Mayor Lurie releases his budget next week. Here’s how Trump royally screwed it

More and more, San Francisco’s 2026 budget process is resembling a slasher flick. Shadows are dancing across City Hall’s marble-wrought grand staircase, with President Donald Trump threatening to leap into view, ready to gouge hundreds of millions from the city’s coffers. The threat is real: Roughly $2 billion of San Francisco’s $16 billion budget flows from Washington, funding hundreds of grant programs across nearly every city department. Trump has already started turning off the tap. With a $643 million deficit looming, Mayor Daniel Lurie has days to reveal how the city absorbs the pain — and who feels it most. Trump has already made real cuts to healthcare. And while San Francisco has fought back — filing more than a dozen lawsuits against the administration and winning most of them so far — a single appellate loss could imperil billions. Fear that Trump may further upend any number of federal revenue streams undergirds every hard fiscal choice in front of Lurie. On June 1, the mayor will propose his draft budget to the Board of Supervisors and voters, revealing the true extent of the bloodletting. Trump’s policy choices are projected to disenroll up to 45,000 San Franciscans from healthcare and tens of thousands from food stamps. To protect those programs, Lurie is trimming across all 55 city departments rather than gutting public health and human services, his budget director, Sophia Kittler, told The Standard. “This is a loss to the whole city,” Kittler said. “We’re treating it as a citywide deficit.” The impacts are already here. Government layoffs loom, and nonprofit social safety-net programs know they face the chopping block. In anticipation of deep layoffs, labor has signaled a historic general strike is possible next year. In the meantime, tens of thousands of San Franciscans may lose crucial services, from food stamps to doulas. So what can San Francisco do to save itself? And how devastating will the impacts be? The answers are uncertain, but the city is preparing anyway. Threats in the shadows Since it’s a city and a county, San Francisco is uniquely vulnerable to federal meddling. Large counties often administer healthcare, serving as a pass-through for federal funding, creating a single vulnerable pot of money. But the city also depends on federal and state grants, both of which are primarily funded by the federal government. Trump could whisk much of it away with the stroke of a pen or the tap of a button on his social media platform, Truth Social . Much of it is also at risk in court. San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu is litigating more than a dozen lawsuits against the federal government, most of which touch on funding to the city. “Our legal efforts to defend our communities and protect our federal funding are paying off,” Chiu said in a statement. “We have seen many early wins in the lower courts, preserving billions of dollars in federal funding for our city.” Yet the risk still persists. The largest of these suits seeks to challenge the Trump administration’s effort to axe grants for any program it deems related to diversity, equity, and inclusion. As Chiu’s office wrote , Trump’s rules sought to instill his anti-immigrant, anti-LGBTQ+, anti-choice, and anti-equity policy preferences on federal spending. A court granted a preliminary injunction against Trump imposing new restrictions on those grants last year, Chiu’s office said the decision preserved billions in funding that help San Francisco support early childhood development, critical health services, safe and effective transportation, and housing to our most vulnerable. Each lawsuit represents a distinct fiscal vulnerability, a situation that insiders speculate will prompt Lurie to budget cautiously. He doesn’t have much room for error — the city has about $433 million in its federal-risk reserve fund, which Lurie and the Board of Supervisors created last year. If the worst federal funding losses happen, it won’t be enough. One Big Beautiful screw you You might’ve noticed that downtown still isn’t the hotbed it once was. That carries economic implications, since the city largely fills its general fund coffers from taxes generated by employee-filled high rises, including property taxes. In that weakened economic state came Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act , also known as H.R. 1, which threatens to see tens of thousands of San Franciscans lose Medi-Cal coverage and CalFresh food access — which in turn will prompt a roughly $300 million, two-year loss in federal payments to San Francisco to administer those programs locally. It isn’t a straight cut. Instead, the legislation implemented stricter work and filing requirements and is projected to cause people to lose their care. The Lurie administration budgeted $34 million to help those people navigate stricter filing requirements and retain access to Medi-Cal and CalFresh, but it remains to be seen how successful the effort will be. The funding losses primarily hit the Department of Public Health and the Human Services Agency. Those program losses equal roughly half of the city’s $643 million budget deficit. Lurie’s office chose to distribute the pain of that funding loss across the city’s 55 or so departments. Kittler said the other choice would be to decimate public health programs and food stamps, and that wasn’t a choice at all. Stemming the bleeding The Board of Supervisors will haggle with the mayor over budget details throughout June. There aren’t many choices before them. The city can either cut its funding or increase its revenue. Both choices carry risk. As nonprofit leaders have told The Standard, Lurie’s intention to cut community social service programs may have downstream impacts: if nonprofits that help tenants fight their evictions lose funding, for instance, more people may pressure homeless services in the coming months. Supervisor Conie Chan, the budget chair, laid out another plan in an early-May budget briefing with reporters. She said San Francisco shouldn’t live in fear of D.C. “You can absolutely plan that way. But then what you will end up with is just cuts and cuts and cuts,” Chan said. Instead, she said, Lurie should dip into reserves until 2028, when the Overpaid CEO Tax would begin generating an estimated $300 million annually. Dipping into reserves could leave San Francisco vulnerable to other Trump cuts, which may be anathema to risk-averse Lurie. It is also wholly dependent on voters approving the tax in June. Lurie opposed the tax. But if it does pass, he’ll have one more tool to forestall the worst of Trump’s cuts, whether he wanted it or not.

