties, but she was widely revered by San Francisco’s political establishment. She is consistently mentioned as a mentor to many women who have followed her path in public service.



Next week’s vote may be the first in a slew of Feinstein renamings. The New York Times reported that other <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/18/us/california-feinstein-airport-name.html">places to honor the late senator</a> could include a bicycle trail along Lake Tahoe, Diamond Valley Lake in Southern California and the Elk River Trail in Humboldt County.



Tuesday’s vote was not be the first time the international terminal has honored a former elected official. In 2019, the city renamed the terminal’s departures hall after late Mayor <a href="https://www.sfexaminer.com/archives/sfo-departures-hall-to-be-named-after-mayor-ed-lee-but-not-the-international-terminal/article_d8812e7a-4896-5c08-a017-5b5e939d9fc3.html">Ed Lee</a>, who died from a heart attack while still in office in 2017.



<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-what-happens-next">What Happens Next</h2>



With the adoption of the resolution to rename the International Terminal for Dianne Feinstein, SFO will begin work with the Dianne Feinstein 100-plus Committee to develop an approach for implementation. This will include collaboration on locations, design, and content to celebrate the legacy of Senator Feinstein relative to both SFO and the City of San Francisco. There is no defined timeline for this activity, but the goal is to ensure the finished result captures the intent which led to the naming campaign.

Plan to fix ‘broken’ San Francisco blows up in 2 weeks

In an embarrassing blunder, a moderate political group in San Francisco withdrew <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/12/05/san-francisco-could-vote-on-drastic-reforms-to-city-hall-next-year/">a ballot measure intended to cut bureaucracy</a> at City Hall just two weeks after it announced the ordinance in a press conference.



TogetherSF Action confirmed to The Standard on Monday that it was pulling one of two proposed ballot measures to reform the city charter because, contrary to <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/08/22/does-san-franciscos-mayor-need-more-power-this-group-says-yes/">the group&#8217;s goal of empowering the mayor</a> to make more decisions, it would actually hand more authority to the Board of Supervisors.&nbsp;



The group decided to scrap the measure before a Tuesday deadline after huddling with officials in the Mayor&#8217;s Office last week. TogetherSF Action plans to revise it and submit a new version to the Department of Elections.



Earlier this month, TogetherSF Action announced it was introducing two ballot measures to reform the city charter—one to give the mayor more power and the other to cut the number of city commissions in half. The group contends that giving the mayor more authority is key to making progress on public safety and the housing, homelessness and drug crises.&nbsp;



But the proposal to eliminate commissions contained a fatal flaw, according to multiple sources in and around City Hall: Eliminating certain commissions would kick oversight responsibilities over to the Board of Supervisors, a group Mayor London Breed has repeatedly criticized as being <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/03/07/mayor-breed-pushes-27m-police-overtime-bill-slams-obstructionist-board/">“obstructionist”</a> and <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/03/29/mayor-breed-hits-back-at-sf-progressives-touts-conservatorship-in-jon-stewart-interview/">tone-deaf on the issues</a> many San Franciscans are facing.



Multiple sources in and around City Hall suggested the errors in TogetherSF Action’s proposed measure came from a DIY approach and a failure to consult with experts until concerns arose. One source, who is familiar with the issues but was not authorized to speak publicly, called the proposal “sloppy.”



Kanishka Cheng, the head of the nonprofit TogetherSF and its political arm, TogetherSF Action, said in a statement Monday that the ballot measure to eliminate commissions—known as the <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24229164-20231204_cutthedysfunctionalbureaucracy_text">“Cut the Dysfunctional Bureaucracy Initiative”</a>—was being updated to change the “status quo” on city operations.



“San Francisco’s governance structure is broken and we are committed to advancing bold reforms at the ballot this November to ensure city government is better positioned to tackle the challenges facing our city,” Cheng said. “We are making updates to our reform measure that will make the initiative stronger and clarify authority and responsibilities between the executive and legislative branches. Voters deserve to know who is responsible for the city government’s decisions and to hold them accountable.”&nbsp;



Michael Moritz, who is chairman of The Standard, has provided funding to the 501c3 nonprofit TogetherSF and its political arm, TogetherSF Action.



The second proposed ballot measure—known as the “We Need SF To Work Initiative”—would give the mayor sole discretion to hire and fire department heads, strengthen the mayor’s ability to control commissions, and allow for the creation of deputy mayor positions.



Under city rules, any voter-led ballot initiative must first be submitted to the Department of Elections. After a 15-day review period by the City Attorney’s Office, the proposal receives a title and summary, and advocates can proceed to collect petition signatures. Sources suggested it would take four to five months to collect the almost 50,000 petition signatures required by July 8 to <a href="https://sfelections.org/tools/cscal_nov24/">qualify for the November 2024 ballot</a>. That 15-day period was to expire Tuesday.



<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-plan-to-cut-commissions-in-san-francisco">Plan to Cut Commissions in San Francisco</h2>



The <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24229164-20231204_cutthedysfunctionalbureaucracy_text">“Cut the Dysfunctional Bureaucracy Initiative”</a> proposed creating a task force to review commissions in the city and suggest which ones were redundant and ripe for elimination. As of this summer, San Francisco had <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/07/06/only-1-person-at-sf-city-hall-knows-the-answer-to-this-simple-question/">53 departments, 56 boards and commissions and 74 other advisory bodies</a>.



