Gavin got gifted a gun. Getting it home to California will be tricky

In his six years as governor, Gavin Newsom has signed some of the nation’s <a href="https://www.gov.ca.gov/priorities-and-progress/priorities/public-safety/">strongest gun control</a> laws.



It was a surprise to some, then, when Newsom accepted a Sig Sauer P365-Xmacro pistol from the conservative podcast host Shawn Ryan while the two recorded a four-hour <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BBq3Q_fHSU">episode</a> last week in Tennessee. 



“Everybody gets a gift,” Ryan said, before presenting the governor with the gun.



“Brother, this is fabulous,” Newsom responded. “The last thing people would expect is that I respect this gift.”&nbsp;



“Really?” Ryan asked.&nbsp;



“Yeah, man. I’m not anti-gun at all,” Newsom said.&nbsp;



The gun, which is legal to own in California, will be the first firearm registered in Newsom’s name, his spokesperson Izzy Gardon confirmed. The pistol typically retails for around $700; state ethics rules <a href="https://www.fppc.ca.gov/learn/public-officials-and-employees-rules-/gifts-and-honoraria.html">limit the value of gifts</a> politicians can accept at $630. Gardon said Newsom will pay Ryan the difference.&nbsp;



But transporting the gun from Tennessee back to California is a logistically — and politically — tricky process, and one that gun rights advocates say will show the governor firsthand how difficult it has become to own firearms in the Golden State.&nbsp;



“King Newsom is going to have to go through everything that all of the subjects of California, the plebeians, have to go through,” Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, said in an interview.&nbsp;



Here’s the <a href="https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/cfl2021.pdf">checklist</a> that Newsom would generally have to follow to receive the gun:&nbsp;



<ol class="wp-block-list">
<li>Ryan would have to bring the pistol to a licensed dealer in Tennessee to be transported to an authorized dealer in California.&nbsp;</li>



<li>Once the gun arrives, Newsom would have to fill out forms, including a <a href="https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs">Dealer Record of Sale</a> document, for the dealer to submit to the California Department of Justice.&nbsp;</li>



<li>Newsom would have to wait 10 days before he could receive the gun. During that time, the DOJ would run a background check to ensure he is not banned from possessing firearms. (California <a href="https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/firearms/forms/prohibcatmisd.pdf">generally bars</a> former felons from owning guns, as well as those convicted of certain domestic violence crimes and those subject to restraining and other protective orders.)&nbsp;</li>



<li>The governor would have to obtain a Firearm Safety Certificate, which requires a 75% score on a written test “pertaining to firearm laws and safety requirements” administered by a certified instructor from the DOJ. State law additionally requires a gun owner to perform a “safe handling demonstration” at the dealership before taking possession of the firearm.&nbsp;</li>



<li>If Newsom does not own one, he would have to purchase a <a href="https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/fsdcertlist">certified lock box or other DOJ-approved safety device</a> to store his gun.&nbsp;</li>



<li>Once satisfying those requirements, Newsom could take the gun home. But he would have to start a separate licensing and training process in Marin County, <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2024/11/15/gavin-newsom-buys-marin-mansion/">where he lives</a>, with the sheriff’s department if he wanted to obtain a concealed-carry license.&nbsp;</li>
</ol>



Gardon did not confirm whether Newsom had started the process of transferring the gun to California or if it had already arrived.&nbsp;



During his conversation with Ryan, Newsom defended California’s gun laws, arguing that they have earned the state one of the country’s <a href="https://giffords.org/lawcenter/resources/scorecard/?scorecard=CA">lowest rates of gun-related deaths</a>. In contrast, Republican-run states, including Tennessee, typically have the highest rates.



But 2nd Amendment activists have long argued that California’s restrictions have made it onerous to own firearms in the state. Paredes called Newsom’s acceptance of the gift “the height of hypocrisy.”&nbsp;



“He is the chameleon governor who is now changing his stripes and is excited about receiving a gun, where he has done absolutely nothing but travesties against the 2nd Amendment as governor,” Paredes said.&nbsp;



Thad Kousser, a political science professor at UC San Diego, said Newsom’s foray into gun ownership is likely part of a broader effort to “break down his national image as an unabashed progressive on every policy” ahead of a <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/07/08/newsom-president-campaign-tracker/">likely 2028 presidential run</a>.&nbsp;



“By accepting that gun … he may have tried to send the message that gun control is about stopping people from having assault weapons and not opposition to any licensed gun ownership,” Kousser said. “He’s both trying to change his image and trying to kind of create a new image for what a progressive today stands for.”&nbsp;



Gun control advocates who have worked with Newsom to tighten California’s rules said they see no problem with the governor’s new weapon.&nbsp;



“Gun owners make our movement stronger,” Monisha Henley, senior vice president for government affairs at Everytown for Gun Safety, said in a statement. “From tackling ghost guns to taking the gun industry head on, Gov. Newsom has shown his commitment to gun safety.”&nbsp;&nbsp;



Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel, a Democrat from Encino who has written several of California’s restrictive gun laws, said he doesn’t “see any contradiction between responsible gun ownership and supporting strong, commonsense gun safety laws.”



“In fact, many of the most passionate and engaged gun safety advocates we’ve worked with are themselves gun owners — because they understand that commonsense laws can protect communities without infringing on 2nd Amendment rights,” Gabriel said.&nbsp;



In his conversation with Ryan, Newsom said he spent Mother’s Day shooting skeet with his kids and wife. Newsom noted that his father-in-law, a staunch conservative who has donated to Republican political campaigns, gifted his young son his first rifle.&nbsp;



But he also said he was “challenged by large-capacity magazine clips in urban centers” and the proliferation of “weapons of war.” California’s rules around background checks, age requirements for gun ownership, and restrictions around those deemed unsafe from possessing firearms have contributed to a safer state, he argued.&nbsp;



“But otherwise, man,” Newsom said, “people have the right to bear arms.”&nbsp;

Attorney General Pam Bondi tells SF jails to hand over list of noncitizen inmates

The Department of Justice has requested a list of all noncitizen inmates in San Francisco&#8217;s jails and has threatened to &#8220;pursue all available means&#8221; if the sheriff does not cooperate. If the San Francisco Sheriff&#8217;s Department, which runs the jails, hands over the data, it will be in violation of the city&#8217;s sanctuary laws.



The request was also made to other California counties, including Los Angeles, in the form of a statement released Thursday morning. “Removing criminal illegal aliens is this administration’s highest priority,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in the press release. “I look forward to cooperating with California’s county sheriffs to accomplish our shared duty of keeping Californians and all Americans safe and secure.”



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1667" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/gettyimages-2223516433.jpg?w=2500" alt="A woman in a blue suit sits between two men in suits. She looks intently at one of them, who is blurred and speaking. The background features a flag." class="wp-image-419872" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/gettyimages-2223516433.jpg 5574w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/gettyimages-2223516433.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/gettyimages-2223516433.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/gettyimages-2223516433.jpg?resize=2500,1667 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/gettyimages-2223516433.jpg?resize=1536,1024 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/gettyimages-2223516433.jpg?resize=2048,1365 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Attorney General Pam Bondi with President Donald Trump during a July 8 Cabinet meeting.</figcaption></figure>



The SF Sheriff&#8217;s Department said it had not received an official request from the DOJ.



“In the absence of formal communication, we will review the information referenced in the DOJ’s press release and provide a response forthwith,&#8221; a sheriff&#8217;s spokesperson said.



San Francisco passed its <a href="https://www.sf.gov/information--sanctuary-city-ordinance">sanctuary law</a> in 1989 and has updated it multiple times since. One of its main intents is to allow immigrants to report crime and other issues to authorities without fear of being reported to immigration officials. 