Fire chief’s top aide accused of mishandling union cash

The San Francisco firefighters union is accusing a top Fire Department official, Adrienne Sims, of mishandling funds and plans to report the activity to the authorities, The Standard has learned. Sims, 54, who serves as chief of staff to SFFD Chief Dean Crispen, has been with the department since 2001. She was a board member of SF Firefighters Local 798 for eight years from 2014 to 2022, serving as treasurer for the last two. How Sims allegedly misused money from Local 798, one of the city’s most powerful labor groups, or how much was involved, is not known. It appears the allegations involve expenses Sims charged to the union in 2023. Local 798 President Sam Gebler said the union “recently identified potential irregularities involving union finances.” “This matter involves union funds — not taxpayer dollars,” he said in a statement. “As Local 798 is a private entity, this is being addressed through appropriate internal processes and, where necessary, outside authorities. Local 798 is committed to accountability and safeguarding the finances and integrity of our union. While we are limited in what we can discuss during an active review, we are taking this matter seriously and will ensure it is handled properly.” Sims, in a call with The Standard, denied any wrongdoing. Crispen and the district attorney’s office did not respond to a request for comment. The Standard obtained a video of a Zoom meeting, recorded Friday, in which Sims addresses the accusations with union officials. In the roughly four-and-a-half-minute clip, Sims denies the allegations, saying that in certain cases, there are no records of charges she made to the union. She says she intends to pay back some of her expenses. “The BFA gala that happened three years ago, I paid for because it was going to sell out,” she says in the clip, likely referring to the Black Firefighters Association. “It’s in the minutes, and it is reimbursable. I don’t have a receipt for that BFA gala, so I am having to pay the $2,500 back. There is also a golf tournament that never made it into the minutes. I was not the [union’s] treasurer at the time, and it didn’t make it into the minutes, so that’s $3,500.” In the video, Sims says she had refused to sign a letter Gebler drafted stating that she “participated in misconduct.” “I have hired my own legal counsel to represent me, because dragging my reputation through the mud is unnecessary,” she says. Sims told The Standard she has not yet hired a lawyer and did not know how much money she was accused of mishandling. Gebler declined to comment on the video. When asked if Sims has been put on leave by the SFFD, a spokesperson declined to comment. In the Zoom video and in the call with The Standard, Sims said she has been taking time off since April 1 because of “anxiety and PTSD.” She said her absence was unrelated to the allegations. “As a previous treasurer of Local 798, I do understand the responsibility of President Gebler to be transparent to the members,” Sims said. “It is really not as salacious as people would like it to be.” An SFFD spokesperson said the agency “has not been notified of any criminal or civil charges toward any employee by San Francisco Firefighters Local 798. As information becomes available, the SFFD will work with the city attorney’s office.” Local 798 represents 1,600 firefighters, paramedics, and EMTs. It’s considered one of the most influential labor groups in the city, along with the police union, and politicians eagerly seek out its endorsement. Sims is a native of San Francisco, according to an online biography from the California Firefighter Joint Apprenticeship Committee . In a March 2025 interview with KRON4, she said she was recruited to the department via a female firefighter from Station 18 in the Sunset. Sims said she had faced challenges being a female firefighter in a field dominated by men. “I’m a woman. I’m a Black woman,” she said in the interview. “There’s not a lot of us. Sometimes you do feel, and maybe it’s more self-pressure that you put on yourself, to give 110%, 120%, 200% on this job. It’s not a job that’s necessarily catered toward women.” In 2022, Mayor London Breed posted an online tribute to Sims, whom she described as a “San Francisco native and a woman of many firsts.” “Sims helps recruit the next generation of first responders through her work with the San Francisco Black Firefighters and by teaching classes nationwide as a certified firefighting instructor. She continues to be a leader and inspiration for so many of our young people,” Breed wrote.