TogetherSF Action’s original plan suggested the number of commissions be capped at 65.&nbsp;



TogetherSF Action said the revised version will seek to keep bodies such as the Board of Appeals, Police Commission, Fire Commission and Planning Commission while allowing the mayor and supervisors the ability to hire and fire commissioners for the Public Utilities Commission, the Fine Arts Commissions, the War Memorial Board and the Airport Commission.



Permitting appeals would go to the Board of Appeals instead of supervisors. For commissions such as the Public Utilities Commission, the Airport Commission and the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, the mayor would be able to appoint a supermajority of commissioners.&nbsp;&nbsp;



Supervisor Aaron Peskin, the president of the Board of Supervisors, said the mistakes should be seen as a “teachable moment.” He suggested the group should have worked with <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/10/31/san-francisco-city-hall-ballot-measure-reforms-rafael-mandelman/">Supervisor Rafael Mandelman, who also introduced a charter reform measure</a> that had some overlapping goals with TogetherSF Action’s proposal.&nbsp;



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="2999" height="2000" src="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/20231109_detentiondrugdealers-37.jpg?w=2500" alt="A man gesticulates and speaks with 1 hand extended out next to a podium with a gilded facade in the background." class="wp-image-219949" srcset="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/20231109_detentiondrugdealers-37.jpg 2999w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/20231109_detentiondrugdealers-37.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/20231109_detentiondrugdealers-37.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/20231109_detentiondrugdealers-37.jpg?resize=2500,1667 2500w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/20231109_detentiondrugdealers-37.jpg?resize=1536,1024 1536w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/20231109_detentiondrugdealers-37.jpg?resize=2048,1366 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2999px) 100vw, 2999px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin criticized TogetherSF Action&#8217;s proposed ballot measure as ill-conceived. </figcaption></figure>



“We can have a discussion about what the best public policy is, but if it’s not what they intended, it shows this organization and its members don’t know what they’re doing,” Peskin said. “When you’re tinkering with your constitution, it should be tinkered with in public.”



The Mayor’s Office declined to comment.



The Department of Elections received <a href="https://www.sf.gov/sites/default/files/2023-12/20231218_Withdrawal%20Letter.pdf">a letter from Cheng</a> requesting that the ballot measure be withdrawn Monday afternoon. She added that she plans to submit a revised version “in the coming days.” Once resubmitted, another 15-day review process would start before any signatures could be gathered.&nbsp;



Mandelman said he has not seen TogetherSF Action’s ballot measures, but he and the group have been talking about ways to improve the city through charter reform. He indicated his ballot measure, which also suggests the creation of deputy mayors, would be more incremental with an eye on continuing to reform the city charter in 2026.



“To their credit, they are motivated by a sincere desire to fix problems in San Francisco city governance. In my experience, that’s not easy,” Mandelman said. “It’s hard to fault them for trying to come up with some structural solutions.”

$24K ethics fine levied against ex-San Francisco planning commissioner

Former San Francisco Planning Commissioner Frank Fung agreed to be fined $24,200 for violating multiple city ethics rules at a hearing on Friday.



A stipulation agreement brought by the <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2022/07/06/for-failing-to-report-income-former-san-francisco-appeals-board-president-and-ex-school-district-board-member-get-fined-by-ethics-watchdogs/">San Francisco Ethics Commission</a> found that Fung&#8217;s architectural firm, ED2 International, entered into a subcontract with the city&#8217;s Airport Commission in 2021 while he served as a city official. ED2 International received $39,460 from the city as part of the subcontract agreement.



Fung was a planning commissioner from May 2019 to June 2022.



Fung also failed to report large sources of income he received as an owner of the architectural firm while he was a planning commissioner, according to the stipulation agreement.



Fung admitted he &#8220;made a mistake&#8221; and misunderstood San Francisco&#8217;s laws on the extent his company could be involved in public work, he told The Standard. 



If the Ethics Commission approves the agreement put forward by commission staff on Friday, Fung could be fined $20,000 for entering a contract agreement with the city while holding a governmental position and $4,200 for his failures to disclose income.

Do San Francisco city workers get ‘company car’ perks?

<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-the-standard-s-mike-ege-backs-into-a-reader-question-submitted-to-ask-the-standard-can-city-employees-drive-city-owned-cars-for-personal-use">The Standard&#8217;s Mike Ege backs into a reader question submitted to Ask The Standard: Can city employees drive city-owned cars for personal use?</h2>



<hr class="wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity"/>


<div class="wp-block-image">
<figure class="alignright size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="5107" height="3127" src="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/rebrand_askthestandard.png?w=2500" alt="Image of speech bubble with &quot;Ask The Standard&quot; inside." class="wp-image-247020" srcset="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/rebrand_askthestandard.png 5107w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/rebrand_askthestandard.png?resize=300,184 300w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/rebrand_askthestandard.png?resize=768,470 768w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/rebrand_askthestandard.png?resize=2500,1531 2500w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/rebrand_askthestandard.png?resize=1536,940 1536w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/rebrand_askthestandard.png?resize=2048,1254 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 5107px) 100vw, 5107px" /></figure></div>


San Francisco <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/06/29/san-francisco-lawmakers-hash-out-14-billion-budget-deal/">approved an annual budget of almost $15 billion last month</a>—the largest in memory, despite major economic pressures <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/07/12/san-franciscos-hefty-taxes-threaten-downtowns-revival-report-finds/">stemming from the pandemic</a>.



That leaves many San Francisco taxpayers wondering where the money goes, and one commonsense reader question fielded by Ask The Standard is a perennial one: Do city workers get to drive city-owned cars for personal use?



