Three grocers walked away from a vacant Fillmore Safeway. Now it’s a political battle

Three separate efforts to bring a grocery store back to a vacant Safeway site in the Fillmore have collapsed, deepening a political fight over who’s to blame — and what San Francisco should do about it. Grocery Outlet, Smart & Final, and Sprouts Farmers Market have all explored taking over the former Safeway at 1335 Webster St. on a short-term basis, as Safeway finalizes the sale of the property to Align Real Estate, which intends to build housing on the site. The collapse of all three efforts leaves the Fillmore, a historically Black and low-income San Francisco neighborhood, without a full-service grocery store for the foreseeable future — more than a year after Safeway’s Webster Street location closed. The failed talks come amid a broader political fight: Supervisor Bilal Mahmood is pushing a ballot measure to tax vacant grocery stores and subsidize new operators, an effort now tangled up with accusations that Safeway hindered efforts to bring in a new grocer . In an interview, Mahmood said negotiations to bring a grocer back to the site are dead in the water, and emails his office provided in response to a verbal records request back up that account. Sprouts’ interest in the site has not been previously reported. “Oh my God. It’s devastating news,” said Majeid Crawford, a Fillmore native. “We were really hoping something would happen; the community has been waiting and hopeful.” In the months before Safeway closed in February 2025, neighbors rallied and pushed for the grocer to stay open, or for a new grocer to take over the space. Crawford — executive director of the New Community Leadership Foundation, a group trying to prevent the Fillmore’s gentrification — said the failure to find a new grocer will send shockwaves through the neighborhood. Safeway’s Webster Street store served the Fillmore community for four decades. The new owner, Align Real Estate, plans a mixed-use project on the site with more than 1,800 housing units and a ground-floor grocery. Lawmakers had hoped a temporary grocery store could load Fillmore neighbors’ shopping bags in the years before the project breaks ground. Mahmood is hoping his ballot measure to establish a fund to subsidize grocery stores and levy a tax on vacant supermarkets will pressure grocers to lease to new operators or reopen. The idea resembles one from New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, whose proposal would establish government-subsidized grocery stores. While Mahmood’s proposal faced a setback last week from the Board of Supervisors and opposition from Mayor Daniel Lurie , he’s planning to introduce a motion Tuesday for the Board of Supervisors to re-hear the measure by the end of the month, which would restart the process of placing it on the ballot. Lurie previously said he’s working to bring more grocery stores to San Francisco, but new taxes won’t help that effort. Mahmood alleges the negotiations between the three grocers, Safeway, and Align Real Estate failed because Safeway impeded efforts to find a replacement grocer. Emails Mahmood provided offer a behind-the-scenes look at negotiations marked by canceled meetings, stalled talks, and growing frustration. “It shows us that Safeway was never intending to actually put a grocery store in there,” Mahmood said of the emails. “We know of three grocers who were made an offer to go onto that property.” Safeway, Grocery Outlet, and Sprouts declined to comment. Smart & Final did not respond to a request to comment. David Balducci, a principal at Align Real Estate, told The Standard they’ve not given up. “The Fillmore community deserves a grocery store, and we will do everything we can to bring one to the site,” Balducci said. “Unfortunately, Supervisor Mahmood’s tax on grocery store vacancies would only make it more difficult to open a store.” Mahmood told a different tale. “Align told me that there is no plan to do a short-term activation with another grocery operator anymore,” he said. The effort was difficult from the start — Safeway promised to rip out its freezers at the end of 2024, before it even closed, making it more difficult for a new grocer to move in. In January last year, Grocery Outlet made an offer to Safeway to take over the site. In an email sent Jan. 9, Bill Coyle, vice president of real estate with Grocery Outlet, aired a hopeful tone about his meeting with the supervisor and Align Real Estate. “You have [Grocery Outlet’s] commitment we shall pursue with vigor and hope for the best outcome,” he wrote. On Jan. 22, 2025, Grocery Outlet sent a proposal to Safeway, outlining a “scaled-down” version of its store for two to three years, paying Safeway $400,000 in annual rent. The hope, Coyle wrote, was that Grocery Outlet would become a permanent grocer once Align Real Estate’s project was complete. “Politicians happy. Community happy,” he wrote. His optimism was short-lived. Coyle said he wrote to Mahmood Feb. 4 that “I have NOT heard back” from a consultant working for Safeway. In an email venting his frustration over the process, he alleged Safeway has a pattern of making it difficult for other grocery stores to open. “It’s what they do,” he wrote to Mahmood, “impede competition.” By Feb. 19, the parties met once again. Coyle emailed Mahmood shortly before, noting that the cost to open a grocery store there — even a temporary one — would be at least $2 million. Emails revealed the deal’s definitive end in April: Eric Holzer, senior director of corporate real estate at Albertsons, which owns Safeway, wrote to Mahmood acknowledging that Grocery Outlet “dropped their interest.” In the intervening months, Safeway and Align Real Estate held discussions with Smart & Final, a grocer with other San Francisco locations, and Sprouts, a Bay Area staple exploring its first San Francisco location in the Showplace Square neighborhood. Sources with knowledge of the deal rejected the notion that Safeway had impeded efforts to bring in a new grocer and said the grocers walked away from the deal for financial reasons. The amount needed to bring the building up to code, which may have been $2 million to $4 million, was so high that they would need to operate a store there longer than the proposal allowed for it to pencil out. Mahmood said the emails show Safeway “intentionally dragged their feet to allow the deal to die.” The lack of a local grocery store hurts low-income Fillmore families, people with disabilities, and seniors who can’t travel far, according to Crawford, the neighborhood advocate. He knows its importance personally: His mother was an artist and single parent who shopped at Safeway when he was a child. She would stretch her limited dollars and buy ingredients to whip up a family favorite: spaghetti and meatballs. “To hear all those things fell through,” he said, “it feels like our community is being erased.”