PG&E launches $10 million PAC to take out gubernatorial candidate Tom Steyer

This article is from Power Play, a twice-weekly newsletter rounding up the latest City Hall and local politics gossip. To sign up, visit The Standard’s newsletter page . Billionaire investor Tom Steyer has vastly outspent every opponent in the 2026 race for California governor, pouring $120 million of his own cash into his campaign. Now one of the state’s most powerful and politically connected corporations is trying to give him a run for his money … just as Steyer is seeing a boost in the polls post- Eric Swalwell scandal. Pacific Gas & Electric has injected close to $10 million into an anti-Steyer PAC called “Californians for Resilient and Affordable Energy,” according to new campaign finance disclosures. The PAC is also supported by the California Electric Utility Industry Labor Management Cooperation Committee and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1245, which represents around 30,000 utility workers in California and Nevada. Though PG&E’s millions are helping the effort behind ads that rip Steyer for his Proposition 13 reforms and wealthy background, you’d have to have a quick eye to realize the utility company is somehow connected. That’s because Californians for Resilient and Affordable Energy is actually taking its money and putting it into another anti-Steyer PAC, California Is Not for Sale, the group running the ads. California Is Not for Sale is supported by the real estate and construction industry. The disclosure at the end of the ads is a block of text, with the utility nestled in as one of its top funders. So why is PG&E going after Steyer? If he becomes governor, Steyer plans to introduce electricity reforms that could end up being a threat to the company and other investor-owned utilities. Steyer has promised to appoint people to the California Public Utilities Commission who are critical of utility profits and to pull back on expensive infrastructure projects, among other changes. The anti-Steyer blitz does not rip the candidate for his proposals to “smash the utility monopolies. ” Instead, one ad skewers the candidate for his Prop. 13 reform proposal, which would increase commercial property taxes. “What’s billionaire Tom Steyer’s plan to make California more affordable? Higher property taxes,” a voice says before a record scratch. “Wait, what? That’s right … of course, billionaire Steyer doesn’t have to worry about the cost of things like groceries, electricity, or property taxes.” (Steyer’s team says his reforms would not touch residential properties.) For his part, Steyer has created cheeky videos about PG&E, including one on Valentine’s Day that poked fun at CEO Patti Poppe ’s message of “ leading with love .” “Let’s be clear, a monopoly can’t love you,” Steyer says in the video as he stands in front of the substation that caught fire in December, leading to 130,000 PG&E customers losing power . “A monopoly is an abusive relationship.” In another video, titled “ Busting Utility Monopolies ,” he ambitiously promises to cut energy costs by 25%. PG&E deferred comment to California Is Not for Sale, which said in a statement, “The only ‘big money interest’ in this race is Tom Steyer.” — Gabe Greschler Got tips? Send to us at powerplay@sfstandard.com . DEAD BILL : If PG&E is able to squelch Steyer’s momentum, it won’t be their only win this year. On Tuesday, state Sen. Scott Wiener ’s SB 875 — a bill that would give cities more power to separate from their utility company by winnowing the role of the California Public Utilities Commission — failed to pass out of the Senate committee on energy, utilities, and communications. The legislation faced stiff opposition from PG&E and other powerful private utilities, the Bay Area Council, and the California Chamber of Commerce. Opponents claimed that the bill would be disastrous for the region’s utility jobs. Scott Wetch of the California Coalition of Utility Employees said at the hearing that 1,500 jobs could be lost if San Francisco turns to public power, adding that members’ pensions would be wrecked. “At a time when California should be strengthening the grid and protecting affordability, SB 875 instead introduces cost-shifts, uncertainty, and weakened oversight,” said Joshua Levenberg , an attorney for PG&E. And in one last PG&E-related piece of news: The city’s Public Utilities Commission submitted a cost estimate Monday of how much San Francisco would need to take over the utility company’s equipment in a switch to public power. The total: $3.4 billion — about a billion more than what the city offered in 2019. PG&E told NBC Bay Area its assets are “not for sale.” Considering the budget situation, maybe the city can ask Steyer to pitch in? — G.G. DC DUO: In the race to replace Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi in Congress, one person has been conspicuously missing — Pelosi herself. Well, congressional candidate and Supervisor Connie Chan must be smiling widely, as Pelosi made an appearance at the candidate's Capitol Hill fundraiser Wednesday night, insiders told Power Play. While Politico did just spot Chan hopping out of Pelosi's office — Chan is in D.C. for a building trades conference — the San Francisco legend's hobnobbing amidst funders gnoshing on vegetable dumplings may give Chan's coffers a hopeful bump. Her fundraising lagged behind opponents Wiener and Saikat Chakrabarti , the latter of whom has self-funded to the tune of nearly $5 million . There were dozens of attendees at the fundraiser hosted by Sen. Adam Schiff , Reps. Grace Meng and Judy Chu, as well as a smattering of groups, including the Asian American Action Fund and a national Teamsters PAC. — Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez A LITTLE SUMTHIN SUMTHIN: For contractors doing business with the city, donating money to candidates whose office would deal with said contractor is an ethical nope. San Francisco bars the practice, as it reeks of seeking undue influence. But that doesn’t stop folks from trying: A San Francisco Ethics Commission audit presented this month found a preliminary count of roughly 200 restricted donors giving to 2024 campaigns. The presentation came with a caveat: The findings aren’t final. Ethics Commission staff still needs to comb through the data to verify that the process — which looked at lists of campaign donors and prohibited contractors — didn’t mistakenly match people with identical names. One takeaway from the early data: The mayor’s race was the main focus of prohibited contractor donations. Shocker. While most of the prohibited donations went to former Mayor London Breed (with a count of 58), Mark Farrell, Aaron Peskin, and Mayor Daniel Lurie all netted between 35 and 38. While the donors and politician recipients are culled from public data, naming individual donors would be problematic, considering the draft nature of the findings. Broadly, however, Lurie’s prohibited donations run the gamut from rag-tag nonprofit healthcare contractors to deep-pocketed developers. When the list is verified, don’t expect to see any big fines levied against candidates for accepting the money. All they’ve got to do is give it back. — J. F. R. MONEY HERE, MONEY THERE: For years, people running for the Board of Supervisors and the local Democratic Party board have enjoyed a Caldecott Tunnel-sized loophole in campaign finance law: While supervisor candidates are limited to $500 donations per person, Democratic Party candidates can rake in far larger amounts, often in the thousands. Much hay has been made about the alleged “ slush fund ,” which slowly faded from use until just this week. Insiders spotted the Police Officers Association donating an eyebrow-raising $2,500 to Supervisor Matt Dorsey ’s 2024 Democratic Party campaign committee . The race is long over — why do you need campaign donations? Dorsey said he used the campaign bank account for permitted “office-holder” purposes. Before the police union donations, Dorsey’s Democratic Party campaign funds paid for a poll to take the electorate’s temperature on his signature drug-free supportive housing measure . He plans to use the new donation to buy tickets for the Alice B. Toklas LGBTQ Democratic Club’s annual Pride breakfast in June. Coming up through the city attorney’s office “makes you very careful about dotting i's and crossing t's,” Dorsey said. — J.F.R. FULL OF ENERGY : Lurie’s first international trip to Asia is wrapping up after stops in Shanghai and Seoul to promote tourism, arts, and cultural exchange. Chinese-language media have largely portrayed him positively, highlighting his social-media savvy and his slogan “Let’s go, San Francisco.” Coverage also emphasized his packed schedule and high energy as he rushed between events across Shanghai. One video showed the mayor running up the stairs at the Shanghai Grand Opera House while his communications director Han Zou and a security detail struggled to keep up. “I’m a little out of breath,” the mayor said in an Instagram post afterward. Another article noted his surprise at Shanghai’s vibrant nightlife. Some Chinese media outlets apparently received a note from the mayor’s office describing Lurie as a “moderate Democrat” who supports “cracking down on crime and improving public safety,” with an approval rating of 70% . In Korea, Lurie also toured the National Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art and the Global Business Complex site, where San Francisco’s Exploratorium is partnering with Hyundai Motor Group to open a new hands-on science museum. He will travel to Virginia for a conference after the Asia trip and is scheduled to return to San Francisco on Saturday. — Han Li

Jackie Fielder requests three-month leave of absence after mental health crisis

Supervisor Jackie Fielder has requested three months off from attending City Hall meetings following a mental health crisis. Fielder made the request of the clerk of the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday, asking to be excused from board and committee meetings through June. “For personal reasons, I am respectfully requesting that I be excused from the Board of Supervisors,” Fielder wrote. The excusal requires a vote of the board at each meeting. The amount of time off Fielder has requested is nearly unheard of, but so are the supervisor’s recent hardships. Fielder checked into a hospital in late March amid a mental health crisis that led her to publicly consider resignation. She has represented a heavily Latino community amid Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids and weathered a recent investigation into the leak of a confidential memo that led her staff to be interviewed by the city attorney’s office. Her district includes the Mission, Bernal Heights, Potrero Hill, and other neighborhoods. In a statement last week, her staffers said they would continue to provide neighborhood services in Fielder’s absence. Other offices have occasionally dealt with absences such as District 3, which includes Chinatown and North Beach, when Supervisor Danny Sauter went on paternity leave. Last week, supporters left flowers and notes with supportive affirmations outside Fielder’s City Hall office. “Rest is resistance,” one said. “You are needed.”