The answer is no, strictly speaking. 



But some city employees in certain critical roles continue to have “take-home” cars, the use of which is subject to strict rules. Those rules have become tighter in recent years after recurring allegations that employees were misusing city vehicles.&nbsp;



San Francisco recently adopted a <a href="https://sfdhr.org/sites/default/files/documents/Forms-Documents/Citywide-Vehicle-Use-Policy.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">citywide vehicle-use policy</a>, and earlier passed a <a href="https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/san_francisco/latest/sf_admin/0-0-0-1632" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">city ordinance</a> that limits the use of city-owned vehicles for official purposes. The law does allow for “take-home” cars for employees whose job requires them to be “on call,” or who work for certain emergency service or utility agencies that need vehicles with special equipment.&nbsp;



The policy came partly in response to <a href="https://sfgov.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3911003&amp;GUID=E29FAE16-CA59-48B1-B8AC-2386729EA1C7&amp;Options=ID%7CText%7C&amp;Search=city+owned+vehicles" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">a 2019 Board of Supervisors hearing</a> examining take-home car use. Then-Supervisor Sandra Lee Fewer called the hearing after being advised of widespread compliance issues some months earlier.&nbsp;



According to a 2019 <a href="https://sfbos.org/sites/default/files/BLA_Policy_Report_Assignment_Take-Home%20Vehicles_March_2019.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">report from the Budget and Legislative Analyst&#8217;s Office</a>, 247 take-home vehicles had been authorized by city agencies—more than twice the number permitted by city law, costing the city $1.58 million per year. Departments with the most take-home vehicles included the police and fire departments and the Airport Commission.&nbsp;



The issue got enough <a href="https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/audit-raises-questions-about-san-franciscos-take-home-vehicles/99912/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">media attention</a> that a representative of car-sharing service Zipcar showed up to the hearing and suggested the city use its service rather than maintain take-home cars.



Mayor Willie Brown <a href="https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Brown-Wants-Curbs-On-Employees-Use-Of-City-Owned-2983210.php" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">also scrutinized take-home cars</a> when he was faced with fixing a $70 million budget deficit in 1996. The answer was the implementation of a city motor pool that had originally been authorized by an ordinance in 1939. Around 400 take-home cars had been authorized at the time, and Brown himself was known at the time for being chauffeured around the city in a Lincoln Town Car.&nbsp;



Shortly thereafter, the city’s civil grand jury <a href="https://civilgrandjury.sfgov.org/1996_1997/City_and_County_Motor_Vehicle_Policy_9697.pdf">released a report</a> deeming the current system “unsatisfactory,” adding, “The current system lacks any supervisory control. Abuses of the current system are widespread.”



Despite the various reports, hearings and investigations over the years, allegations of improper use of city vehicles still crop up regularly.&nbsp;



Investigations by the Controller’s Office this year showed six reports of improper use, including one case where a city vehicle was <a href="https://sf.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/Whistleblower%20Program%20FY22%20Q4-Annual%20Report%2010.25.22.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">used to move personal belongings</a> and another where a city employee <a href="https://sf.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/Whistleblower%20Program%20FY22%20Q3%20Report%208.2.22.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">regularly drove their child to school using a city vehicle</a>. Repercussions for those violations ranged from counseling to a cease-and-desist letter plus “additional corrective action planned.”&nbsp;



Under current policy, the city can fine employees who violate the ordinance an amount equivalent to three times the city’s mileage reimbursement for unauthorized miles traveled.



<div style="width:100%;height:500px;" data-fillout-id="9i1svJd2kSus" data-fillout-embed-type="standard" data-fillout-inherit-parameters data-fillout-dynamic-resize></div><script src="https://server.fillout.com/embed/v1/"></script>

‘Spite project’ for 10 townhouses delayed by San Francisco lawmakers

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors ruled on appeals for two controversial housing developments Tuesday, perhaps providing a preview of how permit appeals will fare in a new regulatory environment dominated by <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/politics/city-hall/housing-shell-game-supes-latest-actions-set-to-slow-new-housing-as-state-mandate-looms/">state intervention to expedite the construction of new housing</a>.



Compared with Peskin’s introduction later in the meeting of <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/politics/san-francisco-lawmakers-cut-deal-to-boost-housing-construction/">major reforms of the city’s inclusionary affordable housing rules and fees,</a> which he is co-sponsoring with Mayor London Breed, the appeal votes reflect continued ambivalence over the city’s new development landscape.



The board upheld the appeal of one project on Nob Hill that had been deemed a “spite project” by appellants and denied another for a group housing project in the Mission that had already been the subject of state review.



The first project, a <a href="https://socketsite.com/archives/2022/08/wall-of-nob-hill-townhomes-now-on-the-boards.html" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">cluster of 10 townhomes at 1151 Washington St.</a> on the slope of Nob Hill near Upper Chinatown, had been described by appellant attorney Scott Emblidge in a<a href="https://sfgov.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&amp;ID=12100994&amp;GUID=D2854055-6997-4851-B3C2-D68685656C98" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener"> June 16 appeal letter</a> as “absurd in so many ways” and as a “spite project.”



GET THE INSIDE SCOOP: Power Play is The Standard&#8217;s insider email newsletter covering City Hall and politics. Sign up&nbsp;<a href="https://mailchi.mp/sfstandard/powerplay_signup/">here</a>.



In the letter, Emblidge alleged the developer “made it clear through extensive online posts that he is proposing this monstrosity because of his anger at the city for having turned down an earlier remodel project that did not comply with the Planning Code.”



