Will Pelosi’s heir also visit Taiwan? Chan and Wiener answer very differently

Power Play recently transitioned to a subscriber-only newsletter. Click here for a limited-time offer starting at $1 for the first month (and the cost of a beer every month thereafter). For a congressional race confined to most of San Francisco’s 49 square miles, foreign policy has taken up a surprising amount of the conversation; in particular, state Sen. Scott Wiener ’s position on the Israel-Gaza conflict. But another hot geopolitical issue has stayed mostly out of view: Taiwan. Power Play noted last week that Supervisor Connie Chan ’s newly published policy platform doesn’t address the issue, whereas Wiener has taken the Democratic Party’s mainstream approach of opposing any forcible change to the status quo across the Taiwan Strait. The different approaches come at a critical moment: China this month conducted its first submarine-launched ballistic missile test into international waters, raising tensions in the Indo-Pacific region. China’s leader, Xi Jinping , is expected to visit Washington in September. We posed a question to both congressional candidates: Would they, like Rep. Nancy Pelosi did in 2022 , visit Taiwan? Wiener’s response was short: “Yes, I would go to Taiwan, and I would also go to China,” he said. A spokesperson for Chan — who was born in Hong Kong, lived in Taiwan, and moved to the U.S. at 13 — said, “San Franciscans expect their next representative to focus on the growing affordability crisis and a rigged economy that hurts working people. As a freshman member of Congress, Connie doesn’t expect to travel overseas during her first years in office while she addresses these challenges.” She added, “But with any travel, her approach would be consistent: She would prioritize clear goals and deliverables that serve the best interests of San Francisco and the American people. And that approach would guide her decision on making the trip.” The response lays bare the tightrope that Chan, Pelosi’s chosen successor, is having to walk on Taiwan and shows how she could end up having a different take on the U.S.-China relationship. Pelosi’s Taiwan trip was seen as a provocation to China and even sparked protests in San Francisco by anti-war activists, who felt it needlessly escalated tensions between two nuclear-armed powers. David Ho , a Chinatown organizer working for an independent expenditure committee supporting Chan, says Pelosi was able to take a more hawkish view on China, and Chinese Americans could look the other way because of her support for tenants’ rights and other issues. Chan — and, for that matter, Wiener — don’t have that political capital, Ho said. Ho said feelings toward China have changed over the decades. While Chinese immigrants who came to the U.S. after the 1949 revolution experienced persecution — and thus, may have had more critical feelings toward the communist government — their children and grandchildren may feel less antagonistic toward China. Ho said Chan’s reluctance to make a big issue out of Taiwan comes from not wanting to push away Chinese American voters who are nervous that antagonism toward China could result in hatred toward their community. “Today, people don’t want to see our American politicians, particularly in the Chinese American community, attack China,” he said. “They know historically what it will lead to: anti-Asian hate, more xenophobic policies. I think that perspective is very real. We just lived through it during the pandemic.” He added, “At the end of the day, all politics is local. If it impacts someone’s ability to survive, then I think that’s what matters most.” — Gabriel Greschler Got tips? Send them to us at powerplay@sfstandard.com . PRETRIAL SERVICES DRAMA: The San Francisco Pretrial Diversion Project has, for nearly 50 years, ensured that criminal defendants who are not in jail return for court dates and remain out of trouble. But the nonprofit has been in a fight for its life since last year, when the San Francisco Superior Court said it wanted the Adult Probation Department to take over the work, citing concerns about the nonprofit’s finances and transparency. Last week, in an effort to sweeten a compromise that would retain city funding for the Pretrial Diversion Project, its leader, David Mauroff, resigned. “As the CEO and central figure in our messaging and goal to protect SF Pretrial and the tireless and amazing employees, I volunteered to step down as CEO as a negotiating tactic. Although I had always envisioned retiring in this role, speaking truth to power can carry consequences,” Mauroff wrote to his staff on July 15. The nonprofit’s board also offered to have monthly check-ins and audits, according to member Sandra Lee Fewer , a former SF supervisor. Meanwhile, a long list of backers, from the ACLU to the Bar Association, has tried to convince Lurie to keep paying for the Pretrial Diversion Project. The court and the mayor, whose office had no comment, would not budge. “We tried to change the mayor’s mind, but the mayor chose to listen to the courts. It is the mayor’s budget,” said Fewer. “So we tried to broker a compromise, but no compromise was ever agreed upon.” The battle began last summer, when the San Francisco Superior Court threatened to end the contract with the nonprofit, even though the contract was issued by the Sheriff’s Office, which has defended the organization. The court cited financial issues and lack of transparency. But many said the rift was also due to a personal dispute between the leaders of the nonprofit and the court’s CEO Brandon Riley . At the time, Mauroff offered to resign if it would save his organization. The court declined the offer, setting off a year of back and forth that culminated in hearings at the Board of Supervisors last month. As of late June, the Sheriff’s Office had approved a new, three-year contract for the nonprofit, but the mayor’s budget funded only the first year. The mayor ultimately sided with the court, leaving the Adult Probation Department poised to assume the work and ending nearly five decades of the nonprofit’s role in overseeing defendants released before trial. — Jonah Owen Lamb NEW MAYOR EMPLOYEE : Mayor Daniel Lurie ’s lead spokesperson, Charles Lutvak , has a new deputy. Shelby Weiss joined the office Tuesday and reports to Lutvak as deputy press secretary, a position previously held by Kate Poltrack , who left this year to work for Senate candidate James Talarico of Texas. Weiss spent five years at Rally, a communications agency for nonprofits, philanthropy, and foundations, according to her LinkedIn profile. She’s a UC Berkeley alum. We wish her the best of luck in her new gig. — G.G. FARE THEE WELL: Last May, I joined The Standard’s politics team as a deputy politics editor and senior politics reporter, bringing my experience covering statewide figures to a stellar crew of journalists focused on City Hall. I’ve had a blast covering a range of interesting stories, like Gov. Gavin Newsom ’s army of social media trolls , California’s redistricting war with Texas , the implosion of San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan ’s gubernatorial bid, and a burgeoning new #MeToo movement. After more than a year on the team — and one baby later — today is my last day at The Standard. But my nearly decade-long journey covering California and San Francisco politics isn’t ending. I am joining the San Francisco Chronicle in August as the paper’s Washington, D.C., correspondent, where I will cover the California delegation and growing tensions between the federal and state governments (and perhaps lend a hand in coverage of a certain governor eyeing the White House). I plan to move with my husband and first-generation San Francisco son to the nation’s capital in October. I will miss San Francisco terribly. My roots stretch back through generations of southern Illinoisans and Chicagoland Italian immigrants, but this city feels like home. I will certainly miss San Francisco’s spicy politics, which I choose to see as evidence of how much everyone, no matter their political leanings, loves this city. And I’ll be dreaming in D.C. about Mission burritos and dumplings in the Richmond — which are worth frequent trips back. — Hannah Wiley