Sheryl Davis faces 19 criminal charges. Her supporters are still ride or die

Sheryl Davis, a once-renowned figure in San Francisco’s Black community who oversaw the distribution of tens of millions of taxpayer dollars in the post-George Floyd era, had her first day in court Thursday after being arrested on a slew of corruption charges. It didn’t stop her from bringing an entourage. More than two dozen supporters crowded the Hall of Justice hallway, and a handful closed in as a phalanx to block photographers waiting to capture Davis’ entrance to court. Davis was in court to enter a plea on 19 charges — including 17 felonies — related to a corruption scheme she allegedly ran as head of the city’s Human Rights Commission. Her codefendant, James Spingola, who has close personal ties with Davis and once led the nonprofit Collective Impact, has been charged with four counts of felony aiding and abetting a conflict of interest in a government contract. Davis pleaded not guilty to the charges. Her attorney Anthony Brass said they “deny all allegations.” Davis’ supporters remain convinced of her innocence. Margaret Brodkin, former director of the Department of Children, Youth, and Their Families, called the allegations against Davis “flawed and distorted.” “James Spingola and Sheryl Davis are two of the most dedicated and skilled service providers, program developers, and community leaders in the city in many decades,” Brodkin said. “Treating them like criminals is itself a crime.” Also showing up in support was Kevin Ortiz, former president of the San Francisco Latino Democratic Club, who was part of the group that surrounded Davis as she entered the court. Ortiz, who has been accused of sexual misconduct , said he was in court in an official capacity as a paralegal for law firm Quadra & Coll, which is representing Davis in civil matters related to the changes. Most of Davis’ cheering squad declined to speak to The Standard. In the packed courtroom, one woman stuck her middle finger at the group of photographers. Others in the room shot dirty looks at reporters. Davis kept her head high during the proceedings and was seen chewing gum. The charges against Davis stem from her involvement in the Dream Keeper Initiative — a signature program of former Mayor London Breed that was managed by the Human Rights Commission — to bolster programming for the Black community and other nonprofits. The Human Rights Commission investigates discrimination complaints, advises the city leadership on civil rights issues, and works to ensure equal access to city services and contracting. It was merged, along with another scandal-ridden agency, the Department on the Status of Women, into the Agency on Human Rights during Daniel Lurie’s first year as mayor. Prosecutors allege Davis sent nearly $8.5 million in Dream Keeper grants — and other city funds — to Collective Impact despite clear conflicts of interest, including that she and Spingola lived together. The charges also allege that Davis’ son reaped benefits from entities that received Dream Keeper Initiative funds. Davis signed contracts for millions of dollars to the nonprofit Homeless Children’s Network, which paid her son more than $140,000 as a contractor between 2021 and 2024. Those payments were for questionable work and were deposited into a bank account held jointly by Davis and her son, according to court documents. Collective Impact also paid $45,000 on payroll, rent, and graduate school tuition for Davis’ son, prosecutors say. Prosecutors say Davis used a combination of city and Collective Impact funds to pay for personal expenses, including a PR firm promoting her personal brand, marketing her children’s book, and flight upgrades. They also allege she spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in city money on tables and VIP admissions to events in Beverly Hills, Martha’s Vineyard, and New York City. She also directed spending through an entity called Megablack, which District Attorney Brooke Jenkins described as a community initiative with no formal nonprofit status, no leadership structure, and no state registration. Funds raised for Megablack flowed into Collective Impact’s bank accounts, and prosecutors allege Davis steered those dollars toward expenses that the Human Rights Commission — as a city agency — would not have been permitted to make, including paying for musicians, banquets, and a wine-tasting event. Brass said Davis has been forthcoming about her role as a city official with nonprofit connections. “I have a lot of questions about the processes within the mayor’s office and the city attorney’s office,” Brass said. “This is a person who was asking for more transparency. She asked to be audited. She actively wanted to give up her power. And she has proactively announced her conflicts of interest. I’m very curious how they have a criminal case based on her conduct.” Representatives of the Human Rights Commission declined to comment. Davis’ tenure at the Human Rights Commission, which she joined in 2016, ended in 2024 after The Standard reported that she had signed off on city contracts worth at least $1.5 million to Spingola while the two were living together. The revelations created a scandal for Breed, who was in the middle of a reelection bid and said she was aware of the “very close” relationship between Davis and Spingola. The district attorney’s office cited The Standard’s reporting in its arrest warrant. Jenkins said $350,000 of misused funds represents a combination of misappropriated Dream Keeper Initiative funds and Proposition Q funds administered through Davis’ department. Jenkins acknowledged that the total could grow as the investigation continues. The investigation involved more than 50 search warrants and a large volume of emails between Davis and third parties. Jenkins said her office received tips through its Public Integrity Unit and determined that there was sufficient basis to open a criminal investigation, which was launched after Davis had left office. Jenkins declined to say whether Breed had knowledge of the alleged misconduct, noting only that charges were filed against those prosecutors believe committed crimes. She didn’t implicate Breed. “We have to hold government actors accountable,” Jenkins added, “certainly when they are abusing the trust of San Franciscans and abusing taxpayer dollars.” Davis’ arrest followed charges levied against other key figures in the San Francisco nonprofit world. Gwendolyn Westbrook , the former head of a homeless services nonprofit, was accused in February of misappropriating more than $1.2 million in public funds. In 2024, another former nonprofit executive, Kyra Worthy, was charged with 34 felonies for the alleged misuse of $700,000 in public funds. On Thursday, Davis left the courtroom as she entered it, surrounded by supporters. She is due to return May 6.