Earlier plans to expand the existing two-story house on the site were abandoned after the Planning Department blocked a conditional use authorization in 2021. The <a href="https://socketsite.com/archives/2022/11/foreshadowing-problems-or-a-redesign-that-wall-townhomes.html" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">new plans</a> are for a row of townhouses totaling over 12,000 square feet in area and 50 feet in height, overlooking the basketball court of the adjacent Betty Ong Recreation Center.&nbsp;&nbsp;



While perhaps not as much of an eyebrow-raiser as plans for a 50-story skyscraper apartment complex near Ocean Beach, <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/housing-development/skyscraper-plans-revealed-for-san-franciscos-ocean-beach-712-homes-50-stories/">which were submitted to the Planning Department last April</a>, the Washington Street project drew incredulous opposition from both neighbors and community groups.&nbsp;



Opponents cited three major objections to the project, including likely shadows on the basketball court, the presence in the ground of what appellant attorney Richard Drury called “very unusual toxic chemicals” and fire safety issues due to the houses’ narrow paths and spiral staircases.



“There are too many unknowns in this project,” said Hanmin Liu of the Upper Chinatown Neighborhood Association, supporting the appeal of the project’s exemption from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 



Staff from the Planning Department and the Department of Public Health repeatedly testified that issues laid out by the appellants either were irrelevant to the CEQA process, or well within the coverage of the project’s site mitigation plan and did not merit an environmental impact report.&nbsp;



Most supervisors disagreed. Board President Aaron Peskin, in whose district the project is located, said the project presented very unusual circumstances, particularly in regard to its proximity to the Betty Ong Center, which he described as a “precious, unique public resource.”



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="2500" height="1668" src="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-2500x1668.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-132363" srcset="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-2500x1668.jpg 2500w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-300x200.jpg 300w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-768x512.jpg 768w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-1536x1025.jpg 1536w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-2048x1366.jpg 2048w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-650x434.jpg 650w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-370x247.jpg 370w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-800x534.jpg 800w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-450x300.jpg 450w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-20x13.jpg 20w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-185x123.jpg 185w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-740x494.jpg 740w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-400x267.jpg 400w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-1600x1067.jpg 1600w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-225x150.jpg 225w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-900x600.jpg 900w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/022723BOSRoundup-65-72x48.jpg 72w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Supervisor Myrna Melgar speaks during the Board of Supervisors meeting at City Hall on Feb. 28, 2023. | Michaela Vatcheva for The Standard</figcaption></figure>



Supervisor Myrna Melgar concurred. “There’s a mismatch in how we’re treating this. … It’s unusual,” citing the toxics and life safety access issues.&nbsp;



Several members of the pro-housing group YIMBY Action testified in favor of the project and opposed the appeal, warning of consequences from Sacramento. “If we continue to abuse local control, we’re going to lose local control,” said Jane Natoli, a YIMBY Action lead organizer and airport commissioner, during public comment.&nbsp;



In the end, the board remanded the project back for environmental review by a vote of 7-4 with Supervisors Ahsha Safaí, Matt Dorsey, Catherine Stefani and Joel Engardio in dissent.&nbsp;



The board then went on to block an appeal of the conditional use authorization for a six-story “group housing” project at 3832 18th St.&nbsp;



The project originally <a href="https://missionlocal.org/2023/04/sf-rebuked-by-state-revives-controversial-housing-projects/">had a floor trimmed by the Planning Commission in 2021</a> to allay neighbors’ shadow concerns, and Peskin <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/politics/city-hall/sf-board-supervisors-tenderloin-group-housing-parklets/">led a successful tightening of regulations</a> around group housing, also known as “microunit” or “efficiency apartment” buildings, in its wake.&nbsp;



Last year the California Department of Housing and Community Development got involved and ordered San Francisco to allow the original plan.&nbsp;



<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="2215" height="1476" src="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-132405" srcset="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39.jpg 2215w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39-300x200.jpg 300w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39-768x512.jpg 768w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39-2048x1365.jpg 2048w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39-650x433.jpg 650w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39-370x247.jpg 370w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39-800x533.jpg 800w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39-450x300.jpg 450w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39-20x13.jpg 20w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39-185x123.jpg 185w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39-740x493.jpg 740w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39-400x267.jpg 400w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39-1600x1066.jpg 1600w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39-225x150.jpg 225w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39-900x600.jpg 900w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/1022723BOSRoundup-39-72x48.jpg 72w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2215px) 100vw, 2215px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Supervisor Rafael Mandelman listens during the Board of Supervisors meeting at City Hall o...

San Francisco mayor proposes record spending despite $780M deficit

Mayor London Breed’s budget proposal ramps up spending on homelessness and the police department and grows San Francisco&#8217;s budget by $612 million from the current year to $14.6 billion for the next fiscal year, which begins on July 1.



The proposed increase, unveiled in a speech at City Hall Wednesday, comes as the city faces a projected two-year deficit of <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/politics/city-hall/san-franciscos-deficit-swells-to-780m-in-latest-sign-of-budget-distress/">$780 million</a> in the general fund, which accounts for its discretionary spending.



In the coming fiscal year, Breed is proposing a 1% increase to $6.86 billion in San Francisco’s general fund; in the following year, general fund spending is projected to breach $7 billion. To offset higher spending, Breed’s budget dips into budget reserves, relies on other sources of funding and lays out cuts in select city departments.&nbsp;



“I’m really proud that in balancing this budget, we were still able to deliver for our nonprofit workers, our public safety officials and other things, even though we’re facing a budget deficit,” Breed said her speech. 