A spokesperson for Mayor Daniel Lurie said his administration defended the city&#8217;s long-standing sanctuary laws.



“Under San Francisco and California’s longstanding policies, local law enforcement does not participate in federal immigration enforcement. Mayor Lurie is committed to upholding those policies, and so are our city’s public safety leaders,&#8221; said Charles Lutvak. The request for inmate information is the latest move by federal authorities to ramp up mass deportations, which have been on the rise in San Francisco and across the country and have faced legal pushback and protests. Just this week, President Donald Trump&#8217;s border czar, Tom Homan, again threatened to double down on immigration enforcement in sanctuary cities. Since Jan. 1, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials have sent the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department 353 detainer requests, according to department data. The <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0p8x3B29TLs" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">department&#8217;s policy</a> is to only honor requests regarding individuals convicted of certain serious or violent felonies. It also considers whether the person poses a risk to public safety. Since April 1, the department has honored one detainer request, its spokesperson said. 



Sheriff Paul Miyamoto released a statement Thursday, saying his &#8220;priority is public safety—not politics—and we will not foster fear in immigrant communities by acting as an arm of immigration enforcement.&#8221;



&#8220;The [SFSO] does not participate in civil immigration enforcement. The federal government already knows the identity and has the fingerprints of every inmate in San Francisco’s jails,&#8221; Miyamoto said. &#8220;If the federal government has a legal reason to arrest someone, they can do so by obtaining a criminal warrant or a court order. The Sheriff will respond to any request for information consistent with local, state, and federal law and the Sheriff has and will continue to honor judicial warrants.&#8221;



Bondi was in <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/07/17/pelosi-alcatraz-prison-trump/">San Francisco on Thursday to visit Alcatraz</a>, where she was expected to announce plans to reopen the federal prison on the island. A prison there closed in 1963 and has been a popular tourist destination since 1973, attracting more than 1 million visitors a year.



Editor&#8217;s note: In an earlier version of this story, San Francisco Sheriff&#8217;s Department officials inaccurately cited 706 detainer requests received from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement since Jan. 1. The correct number is 353.

City Hall’s ‘incredibly hard’ budget is done. Here are the winners and losers

Following months of tough negotiations at City Hall, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors on Tuesday approved Mayor Daniel Lurie’s <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/30/san-francisco-budget-daniel-lurie-deficit-proposal/">$15.9 billion budget</a>, which required major belt-tightening to close a historic $782 million deficit.&nbsp;



The financial plan reflects <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/30/san-francisco-budget-screwed-lurie/">some of the most significant cuts</a> to San Francisco’s budget in nearly two decades, when the Great Recession decimated City Hall’s coffers. Lurie, a political neophyte who rose to power on promises to curb irresponsible spending, slashed nonprofit contracts, department budgets, and some city jobs.&nbsp;



The Board of Supervisors, which added several politically moderate members after last year’s election, navigated tricky waters in an effort to avoid the most painful cuts. Unions and community groups fought back against the austerity measures — to limited success.



Several of the board’s progressive members joined forces with moderates in a 10-1 vote to approve the budget. Lurie has until Aug. 1 to sign it.



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1668" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/supervisors-fighting-for-presidency-a-black-horse-wins_aar_28.jpg?w=2500" alt="A woman with long dark hair and gold hoop earrings is seated in a formal setting, looking to the side attentively. A gold thermos and sanitizer are visible." class="wp-image-353124" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/supervisors-fighting-for-presidency-a-black-horse-wins_aar_28.jpg 7433w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/supervisors-fighting-for-presidency-a-black-horse-wins_aar_28.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/supervisors-fighting-for-presidency-a-black-horse-wins_aar_28.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/supervisors-fighting-for-presidency-a-black-horse-wins_aar_28.jpg?resize=2500,1668 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/supervisors-fighting-for-presidency-a-black-horse-wins_aar_28.jpg?resize=1536,1025 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/supervisors-fighting-for-presidency-a-black-horse-wins_aar_28.jpg?resize=2048,1366 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Supervisor Jackie Fielder emerged as a vocal critic of the mayor&#8217;s budget proposal.</figcaption></figure>



Supervisor Connie Chan, who received accolades from the board and Lurie’s office for steering the negotiations as budget chair, said during the vote that the spending plan is not “something we all can fully celebrate.”&nbsp;



“But we must acknowledge how we have come together despite our differences to meet this moment,” Chan said.



Supervisor Jackie Fielder, a freshman lawmaker who has emerged as the board’s progressive leader, cast the sole “no” vote against the budget, saying it&nbsp;included cuts to programs that&nbsp;serve the city’s most vulnerable.



&#8220;For all these reasons, I cannot in good conscience vote in support of this budget,&#8221; Fielder said. &#8220;And I will be voting no — with disappointment, with frustration, but also with clarity about the kind of city we are fighting to become. We owe our residents more than austerity. We owe them dignity.&#8221;



Here’s a look at the winners and losers.&nbsp;



<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-winner-with-caveats-mayor-daniel-lurie">Winner (with caveats): Mayor Daniel Lurie</h2>



Lurie entered the mayor’s office as budget <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/01/23/daniel-lurie-san-francisco-mayor-budget-cuts/">cutter-in-chief</a>. He didn’t get everything he wanted in the final budget deal, but the reduced spending is undoubtedly a small win for the mayor.



Lurie’s trims mean less funding for the network of <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/06/05/daniel-lurie-budget-cuts-san-francisco-nonprofit-grants/">nonprofits</a> that provide a variety of services to San Franciscans. In a hard-fought battle, the mayor successfully <a href="https://link.sfstandard.com/view/65c28f2e664d5a5d7e0849a8o1rqy.2h1/aba0897b">diverted some money</a> from a 2018 voter-approved proposition intended for homeless services to instead fund his goal of building shelter beds. Lurie was able to <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/06/26/san-francisco-mayor-daniel-lurie-layoffs-negotiation-budget/">get some of his requested layoffs into the budget amid pushback</a> from certain supervisors and unions.



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1667" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/20250205_8393232314_budgethearing_asd_1.jpg?w=2500" alt="The image shows two people seated at a conference table with laptops and microphones. The focus is on a woman, appearing attentive, with blurred screens in the foreground." class="wp-image-363859" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/20250205_8393232314_budgethearing_asd_1.jpg 6414w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/20250205_8393232314_budgethearing_asd_1.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/20250205_8393232314_budgethearing_asd_1.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/20250205_8393232314_budgethearing_asd_1.jpg?resize=2500,1667 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/20250205_8393232314_budgethearing_asd_1.jpg?resize=1536,1024 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/20250205_8393232314_budgethearing_asd_1.jpg?resize=2048,1366 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Supervisor Connie Chan helped shuttle City Hall through the budget process this year.</figcaption></figure>



The mayor continues to face difficult budget years ahead. This year’s blueprint addresses only a portion of San Francisco’s long-standing structural deficit.&nbsp;



“So, this budget year was incredibly hard,” Lurie’s planning chief, Sarah Dennis Phillips, said in a hearing last week. “Future budget years, probably for the next two years, will continue to be hard.”&nbsp;



San Francisco’s budget could worsen if President Donald Trump <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/04/10/san-francisco-lurie-budget-trump-2-billion/">follows through on promises to cut billions of dollars in federal funding</a> to sanctuary cities.&nbsp;



<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-winner-law-enforcement">Winner: Law enforcement </h2>



The biggest winner of this budget season? <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/27/san-francisco-budget-cuts-district-attorney-public-defender/">The cops</a>.&nbsp;



Lurie followed through on his campaign promise to prioritize public safety by bumping the budgets of several agencies. The San Francisco Police Department received a roughly 3% funding boost to $849 million. The San Francisco Sheriff’s Department, which provides security for the city’s courts and runs jails, received a 7% bump to $345 million. The district attorney’s office got a 3% boost to $96 million.