‘Knife fight’ politics take a mental health toll on SF leaders

Janice Li was riding high in November 2018, freshly elected to the BART board of directors after years of advocacy work for safer streets at the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition. Her victory was decisive, with a 12-point win over her nearest rival. She had earned the right to celebrate. But Li couldn’t bring herself to leave her apartment. The following weeks were marred by panic attacks and anxiety. “There’s no feeling quite like being in elected office and the loneliness that you face,” Li said. Local officials are opening up about how holding office has affected their mental health after Supervisor Jackie Fielder checked into a hospital amid a mental health crisis that led her to publicly consider resignation. Her tenure on the Board of Supervisors has been brief but intense. For just over a year, Fielder has represented a heavily Latino community amid Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids, dealt with a drug crisis that has moved into the heart of her district, and weathered a recent investigation into the leak of a confidential memo that has put her office in the city attorney’s sights. San Francisco politics are often described as a “knife fight in a phone booth,” a phrase coined by David Chiu, now the city attorney. The city’s unique brutality has for decades sharpened politicians — from the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein to Gov. Gavin Newsom — preparing them for higher office. But some say there’s a painful personal cost to San Francisco’s unrelenting gladiatorial politics. It bloodies as many people as it hones. Li has for years spoken frankly about her mental health struggles, while the stigma has held others back. Women, people of color, and queer politicians can face more scrutiny, Li said, especially when they’re young and new to office. But she was determined to not let the pressure end her career. She found solace in a tight-knit friend group of early-career LGBTQ+ Asian politicos, including Board of Education Commissioner Phil Kim and Entertainment Commission member Cyn Wang. That support, therapy, and Li’s own acumen bolstered her continued success on the BART board, where she has served as vice president and president. Now Li reaches out to freshman politicians to ensure that they too enjoy peer support; among them is Ruth Ferguson, 31, whom Mayor Daniel Lurie appointed in January to the City College of San Francisco board of trustees. Ferguson weathered harassment working in the state Legislature in the 2020s, which she reported in formal complaints and called out publicly. But it left her with diagnosed PTSD, which has flared in the San Francisco political fray. In a city proud of its self-described acceptance of people of all backgrounds, and at a time of unprecedented awareness of social inequities, Ferguson experienced even more vitriol, particularly against herself and other women. There’s the everyday condescension, and then there’s the rage. Last month, a local political gadfly wrote to her in a Facebook message calling her a “skank bitch” for backing a ballot measure to institute stricter Board of Supervisors term limits. Comments on Fielder’s mental health crisis and leave from office took a similar disturbing tone. Online trolls accused her of hiding a sexually transmitted disease, and more. “I don’t think it needs to be this way,” Ferguson said. Rigel Robinson was elected to the Berkeley City Council in 2018 and soon faced a similar kind of hate. He was stalked, threatened, and harassed over his support for a housing development near People’s Park. The pressure led him to resign in 2024. He’s now a consultant for the Bay Area Council, working remotely from Paris, where his wife pursues her dream career as a bioengineer. “I treasured my time in elected office and am deeply proud of the work I got done for my city,” he said by text message. “But I am also proud to have left when I did.” Former San Francisco Supervisor Jane Kim, who is running to be state insurance commissioner, said she has seen the city’s hard-knuckle politics drum out good public servants, especially young women. Even the regular practice of updating constituents via social media can make you feel exposed, Kim said. “Whenever I’ve run for office, whenever I’ve been in office, the sensation is you feel raw all the time, like all your skin is peeled off, so the wind is just blowing into your body without any form of protection,” she said. Running a campaign for statewide office is not nearly as stressful as a local race in San Francisco, Kim said, where politicians have far more face time with opponents and critics. San Francisco’s dense, 7x7-mile peninsula means running into opponents three times a night and having lobbyists accost you at restaurants. There’s no escape. Two years after leaving San Francisco public office in 2019, Kim had bloodwork done. Every metric showed that she was far healthier than she had been in years. “Clearly, my body kept receipts,” she said.

Ex-Human Rights Commission head charged in corruption probe; Breed not implicated

San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins announced charges Monday against Sheryl Davis, former executive director of the city’s Human Rights Commission, and James Spingola, former head of the nonprofit Collective Impact, alleging that they misused roughly $350,000 in public funds intended for the Black community. Davis faces 19 criminal counts, including felony misappropriation of public funds and felony perjury by certification. Spingola, who exited Collective Impact in October, is being charged with four counts of felony aiding and abetting a conflict of interest in a government contract. The two lived together as Davis was directing grants to Spingola’s nonprofit. “We have to make sure that we hold everything accountable. Each and every day we file cases involving street crime, but people have to understand that accountability goes beyond what happens on the streets,” Jenkins said Monday, adding that the investigation is ongoing. Davis and Spingola surrendered voluntarily and were booked into San Francisco County Jail, Jenkins said. The charges — a result of an 18-month-long investigation — stem from the Dream Keeper Initiative, a program launched under former Mayor London Breed to funnel money into Black communities, which was managed by the Human Rights Commission. Prosecutors allege Davis steered nearly $8.5 million in Dream Keeper grants — and other city funds — to Collective Impact despite conflicts of interest that should have disqualified her from the decision-making process. Collective Impact and Spingola received more than $3 million in additional funds through the city’s Office of Economic and Workforce Development, prosecutors said. Prosecutors allege Davis had two direct conflicts of interest. First, according to the warrant affidavit, Davis and Spingola have lived together since 2015, share accounts at two banks, and have traveled together, paying for each other’s flights and hotel stays. Spingola wrote monthly rent checks to their landlord from the bank account where his Collective Impact paycheck was deposited, according to prosecutors. “We are not alleging that they even had an intimate relationship,” Jenkins said, adding that the conflict-of-interest charges rest on the entanglement of their finances, not on any theory of a romantic relationship. The second conflict relates to Davis’ continued financial involvement with Collective Impact after joining the Human Rights Commission. Prosecutors allege she remained a signatory on Collective Impact’s bank account, signed checks, authorized reimbursements to herself and used Collective Impact funds to pay Human Rights Commission expenses. Jenkins also alleges that Davis’ son received direct financial benefits from organizations that received Dream Keeper money. Prosecutors say Davis signed four contracts awarding millions of dollars to the nonprofit Homeless Children’s Network while the organization was simultaneously paying her son more than $140,000 as an independent contractor between October 2021 and 2024. Those payments were deposited into a bank account held jointly by Davis and her son, according to the warrant affidavit. Among the payments, prosecutors allege, he received $10,000 for helping the director of Homeless Children’s Network prepare five presentation slides for a panel on which Davis served as moderator and $40,000 for a two-month research project for which he was permitted to determine the scope of his own work. Collective Impact also spent more than $45,000 on behalf of Davis’ son in 2023 and 2024, on payroll, rent, and graduate school tuition, prosecutors said. Jenkins alleged Davis used a combination of city and Collective Impact funds to pay for personal projects, including hiring public relations firms to promote her personal brand and website, promoting and selling her children’s book, and upgrading flights. Prosecutors allege funds were used to purchase tables and VIP admissions to events in Beverly Hills, Martha’s Vineyard, and New York City, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars. Davis also directed spending through an entity called Megablack, described by Jenkins as a community initiative with no formal nonprofit status, no leadership structure, and no registration with the California secretary of state or attorney general’s office. Funds raised for Megablack flowed into Collective Impact’s bank accounts. Prosecutors allege Davis directed those funds toward expenses the Human Rights Commission would not have been permitted to make as a city agency, including payments for music artists, banquets, and a wine-tasting event. Davis’ attorney Tony Brass said she has been forthcoming about her role as a city official with nonprofit connections. “I have a lot of questions about the processes within the mayor’s office and the city attorney’s office,” Brass said. “This is a person who was asking for more transparency. She asked to be audited. She actively wanted to give up her power. And she has proactively announced her conflicts of interest. I’m very curious how they have a criminal case based on her conduct.” Representatives of the Human Rights Commission declined to comment. Davis joined the commission in 2016 and quickly became an important figure in the city’s efforts to economically bolster Black communities. Her role became more prominent in 2021, when Breed launched the Dream Keeper Initiative in response to George Floyd’s murder and placed it under the management of the Human Rights Commission. Davis’ tenure there ended in 2024, when The Standard was first to report that she had signed off on city contracts worth at least $1.5 million to Spingola while the two were living together. The revelations created a scandal for Breed, who was in the middle of a reelection bid and said she was aware of the “very close” relationship between Davis and Spingola. The district attorney’s office cited The Standard’s reporting in its arrest warrant. Jenkins said the $350,000 of misused funds represents a combination of misappropriated Dream Keeper Initiative funds and Proposition Q funds administered through Davis’ department. Proposition Q allows city departments to bypass the need for a contract for the purchase of goods under $10,000. Jenkins acknowledged the total could grow as the investigation continues. Jenkins said the investigation involved more than 50 search warrants served on various entities, along with a large volume of emails between Davis and third parties. She said the probe began after her office received tips through its Public Integrity Unit and determined there was sufficient basis to open a criminal investigation. The investigation was launched after Davis had left office. Jenkins declined to say whether Breed had knowledge of the alleged misconduct, noting only that charges were filed against individuals whom prosecutors believe committed crimes. She did not implicate Breed. “If more comes out, those charges can be changed,” Jenkins said. “More can be added.” “We have to hold government actors accountable,” Jenkins added, “certainly when they are abusing the trust of San Franciscans and abusing taxpayer dollars.” Monday’s arrest follows other charges levied against figures in the San Francisco nonprofit world. Gwendolyn Westbrook , the former head of a homeless services nonprofit, was accused in February of misappropriating more than $1.2 million in public funds. In 2024, another former nonprofit executive, Kyra Worthy, was charged with 34 felonies for the alleged misuse of $700,000 in public funds.