<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="1128" height="752" src="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/1BreedBudgetReveal053123-035.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-165909" srcset="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/1BreedBudgetReveal053123-035.jpg 1128w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/1BreedBudgetReveal053123-035.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/1BreedBudgetReveal053123-035.jpg?resize=768,512 768w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 1128px) 100vw, 1128px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Mayor London Breed talks about the balanced budget and key priorities for the city in San Francisco, on Wednesday, May 31, 2023. | Justin Katigbak for The Standard</figcaption></figure>



GET THE INSIDE SCOOP:&nbsp;Power Play is The Standard&#8217;s new insider email newsletter covering City Hall and politics. Sign up&nbsp;<a href="https://mailchi.mp/sfstandard/powerplay_signup/">here</a>.



Breed’s budget proposal will be hashed out at the Board of Supervisors and must be signed by Aug. 1. If the board&#8217;s Budget Committee Chair Connie Chan’s statement on the budget proposal is any indication, the negotiation process could prove contentious.



“I will go through every line item, and ask each and every city department how they will spend our public dollars and deliver the results we all deserve,&#8221; Chan said in a statement. &#8220;They all will be held accountable, dollar for dollar.&#8221;



<iframe title="San Francisco Annual Budget" aria-label="Stacked Column Chart" id="datawrapper-chart-LEzSX" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/LEzSX/6/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="width: 0; min-width: 100% !important; border: none;" height="400" data-external="1"></iframe><script type="text/javascript">!function(){"use strict";window.addEventListener("message",(function(a){if(void 0!==a.data["datawrapper-height"]){var e=document.querySelectorAll("iframe");for(var t in a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var r=0;r<e.length;r++)if(e[r].contentWindow===a.source){var i=a.data["datawrapper-height"][t]+"px";e[r].style.height=i}}}))}();
</script>



To balance the budget, the proposed spending increase is paired with departmental cuts that include a reduction of certain contracts and decreased salary budgets by eliminating vacant positions. The proposed budget funds salaries and benefits for 33,476 city employees next year, a 0.8% increase in the labor force compared with last year.&nbsp;



As part of her budget instructions to departments, the mayor required general fund budget reductions of 5% next year and 8% the year after.&nbsp;



The departments that are seeing the biggest increases in year-over-year funding include the Department of Public Health, the Airport Commission, the Department of Public Works and the Municipal Transportation Agency.&nbsp;



Those seeing the biggest losses by dollar amount include the San Francisco Port, the Department of Early Childhood and the Office of the Mayor.



<iframe title="San Francisco City Department Funding Changes Under Mayor's Proposed Budget" aria-label="Table" id="datawrapper-chart-p2Yj7" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/p2Yj7/2/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="width: 0; min-width: 100% !important; border: none;" height="572" data-external="1"></iframe><script type="text/javascript">!function(){"use strict";window.addEventListener("message",(function(a){if(void 0!==a.data["datawrapper-height"]){var e=document.querySelectorAll("iframe");for(var t in a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var r=0;r<e.length;r++)if(e[r].contentWindow===a.source){var i=a.data["datawrapper-height"][t]+"px";e[r].style.height=i}}}))}();
</script>



Cuts also include reduced funding for the city’s 10-year capital plan. Instead of wholesale elimination of individual programs, departments generally proposed marginal cuts across a variety of programs and spending areas. The city is also dipping into an additional $76 million in reserve funds, as well as $90 million in previously appropriated reserve funds, to close the budget shortfall.&nbsp;



In order to sustain or increase spending in priority areas while balancing the budget, Breed’s proposal also relies on some creative accounting, like shifting spending to non-general fund revenue sources like state funds and special tax funds.



The budget directs revenue from 2018’s Prop. C, known as Our City, Our Home, toward helping to fund efforts to combat homelessness. As proposed, Breed’s budget <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/public-health/homelessness/san-francisco-mayor-to-increase-homelessness-spending-despite-budget-deficit/">increases homelessness spending</a> from $672 million this year to $692.6 million next year. If approved, Breed has said the spending would help create 600 shelter beds and 545 housing units over the next year. 



<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="1507" height="1005" src="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/BreedBudgetReveal053123-229-1.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-165900" srcset="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/BreedBudgetReveal053123-229-1.jpg 1507w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/BreedBudgetReveal053123-229-1.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/BreedBudgetReveal053123-229-1.jpg?resize=768,512 768w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 1507px) 100vw, 1507px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">People in the crowed held up signs around housing including “Family and Tay Housing” during Mayor London Breed speech about the City's budget. | Justin Katigbak for The Standard</figcaption></figure>



That’s tied to an effort to <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/public-health/breed-to-fund-wellness-hubs-for-overdose-prevention-in-upcoming-budget/">boost funding for behavioral health and addiction initiatives</a>, including the addition of 30 beds for those with both mental health and substance abuse disorders, implementation of the state’s Community Assistance, Recovery and Empowerment (CARE) Court system and three new wellness hubs for overdose prevention.&nbsp;



The city will rely on a portion of the <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/public-health/walgreens-to-pay-san-francisco-230m-for-opioid-crisis/">$350 million settlement</a> gained through litigation against pharma companies and Walgreens to help shift spending away from general revenue and start new programs.&nbsp;



The budget also allocates around $30 million in <a href="https://sfoece.org/2021/06/29/baby-prop-c-fact-sheet-legal-uses-and-allocations/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">revenue from Baby Prop. C</a>, a tax measure to fund early childhood services, to the city’s Food Access Program, which supports food pantries and grocery vouchers.&nbsp;



On the public safety front, the mayor is <a href="https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/politics/london-breed-wants-sfpd-to-hire-200-new-cops-by-end-of-2024/article_fa4482c4-fbe8-11ed-a1e0-f364c1df2fea.html" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">proposing increased investment</a> for recruiting at the San Francisco Police Department with the goal of hiring 220 officers in the next two years. Her budget proposal also includes additional hiring and retention bonuses, boosting the number of police service aides and maintaining existing ambassador programs. 