Those increases prompted Fielder to rip into the mayor at Tuesday’s hearing over his decision to keep law enforcement funding intact while cutting community services.&nbsp;



&#8220;While programs serving immigrants, families, BIPOC and LGBTQ communities were gutted, law enforcement walked away with more money,&#8221; Fielder said.



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1668" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9334360850_icemissionprotest_053.jpg?w=2500" alt="A line of police officers in riot gear, wearing helmets and face shields, stands against a building. They appear alert, holding batons, with focus on one officer." class="wp-image-408648" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9334360850_icemissionprotest_053.jpg 6481w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9334360850_icemissionprotest_053.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9334360850_icemissionprotest_053.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9334360850_icemissionprotest_053.jpg?resize=2500,1668 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9334360850_icemissionprotest_053.jpg?resize=1536,1025 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9334360850_icemissionprotest_053.jpg?resize=2048,1366 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Law enforcement saw budget increases under Lurie, who campaigned on prioritizing public safety.</figcaption></figure>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-losers-some-commissions-and-departments">Losers: Some commissions and departments</h2>



Other departments did not fare as well as those related to public safety.



Notably, the <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/30/sf-status-of-women-human-rights-commission-budget/">scandal-ridden Human Rights Commission</a> saw its budget hollowed out by more than a third, to $27.9 million. The Department of Police Accountability saw a drop of 5% to $9 million.



Among others that lost significant chunks of their budgets: San Francisco Homelessness and Supportive Housing, the Office of Economic and Workforce Development, and the Ethics Commission.&nbsp;



<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-partial-losers-unions-and-nonprofits">Partial losers: Unions and nonprofits</h2>



One of the fiercest fights to erupt during the budget negotiations was <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/28/san-francisco-mayor-daniel-lurie-budget-layoffs/">over Lurie’s proposed layoffs</a>. The mayor’s initial budget proposal cut roughly 100 filled positions and more than 1,000 unfilled roles from the city’s payroll —&nbsp;<a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/06/26/san-francisco-budget-government-population-daniel-lurie/">a sliver of the total workforce of 34,800</a>.



The unions came out in force over the last several weeks to defend their workers. Late last month, the board restored funding for 57 filled positions, meaning 40 workers will get pink slips. Roughly 1,300 unfilled positions will be axed.



Nonprofits <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/06/05/daniel-lurie-budget-cuts-san-francisco-nonprofit-grants/">didn’t fare well</a> in the budget, which reduced city contracts by around $180 million. The cuts will affect numerous departments, including Homelessness and Supportive Housing, Economic and Workforce Development, and the Department on the Status of Women, all responsible for doling out grants to a vast network of local nonprofits.

San Francisco balances on thin blue line with Trump ICE arrests

After violent clashes last week between U.S. immigration officers and protesters led to an officer drawing his gun and <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/07/08/ice-van-video-san-francisco-immigration-court/">a woman being flung from the hood of a speeding federal vehicle</a>, San Francisco police face a thorny question: to intervene or not to intervene.&nbsp;



One San Francisco Police Department deputy chief has weighed in, committing to more aggressively defend federal officers in confrontations with the public. But few in city leadership are willing to discuss how far police might go in blocking people from protesting the arrest of undocumented immigrants — or whether these actions could violate First and Fourth Amendment rights and sanctuary city policies.



The <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/06/05/san-francisco-ice-arrests-mothers-children/">surge in immigration enforcement</a> under President Donald Trump has fanned out across California and has been most pronounced in Los Angeles, where raids have met fierce resistance and led to rioting. In response, the Los Angeles Police Department <a href="https://www.police1.com/law-enforcement-policies/new-lapd-policy-requires-officers-to-verify-identities-of-ice-agents-during-responses">issued public guidelines</a> on how its officers intend to engage with masked federal immigration officers, while Mayor Karen Bass has personally confronted federal agents and criticized the Trump administration.



San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie, by contrast, appears to be taking a wait — and wait, and wait — and see approach. In interviews, he has repeated the talking point that he will keep San Franciscans “safe” without going into detail or mentioning Trump directly.&nbsp;



Lurie declined to comment. His spokesperson Charles Lutvak cited the mayor’s efforts to fund legal efforts in defending immigrants. Part of that funding was restored after The Standard reported that Lurie was <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/06/13/san-francisco-ice-arrests-daniel-lurie-budget-cuts/">cutting the budget for immigrant services</a>.



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="953" height="635" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/20241108_mayorlurieannouncement_jason_-0702.jpg?w=953" alt="A group of people stand closely together, with two men in suits prominently in the foreground. One man speaks at a microphone, while the other looks on attentively." class="wp-image-349866" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/20241108_mayorlurieannouncement_jason_-0702.jpg 953w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/20241108_mayorlurieannouncement_jason_-0702.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/20241108_mayorlurieannouncement_jason_-0702.jpg?resize=768,512 768w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 953px) 100vw, 953px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Mayor Daniel Lurie and interim SFPD Chief Paul Yep may take a tougher stand on protesters following violent clashes last week.</figcaption></figure>



The issue of how San Francisco intends to deal with an escalation in immigration enforcement, and corresponding protests, has gained greater attention after SFPD Deputy Chief Derrick Lew made surprising comments last week at a town hall in the Castro. According to <a href="https://missionlocal.org/2025/07/sfpd-ice-protesters/">a report by Mission Local</a>, Lew said the department is focused on keeping the public safe and allowing for peaceful protests, but officers will equally prioritize the welfare of agents for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other federal agencies.



“We can’t just sit by and watch our fellow law enforcement agent or officer get hurt,” Lew reportedly said.



The comments raised the hackles of Supervisor Jackie Fielder and immigrant rights advocates, who have called on Lurie to take a more forceful stance in support of the immigrant community. Fielder, who represents the Mission, responded in a fiery fashion Monday, accusing ICE of being a &#8220;fascist agency” and demanding answers on local law enforcement activities in a letter of inquiry sent to Lurie, the controller’s office, and the SFPD and Sheriff’s Department. She noted that ICE has the manpower and legal authority to make arrests on its own if necessary.



“It’s baffling that SFPD leadership would equate unarmed protestors with Trump’s armed ICE agents,” Fielder said in a statement. “They can protect themselves with their pepper spray, their guns, their vehicles, and their armor, as they did so readily last Tuesday.”&nbsp;



She added, “This is not a law enforcement agency upholding public safety; it is a fascist operation that is violating court orders and the rule of law to stoke fear and sow chaos.”&nbsp;



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-posts-container">
<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>
</div>



Fielder demanded more information on how police intend to engage with protesters and ICE agents in accordance with local laws. She also questioned law enforcement agencies’ reported practice of sharing data from license-plate readers with federal authorities. An investigation by The Standard found that police in San Francisco and Oakland appear to have <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/07/14/oakland-san-francisco-ice-license-plate-readers/">violated laws around sharing information</a> with federal agencies.



ICE officials issued a statement Monday accusing protesters in San Francisco of attacking and obstructing federal officers July 8 outside of the federal immigration court on Sansome Street. Federal officials said the violence is part of a trend of assaults on ICE officers, including an alleged coordinated attack on an ICE facility in Texas that led to an officer being shot.



“These violent individuals have zero respect for the rule of law and casually violate it,” a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security wrote in an email.



Evan Sernoffsky, director of communications for the SFPD, said Lew’s town hall comments did not run afoul of local policies and state law, which forbid police from working with ICE on immigration-related enforcement. Sources have told The Standard that Lew is a strong candidate to take over the SFPD after the recent <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/07/police-chief-bill-scott-announces-resignation/">resignation of Chief Bill Scott</a>.&nbsp;Paul Yep is currently serving as interim chief.