Mahmood’s Mamdani move meets San Francisco City Hall reality

Power Play recently transitioned to a subscriber-only newsletter. Click here for a limited-time offer starting at $1 for the first month (and the cost of a beer every month thereafter). A flurry of sharp-elbowed politickin’ went down at City Hall this week, causing Supervisor Bilal Mahmood ’s government-backed-grocery-store proposal to go down in flames for now. A quick rewind: Mahmood said he got a call from Supervisor Connie Chan on Thursday, telling him she did not support the vacant tax part of his legislation and conveying Mayor Daniel Lurie ’s displeasure with it, too. She then struck it from the agenda of Wednesday’s Budget and Finance Committee. The fracas offered a raw view into Mahmood’s political ambitions and how Chan is strategically positioning herself on the board. Mahmood’s aspirations aren’t exactly a mystery: He ran unsuccessfully for the state Assembly in 2022 before nabbing a supervisor seat two years later on a moderate-ish campaign platform. The way he has operated since — he’s been a prolific legislator compared with his fellow freshman class of supervisors ; he supported the union-backed Overpaid CEO Tax, a position that riled some of the city’s tech class; and he has been outspoken on the issue of Immigration and Customs Enforcement — paints a picture of a politico who can’t neatly be placed within the city’s moderate-progressive framework. The Assembly seat he once ran for could open up if state Sen. Scott Wiener wins his congressional bid and current Assemblymember Matt Haney makes a move for the upper chamber. Mahmood has discussed his interest in a potential run, according to one political insider with direct knowledge of the supervisor’s plans. It was intriguing to see Mahmood openly call out Chan and, especially, Lurie, with whom board members have largely stayed on good terms, barring the occasional chatter by Supervisors Jackie Fielder and Myrna Melgar . One source familiar with the deliberations over Mahmood’s legislation said there were holes in it and questioned whether it could actually fix the problems it was promising to address. The source added that the debacle was a sign of a politician who is driven but unable to build the coalitions necessary to pass such laws. Mahmood pushed back at the idea of the proposal not being ready: “It’s been a collaborative process here. We’ve gotten feedback from multiple stakeholders. It is ready to go,” he said. As for the Assembly run, he said, “I’m right now focused on District 5 and serving out my term.” Mahmood hopes his legislation will be saved at the last minute with the help of Board President Rafael Mandelman , who has the power to pull it out of committee to the full board for a vote. Mandelman did not respond to a request for comment, but told The Examiner on Friday that he was considering it. Regardless of its fate, the grocery legislation is an attempt by Mahmood to inject a bit of Zohran Mamdani -style politics into San Francisco and carve out a lane for himself as a YIMBY-friendly progressive with a populist flair. Whether that type of candidate can be successful in this city remains to be seen ; the New York mayor and his democratic socialist allies might have been able to notch a series of wins last month, but San Francisco’s recent June primary shows that the Lurie style of moderate politics remains dominant . As for Chan, given her progressive politics, this week’s episode is puzzling. There’s no reason why, on the face of it, she wouldn’t support Mahmood’s grocery tax. But she has other priorities to consider. For one, word on the street is that Chan and Lurie get along pretty well, and they might need each other to be successful. Another consideration is the crowded November ballot. Lurie is banking on the passage of his Muni parcel tax measure, and there’s also the regional BART tax. Some at City Hall may have worried that adding Mahmood’s proposal to the mix could contribute to voter fatigue over taxes. And, of course, Chan is running for a congressional seat. The grocery bill may be one of those risky pieces of legislation — it is certainly a controversial idea at the national level — that could alienate a voting bloc she’s trying to court; among them, moderate Chinese residents who could be wary of government-backed supermarkets. — Gabriel Greschler NOTHING TO SEE HERE: The San Francisco Democratic Party has released its July 18 endorsement interview schedule , leading up to its almighty endorsement, a stamp of approval that can sway voters citywide. Supervisor candidates vying for Districts 2, 4, 6, and 10 will meet with the Dems in hopes of gaining the almighty endorsement. Readers may have picked up on a conspicuous absence from the Democratic Party’s potential endorsements: District 8, the Castro and Noe Valley, where candidate Manny Yekutiel is facing sexual assault allegations first reported by The Standard . So what’s the deal? Did the Dems just plumb forget to schedule District 8 interviews? Insiders say the party still appears inclined to back Yekutiel, and delaying an endorsement in District 8 could be a ploy to give the news cycle time to die down. If the party endorses too close to the allegations, it may get flak that it didn’t listen to a victim of abuse. This has implications for other candidates, too, including Gary McCoy, an aide to Rep. Nancy Pelosi, and Michael Nguyen, an attorney and drag performer. Whatever the reason, Nancy Tung, the SF Democratic Party board chair, told us “Given the allegations in the press regarding a candidate in District 8, I made the decision to delay the endorsement by one month. It is important that we allow sufficient time for facts to develop and become public, and for our members to have necessary conversations to inform their endorsement vote.” We asked former Supervisor Aaron Peskin, who chaired the party for four years, about the implications of omitting District 8 from the endorsement schedule. “It’s very bizarre,” Peskin said. “Not everyone having to play by the same rules, by the same time frames, is just on its face not fair and not consistent.” — Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez CALI-FORDABLE : GOP gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton made a campaign stop at the San Francisco Italian Athletic Club Friday evening, where he pitched his vision to make the state “Cali-fordable” and finally put an end to the “government bureaucracy running our lives.” “I hate bureaucracy,” he told the crowd of roughly 200. “I’m going to take a sledgehammer to that big, bloated, bureaucratic nanny state government we’ve got telling us how to live, how to run our businesses, how to raise our kids, what kind of house to live in, what kind of car to drive, how to cook our food, no more gas stoves. We are done with that.” Let’s get this out of the way: Hilton faces long-shot odds of becoming California’s next governor , despite his charisma and British charm. But there were moments during his campaign stop that should give Democrats — not just those in California — pause. One man noted the dire state of California schools. Another man, a general contractor, said he left the Democratic Party over concerns with crime and after his work van was stolen from outside his house. A third asked Hilton how he planned to address fraud and government waste while in office. These are not overtly partisan issues. And though Democratic candidate Xavier Becerra could sleepwalk to victory in November, he and other Democrats looking to take back power in Washington this year should be cautious not to shrug off the entire voting bloc as conspiracy theorists — though the crowd featured a few. One man asked Hilton about his plan to “counteract” illegal voting. “We saw what happened to Spencer Pratt recently when he was running for mayor,” the man said. “It’s actually, in a way, worse than you think, because it’s legalized,” Hilton responded. He ticked off ballot harvesting, same-day registration, and counting ballots that arrive a week after Election Day as evidence of what he characterized as California’s fraudulent system. He noted how a woman in Orange County was able to register her dog to vote — forgetting, it seems, to mention that she was caught, faced charges, and was a registered Republican . — Hannah Wiley CONSEQUENCES: A revolt inside one of San Francisco’s oldest Chinese institutions may see a mass resignation by its leadership. On the line are the futures of two community leaders and the reputation of the Chinese Chamber of Commerce, founded in 1917 , which organizes the annual Chinese New Year parade, the Miss Chinatown USA Pageant, and other community events that fuel Chinatown’s tourism economy. Thirteen members of the chamber’s board of directors and supervisory board of directors have threatened to resign unless the organization removes Donald Luu from its board and other senior leaders step down. The demand, which came in a letter to acting President Robert Chiang and a bevy of VPs, follows allegations that Luu sexually harassed chamber staffer Judy Lee . Luu has resigned as the organization’s president. “We believe that Donald Luu is putting his own interests ahead of the chamber’s and betraying the trust placed in him,” the directors wrote. “We also believe that you have failed to take the necessary steps to protect the chamber from Director Luu’s manipulations.” While Lee has publicly alleged sexual harassment, the letter from the 13 board members also refers to allegations of sexual assault. And, as The Standard reported Friday, Luu tried to pay Lee to remain silent . The New Year parade’s all-important fiscal sponsors may get spooked if the organization is seen as shielding people responsible for sexual assault, sources say. The late community organizer Rose Pak helped build the Chinese Chamber into a powerful voice. “It’s important because it’s the advocacy organization of the Chinese business community,” former Mayor Willie Brown told Power Play. “The promotions of things like the Chinese New Year parade are beyond belief in how it has gained the title of greatest Chinese parade in the country.” Pak famously spoke candidly. In that spirit, we’ll share what at least three sources told Power Play: The state of the Chinese Chamber today would have Pak rolling in her grave, had she not been cremated. — J.F.R.