Supervisor Jackie Fielder in the hospital; City Hall hangs in the balance

Supervisor Jackie Fielder is in a hospital in San Francisco following major turmoil in her office and her absence from public meetings for the past two weeks. Fielder told a reporter from The Standard that she was available to speak in person at the hospital. A hospital security guard confirmed that Fielder was in the facility but would not allow the reporter to enter. The Standard has no confirmation of her condition. Fielder has told multiple people that she plans to resign. As of 4:30 p.m. Friday, the Board of Supervisors clerk had no documentation of Fielder’s resignation. A legislative aide shared a statement from Fielder’s office: “Jackie Fielder is going through an acute personal health crisis right now and we are not at liberty to share details, but we appreciate the support people have given us and are proud of her for taking care of herself.” Considered the most left-leaning member of the board, Fielder is known for her advocacy for public banking, tenant protections, and opposition to corporate interests and President Donald Trump’s aggressive immigration policies. This month, she called for an audit of the Sheriff’s Department . Should Fielder’s seat be vacated, the ideological balance of the Board of Supervisors would likely shift, empowering Mayor Daniel Lurie, with whom Fielder often sparred. The mayor would be able to appoint as supervisor a moderate who aligns with his policies on public safety and homelessness and would shield his legislation against vetoes from the board, which requires a supermajority. The rebalance of power would also put more pressure on the 2026 Board of Supervisors elections, where money is already flowing from special interests. “I am sending Supervisor Fielder my best wishes for a speedy recovery. She is a dedicated advocate for her community,” Lurie said in a statement. “I am encouraging everyone to give her the time and space to get better so she can do that work fully.” Anya Worley-Ziegmann, a progressive organizer known for their work with the People’s Budget Coalition and the local Democratic Socialists of America chapter, said Fielder is a key figure in the progressive movement. “It’s hard to put into words what Jackie’s candidacy and time in office means to working-class San Francisco,” Worley-Ziegmann said. “[It’s] always about the movement that she represents.” A progressive who won election in 2024, defeating moderate candidate Trevor Chandler, Fielder represents the Mission, Bernal Heights, and Portola. She ran for state Senate in 2020 but lost to incumbent Scott Wiener. Fielder’s office has seen tumult following a city attorney’s investigation into a reported leak. Feng Han’s employment as an aide in the office ceased March 12, according to the city clerk. Fielder excused herself from at least four board and committee meetings this month, records show. In a statement, City Attorney’s Office spokesperson Jen Kwart wished Fielder a quick recovery. “Our thoughts are with Supervisor Fielder,” Kwart said, “And (we) encourage her to take the time and space necessary to thoroughly consider any potential resignation.” A graduate of Stanford University, Fielder was involved in activism before becoming a supervisor, campaigning against the Dakota Access Pipeline, an oil pipeline that sparked protests during construction. Fielder taught classes at San Francisco State University from 2018 to 2020. She also served as a commissioner and vice chair of the San Francisco Local Agency Formation Commission and was co-director of Stop the Money Pipeline, a campaign that aimed to push back on money going to fossil fuel companies. During the 2024 race, Fielder handily beat her main opponent, Chandler, who ran a moderate campaign.