A nonprofit keeps 95% of clients out of jail and in court. SF courts want to kill it

Tierra Simms has walked the two blocks from her SoMa workplace to the 7th Street jail countless times. After each visit, the 37-year-old returns with one or a handful of people just released from jail. Many lug their belongings in transparent plastic bags as they follow her back to her office. Her job — and the bulk of the work at the San Francisco Pretrial Diversion Project — is ensuring that those released from jail during their legal proceedings return for court hearings and stay out of trouble in the meantime. By most accounts, the nationally recognized nonprofit has been living up to its responsibilities. A recent report found that an average of 95% of the organization’s clients returned to court as scheduled in 2025. An even higher number — 97% — were not rearrested or charged while awaiting trial. But a year-old squabble with the San Francisco Superior Court may lead to the dissolution of the nearly 50-year-old nonprofit. For decades, SF Pretrial, and then Santa Clara County, were the only counties with such programs. Since its founding, the nonprofit has expanded to more than 100 employees who at any time serve roughly 1,800 clients. The organization has an annual budget of roughly $16 million, funded by city contracts, grants, and donations. In addition to making sure clients return to court, SF Pretrial helps them find housing and treatment for drug and mental health issues, among other services. There is even a hotel near the office, with which the group contracts for clients with no place to go. In 2018, when California passed a law reforming the money bail system, it authorized county probation departments to operate pretrial services. That led to most counties adopting a pretrial system run by law enforcement agencies. But the law had a carve-out for SF Pretrial due to its success and long-standing relationship with the courts. San Francisco Superior Court said it has asked the city’s Adult Probation Department to take over pretrial services to centralize its control over released defendants. The court cited financial issues and a lack of transparency by the nonprofit as the reasons. ‘This decision is not based on sound public policy or what’s best for San Francisco and public safety.’ If Mayor Daniel Lurie’s budget, to be worked out by the end of June, allocates the necessary funds to the Probation Department for a new pretrial services program, the move will be final. SF Pretrial leaders — who include a former San Francisco Police Department chief — say they don’t understand why an organization that has had success for decades is being dismantled. They warn that a law enforcement agency tasked with tracking people who have not yet been convicted of a crime is problematic and that a ham-fisted transition could create chaos for courts already plagued by backlogs and lawyer shortages. They contend that the court’s mismanagement claims have been rectified and that the transparency allegations are unfounded, while stating that the Probation Department has its own troubled history. “This decision is not based on sound public policy or what’s best for San Francisco and public safety,” said SF Pretrial CEO David Mauroff. “The goal is to consolidate power and control between the superior court and adult probation, which is under the court’s authority.” The population of those awaiting trial outside of county jail has been a central focus of debates around public safety. The group is likely to grow following a state Supreme Court ruling on bail reform, clarifying that only people who pose a danger to the public can be held without bail — everyone else must be charged bail they can afford. ‘When I call them by their names, they are always surprised.’ A years-long battle Efforts to move pretrial services under the Probation Department go back years. In 2019, the department tried to take over SF Pretrial’s work by applying for a state pretrial pilot program. It failed to be selected. But in March 2025, SF Pretrial got into hot water over mismanagement of its retirement fund . This led to an investigation by the district attorney and a city review into the nonprofit’s compliance with contracting rules. The upheaval prompted the court to begin its own inquiry into the organization. On June 18, 2025, SF Superior Court CEO Brandon Riley notified Mauroff that the court had filed a Public Records Act request seeking documents about SF Pretrial’s contracts and internal finances. As Mauroff conferred with the nonprofit’s board, he was rebuffed from participating in the court’s investigation. “Hello, Mr. Mauroff. The Court is currently investigating more serious issues regarding San Francisco Pretrial and exploring potential solutions. We respectfully decline your offer to participate,” Riley wrote in an email. ‘Most of the time they are people of color. It feels like they have fallen through the gaps.’ Weeks later, Mauroff sent a follow-up notifying the court that the city no longer viewed SF Pretrial as a seriously problematic nonprofit and that the DA’s investigation had been closed. When the nonprofit refused to hand over the documents, citing the limits of public records laws over nongovernment entities, Riley responded that the court would begin the search for a replacement: “Great! I figured it would come to this.” In October, Riley wrote to the state’s judicial council about his plan to move pretrial work to the Probation Department. Still, the nonprofit continued to inform the court about its improved oversight program for defendants and updates on how it was living up to requirements for city-contracted nonprofits. As the months ticked by, SF Pretrial remained unsure of its future. The nonprofit responded to a Request for Proposals from the SF Sheriff’s Office for the same services it has provided the court, and was awarded the contract. In March, the Probation Department requested $12.8 million from the mayor to stand up its own pretrial unit, saying it was prepared to begin operations July 1, 2026, and would hire nearly 30 new staffers. The issue bubbled to the surface at a hearing last week of the Board of Supervisors’ Budget and Finance Committee, at which members of the Sheriff’s Office, the ACLU, and dozens of other public commenters spoke in support of SF Pretrial as the panel weighed approval of the sheriff’s contract. ‘I was in the Probation Department. This is not what we did. Here, it’s “How can we help you not go back into custody?”’ “It is a challenging process, and one that we feel would take, at minimum, a year,” Sheriff Paul Miyamoto said. “We just had our first meeting with the Probation Department in terms of talking about what their plan is.” Anya Worley-Ziegmann, a coordinator with citizen watchdog group the People’s Budget Coalition, decried the switch to the Probation Department. “No other agency is hiring new positions,” Worley-Ziegmann said. “They are ramming this through and steering us toward a collapse of our pretrial system.” Supervisor Connie Chan said she had questions about the decision, but no representative of the court was present to answer them. The three-member body ultimately forwarded SF Pretrial’s$22.5 million, three-year contract with the Sheriff’s Office to the full board for approval. The court justified its actions, claiming the Probation Department will be more accountable and transparent and will improve public safety. “SF Pretrial refused to provide the records requested by the court, leading to the court’s decision to discontinue its partnership,” a statement said. “The fiscal implications, along with reporting inaccuracies and limited information to judges, demonstrated the urgency of the court’s decision to move forward. The court claimed the nonprofit’s work was shoddy and unaccountable but did not provide data to support its claims. ‘I’ve been homeless before. I can relate to them. When I tell my clients that, they are able to open up.’ No one from the court agreed to an interview to explain its course of action. SF Pretrial responded by pointing out that it handles nearly 40,000 client check-ins each quarter, and occasional discrepancies are addressed in real time. The Adult Probation Department has been planning a takeover since the court reached out last year — yet none of the pretrial services positions have been filled, and no launch is expected until 2027. ‘If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’ Numerous former judges and lawyers, and the San Francisco Bar Association, oppose the court’s decision to cut ties with the nonprofit. Defense attorney David Rizk called the move “ridiculous” and “foolhardy,” contending that the court, which falls under the state’s judicial branch, has no legal authority to tell the city how to spend its funds. A retired Superior Court judge, who asked to remain anonymous, said she doesn’t understand why the court is playing hardball. “My experience with Pretrial has been, they go the extra mile,” she said. “They go and find the people, look in encampments. They do the kinds of things adult probation’s not going to do. It’s just not in their DNA.” ‘We are not here to put you in jail.’ Elston Mallory, an SF Pretrial case manager and former Marin County probation officer, said the Probation Department’s message will be “Show up or go back to jail,” while the nonprofit’s message is “How can we help you not go back into custody?” SF Pretrial board member Toney Chaplin has been on both sides. A retired Hayward police chief who served in SFPD’s ranks for nearly 30 years, Chaplin said this work has gone under the radar for years. But as a cop, he saw the way that the nonprofit’s employees built trust and relationships in a way that law enforcement simply can’t. “Those people come to court because we make sure they do,” he said of the nonprofit. “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” Additionally, transitioning pretrial services to probation could negatively impact public safety, said retired appeals court Judge Anthony Kline, noting that it could lead to fewer people showing up to court. “It’s a huge mistake,” Kline said. “The public safety of San Francisco, which is pretty high right now, is heavily attributable to this pretrial project.”