SF was headed for Mamdani-style grocery stores. Those plans have been spiked

Supervisor Bilal Mahmood said Mayor Daniel Lurie and another lawmaker have derailed part of his government-backed grocery store proposal after it was kept off the agenda of a committee hearing. He said Amazon also played a role in its destruction. The proposal, a two-part ballot measure authored by Mahmood last month, would establish a fund to subsidize grocery stores and levy a tax on vacant supermarkets and pharmacies owned by large businesses. Mahmood said he received a call Thursday afternoon from Supervisor Connie Chan, chair of the Budget Committee, informing him that the tax proposal would be stricken from Wednesday’s Budget and Finance Committee agenda. Chan told Mahmood of her disapproval and signaled that the mayor was opposed to the legislation, he said. “This is frankly just bad governance at the board,” said Mahmood. Mahmood said Lurie and Chan’s intervention makes it difficult for the proposal to move forward since it needs to be heard by the full Board of Supervisors by late July to make it to the November ballot. The dispute highlights competing visions for reviving San Francisco’s economy. Mahmood argues that vacant grocery and pharmacy sites should face financial pressure to reopen or lease to another operator, while Lurie has emphasized incentives and public-private partnerships to encourage businesses to return downtown. “Mayor Lurie is working to bring grocery stores to San Francisco’s communities,” his spokesperson, Charles Lutvak, said in a statement. “More taxes won’t achieve that. We support the Affordable Grocery Fund and will continue working with Supervisor Mahmood and the entire board to bring more grocery stores to the city.” Robyn Burke, a spokesperson for Chan, said the supervisor “agrees” with the intent of the measure, “but she also understands that much work needs to be done to this measure. Supervisor Mahmood has amendments he wants to make to his legislation. With that, she came to the conclusion that this measure is not ready at this time.” Mahmood says he has faced stiff opposition from business groups opposed to the proposal, including Amazon. The supervisor said a lobbyist for Amazon suggested last month that the retail giant could mount a campaign against the tax and requested that its vacant Whole Foods storefront on Market Street be exempt from the legislation. The supervisor declined to grant the exemption. Amazon lobbyist David Noyola denied this. “Amazon is in full overdrive trying to kill this ballot measure,” Mahmood told The Standard, adding that the company doesn’t “want to be held accountable for the zombie stores they hold,” using a term critical of companies that close a storefront but continue to hold the lease. Pro-business groups, including the Chamber of Commerce and Advance SF, have expressed skepticism about the idea to the supervisor. Nationally, the idea has proved controversial as moderate Democrats contend with a growing populist fervor within their party and the country reels from an affordability crisis. Amazon’s Whole Foods site on Market shuttered in 2023 after being open for a little over a year, emblematic of the anxieties surrounding downtown’s post-pandemic economy and worsening street conditions at the time. Since then, Lurie and others have launched efforts to rehabilitate the neighborhood, as office vacancies remain a challenge. Recent figures show some recovery as artificial intelligence companies increase demand. In April, the Downtown Development Corporation, a group created by Lurie’s allies in an effort to revitalize the neighborhood, announced a $25 million initiative to help businesses with below-market rate loans and move-in grants. Mahmood said he is spearheading the ballot measure because of the growing problem of disappearing supermarkets and pharmacies across the city, as well as rising food prices that are a national problem. Mahmood’s district covers the Tenderloin, a neighborhood known for a lack of pharmacies and supermarkets. The city in 2024 opened a free grocery store for low-income residents in the Bayview. Mahmood’s ballot measure would have a dual purpose. It would create a fund, fueled by philanthropic dollars or city coffers, to subsidize the conversion of corner stores into grocery stores with fresh foods or, as New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani has suggested, to lease out city-owned spaces at below-market rates to affordable grocers. It would also tax vacant grocery stores and pharmacies operated by large chains at $3 per square foot in the first year, $5 in the second, and $10 annually thereafter, capped at $250,000. Mahmood maintains that the tax would not affect small businesses, and that the affected companies would be able to avoid the penalty if they lease their vacant space to someone else, abandon their lease so someone else can take it over, or reactivate the storefront themselves. He said the argument businesses have used to defend closures — that crime and homelessness make it difficult to run a storefront — doesn’t pass muster. “I recognize during COVID there were concerns, but the data show that crime is down,” he said. “That excuse is no longer valid.” Amazon’s vacant Whole Foods site is roughly 65,000 square feet. A report from the city controller on the proposal’s cost is pending, said Mahmood. He claims the measure could generate several million dollars in tax revenue. Noyola pushed back against Mahmood’s description of Amazon’s position. “That’s an inaccurate characterization of a conversation I had with Supervisor Mahmood. Full stop,” the lobbyist said, adding that the business community at large tried to propose an exemption for the downtown neighborhood, not for the Whole Foods site specifically. Mahmood stood by his account, saying Noyola told him Amazon spent $250,000 opposing Proposition D — the Overpaid CEO Tax that failed in June — and could spend a similar amount opposing his measure. New York City’s Mamdani, whose progressive politics have proved popular after a slate of congressional wins by democratic socialist candidates during the city’s June primary, announced his first city-owned grocery store in May at an affordable housing complex in the Bronx. The SF Board of Supervisors’ rules committee is set to vote Monday on the fund aspect of Mahmood’s law. Mahmood said he has four supporters of his proposal: Supervisors Cheyenne Chen, Danny Sauter, Stephen Sherrill, and Myrna Melgar. He would need a vote from one more supervisor to move the fund measure from the full board to the November ballot.