Muni streetcar crashed into Lurie’s Rivian. Plus: Sunset supe angers YIMBYs

This article is from Power Play, a twice-weekly newsletter rounding up the latest City Hall and local politics gossip. To sign up, visit The Standard’s newsletter page . Mayor Daniel Lurie ’s “ Tussle in the Tenderloin ” this month raised eyebrows and questions about his propensity for hopping out of his vehicle and mixing it up on the street. But another incident, in December, involving the mayor’s security detail and suped-up black Rivian went quietly under the radar. That time, it wasn’t people on the sidewalk who came to blows with Team Lurie but a historic, green San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency streetcar. Video from Dec. 11, obtained by Power Play, shows Lurie’s Rivian colliding with an F-Market & Wharves streetcar heading southbound on Market Street. The $134,000 electric vehicle ( bought and donated to the city by Lurie himself) stops abruptly at the intersection of Octavia Boulevard while turning on its police lights, attempting to make a U-turn at a prohibited left-turn intersection. The streetcar does not have time to stop and collides with the Rivian, pushing it a couple of feet to the left of the road. The train operator reported that someone onboard was injured, according to SFMTA records; however, video shot from inside the streetcar doesn’t appear to show anyone with a serious injury. A records request to the city attorney’s office returned no accident-related injury claims against the city in connection with the event. However, what appeared to be a minor crash turned out to be a surprisingly expensive repair estimate for the streetcar. ( Welcome to San Francisco .) For parts, paint, labor, and lost revenue to the SFMTA, the bill came to a whopping $21,438. That particular streetcar was built in 1946 in San Diego , and the model is in use in few places around the world, meaning SFMTA machinists often have to build parts from scratch . Lurie’s office did not respond to a request for comment about whether he was in the vehicle at the time of the crash. The video doesn’t show him exiting the Rivian after the incident; instead, an unidentified staffer holding what appears to be a blazer jumps out and crosses the street. San Francisco Police Department policy states that lights and sirens should be used “only when an emergency response appears reasonably necessary to prevent serious injury to persons, whether or not a criminal offense is involved.” In an unrelated incident, David Lazar , a former assistant SFPD chief, in an apparent violation of policy, used the lights on his unmarked police car to get around traffic during 2025’s NBA All-Star Weekend, resulting in a crash . So what was the Rivian, driven by SFPD officer Noel Castro , doing with its lights on? SFPD spokesperson Mason Lee said only that it was “for a law enforcement purpose.” He added, “The U-Turn was necessary to prevent or reduce the risk of injury to persons at the scene.” Lee declined to provide additional details but said that an investigation had found that the streetcar operator was at fault for following the Rivian too closely. A streetcar operator who spoke anonymously with Power Play said they usually keep one train’s length (about 60 feet) away from vehicles, and braking can depend on a host of factors, including street conditions and weather. — G.G. and J.F.R. Got tips? Send to us at powerplay@sfstandard.com . WHERE’S MY INVITE: After the embarrassing cancellation of a gubernatorial debate by the University of Southern California (this writer’s alma mater) because of the exclusion of some candidates, a San Francisco congressional candidate is pressuring a media organization over her exclusion from a debate stage. Political activist and former Trump appointee Marie Hurabiell has hired well-traveled election attorney Jim Sutton , who sent a letter to KQED regarding her omission from an upcoming debate. In the letter, Sutton argues that KQED could be at risk of violating the law, noting that nonprofits must exercise caution when excluding candidates and ensure their selection criteria are neutral. “Choosing which candidates may participate in a debate when other candidates may still decide to run … is by definition arbitrary and unreasonable,” Sutton wrote. KQED had previously responded to Sutton that it set a Feb. 23 deadline for participants’ qualification — a cutoff that came two days before Hurabiell announced her candidacy — to allow sufficient time for production. The station claimed that adjusting the deadline for a specific candidate would be inequitable. Another requirement is that candidates must either raise $100,000 or receive contributions from 500 donors in their most recent filing, which was due at the end of 2025 . Peter Cavagnaro , KQED’s communications director, confirmed Wednesday that the decision to exclude Hurabiell remains unchanged and that the organization is committed to a fair, transparent, and substantive event. Hurabiell said the campaign is filing a formal complaint to the Federal Election Commission. The debate is scheduled for Tuesday evening and will feature the other candidates seeking to succeed Rep. Nancy Pelosi : Supervisor Connie Chan , former congressional staffer and software engineer Saikat Chakrabarti , and state Sen. Scott Wiener . — H.L. ON HER OWN: Speaking of Hurabiell, the self-described “commonsense” candidate has done something nonsensical for an aspiring San Francisco politician: She turned down the chance to proclaim the rights of transgender people. A San Francisco Democratic Party proposal to reaffirm the city as a sanctuary for transgender people, authored by local Dems Emma Hare , Peter Gallotta, and Eric Kingsbury , was dutifully endorsed by Wiener, Chakrabarti, and Chan. But not Hurabiell, who has been vocal on X about her anti-trans stance and told Power Play she is neutral on the measure. “I absolutely support defending the rights, safety, and dignity of all San Franciscans. That being said, it’s well known I object to biological males accessing women’s sports or spaces based on self-identification,” she said. For years, Hurabiell has essentially denied the existence of transgender people in tweets we won’t link to here. But such a stance puts her out of step with pretty much every other political player in town, including her close ally Lurie, whose campaign promised to support trans youth. Kingsbury noted that the candidate was out of step with local Dems. “There’s a party that agrees with her,” he quipped. “It’s not the Democratic one.” The SF Democratic Party will vote on the measure at Wednesday’s regular meeting. It’ll likely sail through. Transgender Day of Visibility is March 31. — J.F.R. SUNSET BETRAYAL: The San Francisco YIMBY party endorsed Supervisor Alan Wong for his June reelection bid after he supported a major upzoning effort last year. Now the group feels betrayed. Wong has initiated a petition calling for the cleanup of a toxic plume beneath the 2500 block of Irving Street, an effort that just happens to also target a controversial affordable housing project . Wong and nearby residents say toxic dry-cleaning chemicals — particularly perchloroethylene, or PCE — have been detected in the subsurface soil and in homes. But housing advocates see other dirty motives at work. In a scathing letter , YIMBY blasted Wong’s move as an inflammatory, NIMBY-driven petition, arguing that the alleged public health risks are based on claims that were thoroughly evaluated and disproved during the permitting process. The group also criticized Wong’s decision to oppose a senior affordable housing project at 1234 Great Highway. “We expect better from a city supervisor than peddling NIMBY conspiracy theories and opposing affordable housing projects in his district,” the letter said. It is a rare move for YIMBY to publicly rebuke one of its endorsed candidates, and the group could choose to withdraw its endorsement. Wong said in a statement that the project has already been built and that it is now more about addressing community concerns. “When there is documented evidence of chemical contamination in the surrounding neighborhood, it is understandable that neighbors want more than a narrow, site-only response,” Wong said. — H.L. Clarification: This article has been updated to clarify that the $21,438 repair is an estimate.