Where do San Francisco mayoral candidates stand on drugs and homelessness?

The race to become San Francisco’s next mayor is still in its early stages, but that hasn’t stopped candidates from trading barbs over their plans to solve the city’s most pressing issues.&nbsp;&nbsp;



On the same day last week, Levi Strauss heir and nonprofit founder Daniel Lurie <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/09/26/qa-daniel-lurie-cites-crisis-of-leadership-in-run-for-san-francisco-mayor/">announced his run for mayor</a> as Mayor London Breed publicly proposed a <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/09/29/mayor-london-breeds-plan-to-require-drug-treatment-on-san-franciscos-poorest-has-a-potential-poison-pill/">controversial policy</a> that would <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/09/26/mayor-halts-cash-for-drug-users/">force people on welfare</a> to undergo drug screenings.&nbsp;



The dueling conferences marked the beginning of a 2024 race that’s likely to be hyper-focused on the city’s <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/09/18/san-francisco-ties-record-for-most-overdose-deaths-in-a-month/">drug</a> and <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/09/18/homeless-shelter-data/">homelessness crises</a>. And in a subsequent press release, Lurie accused Breed’s office of “headline chasing&#8221;; Breed’s office hit back in a statement to The Standard saying, “Let’s hear the ideas.”&nbsp;



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="3000" height="2001" src="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/LurieForMayor09262023__0556-1.jpg?w=2500" alt="A man in a white shirt and tie gestures while speaking at a podium labeled &quot;FOR MAYOR.&quot;" class="wp-image-204927" srcset="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/LurieForMayor09262023__0556-1.jpg 3000w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/LurieForMayor09262023__0556-1.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/LurieForMayor09262023__0556-1.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/LurieForMayor09262023__0556-1.jpg?resize=2500,1668 2500w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/LurieForMayor09262023__0556-1.jpg?resize=1536,1025 1536w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/LurieForMayor09262023__0556-1.jpg?resize=2048,1366 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 3000px) 100vw, 3000px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Daniel Lurie holds a press conference at the Potrero Hill Neighborhood House in September after filing paperwork officially announcing his candidacy for the November 2024 election.</figcaption></figure>



Each candidate has their own history of trying to tackle the issues. Breed ran her <a href="https://londonbreed.medium.com/a-bold-approach-to-homelessness-a42121dc586c">2018 mayoral campaign </a>on ending long-term street encampments and providing safe spaces to inject drugs. Lurie founded a nonprofit with a focus on addressing homelessness. Supervisor Ahsha Safaí, another mayoral challenger, drafted legislation last year that led to the creation of the <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/03/28/can-you-fight-bureaucracy-with-bureaucracy-this-new-commission-is-optimistic/">city’s Homelessness Oversight Commission</a>.