After Swalwell and Platner, Cheyenne Hunt is building a new #MeToo movement

Former East Bay Rep. Eric Swalwell dodged more than a decade of misconduct rumors on Capitol Hill. Maine U.S. Senate candidate Graham Platner withstood allegations of physical misconduct, disturbing Reddit posts, and a Nazi tattoo. Then they encountered Cheyenne Hunt. A 29-year-old political activist, attorney, and content creator with a vast social media following, Hunt has spent several months organizing women behind the scenes to amplify allegations of sexual misconduct, including rape, against both Swalwell and Platner . She has connected accusers with lawyers, therapists, and reporters while using her own online platforms to share their stories. The result: Swalwell resigned from Congress, shelved his campaign for governor , and has largely disappeared from public view amid multiple investigations into his alleged misconduct. Platner is thought to be on the verge of dropping out of his Senate race after losing critical endorsements from key progressives , including Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and California Rep. Ro Khanna. Swalwell and Platner have denied the allegations. “This is a reckoning,” Hunt told The Standard on a Thursday morning in June from the living room of the inland Orange County house she shares with her boyfriend, where stacks of law books fill three large shelves and a vase of pink peonies serves as the backdrop to the Zoom calls that fill her schedule. “No predators in power.” Hunt hasn’t had time for a break in the three months since the Swalwell story broke. Her days start early and end late, a drumbeat of staff meetings and check-ins with organizers. She forgets to stop and eat, she said, and her boyfriend often reminds her she needs a meal. During a day spent shadowing Hunt, The Standard watched her prepare for another cycle of chaos. In between back-to-back meetings, she was on frequent, feverish calls with a Politico reporter working to break the Platner story. Even she is shocked by what has unfolded in the weeks since her friend Annika Albrecht texted to ask if Hunt would post a video about the sexual harassment Albrecht claims she experienced from Swalwell . Hunt didn’t know that her March 31 video , which has generated more than 150,000 views on TikTok and Instagram, was the beginning of not only Swalwell’s downfall but her new mission. But Hunt wasn’t working alone. Arielle Fodor, a content creator and former teacher who goes by “Mrs. Frazzled” online, had also been posting cryptic messages about rumors of misconduct by Swalwell. Hunt, Fodor, and Albrecht teamed up to take the allegations that were circulating on social media to reporters. They collaborated with CNN for a story that broke April 10 with Albrecht’s allegations, along with accusations from three other women that ranged from harassment to sexual assault. Hunt has since resigned as executive director of the advocacy organization Gen-Z for Change and started Reckoning Action, a political organization with the goal of ending misogyny in places of power. Fodor is an adviser to the group, as are some of Swalwell’s accusers. Hunt said the group’s goals are to change sexual harassment laws and raise enough money to build a robust network of legal aid and other support services for victims. But this is not a millenial #MeToo movement. A key pillar of Reckoning Action is leveraging social media to inspire cultural change. TikTok, Twitter, and Instagram are increasingly where people — especially Gen Z — find, read, and talk about serious issues, Hunt said. And with her 220,000 followers on TikTok and 222,000 on Instagram, she is uniquely positioned to use social media as a tool to spark another #MeToo chapter, this one adapted for a digital-first era. “If you’re not having conversations with people where they’re listening, then you’re not in the conversation at all,” Hunt said. “It was content creators that blew the door open and found all these sources and made it happen.” ‘I had something to say’ Hunt’s political activism began in California’s rural Lake County, where she was raised by her single mom and grandmother. Hunt moved to Orange County when she was 14 and, two years later, graduated early from high school. She went to the University of Denver and moved back to Orange County for law school at UC Irvine. It was at law school in 2020, when she joined Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar’s office as a Senate Judiciary Committee law clerk, that Hunt found her calling in politics. She arrived in D.C. just as the first impeachment trial against President Donald Trump was beginning. It was evident how toxic a workplace the Capitol could be, Hunt said, especially for the many “hungry, ambitious young women” staffing lawmakers’ offices. “Many of whom this is the first job that they have ever had, and they’re looking for their big break,” she said. She returned home for law school graduation and to take care of her dying grandmother, then moved back to D.C. to work as a Big Tech accountability advocate at Public Citizen, a left-leaning consumer advocacy organization. “She’s a troublemaker,” Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen, said of Hunt. “A good troublemaker.” Weissman said he was impressed by Hunt’s creative approach to using social media to identify and solve problems. “It’s not just having the information, but how to frame the information, present the information, in a way that excites people in the algorithm nowadays,” he said. “And she had found a key.” Disillusioned by the lack of Gen Z representation in Congress, Hunt returned to Orange County with a plan to run for Congress in 2024 against Republican Rep. Michelle Steel in what was then California’s 45th District. She lost badly, earning just 8% of the vote in the March primary. “At the end of the day, like, I had something to say,” Hunt said of the experience. “There was a generation of women that was completely unrepresented at the federal level, and I wanted to take my swing at it.” As executive director of Gen-Z for Change, an organization that uses social media as an advocacy tool for progressive causes, it became her job to be “chronically online,” she said. But after the Swalwell news broke, Hunt said it became clear that she needed to focus on the strategy full time. She started Reckoning Action and, as executive director, oversees a team of about half a dozen women and men. “I have a habit of doing things that people think are insane,” she said. “But I think them through. I didn’t want to start something unless it was really clear that there was a place in the movement for it and that it would be sustainable.” Responding to #MeToo backlash Hunt said hundreds of women have reached out in the weeks since Swalwell resigned with their own experiences of sexual misconduct. It became clear from those conversations how much had changed since the #MeToo movement first went viral in 2017. What she learned: #MeToo is out; the manosphere is in. “I just think that we see politics so often function as a pendulum, where there’s progress, and then there’s backlash,” Hunt said. “And the backlash to the #MeToo movement was a generation of men that, for the first time, was realizing that they may not be able to act towards women with impunity anymore, and that was stark.” Young men are increasingly enamored with media figures like Joe Rogan, Jordan Peterson, Christopher Rufo and the late Charlie Kirk, and even far-right extremists like Nick Fuentes, an antisemitic white nationalist streamer. Hunt blames much of the rise of the manosphere on social media and its proliferation of right-wing accounts that once existed on the fringe but in recent years have exploded into the mainstream. Right-wing content creators have gamed the algorithm to prey on lonely young men, Hunt said, “offering them something that looks like community and is really just isolation, for their own kind of political agenda.” Hunt worries about women too. After a decade of the #girlboss, women seem less interested in the C-suite and more intrigued by the “Make America Healthy Again” and “trad wife” movements. From Hunt’s perspective, the same digital rabbit hole that pulls men into the manosphere is working to drag women back to the 1950s. “That’s why MAHA content exists,” Hunt said. “It starts because they’re, like, making banana bread, and then at some point they start talking about, I don’t know, fucking ivermectin or something.” A key pillar of Reckoning Action is promoting “narrative change,” not just through stories in traditional news outlets but through social media. Hunt wants to replicate the right-wing playbook of going viral, but to the left’s benefit. To do that, she envisions contracting with left-wing influencers on paid anti-misogyny campaigns, leveraging their specific brands to appeal to broader audiences. Hunt imagines collaborating with the podcast “The Basement Yard,” a comedy show with Joe Santagato and Frank Alvarez, who spend an hour gabbing about random topics. Under Hunt’s playbook, they would be paid to spend a few minutes railing against misogyny. “The people that listen to ‘Pod Save America,’ they already agree with us,” Hunt said. “That’s not going to reach new audiences and make meaningful difference. It’s not going to break out of the echo chamber. We need content that can compete with their content. Entertainment-first content.” Fodor has been doing this for years. Users might come to her initially for education news , but they will also find her “gentle parenting” spoofs on political topics, like a recent video in which she pretends to talk to a kid about how “yucky” it is that the Supreme Court ruled in favor of states with bans on transgender kids playing in girls sports . “I think everybody tries to hit it differently. And that’s kind of a cool thing about content creators,” Fodor said in an interview. “Is that everybody is pulling on their little thread in their corner in their own way.” Omar Wasow, an assistant professor of political science at UC Berkeley, said social media has always been an incubator for social and political movements, many for progressive causes. The #MeToo movement started with a hashtag, of course, and the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 began with the video of George Floyd’s murder spreading online. “In the U.S. and around the world, we’ve seen movements that can emerge almost out of nothing,” Wasow said. But the right has commanded social media in recent years, to great political effect. “It’s not just activists who are taking this up. It’s the most powerful people in the world in the current presidential administration,” Wasow said. Hunt noted that right-wing influencers have become “masters” at pushing online fringe ideas that eventually make their way into real-life politics. What was once considered “radical” is now law, Hunt said, like the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade and subsequent state legislation to criminalize women who get abortions. That same strategy won’t have an immediate impact for Hunt’s cause, she conceded over a lunch of vegan pho at a favorite Orange County Vietnamese restaurant. “I’m known for being pretty impatient, but I also understand that’s going to take time,” she said. “Institutional change takes time.” Her goal of ending misogyny in places of power is going to require a coalition of “unlikely bedfellows” working together. One of her goals, for example, is to change House ethics rules to make it safer for accusers to come forward with claims of inappropriate behavior. Reckoning Action is already working with the Democratic Women’s Caucus on the effort, but Hunt acknowledged, “we’re gonna need everybody on board,” perhaps including some Republicans. Old and new media partnerships But there could be limits to Hunt’s vision. Putting such an emphasis on social media is risky, said Juliet Williams, a gender studies professor at UCLA. The country’s major tech companies are run by “a bunch of super regressive dudes” who have cozied up to Trump. Old-school, grassroots organizing is still important, she said. “There’s no feminist Elon Musk,” Williams said. “Technology, social media, influencing — these platforms are not why #Metoo didn’t go where we wanted it to, and it’s not what is going to save us now.” There’s also a line that content creators can’t — or shouldn’t — cross. Both Hunt and Fodor said there was a limit with the Swalwell allegations that they felt comfortable posting on their pages. That’s when they turned to legacy newsrooms with the story. “I don’t want to see creators thinking that they should be talking about sensitive sexual assault stories or anything that’s of that level of consequence,” she said. “Because they don’t have the resources to do the corroboration and the independent fact-checking and what needs to be done for those [stories] to be told in a way that’s absolutely unimpeachable.” But even news organizations can’t prevent the repercussions victims may face after coming forward. A private investigator has contacted at least one former Swalwell staffer about her time working for the congressman, according to the news site NOTUS . Swalwell’s attorney Sara Azari confirmed to the outlet that she had hired the New York firm Beau Dietl & Associates as part of an investigation into the allegations. Azari did not respond to The Standard’s request for comment. “That is purely an intimidation tactic that is all about intimidating these women and trying to silence other ones from coming forward,” Hunt said. It’s why many women never come forward with their stories, said Gloria Allred, a women’s rights attorney who has represented victims in cases against Harvey Weinstein , Bill Cosby, R. Kelly , and Jeffrey Epstein. Allred said she wants women to know there is “another option.” “And that’s within the justice system,” she said, which allows victims to receive compensation for alleged abuse without any impact on their public image or threat of retaliation tactics like defamation lawsuits. “There are still some people who do not wish to live their life on the internet.” Allred said. “I understand the desire that young women have to hold the accused accountable. I agree that the accused should be held accountable. The real issue is, how can they best achieve that with the minimum harm to themselves and a maximum benefit to themselves?” If there’s anything Sacramento lobbyist Samantha Corbin has learned since she helped launch “ We Said Enough ,” the #MeToo movement in the California Capitol, it’s that “no one cares about women.” Corbin said since the coalition launched with an October 2017 letter exposing the “pervasive” culture of sexual harassment in the Capitol, she has received weekly calls from people alleging misconduct in and around the Legislature. The group notched some initial wins when several lawmakers resigned amid allegations of misconduct. Additionally, the Legislature in 2019 launched a Workplace Conduct Unit to independently investigate anonymous complaints of wrongdoing in the Capitol. The unit has received roughly 840 complaints, according to a February report, and “resolved” around 97% of them. Corbin acknowledged how difficult it is for advocates to maintain the momentum and progress made after a news cycle ends and public attention inevitably turns to other issues. “You consistently have to have people who have energy, who have a new way of telling the story and engaging people,” Corbin said. If Hunt is willing to carry the baton — and use new tools to tell women’s stories — then “fuck yeah, girl, get it.” Beyond Swalwell and Platner During a recent Zoom meeting with Reckoning Action organizers, Hunt was grappling with what comes next. The group was planning several weeks’ worth of social media and Substack content, not just on Swalwell but on other topics that could help push their anti-misogyny message. She was also preparing, ahead of Politico’s Platner story, to face down the same accusations that surfaced during the Swalwell allegations: that she was secretly working with Republicans to sabotage Democrats, that she was a shill for billionaires who want to buy U.S. elections. In his statement denying the allegations, Platner accused “out-of-state establishment operatives” of working to sabotage his campaign, a characterization that Hunt laughed at during her CNN interviews . These are the moments when Hunt refers back to her mission: No predators in power. “Period,” she said. “Women should not be sacrificed at the altar of the next election,” she argued. “If you think that it’s politically strategic to knowingly put someone in power that has a history of violence against women, then you are ceding the moral high ground that we so frequently claim to differentiate ourselves as Democrats.” Hunt, and Reckoning Action at large, has called on Platner to withdraw from the Senate race before a July 13 deadline for Democrats to replace him. Beyond Swalwell and Platner, Hunt has big plans over the next year for Reckoning Action. She wants to hire more organizers, and dreams of getting federal legislation introduced this year to ban politicians who are accused of misconduct from using campaign funds for legal bills. (Swalwell has used more than $300,000 in campaign funds to pay his attorney , according to state financial records.) The team also wants to ramp up messaging around the “Epstein class” and to target vulnerable Republicans in the midterms who voted against making the Epstein files public . Hunt was spending her birthday Tuesday evening recovering from the exhausting media blitz following the Platner revelations and fielding a steady stream of profile requests from reporters. “Eventually, this reckoning media moment, it will end,” Hunt said. “Does that freak me out, that we won’t squeeze every bit of juice out of it that we possibly can? To hold every single predator accountable that we possibly can? Yeah.” For now at least, the reckoning is still trending.