4,324 contacts. 236 lobbyists. One very busy City Hall

Who was the most-lobbied San Francisco official in 2025? If you guessed Mayor Daniel Lurie, you chose wrong. It was San Francisco Airport Director Mike Nakornkhet and his staff, who were contacted more than 400 times — almost all by lobbyists for one company: Waymo. That includes 30 times on just one day in November, as the autonomous vehicle maker was pushing to get its robotaxis into SFO. We took a peek inside 2025 Ethics Commission data to better understand the $13.4 million City Hall influence apparatus. San Francisco’s lobbying machine is especially active, insiders say, because of the city’s political prestige and bureaucratic friction. It’s a city for the politically ambitious where it’s also notoriously difficult to get anything done. For comparison, on the other side of Silicon Valley, San Jose had fewer than one-third as many registered lobbyists as San Francisco had last year. San Francisco officials were contacted 4,324 times by lobbyists in 2025, or nearly a dozen times every day. Nearly 40% of those contacts — 1,720 — were related to building permits. Transportation came next, with 955. Human rights ranked last, with only three contacts. Companies large and small rely on lobbyists. The eight-location gym chain SF Fitness hired one who spent all of last year trying to secure building permits for a location at 1600 Jackson St. in Nob Hill, contacting city officials 113 times. Meanwhile, Two Sigma Investments, a $70 billion New York hedge fund, reached out to the San Francisco Employees’ Retirement System no fewer than 99 times — not to influence legislation but to pitch a pension fund investment. For businesses that can afford it, lobbying can feel like a capitalist’s dream. While roughly 236 lobbyists were registered in San Francisco in 2025, a handful of pros dominated the field. Rich Peterson of Lighthouse Public Affairs brought in nearly $2.9 million from 51 clients. Chris Gruwell of New Deal Advisers earned slightly less — $2.6 million — but represented the most clients, with 56. But that doesn’t tell the full story. While San Francisco requires outside lobbying firms to disclose their client lists and fees, large companies often employ full-time in-house staff to influence policy. Those lobbyists are required to report when they contact public officials, but they report only the portion of their salary that corresponds to time spent lobbying, not their full compensation. The true cost of influence at City Hall is a mystery and almost certainly far higher than the numbers suggest. Here are the five companies whose lobbyists contacted San Francisco officials the most in 2025, what they wanted, and whether or not they got it. The busiest companies Waymo: 678 contacts No company worked City Hall harder than Waymo. The robotaxi company, owned by Alphabet, hired lobbyists who contacted public officials more than three times as often as the next busiest client — almost entirely as part of a push to get its vehicles into San Francisco International Airport. Waymo ran two parallel lobbying operations: an outside firm that was paid $10,000 a month and an in-house team that targeted airport staff, the mayor’s office, the city attorney, planning, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, the Board of Supervisors, and the Police Department. By year’s end, the company was also playing defense. When a beloved bodega cat died after being struck by a Waymo on Oct. 27, Supervisor Jackie Fielder called for stricter public regulation of robotaxis . In the following weeks, Waymo’s lobbyists contacted seven different supervisors, asking them to oppose any restrictions on autonomous vehicle operations countywide. It all seems to have been worth it. In September, Lurie announced that Waymo had been granted a permit to operate at the airport. By January, the company had begun offering rides to SFO. Meanwhile, Fielder’s call for more robotaxi regulation appears not to have found other takers inside City Hall. “SFO followed a measured and deliberate process to evaluating the permitting of Waymo at the Airport,” a representative for the airport said. “Other companies have also expressed interest in providing autonomous vehicle services at the Airport, and we have engaged with them in a similar, consistent manner.” Union Square Alliance: 207 contacts The business improvement district that manages Union Square spent the year lobbying on multiple fronts: pushing the Powell Street Corridor Improvement Project, campaigning for more police resources and physical barriers to deter retail theft, and trying to bring life back to the neighborhood’s public spaces with food trucks, holiday events, and a Winter Walk street closure. Starting in June, it turned its focus to securing its own future, lobbying the Recreation and Parks Department to extend its contract to manage Union Square Plaza. Teamster Joint Council 7: 203 contacts The Teamsters represent more than 70,000 Bay Area workers, and in 2025 their primary concern was automation. The union monitored autonomous vehicle policy at every city agency that touches transportation — the airport, SFMTA, the mayor’s office, the city attorney — and in July lobbied every member of the Board of Supervisors in support of a ban on commercial deliveries by autonomous vehicles. The union was also fighting to protect San Francisco’s production, distribution, and repair zones — areas set aside for the kind of blue-collar work Teamsters depend on — from encroachment by tech companies seeking permits for laboratories and outdoor testing. When DoorDash sought to use an industrial site in the Mission to test delivery drones, Teamsters appealed the city’s approval and lobbied the Board of Supervisors, coming out victorious . In December, the board approved legislation requiring companies to obtain a conditional-use permit before converting outdoor PDR spaces for testing purposes. Pacific Gas and Electric: 148 contacts PG&E spent the year meeting with Lurie’s office sometimes multiple times a week, pitching itself as a reliable partner on service planning and long-term grid capacity — seemingly in an attempt to fight off San Francisco’s ongoing effort to municipalize its electrical grid . Then, a major power outage that began Dec. 20 sent PG&E lobbyists scrambling into the new year, with three contacts to the mayor’s office on Jan. 2 alone. The company brought in a new lobbyist to manage the fallout and began making the rounds to every relevant city agency. Hines: 142 contacts The Texas real estate giant responsible for building the Salesforce tower spent 2025 grinding through the permitting process for one of the most significant development opportunities downtown: the old PG&E headquarters at 77 Beale St., a sprawling Financial District property where Hines plans to build the city’s tallest building. Lobbyists contacted the Planning Department, the city attorney, the Office of Economic and Workforce Development, the Department of Building Inspection, the Fire Department, and Public Works. The most-contacted officials Nakornkhet’s office was contacted far more than any other agency or official. Lurie came second, with 297 contacts to his office, most from PG&E, Union Square Alliance, and Waymo. The Board of Supervisors was lobbied more than any city department, and Matt Dorsey of District 6 — a major area of development — was contacted the most. Dorsey was also lobbied by the SF Deputy Sheriff’s Association more than any other supervisor. Fielder, who represents District 9, was contacted by the Teamsters more than any other supervisor. Waymo didn’t contact her once. City planner Corey Teague fielded contacts from a range of corporate rezoning campaigns, all the way down to advocates for a pickleball court. So what about AI? San Francisco is home to the world’s most powerful AI companies, but aside from Waymo, their City Hall lobbying footprint was modest in 2025. Anthropic spent $80,000 hiring lobbyist Alex Tourk at $20,000 a month to meet with the mayor’s office, SFPD, and city HR to pitch a partnership with Claude. OpenAI, which used the same lobbyist in 2024 to support business tax reform, filed no contacts of city officials in 2025. For now, it appears Bay Area-based AI companies are more focused on lobbying at the federal and state levels, where policies could dictate their futures. This story has been updated to include comment from SFO.

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

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

Malcolm Yeung

Jose F. Almanza

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

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