Police officers would have intervened in last week’s chaos, Sernoffsky said, but none arrived&nbsp; until after the violent clashes. This account was disputed by Mission Local, which reported that officers were present at the time of the incidents.



Sernoffsky said officers intervening in physical confrontations should not be seen as assisting ICE in the same way that making immigration-related arrests or providing information to the federal agency would violate local laws.



“If any person in the city comes under a violent attack, it’s the police department’s responsibility to protect public safety,” Sernoffsky said. “It has nothing to do with ICE or anybody else — that is uniform for everybody.”



Board of Supervisors President Rafael Mandelman, who helped moderate last week’s town hall, said San Francisco’s leaders might be wise to consider following in the footsteps of those in Los Angeles, who have issued clear guidance on how police intend to comply with federal immigration actions and how to confirm that masked officers are, in fact, genuine law enforcement officers.



“I think this is a hard question, and the police need to do what they can to maintain order and protect San Franciscans,” Mandelman said. “How they respond to ICE officers and protesters raises challenging questions.”

SF officials convene emergency meeting as Trump deploys soldiers to L.A.

Mayor Daniel Lurie has diligently <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/01/22/donald-trump-san-francisco-fight-mayor-daniel-lurie/">resisted talking about President Donald Trump</a> in public since taking office. The last week may require a change in that strategy.



On Sunday, Trump <a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/live/national-guard-troops-la-immigration-ice-clashes-paramount">deployed 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles</a> after days of raids and arrests by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents sparked protests and physical confrontations with federal agents. Escalating tensions over the weekend included rocks being thrown at federal law enforcement vehicles, federal agents deploying flash-bang grenades and tear gas, and protesters setting Waymos on fire as thousands took to the streets.



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-posts-container">
<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>
</div>



By Sunday night, <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/06/08/anti-ice-protest-s/">the unrest had spread to San Francisco</a>. At a protest outside ICE&#8217;s local headquarters on Sansome Street, protesters hurled hammers and other objects at the building and got into shoving matches with police in riot gear, who used metal barricades to push them back. About 60 people were arrested.



Days earlier in San Francisco, roughly 15 people — including <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/06/05/san-francisco-ice-arrests-mothers-children/">women and children as young as 3</a> — were taken into custody during check-in appointments at a downtown ICE office. One woman and her children, ages 5 and 10, were reportedly forced to sleep on the floor overnight and were not given food. As of Sunday, the woman had been shipped to <a href="https://www.texastribune.org/2025/03/06/texas-dilley-immigration-detention-center-families-reopen/">a detention center in South Texas</a>, according to ICE’s locator system.



On Sunday morning, organized labor in San Francisco convened an emergency meeting to discuss the effects of the escalation in immigration enforcement. Those in attendance at Sunday’s meeting included Lurie, labor leaders, the mayor, City Attorney David Chiu, District Attorney Brooke Jenkins, state Sen. Scott Weiner, and local Democratic Party chair Nancy Tung. Officials met to strategize on how to educate residents on their rights and encourage peaceful protests.&nbsp;



Lurie apparently told those in attendance he was there to listen to their concerns and expressed that the safety of the immigrant community is a priority. A source said the mayor’s words were appreciated, but his public silence on Trump has been frustrating.



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1666" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/ap25008806454603.jpg?w=2500" alt="A man in a dark suit and light blue tie gazes pensively, set against a blurred outdoor background with soft lighting." class="wp-image-360280" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/ap25008806454603.jpg 3236w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/ap25008806454603.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/ap25008806454603.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/ap25008806454603.jpg?resize=2500,1666 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/ap25008806454603.jpg?resize=1536,1024 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/ap25008806454603.jpg?resize=2048,1365 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Mayor Daniel Lurie has stuck to the script when talking about immigration detentions and arrests in San Francisco.</figcaption></figure>



Unlike Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi and Supervisor Jackie Fielder, both of whom quickly condemned ICE’s actions in San Francisco, Lurie waited until Friday afternoon to issue a statement about the arrests after being contacted multiple times by The Standard.



“These efforts to target members of our community who contribute to our city, support our economy, and raise their families here are meant to do the exact opposite and make San Francisco less safe,” Lurie said. “Holding children and families for extended periods without meeting basic needs is particularly cruel.”



The mayor added that he is in regular contact with immigrant advocates who organize the SF Rapid Response Network to act on ICE tips. But few individuals involved in those efforts said they had heard from Lurie’s office about Wednesday’s arrests as of Friday afternoon.



Gabriel Medina, executive director of La Raza Community Resource Center, said his team heard nothing from the Lurie administration.



“I think the mayor is trying to not make too much of a blip on the Trump radar,” Medina said. “What I would hope for is more communication internally that’s not public. I’m not seeing it looking at my channels now.”



Laura Valdéz, executive director of Mission Action, told The Standard she spoke with Lurie on Friday morning and she explained to the mayor the need to step up more forcefully in the face of Trump’s aggressive enforcement tactics.



“We need him to unequivocally condemn the actions of ICE and this unjust and inhumane immigration strategy,” Valdéz said.



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="2441" height="1953" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/img_6366.jpg?w=2441" alt="ICE agent detains immigrant" class="wp-image-405730" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/img_6366.jpg 2441w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/img_6366.jpg?resize=300,240 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/img_6366.jpg?resize=768,614 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/img_6366.jpg?resize=1536,1229 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/img_6366.jpg?resize=2048,1639 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2441px) 100vw, 2441px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Plainclothes ICE agents detain an immigrant May 27 at San Francisco Immigration Court.</figcaption></figure>



Charles Lutvak, a spokesperson for the mayor, said the Lurie administration had reached out to people in the community after the ICE arrests, but he declined to provide details about when or with whom these conversations occurred.



Immigrant advocates say they have had productive conversations with San Francisco police, and Evan Sernoffsky, an SFPD spokesperson, issued a statement saying there is an interagency plan with the Sheriff’s Office to ensure people can peacefully exercise their First Amendment rights. However, he added, violence, property destruction, and other criminal activity will not be tolerated.&nbsp;



“Under longstanding city policy, local law enforcement officers are generally prohibited from assisting in the enforcement of federal immigration laws — that policy keeps our city safer, and we will continue to uphold it,” Sernoffsky said.



It’s unclear what role soldiers in Los Angeles have served beyond sowing fear and stoking protests, but the public outcry by state Democratic leaders has been swift and stern. Gov. Gavin Newsom called the troops a “spectacle” and “a serious breach of state sovereignty,” while Wiener, who represents San Francisco, called the use of federal forces to put down dissent “a core manifestation of fascism.”



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="1024" height="730" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/gettyimages-2219219057.jpg?w=1024" alt="Police officers in riot gear confront protesters on a street. One officer wields a baton, while protesters appear to struggle. Tension is evident." class="wp-image-407976" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/gettyimages-2219219057.jpg 1024w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/gettyimages-2219219057.jpg?resize=300,214 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/gettyimages-2219219057.jpg?resize=768,548 768w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">The National Guard, police, and protesters clash Sunday outside a jail in downtown Los Angeles following two days of protests over immigration raids.</figcaption></figure>



It wasn’t until late Sunday night that <a href="https://x.com/daniellurie/status/1931957300828524682?s=46&amp;t=pyd4Acn73VWtIC6nuFy7LA">Lurie broke his silence, on social media, about ICE activities</a>. He did not directly address the women and children who were rounded up in San Francisco or Trump’s deployment of troops in Los Angeles, focusing mostly on the vandalism and clashes with police that led to arrests. Lurie ended the post by recycling past statements about his commitment to helping immigrants. It was a measured response, but it was at least something after other weekend Instagram posts about his <a href="https://www.instagram.com/stories/danielluriesf/3650564812106372083/?hl=en">frequent coffee consumption</a> and attending <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DKnWsISBr--/?hl=en">a Giants game on Pride Day</a>.