NYC has the Mamdani squad. Where have all the San Francisco socialists gone?

Tuesday’s New York City primary contest saw major victories for progressive and Democratic Socialist candidates, solidifying the rise of the city’s left-leaning political power base. Meanwhile, in San Francisco, lefties are licking their wounds after an early June primary contest saw near-total defeat for them as progressive power is on life support at City Hall. The contrasting results, occurring just weeks apart, reveal two of the country’s most influential cities are charting considerably different political paths. Last year, New York City elected its first-ever democratic socialist mayor, Zohran Mamdani. His preferred congressional candidates — Darializa Avila Chevalier, Brad Lander, and Claire Valdez — all saw victories on June 23. In San Francisco, a corporate-friendly, technocratic mayor was elected in 2024, Daniel Lurie, and he, too, saw all of his priorities succeed during the June 2 primary . That includes the failure of Prop. D, an increase in business taxes championed by labor interests. The divergence reveals a central tension in urban Democratic politics in the U.S.: whether affordability anxiety pushes working-class voters left toward democratic socialism, pushing for an overhaul of the economy, or toward technocratic moderates promising competence and stability. The answer, it turns out, depends heavily on demographics as much as ideology. “Everybody is looking at New York with a little bit of envy,” said Aditya Bhumbla, former co-chair of San Francisco’s Democratic Socialists chapter. “We want that here.” Nationally, the country has always had a perception that San Francisco is a hotbed of lefty politics. But the reality is a lot more complicated. The last progressive mayor was Art Agnos, who served from 1988 to 1992. In more recent years, the city saw a major backlash to progressivism, with voters ousting three school board members in 2022 who were perceived as too far to the left. The same year, voters booted District Attorney Chesa Boudin over his progressive views on criminal justice . In the 2024 election, progressive candidate Aaron Peskin placed third, while moderate candidates took over the Board of Supervisors. Why the two cities have diverged so drastically in their politics comes down to a number of factors: demographic trends, how the issue of affordability impacts both cities, and structural differences in the way elections are conducted, political observers told The Standard. They warned that the comparison is not a perfect one: San Francisco’s population is a 10th of New York City’s, and it’s also a sixth of the land size of the East Coast city, which features five boroughs, creating a much more diverse voter base when it comes to class and race. The first critical difference is income. Over the last decade, San Francisco’s median household income grew more than twice as fast as New York City’s — 37.5% compared to 15.2%, according to U.S. Census data — leaving the two cities at $150,600 and $85,980, respectively. “I think that explains a ton of it,” said Daniel Anderson, a political consultant who worked on progressive candidate Natalie Gee’s unsuccessful June campaign for District 4, about the income differences. “Just in terms of people’s sensibilities, the things they care about, the things they don’t care about. Those types of [working-class] people are not in [San Francisco] as much anymore.” There are also racial differences. “San Francisco is whiter, less black, and less Latino, and that is going to skew it rightward,” said Lincoln Mitchell, who splits his time between New York City and San Francisco as a Columbia University politics professor. Where those lower income people move to also matters for the electorate. Mitchell said there are many more options for working-class people to move within New York’s five boroughs compared to the Bay Area’s limited geography. “The difference in San Francisco is you get pushed out of the city,” Mitchell said. “You’re in Oakland, and then you’re not voting anymore.” He also said that the way the two cities conduct their elections creates a higher possibility of more left-leaning candidates succeeding in New York City. The East Coast metropolis uses a closed primary system, meaning that only registered Democrats can vote in the Democratic primary. Since the city is majority Democrat, the Republican primary is essentially ceremonial, and the Democrat who wins is all but guaranteed to prevail in the November general election. In San Francisco, the races are nonpartisan and party affiliation doesn’t limit who you can vote for. Mitchell explained that in the case of mayoral elections, a Republican or Independent voter in San Francisco can help push a moderate candidate like Lurie to victory. “Neither of these mayors would have been elected under the electoral system in the other city,” Mitchell said about Mamdani and Lurie. Some blame the lack of progressive success in San Francisco on how moderates have shaped their messaging — an effective one, they admit. “The moderate faction in the city did a better job of painting a story for why the city is currently dysfunctional,” said Saikat Chakrabarti, a progressive former aide to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who came in third during San Francisco’s June congressional primary . “That’s why their version is winning.” He described the moderates’ platform as a form of “reactionary politics.” “That tends to work,” he said. “Blaming progressives for the failures of the city: We’re too compassionate. We’re already taxing everyone too high.” Chakrabarti added that the city’s existing progressive network — that includes his opponent Supervisor Connie Chan, whom he trailed behind in third place — makes it harder for an insurgent style of politics like his to make inroads. A centimillionaire who made his fortune as an early employee of the technology company Stripe, Chakrabarti ran a populist campaign that leaned on affordability and taxing the rich. “In San Francisco, there is more of an institutional progressive establishment,” he said.“There’s the moderate establishment, and then there’s the institutionalized progressives. I would argue that it has been hard for progressives to run on a change message because they are part of the establishment.” Others say the amount of money aimed against progressive causes — most recently from technology interests — has stymied their success. The dueling tax battle in June saw $6.6 million raised for a business-backed ballot measure initiative, Prop. C, against the labor-backed Overpaid CEO Tax, Prop. D, which brought in half the amount of donations. Lurie’s circle of donors also forked over $1.8 million to a PAC called SF Believes , ensuring an uphill battle for the mayor’s opponents vying for Districts 2 and 4 , both of whom lost. “When you look at a city of our size and you look at how much is spent by tech and real estate, it’s obvious that this is a disproportionate priority for them to control and move [the city] in a more conservative direction,” said Dean Preston, one of the first Democratic Socialists elected to the Board of Supervisors in decades in 2019 who lost his seat in 2024 . “We are really the epicenter of tech money in politics.” There are signs that some pockets of progressive politics may be seeing a rise in the city. San Francisco’s DSA former co-chair Bhumbla said membership has seen a big uptick since Mamdani’s primary election in June 2025, from 900 members to 1,300 today. (It’s still only a slice of what NYC’s chapter boasts at over 13,000 members as of December.) But what Bhumbla believes could push San Francisco’s progressives into victory is the same message Mamdani ran on: housing affordability. Efforts are already underway as SF’s DSA chapter gathers signatures for a ballot measure this coming November that would raise money for affordable housing. The time is ripe for a housing affordability message, Bhumbla said, as rents have skyrocketed in the wake of San Francisco’s artificial intelligence boom. “The left in the city should have a clear positive answer on how to bring down rent,” they said. “Especially when the moderates want rent to go up to stimulate the economy.”