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="2500" height="1667" src="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/BreedBudgetReveal053123-233-2500x1667.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-165906" srcset="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/BreedBudgetReveal053123-233-2500x1667.jpg 2500w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/BreedBudgetReveal053123-233-300x200.jpg 300w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/BreedBudgetReveal053123-233-768x512.jpg 768w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/BreedBudgetReveal053123-233-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/BreedBudgetReveal053123-233-2048x1365.jpg 2048w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/BreedBudgetReveal053123-233-650x433.jpg 650w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/BreedBudgetReveal053123-233-370x247.jpg 370w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/BreedBudgetReveal053123-233-800x533.jpg 800w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/BreedBudgetReveal053123-233-450x300.jpg 450w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-conten...

Supervisors’ hearing on reparations rescheduled for next month

Editor&#8217;s Note: This article has been updated to reflect that the reparations hearing has been rescheduled for March 14 at 3 p.m. 



This week, supervisors are expected to pass legislation banning compulsory resignation letters from commission appointees, putting to bed the “Resignation-Gate” fracas from last fall.&nbsp;



A hearing to review a controversial plan to offer reparations to some African American residents, originally planned for Tuesday, was rescheduled to March 14 at 3 p.m. because Supervisor Shamann Walton is traveling and will not be present in time for the meeting. 



The Board of Supervisors will also set a date for a hearing to examine the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing (HSH) plan for implementing the city’s recently passed shelter-on-demand law. Supervisor Rafael Mandelman slammed the plan as woefully insufficient, describing it as “the social services equivalent of a $1.7 million toilet.”&nbsp;



<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-correcting-history-a-hearing-on-reparations">Correcting History: A Hearing on Reparations</h2>



The hearing on a <a href="https://sf.gov/sites/default/files/2023-01/HRC%20Reparations%20Report.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">draft plan</a> produced by the African American Reparations Advisory Committee of the Human Rights Commission, originally set for 3 p.m. Tuesday, was abruptly rescheduled for next month. The hearing is now scheduled for March 14 at 3 p.m. 



The plan contains a long list of policy recommendations, ranging from a formal apology by the city for historical wrongs against Black residents, including the displacement of households during the “urban renewal” redevelopment era, to financial compensation for eligible residents.&nbsp;



The most controversial action item is a one-time, lump-sum payment of $5 million to each eligible resident. The draft plan describes this recommendation as compensation for “economic and opportunity losses that Black San Franciscans have endured, collectively, as the result of both intentional decisions and unintended harms perpetuated by City policy.”



But there are <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/politics/will-san-franciscos-case-for-reparations-light-the-match/">a host of other suggestions</a> ranging from financial education and debt relief to long-term subsidies for certain households. Others include mortgage assistance and reform of the application process for affordable housing—policies that have been enacted, or are being considered, in other cities.



The more costly suggestions from the draft plan have become major talking points (or in some cases, screaming points) for conservative pundits nationwide. National Review dubbed the plan “insane” in <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/01/san-franciscos-insane-reparations-program/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">a recent article</a>.



<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-putting-resignation-gate-to-bed">Putting Resignation-Gate to Bed</h2>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="8192" height="5464" src="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/INLINED1_BOSPreview120522.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-100241" srcset="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/INLINED1_BOSPreview120522.jpg 8192w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/INLINED1_BOSPreview120522.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/INLINED1_BOSPreview120522.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/INLINED1_BOSPreview120522.jpg?resize=2500,1667 2500w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/INLINED1_BOSPreview120522.jpg?resize=1536,1025 1536w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/INLINED1_BOSPreview120522.jpg?resize=2048,1366 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 8192px) 100vw, 8192px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Supervisor Dean Preston questions the Mayor’s chief of staff, Sean Elsbernd, at a hearing about resignation letters in October 2022. | Benjamin Fanjoy/ The Standard</figcaption></figure>



Supervisors are also expected to pass <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/politics/preston-targets-mayor-breed-with-ban-on-undated-resignation-letters/">an ordinance to prohibit demanding preemptive resignation letters</a> from prospective commissioners, a practice uncovered by The Standard <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/politics/mayor-breed-may-have-to-stop-making-appointees-sign-secret-undated-resignation-letters/">last September</a>. The ordinance was sponsored by Supervisor Dean Preston.&nbsp;



A discussion at last Monday’s Rules Committee meeting evoked a long-standing debate over whether Mayor London Breed or the supervisors have too much power over commission appointments—and by extension, the city’s <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/politics/city-hall/explanier-san-francisco-boards-and-commissions/">multitude of commissions</a>.&nbsp;



Many of the city’s commissions have appointments split between the mayor and the Board of Supervisors; however, supervisors still get to approve the mayor’s nominees on those commissions.&nbsp;



The Board rejected Breed’s nomination of prosecutor and former district attorney candidate Nancy Tung to the Police Commission, as well as street safety activist Jane Natoli to the SFMTA board in 2020. Natoli was appointed to the Airport Commission in 2021.&nbsp;