But where do the city’s most prominent mayoral candidates—Lurie, Breed and Safaí—stand on drug and homelessness policies?&nbsp;



<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-safe-consumption-sites">Safe-Consumption Sites</h2>



San Francisco has long toyed with the idea of creating facilities that would allow people to use drugs under the supervision of people trained to reverse overdoses. Many drug policy experts have touted the benefits of such sites, asserting <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2022/11/17/city-funded-survey-says-the-tenderloin-center-improved-the-neighborhood-others-arent-convinced/">they reduce public drug use</a> and overdoses. It’s unclear whether the <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2022/05/11/sf-voters-lean-away-from-progressive-policies-as-homelessness-and-public-safety-shape-opinions/">general public is convinced</a>, however.&nbsp;



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="4773" height="3182" src="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/SRO-CityFederal-092823_JY_024.jpg?w=2500" alt="A person is speaking into a microphone, wearing a bright blue top, with a blurry background." class="wp-image-207017" srcset="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/SRO-CityFederal-092823_JY_024.jpg 4773w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/SRO-CityFederal-092823_JY_024.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/SRO-CityFederal-092823_JY_024.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/SRO-CityFederal-092823_JY_024.jpg?resize=2500,1667 2500w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/SRO-CityFederal-092823_JY_024.jpg?resize=1536,1024 1536w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/SRO-CityFederal-092823_JY_024.jpg?resize=2048,1365 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 4773px) 100vw, 4773px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Mayor London Breed speaks at a press conference in Portsmouth Square in Chinatown.</figcaption></figure>



Breed advocated for safe-consumption sites during her 2018 mayoral campaign, but amid legal uncertainty, she has shied away from allowing the city to fund the facilities. In a statement, Breed’s campaign said she would allow a nonprofit to fund and open a safe-consumption site independently, but she is awaiting guidance from the federal government before allowing the city to finance such a facility.&nbsp;



Safaí told The Standard he supports opening safe-consumption sites, but he envisions them working in coordination with sober living facilities and other treatment options. He pointed to his work with the Adult Probation Department to create <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2022/06/02/drug-free-rehab-facility-in-soma-aims-to-transform-lives-and-the-surrounding-community-alike/">sober living programs</a> for people leaving jail.&nbsp;



Lurie differed from the other candidates on the issue, telling The Standard that <a href="https://develop.sfstandard.com/2023/10/06/san-francisco-mayor-candidate-lurie-opposes-drug-sites/">he wouldn’t support opening such sites.</a> In a statement, Lurie suggested they would lure “drug tourism” to the city and said he would instead focus on “shutting down open air drug markets and getting everyone sheltered.”&nbsp;



<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/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1.jpg?w=2500" alt="Two adults stand with a dog; a woman sleeps on the pavement nearby, with bags and a cone visible." class="wp-image-55723" srcset="https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1.jpg 2500w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1-300x200.jpg 300w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1-768x512.jpg 768w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1-2048x1366.jpg 2048w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1-650x433.jpg 650w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1-370x247.jpg 370w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1-800x533.jpg 800w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1-450x300.jpg 450w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1-20x13.jpg 20w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1-185x123.jpg 185w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1-740x493.jpg 740w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1-400x267.jpg 400w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1-1600x1067.jpg 1600w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1-225x150.jpg 225w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1-900x600.jpg 900w, https://content-develop.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/tenderloinLinkageCenter_FEATURED1-72x48.jpg 72w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Shawn and Melissa Holbrook, who’ve been married 17 years, wait in line for services outside a safe-consumption site and service triage that operated in San Francisco for 11 months. </figcaption></figure>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-encampment-clearings">Encampment Clearings</h2>



In December, a local advocacy nonprofit called the Coalition on Homelessness brought a lawsuit accusing San Francisco of violating the constitutional rights of homeless people by destroying their property without offering shelter. U.S. Magistrate Judge Donna Ryu, the judge in the case, sided with the coalition and issued a preliminary injunction restricting the city from enforcing laws prohibiting people from sitting, lying or camping in public spaces.&nbsp;



The issue of whether or not the city should clear encampments has since taken center stage. Advocates decry the adverse impact encamp...

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

STATUTORY signing duty: indictments 'signed by the foreman' (Penal Code 940); presides

SF Civil Grand Jury Foreperson

SF Superior Court

SF Superior Court Presiding Judge

judicial assignments; court administration (CRC 10.603); CEO direction

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

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

Airport Commission Commissioner 1

Airport Commission Commissioner 2

Airport Commission Commissioner 3

Mark Buell

Susan Leal

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

Arts Commission Commissioner 5

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

Assessment Appeals Board #1 Commissioner 3

Assessment Appeals Board #1 Commissioner 4

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

Assessment Appeals Board #2 Commissioner 4

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 Council

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 Council

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 Council

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

The Board of Appeals provides final review for a wide range of City permitting decisions. It ensures an efficient and fair permit issuance process through an impartial panel. The Board exercises authority to make binding decisions on appeals.

Board of Appeals Commissioner 1

Board of Appeals Commissioner 2

Jose Lopez