California’s billionaire tax is headed to voters — and so are the measures to kill it

The California Billionaire Tax Act is officially going to voters — and it isn’t alone. After weeks of negotiations, the health care union sponsoring the measure announced Thursday that it had failed to reach a compromise with the state Legislature to remove the initiative from the ballot by a June 25 deadline. A day earlier, the Secretary of State announced that two initiatives that would counter the Billionaire Tax Act had also qualified for the ballot, setting up a showdown come November. In a defiant news conference Thursday afternoon, SEIU-UHW Vice President Debru Carthan said the union and its allies would continue to fight for the tax through Election Day in November. “We’re here today to make it clear we aren’t backing down,” Carthan said. “The billionaire tax will be on the November ballot, and we intend to win.” The highly controversial initiative would levy a one-time 5% tax on California’s approximately 250 billionaires in an attempt to offset funding lost from federal health care cuts. In recent weeks, as negotiations over the initiative intensified, multiple unions, health care organizations, and affordable housing groups announced their opposition to the measure, claiming it would threaten future tax revenue by driving billionaires out of the state. The measure also has serious money opposing it: Last week, the California Medical Association and California Primary Care Association put $100,000 each into a new group fighting the tax, which has since launched a statewide digital ad calling the initiative a “reckless wealth tax experiment.” The two counter-initiatives headed to the ballot are the product of Building a Better California, a group funded by a coalition of billionaires including Google co-founder Sergey Brin, which has so far raised more than $100 million to oppose the tax and push other policy goals. Golden State Promise, a PAC funded by Ripple Executive Chairman Chris Larsen, has so far spent nearly $10 million opposing the measure, and said Thursday it intends to continue until Election Day. Asked how much money SEIU had set aside to promote the Billionaire Tax Act, Suzanne Jimenez, the union’s chief of staff, said they were planning to raise money from supporters. Proponents of the tax came down hard on Gov. Gavin Newsom in Thursday’s press conference, with Tax Act architect Dave Regan claiming the governor had “made clear he would not entertain any proposal to tax billionaires” — including a proposal to reduce the tax to 2%. “Ironically, Gov. Newsom is in lockstep with Donald Trump and billionaires like Peter Thiel and Sergey Brin on this issue,” Carthan said, citing two of the most prominent billionaire opponents of the tax. “So health care workers and working families across California are putting forward a long-overdue solution: making billionaires pay their fair share.”

“I’m feeling clear-eyed’’: Jackie Fielder returns to City Hall after mental health leave

Supervisor Jackie Fielder’s legislative plans are many: restoring clean streets in her district by building more public restrooms, launching San Francisco’s first public bank to raise funds for priorities like affordable housing, and fighting to restore budgets for community organizations serving immigrants. But before Fielder could rescue anyone else, she had to rescue herself. Following a mental health crisis that saw Fielder hospitalized in March, she’s feeling rested, restored, and ready to return to City Hall, she told The Standard in a wide-ranging interview Wednesday. She first announced her return in Mission Local . “Stepping away from work is not something that I wanted to do or ever want to do, but when the doctor told me three months is the least I need, it felt like I had to put my pride aside,” Fielder said. “I’m glad I did, because I’m feeling more rested, more clear-eyed, and ready to do this job again.” Her first order of business will be town hall-style listening sessions in every neighborhood she represents. She’s still working on the details — where, when, and with whom — but she hopes to invite city staff to hear concerns from residents. Fielder’s district is among the busiest on the board: She represents residents of Bernal Heights, Portola, and the Mission, the latter of which has seen fears of ICE raids spike among its heavily Latino population. Meanwhile, drug use has swelled near BART stations as law enforcement pushed dealers off Sixth Street in South of Market , and an investigation into the leak of a confidential City Hall memo regarding a drug rehab center was added to Fielder’s plate in March. When she first discussed her mental health crisis that month, in both The Standard and Mission Local, Fielder felt “intense pressure” to resign. She needed an exit button. What she didn’t know, initially, she said, was that she could take a medical leave. When her staff presented that option, she took it. Fielder is glad she was honest with her constituents about her struggle. “There’s been so many people coming to me with their own stories of mental health challenges,” she said. “It’s just been overwhelming, and I feel very grateful and lucky for that.” Fielder will return in time to vote on the city’s budget, the result of negotiations between the Board of Supervisors and the mayor’s office, which is due July 1. Mayor Daniel Lurie’s proposed budget slashed funding from workforce development programs, case management for Latino immigrants and Native American community members, and a position as a manager in the Portola business corridor, Fielder said. “This has been a brutal budget season for a lot of the most vulnerable constituencies in San Francisco,” she said. “All of the funding for those services are on the line, and so that’s just top of mind when I get back.” The city would’ve been in a stronger fiscal position if Proposition D, the Overpaid CEO Tax, had passed in June, Fielder said. She was hoping for funding for more public bathrooms in the Mission and said she will continue to push for more bathrooms citywide. Progressives suffered losses on the June ballot, including supervisor races in Districts 4 and 2, which include the Sunset and tony neighborhoods like the Marina and Cow Hollow. Fielder said the local progressive movement needs to look to the future to regain its stature. “I think we need a new generation of progressive leadership, and in San Francisco, it’s hard to have that bench when it’s hard to afford to live in the city,” she said. “My race stands as an example of what’s possible, and so I continue to have hope that one day we’ll have more progressive leadership and representation on the board.” Fielder’s neighborhoods, collectively known as District 9, were not without help in her absence. Her legislative staff, including Jennifer Ferrigno, Ana Herrera, Sasha Gaona, and Sheila Chung Hagen, put in extra hours to address residents’ concerns. Ryen Motzek, president of the Mission Merchants Association, said Gaona in particular stepped up for the Mission as neighbors worried about overdoses near BART stations. “She has been incredibly engaging and incredibly communicative, like some of the best that I’ve seen from any, any department, hands down,” Motzek said. Fielder’s office helped the Mission get unarmed ambassadors to patrol the area, he said, “and they have been an amazing, amazing asset to this community.” Other supervisors pitched in, too, including Chyanne Chen, who led the effort started by Fielder to initiate a public bank in San Francisco. Now Fielder is going back into the fray, facing more than a hundred emails a day, plus texts, calls, and social media DMs, amid an “overwhelming” barrage of needs from the city. She’s ready. “Getting my sleep together and having a consistent eight hours of sleep for the first time in years — that has done wonders for my mental health,” Fielder said. She hopes others in politics, and in San Francisco in general, openly talk about their mental health needs and get the help they need. Fielder has already seen some success: Her admission has helped other public officials feel more confident speaking to The Standard about their own mental health struggles. “I hope I’m a testament to those who are considering asking for help or taking a break or saying no, even if it’s just for a second, just taking a breath,” Fielder said. “The world is hard, and life is hard, and you’ve gotta bring those close to you closer.” She added, “You never know what someone is going through.”