<a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/politics/supervisors-grill-mayor-breeds-chief-of-staff-for-answers-on-undated-resignation-letters/">Mayoral staffers have defended</a> the resignation letters as a final backstop against misconduct or other issues, but opponents on the board characterized it as having a chilling effect on commissioners’ independence.&nbsp;



The Rules Committee <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/politics/does-mayor-breed-have-too-much-control-over-city-hall-ban-on-undated-resignation-letters-stokes-debate/">recommended the ordinance by a 2-1 vote</a>, with Chair Aaron Peskin and Supervisor Connie Chan in favor and Supervisor Rafael Mandelman opposed.&nbsp;



<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-is-hsh-dumbing-down-shelter-on-demand">Is HSH Dumbing Down Shelter on Demand?&nbsp;</h2>



Last week, Mandelman requested a hearing on the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing’s (HSH) <a href="https://sfgov.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&amp;ID=11618503&amp;GUID=0BD80C1A-BE99-48DF-B66B-B56239C7B514" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">report on implementation</a> of the “A Place for All” legislation <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/public-health/supes-spar-over-how-to-get-every-homeless-san-franciscan-into-a-shelter-the-streets-cannot-be-a-waiting-room/">passed by the board last June</a>.&nbsp;



The “Place for All” legislation has the stated purpose of dramatically increasing the number of shelter beds available for persons currently on the street, as part of a broader policy goal of ending unsheltered homelessness. It required the homelessness department to write a report describing&nbsp;how it would implement the law.&nbsp;



The resulting report recommended adding 3,810 more units of permanent supportive housing and 2,250 more shelter beds, among other prevention measures, with a total sticker price of $1.45 billion over three years.



Mandelman’s take: There’s nowhere near enough shelter beds, and at $1.45 billion, the whole plan costs way too much.&nbsp;



Mandelman made the unflattering comparison to a <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/community/sfs-toilet-travails-flush-out-citys-inability-to-just-get-things-done/">now-infamous, $1.7 million toilet</a> bound for Noe Valley Town Square, located in Mandelman’s district.&nbsp;



&#8220;That just seems like way too much to me. It&#8217;s more than other communities spend on shelter,&#8221; said Mandelman in <a href="https://abc7news.com/sf-homeless-plan-housing-all-san-francisco-supervisor-rafael-mandelman/12760671/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">an ABC7 interview</a> on Feb. 1.

The Airport Commission oversees policy and strategic planning for San Francisco International Airport. It makes key decisions on airport development projects and financial management. It ensures compliance with regulations and collaborates on initiatives like terminal naming.

Airport Commission

Malcolm Yeung

Jose F. Almanza

Mark Buell

Susan Leal

Airport Commission Commissioner 1

Asian Art Museum

Office of the City Administrator

Adult Probation Department

Airport

Arts Commission

Office of the Assessor-Recorder

Board of Appeals

Office of the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors

Office of the City Attorney

Department of Children, Youth and Their Families

Controller's Office

Planning Department

Civil Service Commission

District Attorney's Office

Department of Building Inspection

Department of Early Childhood

Department of Emergency Management

Department of Police Accountability

Department of Public Health

Department of Public Works

Office of Economic and Workforce Development

Environment Department

Ethics Commission

Fine Arts Museums

Fire Department

Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing

Human Rights Commission

Department of Human Resources

Human Services Agency

Health Service System

Juvenile Probation Department

Public Library

Municipal Transportation Agency

Office of the Mayor

Public Defender's Office

Police Department

Port

Public Utilities Commission

Recreation and Park Department

Department of Elections

Retirement System

Rent Board

Sheriff's Department Office of Inspector General

Sheriff's Department

Department of Technology

Office of the Treasurer & Tax Collector

War Memorial

Department on the Status of Women

General City Responsibilities

General Administration & Finance

Culture & Recreation

Community Health

Human Welfare & Neighborhood Development

Public Works, Transportation & Commerce

Public Protection

SF Civil Grand Jury

The Abatement Appeals Board provides a final review process for City permitting decisions. It ensures fair and efficient adjudication of permit-related disputes before an impartial panel. The board holds authority to make binding decisions on appeals concerning notices of abatement.

Abatement Appeals Board

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 1

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 2

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 3

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 4

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 5

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 6

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 7

The Access Appeals Commission provides final reviews for a wide range of City permitting decisions. It ensures an efficient, fair, and expeditious permit issuance process through an impartial panel. The commission holds authority to make binding decisions on appeals related to City permits.

Access Appeals Commission

Access Appeals Commission Commissioner 1

Access Appeals Commission Commissioner 2

Access Appeals Commission Commissioner 3

Access Appeals Commission Commissioner 4

Access Appeals Commission Commissioner 5

The Adult Day Health Care Planning Council advises on the development and improvement of adult day health care services. It provides expertise in healthcare planning, policy recommendations, and program evaluation. Key responsibilities include assessing community needs and advising on service delivery enhancements.

Adult Day Health Care Planning Council

Adult Probation Department supervises individuals on probation and facilitates their reintegration into the community. It provides reentry and rehabilitative services, including victim restitution and financial assistance for crime victims. The department values public safety, offender rehabilitation, and community partnerships.

Cristel Tullock

The Advisory Committee of Street Artists and Crafts Examiners evaluates arts and crafts applicants and monitors program compliance. It conducts studio visits and public screenings to ensure adherence to established criteria. Members also revise program criteria and undertake additional tasks as needed.