The closest Lurie has come to sparring with Trump was when the mayor noted that the president’s absurd idea to <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/04/trump-alcatraz-prison-again/">convert Alcatraz back to a prison</a> was “not a serious proposal.” But as anxieties mount about Trump&#8217;s actions in California, Lurie&#8217;s ducking and weaving on what is causing the unrest may no longer be viable.



On Friday, the mayor’s office noted in an email to The Standard that it believed none of the people whom ICE arrested last week are San Francisco residents. If and when that changes, maybe it will be the time Lurie feels bold enough to talk directly about he who will not be named.



Editor’s note: This story has been updated after Mission Action officials learned that the organization’s executive director spoke with Lurie on Friday.

SF nonprofits brace for bloodbath as Lurie slashes grant funding

When she first came to San Francisco roughly a decade ago, Ermei Wu landed a job in a Chinatown restaurant to support her three kids. Like many monolingual immigrants, she didn’t have anyone explaining wage laws to her in the language she speaks, Cantonese.&nbsp;



She never knew to challenge her boss for what she later discovered was wage theft, until she joined the Chinese Progressive Association’s program, the Workers Rights Community Collaborative. 



“I knew I had rights as a worker, that I had paid sick leave, that there was minimum wage, that there was overtime,” Wu said through a translator. She pays it forward: “I tell all the people around me about what rights they have as a worker.”



In her next restaurant job, Wu was paid what she was owed. Last year, however, the Office of Labor and Standards Enforcement scaled back the workers&#8217; rights program by nearly $400,000, roughly half its budget. This year, the program is set to lose the other half and shutter entirely.



It&#8217;s not the only one. The pot of money funding San Francisco’s legion of do-good organizations is about to shrink.



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-posts-container">
<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>
</div>



Mayor Daniel Lurie’s <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/30/san-francisco-budget-daniel-lurie-deficit-proposal/">budget would cut</a> roughly $154 million, or 9%, from the city’s grant programming next year, according to an analysis by The Standard.



Nonprofits are waiting in the dark to find out what will happen to their finances, as the mayor’s budget doesn’t contain line-item details to easily discern contract cuts. The Standard’s analysis offers a first view at just how devastating those trims will be.



Joe Wilson, executive director of the nonprofit Hospitality House, said Lurie’s proposal to gut grant funding may have disturbing consequences. Lurie has repeatedly pressed on the need for public safety, but when nonprofits providing food, shelter, and jobs are cut, people get desperate.



In Lurie’s budget proposal, Hospitality House lost funding from the Office of Economic and Workforce Development that pays for a program on Treasure Island to help 500 job seekers, Wilson said.&nbsp;



“When there are fewer community-based health options, fewer community-based employment options, fewer community-based housing options, the city pays that cost, and it&#8217;s much more costly than the investments we&#8217;re already making,” Wilson said.



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1668" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/20240126_homelesscountwewent_-2399_28da2458-c16a-11ee-bc93-fad3dbc5ec97.jpg?w=2500" alt="Three people stand on a dimly lit street corner at night. One person has a bicycle. They are next to a blue building with bags and a bucket nearby." class="wp-image-406800" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/20240126_homelesscountwewent_-2399_28da2458-c16a-11ee-bc93-fad3dbc5ec97.jpg 3000w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/20240126_homelesscountwewent_-2399_28da2458-c16a-11ee-bc93-fad3dbc5ec97.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/20240126_homelesscountwewent_-2399_28da2458-c16a-11ee-bc93-fad3dbc5ec97.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/20240126_homelesscountwewent_-2399_28da2458-c16a-11ee-bc93-fad3dbc5ec97.jpg?resize=2500,1668 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/20240126_homelesscountwewent_-2399_28da2458-c16a-11ee-bc93-fad3dbc5ec97.jpg?resize=1536,1025 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/20240126_homelesscountwewent_-2399_28da2458-c16a-11ee-bc93-fad3dbc5ec97.jpg?resize=2048,1366 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Grant funding for nonprofit work, including from the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing, will drop next year.</figcaption></figure>



Lurie has repeatedly characterized the city’s spending as excessive, saying San Francisco must make structural cuts to resolve a staggering $782 million deficit. In his budget plan, public safety agencies like the San Francisco Police Department and district attorney’s office maintained their budgets.&nbsp;



The Standard’s analysis found:&nbsp;



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Funding to the City Grant Program, a primary funding pool for nonprofits, will decrease next year for 17 of the 24 departments that have that as a budget line item.</li>



<li>Three departments are losing all grant program funding: the Department on the Status of Women, Building Inspection, and Elections.</li>



<li>The Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing is facing the biggest reduction to its grant program, $83.5 million, though a portion of that is due to Our City, Our Home funding, which will be spent over five years, but was only reflected in last year’s budget.&nbsp;</li>



<li>At No. 2 is Economic and Workforce Development, which will lose $58.6 million. A portion of that is the movement of some major contracts to another department.&nbsp;</li>
</ul>



Some of the department-level reductions are straight-up cuts by Lurie. But in some cases, grants moved from one department to another. In others, the grant reductions are because federal or state funds dried up. During previous years, the city elected to shore up the loss of some state funding with local funding, but in this climate, that generosity is hard to find.



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-datawrapper-chart" data-chart-id="406291"></div>



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Some nonprofit contracts fall under &#8220;non-personnel services,&#8221; a spending category for facilities management, insurance fees, and other expenditures. Non-personnel services spending will increase next year by 2%, or $69 million.&nbsp;</li>



<li>Twenty-five departments will get reductions in non-personnel services. Those include Juvenile Probation (a 75% cut), Ethics Commission (46%), Sheriff’s Department (24%), Public Works (36%), and Human Rights Commission (40%).</li>
</ul>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-datawrapper-chart" data-chart-id="406293"></div>



In <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/01/23/daniel-lurie-san-francisco-mayor-budget-cuts/">a January memo</a> to city department heads, Lurie directed them to cut grants from the “least effective” organizations. But Sarah Wan, director of the Community Youth Center, said even outcomes that are difficult to measure can have real impacts.&nbsp;



CYC started its Bayview Services program in 2011. It provides connections to city and neighborhood services for the Asian American and Pacific Islander community in the Bayview but also offers bridge-building programs between Black and Asian neighbors, such as joint Lunar New Year and Black History Month celebrations, local history bus tours, and translators to help bridge the divide.&nbsp;



CYC is facing a $1.5 million budget reduction. The Bayview CYC location may shutter.&nbsp;



“It took us like 15 years to do that, to build that partnership,” she said. “I think we definitely helped build bridges across communities. It&#8217;s how to ensure everyone feels safe.”



A full accounting of how many organizations would be affected by the mayor’s budget is not available, as it contains only top-line numbers, not the line-item detail necessary to discern what programs may be axed. The People’s Budget coalition, a collective of more than 150 organizations, rallied Wednesday at City Hall to protest the coming cuts.



Despite the unknowns, one thing is certain: Nonprofits are expecting a bloodbath.

Lurie campaigned as an ethics crusader. Now he’s gutting SF’s top watchdog

On the campaign trail, Daniel Lurie vowed to vanquish City Hall corruption, promising to fully fund the city’s governance watchdog, the Ethics Commission.



Now, as mayor, Lurie just blew a gaping hole in the department’s budget, sparking an outcry from its leader.



“We need to spend money on the front end, before they become big problems,” said Patrick Ford, executive director of the Ethics Commission. “In that sense, an investment in ethics is a cost saver in the long run. Our department is tiny. And it is money well spent.”