SF Commission greenlights Lurie’s controversial permitting software deal

A city commission on Thursday cleared a key hurdle for Mayor Daniel Lurie‘s beleaguered permitting overhaul, voting 4-1 to allow San Francisco to continue its lucrative — and controversial — contract with software firm OpenGov. The Civil Service Commission’s vote authorizes the city to contract out IT work to OpenGov, the SF-based tech firm that Lurie’s office hired last summer to modernize the city’s outdated permitting system, bypassing a competitive bid process and sparking allegations of favoritism. The approval came after a grueling two-hour meeting, during which the Planning Department leadership defended its admittedly rough implementation of the new permitting software. Meanwhile, city IT employees, represented by the union IFPTE Local 21, attacked the software as riddled with security holes and called it a “black box” the city could neither improve nor modify. The Civil Service Commission cleared the path for OpenGov, but with strings attached: City leaders agreed to include a labor intermediary in the program to ensure worker protection and remain in talks with IFPTE Local 21 to smooth the software’s implementation. The Planning Department must report back to the commission every six months. The commissioners’ decision knocks down a key roadblock in the way of Lurie’s $6.5 million contract for professional services with OpenGov. The city is planning to spend an additional $22 million in OpenGov licensing fees over the next five years, with the option of a one-year extension. The OpenGov contract is still subject to a vote by the Board of Supervisors. Commissioner Adam Wood cast the lone dissenting vote. He said the implementation of OpenGov was obviously “half-baked” and “rushed.” The commission’s vote comes on the heels of an investigation by The Standard, published last month, into the contract. Multiple former OpenGov employees and current city workers said the company knew it would not meet benchmarks laid out by the mayor’s office and that the software is missing key features. Lurie is betting heavily on OpenGov’s implementation — it’s the centerpiece of his PermitSF plan to revitalize San Francisco’s archaic way of processing the public’s paperwork. In the meeting, Sarah Dennis Phillips, the executive director of the Planning Department, told the Civil Service Commission that the transition to OpenGov isn’t just crucial to meeting the city’s goals of accelerating housing permit approvals; it’s also part of building the city’s tax base. “We’re midstream in our economic recovery,” Phillips said. “We don’t want permits to hold up our jobs or small businesses.” Roughly a dozen union members showed up to the meeting with signs that read, “Protect public services. No contracting out.” Lurie’s office referred The Standard to Office of Small Business spokesperson Michelle Reynolds for comment. “We are looking forward to continuing the vital work to modernize San Francisco’s permitting, in close partnership with city staff whose hard work every day makes it possible,” Reynolds said. We’ve made strong progress and the Civil Service Commission’s approval is an important step towards even more.” That staff was less than happy with OpenGov’s software. IFPTE staff representative Emily Wallace alleged in the meeting that San Franciscans’ data may be left vulnerable. In the meeting, she said the software’s framework reached “end of life” in 2022, raising security issues. Wallace alleged that city workers who spoke out against PermitSF in meetings — where feedback was solicited — were pulled off the work in retaliation, causing a “chilling effect” on staff. “They were told ‘you have too much information, and it threatens to undermine what we are trying to do,’” Wallace claimed. “They were moved.” Planning Department leadership defended their personnel assignments, saying the task of assigning them was complex and ongoing. Last month, ex-SF Planning employee Michael Christensen alleged intimidation by project leaders’ objections to OpenGov’s implementation and said that Liz Watty, one of the managers of PermitSF, asked him to report colleagues who spoke critically of the project. The city denied Christensen’s claims. Lurie began PermitSF in February 2025 and chose OpenGov as the software to lead that effort later that summer. The mayor’s office did not seek a competing bid for the technology, and city staff had preferred another company over OpenGov, raising issues with its apparent lack of features and high cost. A $5.9 million deal was signed with OpenGov in October. Lurie also has connections to OpenGov: The company’s founders donated tens of thousands of dollars to his former nonprofit, Tipping Point Community. Katherine August-deWilde, a major donor to Tipping Point who leads one of the mayor’s business groups, Partnership for San Francisco, was an adviser to OpenGov when the city signed the deal with the company. Lurie and his family also held investments in OpenGov through a firm headed by another Tipping Point donor. In response to the revelations, Supervisor Jackie Fielder called for an investigation into how OpenGov was chosen. The report found the OpenGov selection process “did not violate city requirements,” although it could not be assured that an unfair advantage was not given to bidders for the permit reform contract, because a lack of transparency made it hard to tell. The mayor’s office has denied any favoritism in the deal and claimed that OpenGov was the only software company capable of meeting its aggressive implementation deadlines. Lurie had given the city until February 2026 to create a new, OpenGov-powered software. But the city has not met its deadlines. The city’s contract with OpenGov promised 15 permit types by March. By last month, less than half were available on the new PermitSF platform. In the meeting, Civil Service Commissioner Vitus Leung pressed the Planning Department on OpenGov’s myriad delays. Watty denied OpenGov had any culpability. “The delays are not due to the vendor,” she said. “The delays are due to the city.”