Advisory Committee of Street Artists and Crafts Examiners

The Advisory Council on Human Rights advises on anti-discrimination laws and racial equity initiatives. It provides expertise on reparations and public policy impacts on Black communities. It guides efforts to establish partnerships with Historically Black Colleges and Universities in San Francisco.

Advisory Council on Human Rights

San Francisco Airport manages air traffic operations and ensures safe aircraft movement. It provides parking facilities and maintains airport infrastructure to accommodate travelers and staff. The department oversees ground transportation and coordinates with airlines for efficient passenger services.

Mike Nakornkhet

Airport Director

Animal Care and Control Department manages animal sheltering, adoption, and emergency response services. It enforces animal-related laws and regulations, ensuring the humane treatment and safety of animals. The department also provides public education on responsible pet ownership and animal welfare.

Animal Care and Control Department

Virginia Donohue

Animal Care and Control Department, Director

The San Francisco Arts Commission oversees the integration of arts into city life and ensures public access to cultural experiences. It makes decisions on public art programs and allocates grants to support local artists and performances. The commission actively shapes policies affecting the arts ecosystem in San Francisco.

Arts Commission Commissioner 1

Arts Commission Commissioner 2

Arts Commission Commissioner 3

Arts Commission Commissioner 4

Debra Walker

Suzanne Ferras

Jessica Rothschild

Seth Brenzel

JD Beltran

Marcus Shelby

J Riccardo Benavides

Nabiel Musleh

Charles (Chuck) Collins

Lydia So

Arts Commission Commissioner 15

San Francisco Arts Commission invests in a vibrant arts community and shapes cultural policy. It enlivens the urban environment through public art programs and supports diverse artistic expressions. The commission facilitates meetings and discussions to engage the community in cultural development.

Ralph Remington

Arts Commission, Director of Cultural Affairs

The Asian Art Commission determines policy and administers the Asian Art Museum of San Francisco. It oversees museum operations and collaborates with the Asian Art Museum Foundation on fundraising efforts. Commissioners ensure the museum's strategic direction and financial sustainability.

Asian Art Commission

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 1

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 2

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 3

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 4

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 5

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 6

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 7

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 8

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 9

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 10

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 11

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 12

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 13

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 14

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 15

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 16

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 17

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 18

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 19

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 20

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 21

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 22

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 23

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 24

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 25

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 26

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 27

Asian Art Museum showcases Asian art and culture through exhibitions and educational programs. It offers diverse collections and hosts special events to engage the community. The museum fosters cultural appreciation and understanding by providing access to its extensive art collections.

Dr. Soyoung Lee

Asian Art Museum, Director

The Assessment Appeals Board #1 hears property tax assessment appeals in San Francisco. It evaluates evidence presented by taxpayers and the Assessor to determine property values. The Board has the authority to make final decisions on assessments regardless of property type or value.

Assessment Appeals Board #1

Assessment Appeals Board #1 Commissioner 1

Assessment Appeals Board #1 Commissioner 2

Richard Lee

Stephen Wasserman

Adena Gilbert

Paul Bellar

Quirina Mitchell

Hilary Winslow

The Assessment Appeals Board #2 adjudicates property tax assessment appeals for San Francisco taxpayers. It evaluates evidence presented by taxpayers and the Assessor to determine accurate property values. The Board exercises authority to render final decisions on residential properties and specific real estate assessments.

Assessment Appeals Board #2

Assessment Appeals Board #2 Commissioner 1

Assessment Appeals Board #2 Commissioner 2

Assessment Appeals Board #2 Commissioner 3

Claire Ervin Lee

Louisa Mendoza

Joyce Lewis

Nicholas Goldman

Michelle Domingo

The Assessment Appeals Board #3 provides a platform for San Francisco taxpayers to contest property tax assessments. It conducts hearings where evidence from both taxpayers and the Assessor is evaluated. The Board makes binding decisions on property assessments based on presented evidence.

Assessment Appeals Board #3

Assessment Appeals Board #3 Commissioner 1

Assessment Appeals Board #3 Commissioner 2

Assessment Appeals Board #3 Commissioner 3

Marc Dickow

Assessment Appeals Board #3 Commissioner 5

Assessment Appeals Board #3 Commissioner 6

Assessment Appeals Board #3 Commissioner 7

Assessment Appeals Board #3 Commissioner 8

Assesses property, applies exemptions, collects transfer taxes, and records official documents.

Assessor-Recorder

Joaquín Torres

The Ballot Simplification Committee ensures voter materials are clear and understandable. It reviews and revises ballot language to accurately reflect propositions and measures. The committee advises on simplifying complex legal and technical terms for voter comprehension.

Ballot Simplification Committee

The Bayview Hunters Point Citizens Advisory Committee provides policy advice on planning and land use matters in Zone 2 of Bayview Hunter's Point. It offers expertise in land use policies, zoning issues, and urban development. The committee advises the Board of Supervisors, City Boards, and commissions on relevant projects and initiatives.

Bayview Hunters Point Citizens Advisory Committee

The Behavioral Health Commission advises on mental health policy implementation and quality service delivery. It reviews and advocates for effective mental health services, ensuring policies meet community needs. It educates stakeholders to integrate mental health considerations into broader health strategies.

Behavioral Health Commission

The Bicycle Advisory Committee advises on making bicycling safer and more accessible in San Francisco. It provides recommendations to city agencies to address traffic violence and climate change. The committee advocates for cyclists and addresses biking-related complaints.

Bicycle Advisory Committee