The cuts may include axing the roles of four staffers in the 28-person department who identify loopholes in ethics rules and train city officials on the law. They are crucial to curbing corruption before it takes hold, Ford said.



In his proposed budget, <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/30/san-francisco-budget-daniel-lurie-deficit-proposal/">released Friday</a>, Lurie called for belt-tightening across city departments as part of an effort <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/30/san-francisco-budget-screwed-lurie/">to close a $782 million budget shortfall</a>. The Public Health Department, Office of Economic and Workforce Development, and Public Works, among others, are earmarked for budget cuts. Public safety agencies — the San Francisco Police Department, Sheriff’s Department, district attorney’s office, and public defender’s office — were mostly preserved.



Lurie’s budget requires approval by the Board of Supervisors; the deadline for reaching a deal is July 1. Supervisor Jackie Fielder said a robust Ethics Commission is key as Lurie steps up reliance on wealthy donors to fund city efforts around homelessness and the drug crisis.



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-posts-container">
<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>
</div>



“This drastic budget reduction to the commission severely undermines the city’s ability to investigate misconduct, enforce transparency, and hold public officials accountable,” Fielder said in a statement. “As the city increasingly turns to wealthy individuals and foundations to fill budget gaps, the need for robust oversight and accountability has never been more urgent.”



The Ethics Commission’s workforce expanded from 21 to 28 in the wake of a major scandal in 2020, in which former Public Works director Mohammed Nuru was <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2022/01/06/mohammed-nuru-key-figure-in-sf-corruption-scandal-formally-pleads-guilty/">found guilty</a> of taking bribes from contractors, including a Rolex watch and a tractor.



More department heads were implicated as the scandal unfolded, leading then-Mayor London Breed to hire more Ethics Commission staffers to train officials in good governance — and to catch them when they ran afoul of the law.



In 2023, <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2023/06/05/san-francisco-ethics-watchdog-decries-severe-cuts-under-mayors-budget/https://sfstandard.com/2023/06/05/san-francisco-ethics-watchdog-decries-severe-cuts-under-mayors-budget/">she tried to cut the commission’s budget</a>, a move Lurie called out last year on the campaign trail.



&#8220;While the current mayor attempted to defund the Ethics Commission, I commit to fully funding it,” Lurie said in August.



<figure class="wp-block-video"><video controls src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/1000033044.mp4" playsinline></video></figure>



Soon after, Lurie’s campaign sent out a <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GHWzFiY3Nt0x9qB2eixwhhEC4CXgVFC425mehYnGSxM/edit?tab=t.0">press release</a> defining “fully funding” — essentially arguing that he meant he would fund certain divisions within the Ethics Commission, not the department as a whole.



&#8220;Mayor Lurie committed to fully funding the Ethics Commission by ensuring that the Enforcement and Audit Divisions had the staff and resources necessary to conduct investigations and audits,” the mayor’s spokesperson, Charles Lutvak, said Monday, citing the August press release. “Even facing an historic $800 million budget deficit, that’s exactly what this budget does.&#8221;



The four positions Lurie has proposed to eliminate — three of which are layoffs — are especially impactful considering the Ethics Commission’s tiny size relative to other city agencies, Ford argues. An analysis of staffing levels from the mayor’s proposed budget shows that the Ethics Commission may face a 14% cut to its workforce budget.



That’s the fourth-largest cut out of 53 city departments; by comparison, Recreation and Parks, which is budgeted for nearly 1,000 workers, faces a 0.3% cut to its staffing budget. Not all proposed reductions are to salaries and workers; some city departments may see steep reductions in grants and contracts.



One Ethics Commission position flagged for elimination is a policy analyst, who updates the city’s ethics laws and researches Board of Supervisors legislation in an effort to tighten the rules. Two other positions, senior program administrators, educate the roughly 6,000 city staffers who have to comply with financial disclosure requirements.



“If we don&#8217;t have the staff to create trainings and answer questions, you&#8217;re going to see people not fully understanding how to follow ethics rules, which can, over time, snowball into the kinds of major issues we&#8217;ve seen in recent years,” Ford said.



Lurie’s budget includes other funding that can tackle bad governance, including an inspector general, a position created via ballot measure last year that is tasked with rooting out government fraud.



When a Standard reporter asked Lurie about Ethics Commission cuts during a press conference Friday, the mayor deferred to his staff but added that he is “fully focused on ethics with this budget.”

Lurie’s $15.9B budget just landed. Here’s what to know

Mayor Daniel Lurie released his nearly <a href="https://media.api.sf.gov/documents/70_CSF_Proposed_Budget_Book_June_2024_Final_REV1_0525v2.pdf">$16 billion budget proposal</a> Friday, showcasing his master plan to close San Francisco’s $782 million deficit.



Many services will keep their funding at the current levels: the San Francisco Police Department, the public defender’s office, the district attorney’s office, street cleaning crews, and homelessness services.&nbsp;Other city agencies will likely lose funding. Lurie wants to cut roughly $185 million in contracts and nonprofit spending over two years, though the specifics of those reductions were not immediately available. He has also proposed eliminating approximately 1,400 positions from the city’s job rolls, <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/28/san-francisco-mayor-daniel-lurie-budget-layoffs/">mostly vacancies and retirements</a>. More than 100 of those cuts could come from layoffs.



Under Lurie&#8217;s proposal, the city&#8217;s total budget amounts to $15.9 billion in fiscal 2026 and $16.3 billion in fiscal 2027. 



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-datawrapper-chart" data-chart-id="405257"></div>



In an address Friday morning, Lurie said the cuts are needed to right-size San Francisco’s habit of spending beyond its means, starting with the tech boom in the 2010s and continuing into the pandemic.



“Here’s the bottom line: We have to stop spending more than we can afford,” Lurie said. &#8220;The era of soaring city budgets and deteriorating street conditions is over.”



Despite Lurie’s talk of fiscal austerity, the majority of city departments would receive a budget bump under his proposal. The Department of Emergency Management, home of the 911 dispatch center, gets a 15% increase, the largest in the city. Budgets for the Juvenile Probation Department, the City Treasurer and Tax Collector and the Board of Supervisors would also shoot up by over 10%.&nbsp;



Discounting so-called enterprise departments, or agencies that are largely self-sufficient with independent budget processes, Human Services is set to pull in the largest overall windfall, with an $81 million increase. The police, fire, and sheriff&#8217;s departments would each get a more than $22 million bump.



But 21 departments do lose out in Lurie’s proposal: the Homelessness and Supportive Housing department is set to lose nearly $104 million; the Economic and Workforce Development Department faces a $57 million cut; and the Department of Public Works could lose $26 million trim.



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-datawrapper-chart" data-chart-id="404910"></div>



Other departments that are set to lose large shares of their budget include the Ethics Commission, <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/30/sf-status-of-women-human-rights-commission-budget/">Human Rights Commission</a>, and the Arts Commission. Lurie closed the massive two-year deficit in his budget proposal partially through cuts but also by factoring in better-than-expected estimates for revenue in coming years. Despite delivering a balanced budget proposal for the next two years and taking an estimated $300 million chunk out of the long-term deficit, the mayor acknowledged that the structural deficit will persist in the following years. The mayor’s office confirmed that in balancing the budget, it tapped into $40 million in reserve funds to pay for new equipment across city departments. While other departments are facing layoffs, the administrative budget of the mayor&#8217;s office will get a bump due to negotiated wage increases, officials confirmed.



The mayor’s proposal kicks off negotiations with the Board of Supervisors before the final budget deadline of July 31. Public hearings will begin next month, allowing departments to request more funding.&nbsp;



&#8220;As we move through the board’s budget process in the month of June, it is clear that we have no good options,&#8221; said Supervisor Connie Chan. &#8220;As budget chair, I will work with Mayor Lurie and my colleagues on the Board of Supervisors to invest our public dollars in protecting San Franciscans and our values.&#8221;&nbsp;



<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-uncertain-times">Uncertain times </h2>



The financial threats to the city’s coffers are twofold.



San Francisco has struggled more than many U.S. cities in its economic recovery from the Covid pandemic. Downtown office vacancies skyrocketed at the start of the pandemic, throwing a critical component of the city&#8217;s economy into disarray. Those vacancies remain above 30%.&nbsp;



Meanwhile, President Donald Trump has threatened to withhold billions of dollars in federal funding to San Francisco and other sanctuary cities that don’t comply with his hard-line immigration policies. The president’s budget plans include <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/14/san-francisco-hud-homelessness-housing-trump-budget-cuts/">gutting tens of millions</a> of dollars for low-income housing and homeless-prevention strategies. Republicans in Congress have&nbsp;also proposed cuts to programs for low-income residents, <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-election/political-fight-medicaid-escalates-house-republicans-trump-big-bill-rcna209194">such as Medicaid</a>, which would similarly impact city revenue.



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-posts-container">
<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>
</div>



The <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/04/24/san-francisco-judge-blocks-trump-sanctuary-city-order/">city has responded</a> <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/02/san-francisco-sues-hud-over-illegal-funding-dem/">with federal lawsuits</a> to block those efforts and protect funding streams for critical services.



Also at risk is hundreds of millions of dollars in Federal Emergency Management Agency funding that the city used for emergency shelters for homeless people during the height of the pandemic. City officials now fear they will not be reimbursed for those funds.&nbsp; Lurie confirmed Friday that the federal agency had notified the city of plans to claw back $140 million in funding it has already provided. 



The city also receives $1 billion in federal funding each year for Medicaid and housing, among other services. But there are increasing worries among city leaders that the money will not come through under Trump’s administration. Lurie is therefore proposing a $400 million reserve fund as a way to &#8220;deal with that uncertainty.&#8221;



When asked what will happen if those safety funds are not sufficient, Lurie told reporters at City Hall that he hopes the city&#8217;s economic recovery,&nbsp;predicated on increased tax revenue, will cover for the missing funds.



<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-critics-decry-budget-cuts">Critics decry budget cuts </h2>



Socking that money away, however, has put more pressure on an already buckled budget.



One of Lurie&#8217;s most controversial proposals is to redirect large portions of the <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2022/11/08/wanting-more-from-tax-dollars-voters-poised-to-add-oversight-to-homelessness-department/">Our City, Our Home fund</a>, which voters approved via a 2018 ballot measure. The money was intended to boost transitional housing for younger residents, along with mental health services&nbsp;and additional shelter beds. Lurie instead wants to broaden the pool of San Franciscans the fund would help, raising concerns that there will be less money for the youth whom the ballot measure was intended to serve.&nbsp;



The proposal, which is likely to meet fierce opposition from supporters of homelessness nonprofits, would require a supermajority of the Board of Supervisors to approve.



Swift condemnation from local unions came as Lurie was in the middle of his budget address. In addition to criticizing proposed layoffs, labor groups decried tech companies such as Airbnb that have sued the city <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/03/31/san-francisco-budget-deficit-lawsuits-business-taxes/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">to recoup tax</a> <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/03/31/san-francisco-budget-deficit-lawsuits-business-taxes/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">money</a> they allege was overpaid.



Lurie declined to comment on the Airbnb lawsuit but said he welcomes more businesses to San Francisco.



&#8220;We want businesses here so that we can bring that tax revenue, and we can bring jobs back to San Francisco,&#8221; Lurie said.



&#8220;This is ridiculous. [Lurie] said this is a new era of accountability,&#8221; Anya Worley-Ziegmann of the People&#8217;s Budget Coalition, which advocates for nonprofits, community groups and unions, said Friday at City Hall. &#8220;Where&#8217;s the transparency? Where&#8217;s the budget?&#8221;



Service Employees International Union Local 1021 President Theresa Rutherford, whose union represents many city healthcare workers, said in a statement she was &#8220;deeply disappointed&#8221; in Lurie&#8217;s budget plans.



Rudy Gonzalez of the San Francisco Building &amp; Construction Trades Council said, &#8220;Layoffs are totally unnecessary. We can find the funds to save jobs and uphold San Francisco values.&#8221;



In response to the unions&#8217; criticism, Lurie said, &#8220;I take no joy in this. I was elected to make hard choices.&#8221;



Aside from union leaders,&nbsp;some&nbsp;city officials were dismayed by the proposed budget cuts. Patrick Ford, executive director of the San Francisco Ethics Commission, which monitors campaign finance issues and other matters, said despite <a href="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/press-release_-lurie-takes-on-city-hall-insider-corruption-with-aggressive-ethics-enforcement-proposal-to-restore-trust-integrity-accountability-in-city-government.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Lurie&#8217;s promises on the campaign trail</a>&nbsp;to fully fund the department, up to four positions in the 28-person city agency could be affected by the mayor&#8217;s layoff plans. 



&#8220;Based on what I know so far,&#8221; Ford said, &#8220;the rhetoric and reality are pretty different when it comes to the mayor’s support for ethics.&#8221;

Public safety agencies spared from major cuts after budget blowback

Despite Mayor Daniel Lurie’s warnings that he would have to slash San Francisco’s budget amid a massive deficit, two city departments vital to public safety avoided cuts to their agencies.



The district attorney’s and public defender’s offices will both maintain their previous funding levels in Lurie’s final budget proposal, according to sources familiar with the mayor’s fiscal plan.



The district attorney’s office confirmed to The Standard that it will keep its funding, while representatives for the public defender’s office said they were told the same information but wanted to see the numbers in writing.



Other public safety agencies will also evade the slash and burn of budget season: The San Francisco Police Department, San Francisco Fire Department, the San Francisco Sheriff&#8217;s Department, and 911 dispatchers will all be spared, sources confirmed to The Standard.



Facing a total $782-million deficit, Lurie in January ordered city agencies to slash 15% of their budgets, drawing outcry from department heads who warned the drastic cuts would affect services.



District Attorney Brooke Jenkins warned that a proposed $5.4 million reduction to her office <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/05/brooke-jenkins-daniel-lurie-budget-cuts/">would force her to lay off 25 junior prosecutors</a>, including those handling fentanyl cases. Those cuts would undermine Lurie’s efforts to crack down on public drug use and dealers in San Francisco, she said.



The mayor’s office declined to comment directly on budget details. But in a statement to The Standard, Lurie said, “Public safety and a fair justice system are foundational to San Francisco’s recovery.



“I am committed to protecting the core services that keep our communities safe — and that includes the people on the front lines, both in the courtroom and on the street,” Lurie added.



The mayor is expected to unveil his full budget blueprint near the June 1 deadline, kicking off a month-long negotiations sprint with the Board of Supervisors before the final budget is due. Labor leaders, nonprofit heads, and city officials have for weeks been on tenterhooks to learn what agencies and contracts could be slashed in Lurie’s efforts to plug the deficit.



Budget negotiations have already revealed potential services on the chopping block: <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/02/18/san-francisco-city-hall-street-cleaning-services-department-of-public-works/">street cleaning</a>, downtown Muni services, and even <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/14/sf-fleet-week-funding-budget-crisis/">Fleet Week disaster planning</a>.



Lurie faced the daunting task of balancing his promise of greater fiscal austerity at City Hall with his campaign pledge to increase <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/01/08/daniel-lurie-inauguration-speech-san-francisco/">public safety</a> in San Francisco.



Under Lurie’s draft blueprint, the district attorney’s office is set to receive $89.2 million for fiscal year 2025-26 and $92.4 million for 2026-27. It’s a slight increase from the $85.7 million awarded to the district attorney’s office in former Mayor London Breed’s final budget and represents previously promised salary increases.



Lurie’s proposal would also bump the public defender’s budget to $57.6 million in 2025-26 and $58.1 million in 2026-27 — a small increase from its allotted $55.4 million in 2024-25. The extra funding would pay mostly for expert witnesses and professional services contracts.



Lurie’s decision to maintain funding levels for the district attorney’s office allows him to avoid escalating a public feud with those on the front lines of fulfilling his public safety plans.



In an April 22 letter to Lurie’s budget office <a href="https://journaliststudio.google.com/u/1/pinpoint/document-view?collection=2c7e3f9dd477d49f&amp;docid=ef883a9ff7b5d8cd_2c7e3f9dd477d49f&amp;dapvm=2">obtained exclusively by The Standard</a>, Jenkins warned she would have to make layoffs and “suspend prosecuting entire categories of crimes” if the mayor carried out his budget reductions. It was the first public spat between Jenkins and Lurie, who has prioritized collegiality in City Hall.



“Mayor Lurie’s decision not to cut funding to our office is a testament to his commitment to prioritizing public safety and making sure that law enforcement agencies like ours have the staff and resources needed to get the job done,” Jenkins said in a statement.



The public defender’s office said the budget still falls short of providing necessary resources to keep up with Lurie’s push for more fentanyl-related arrests. The office&#8217;s chief attorney, Matt Gonzalez, told the San Francisco Superior Court this month <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/05/09/public-defender-fentanyl-san-francisco-lurie/">that the department was “unavailable,”</a> a legal function that effectively closes the office to new cases one day a week.



The public defender’s office learned of the final budget decision through The Standard’s inquiry.



Angela Chan, a high-level staffer at the office, said attorneys would continue to struggle to maintain caseloads and take on new clients even with the sustained funding. Chan said the office still plans to stay closed to new cases one day a week and will request more funding from the Board of Supervisors during June budget negotiations.



“If we stay flat, and the police and sheriff get tens of millions more dollars, that&#8217;s basically a cut for us,” she said. “That means more arrests and no additional staffing to deal with those cases.”



Editor&#8217;s note: This story has been updated with budget information for additional public safety agencies.

Campaign to recall Supervisor Joel Engardio has enough signatures, organizers say

After four months of gathering signatures, the campaign to recall San Francisco Supervisor Joel Engardio has reached a critical milestone, according to the campaign.



The campaign needed to collect at least 9,911 valid signatures, or 20% of registered voters in District 4, to trigger a recall election. The campaign announced Thursday they had collected approximately 14,000 voter signatures and submitted roughly 11,000 they believe to be valid. 



The Department of Elections confirmed in an email statement Friday morning that it had received a raw count of 10,985 signatures. 



In front of City Hall Thursday, about 80 people gathered for a rally before submitting their petition signatures.



“[Joel Engardio] ignored our community’s needs and kept pushing policies and propositions that hurt us and all San Franciscans,” said Selena Chu, a campaign volunteer who spoke at the event. She accused Engardio&#8217;s anti-recall campaign of trying to slow down and obstruct the signature-gathering effort.



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1668" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/9214084407_0490.jpg?w=2500" alt="A group of people stands on steps holding &quot;Recall Engardio&quot; signs. Microphones and boxes labeled &quot;Recall Petitions&quot; are visible, indicating a public protest." class="wp-image-402684" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/9214084407_0490.jpg 5000w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/9214084407_0490.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/9214084407_0490.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/9214084407_0490.jpg?resize=2500,1668 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/9214084407_0490.jpg?resize=1536,1025 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/9214084407_0490.jpg?resize=2048,1366 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Recall organizers delivered about 11,000 signatures they believe are valid to the Department of Elections. </figcaption></figure>



Four sheriff’s deputies were stationed outside Engardio’s City Hall office to guard against any potential disruptions. Engardio spoke to journalists from another private office.



“These past four months, this issue has been on people’s minds,” Engardio said. “But I’m confident that a majority of Sunset voters will reject this recall.”



He believes residents’ anger has waned since the park opened, as fears of worsening traffic have not materialized: &#8220;Because they liked the park, and the traffic was not as bad as people expected it to be,&#8221; Engardio said. 



The high-profile recall effort was <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2024/12/03/recall-campaign-joel-engardio-prop-k-great-highway/">launched late last year</a> shortly after voters approved Proposition K, a divisive ballot measure to close the Great Highway to cars and convert the two miles of road into a park. Engardio, whose district includes the Sunset, where the coastal drive is located, championed the proposition and became a target for recall over concerns about increased traffic congestion in the neighborhood and longer commute times.



According to a source at the Department of Elections, a qualification decision could come as early as next Friday, though a full count of signatures could take over a month. 



“It’s too soon to know if the recall has qualified for the ballot,” Engardio’s anti-recall campaign said in a statement. 



The Great Highway was closed to cars in March and became the Sunset Dunes park a month later, welcoming more than 13,000 visitors on its opening day. Engardio’s campaign emphasized that a recall wouldn&#8217;t reopen the Great Highway to cars, and that the effort to remove him from office “sets a bad precedent for recalling officials over a single policy disagreement.” <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/03/10/prop-k-lawsuit-great-highway-closure/">A lawsuit to overturn the ballot measure</a> is pending in court.



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-posts-container">
<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>
</div>



Prop. K passed with more than 55% of the vote. Supporters of the measure, including urbanists and environmental groups, saw it as a way to repurpose the highway amid coastal erosion concerns. But the initiative&nbsp;deeply divided the city. While the vast majority of votes in favor came from east-side neighborhoods far from the park, the west side largely voted against the measure.&nbsp;



Many residents in the Sunset and Richmond districts, who are most affected by the highway’s closure, said the decision lacked adequate community input and exacerbated traffic concerns. Some political groups, such as the Chinese American Democratic Club, which was an outspoken opponent of Prop. K, have endorsed the recall.&nbsp;



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1668" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/9214084407_0815.jpg?w=2500" alt="A man with a beard in a navy suit and tie is smiling while standing in a dimly lit corridor with gray stone walls." class="wp-image-402690" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/9214084407_0815.jpg 5000w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/9214084407_0815.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/9214084407_0815.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/9214084407_0815.jpg?resize=2500,1668 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/9214084407_0815.jpg?resize=1536,1025 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/9214084407_0815.jpg?resize=2048,1366 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Supervisor Joel Engardio said he believes the anger over the Great Highway closure has waned.</figcaption></figure>



The recall campaign started gathering signatures in January. If the signature count is validated, a special recall election would be scheduled within 120 days.



“There’s been a lot of curiosity about whether the campaign could pull it off,” said Mary Jung, a Democratic political strategist who led the successful 2022 recall of District Attorney Chesa Boudin. “It’s a tough process, and even tougher when it’s limited to a single district.”



If the recall does qualify for the ballot, Engardio has money on hand to fight it. His campaign, backed by tech titans such as Yelp CEO Jeremy Stoppelman, has raised more than $400,000. In contrast, the recall campaign, officially known as “Our Neighborhood, Our Future: Supporting the Recall of Supervisor Engardio,” has raised about $144,000 and has $54,000 in debt.&nbsp;



Engardio has politically powerful allies who are helping him fight the recall effort, including Board of Supervisors President Rafael Mandelman, San Francisco YIMBY, and state Sen. Scott Wiener.



“The recall is becoming a NIMBY effort to stop the positive progress at City Hall,” Wiener said in a recent social media post. “If this recall succeeds, that’s exactly what will happen.”



Editor&#8217;s note: This story has been updated with information from the Department of Elections and details from Thursday&#8217;s rally at City Hall.

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