The strange bedfellows lining up against the California billionaire tax

California unions and billionaires don’t often find themselves on the same side of a political fight. But a bitter battle over a November billionaire tax has splintered some of the state’s many labor unions to create a broad coalition of strange bedfellows who rarely join hands but are now collaborating to kill it. A raft of prominent unions, Republicans, business groups, and anti-tax advocates are united in opposing the initiative, as is Gov. Gavin Newsom, whose office has been negotiating with stakeholders to achieve a last-minute deal to pull the measure from the ballot. The labor groups opposed to the measure include some of Sacramento’s most influential political players, including the California Teachers Association and other organizations representing law enforcement, carpenters, and builders. They’ve joined forces with pro-housing advocates and medical organizations like the California Primary Care Association, California Medical Association, and Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California in their opposition. The labor opposition is all the more remarkable since the tax measure has been conceived and sponsored by SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West. Jason Elliott, Newsom’s former deputy chief of staff, is “astounded” at the breadth of groups opposed to it. “The proponents ought to hope that negotiations are successful because they have given birth to one of the most unpopular measures I’ve seen in years,” Elliott said. “The coalition that has formed to defeat this poorly crafted measure is a coalition that rarely, if ever, comes together in California politics.” The California Secretary of State’s Office announced Wednesday that the sponsors had collected enough signatures to put the tax before voters in November. If passed, it would impose a one-time 5% tax on billionaires’ net worth to raise an estimated $100 billion to offset health care funding cuts under President Donald Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill. “We’re one step closer to saving the hospitals and emergency rooms that we all rely on,” Debru Carthan, spokesperson for the Billionaire Tax Now Coalition, said in a Thursday statement. “David won the second round against Goliath, but healthcare workers and our allies won’t quit until we protect patients from the looming California healthcare collapse manufactured by Trump and Congress.” Those opposed to the measure almost unanimously agree that more funding is needed to save much-needed services. But they are skeptical that the tax is the best way to plug the budget gap. They have criticized it as a Band-Aid solution to a long-term funding crisis, and are anxious that it could drive out some of the state’s wealthiest residents , whose fortunes the California budget leans heavily on. The California Teachers Association said in a June 7 statement that the tax “will not provide the sustainable and long-lasting funding that our schools and communities deserve.” California YIMBY leaders also called the tax “ poorly designed ” and said it would harm housing production by “discouraging investment in California.” Some of the state’s most notable billionaires, including Google co-founder Sergey Brin, Ripple’s Chris Larsen, venture capitalist (and chairman of The Standard) Michael Moritz, and Stripe CEO Patrick Collison, have already promised to spend heavily to try to kill the initiative. Some of the interest groups who are opposed to the tax have also announced plans to form their own well-funded campaign to block its passage . The committee is sponsored by the California Medical Association and California Primary Care Association, which have each given $100,000 to the committee, and the California School Boards Association. Sacramento-based Democratic consultant Andrew Acosta said the overwhelming opposition demonstrates how “UHW poked multiple bears.” “Why would they be excited about an initiative that doesn’t really help them at all? It’s a big pot of money, and they all have needs,” he said. Newsom reportedly promised donors he would convince SEIU-UHW President Dave Regan to pull the measure before a June 25 deadline. But several people with knowledge of the negotiations said they are not going well. Talks between the groups have repeatedly come together, only to fall apart. Barring some “massive pivot” one person said, the measure is likely to stay on the ballot. The coalition backing the tax sent a letter to Newsom Thursday afternoon proposing a “2% version” of the initiative as a compromise, which the group said would help backfill two years’ worth of funding cuts. “A massive healthcare crisis and collapse is coming for California,” the group wrote in its letter. “The current budget plans being discussed in Sacramento ask working Californians to bear the burden. Taxes on consumers. Cuts to healthcare programs. Increased costs for patients who can least afford them. And yet, as those proposals take shape, one group remains entirely untouched: the wealthiest billionaires on earth, many of whom call California home. That is not a balanced solution. It’s a choice, and we believe it’s the wrong one.” The revised proposal has so far failed to sway Newsom. “The Governor has been clear that he is strongly opposed to a California-only wealth tax,” spokesperson Tara Gallegos said in a statement. “The Governor supports making the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share, but this poorly designed state-only measure will defund teachers, schools, clinics, and public safety.” Public sentiment about the measure appears to be evenly split, though a well funded, union-backed campaign to defeat the tax could change that. A Public Policy Institute poll last month found 54% of likely voters supported the initiative, while a June poll sponsored by its opponents found support at 41%. Regan notoriously uses state ballot measures as leverage to notch wins for his union, and is unlikely to back down without some financial concession from the state. History also shows Regan isn’t afraid of losing: of the dozens of measures he has filed in the last 17 years, only two have won , according to a Politico analysis. Regan’s reputation in Sacramento, depending on whom you ask, is either that of a fearless leader willing to take on powerful interests to benefit his members, or someone whose only winning — or failing — strategy is to bully his way into a deal. “Dave Regan is the great coalition builder. Anything he touches, there is a great coalition opposed to him,” said Brandon Castillo, a strategist whose client list includes healthcare organizations that have fought Regan at the ballot box in years past. “Obviously this is a flawed measure. And there’s just not a lot of trust in the proponent,” Castillo said. “What does it take to satisfy what he wants? And can they get there?” It’s a long road to November, and Newsom has outsized leverage in the sheer number of groups opposing the measure. “It’s sometimes hard to get labor and business to agree that today is Thursday, let alone a consequential statewide ballot measure,” Elliot added. “But that’s precisely what has happened here.”

Big lobbying groups merge and expand from Sacramento to Bay Area

Big moves are underway in California’s government affairs and lobbying space. Axiom Advisors, a Sacramento-based consulting firm, is acquiring the Bay Area’s BMWL firm, Power Play has learned. “We’re entering an era where the fight for every consequential issue in California happens across policy, politics, press, and public perception simultaneously,” said Jason Kinney , one of the head honchos at Axiom. “We offer clients the ability to navigate and win across every arena that matters in this state. That’s what this expansion reinforces.” Other power players are joining Axiom: Anthony York , a former aide to Gov. Gavin Newsom and senior adviser to failed gubernatorial candidate Tom Steyer , will be coming aboard, along with Rhys Williams , another ex-Newsomite. Jason Elliott , a San Francisco-based consultant and longtime Newsom adviser, said that combining the geographic power of Bay Area and Sacramento firms makes sense from a strategic standpoint. “Despite the fact that SF and Sacramento are only an hour-and-a-half drive apart, the cultures of those places are very different,” he said. “I think it’s a real value add for these two to come together.” — Gabe Greschler Got tips? Send them to us at powerplay@sfstandard.com . WINNING WHILE LOSING : GOP gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton may have tough odds at winning the governor’s mansion over Democrat Xavier Becerra , but Republicans aren’t expecting November to be a loss. In fact, Hilton making it into the top two was perhaps the only win they needed for November. That’s because if two Democrats had advanced to the general election — a nightmare scenario for both parties — Republicans would have little reason to turn out for other races down the ballot. Hilton’s place in the competition is “very, very important for thousands of Republicans running down-ticket,” said Republican strategist Jon Fleischman . “That’s going to matter in races for Congress, state Senate, Assembly, and school board.” Hilton’s name will also boost other Republican priorities in November, including a ballot initiative to require voters to show identification and another to limit real estate transfer taxes and make it harder for local jurisdictions to raise taxes. The California Billionaire Tax is also expected to generate enthusiasm at the ballot box among conservative voters. Meanwhile, a high-GOP turnout would, in theory, help embattled Republicans running in newly competitive contests after Proposition 50 , Newsom’s retaliatory mid-decade redistricting measure, which voters approved in November. Hilton himself may not be successful, Fleischman said, but he will be “holding up the banner as tall as he can” for the rest of the party. — Hannah Wiley TAX MANIA: What do Mayor Daniel Lurie , the Democratic Socialists of America, and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association have in common? They all want to tweak transfer taxes. San Francisco’s transfer tax, paid when real estate is sold or changes ownership, has been a policy battleground for years. Progressives have called for increasing rates to raise revenue, while moderates argue that reducing them could jump-start housing construction. Experts say the reason so many people seem fixated on this boring tax is simple: It’s the rare tax over which cities have authority, and it’s politically popular, because most voters aren’t forced to pay it. “It’s a lack of options,” said tenant organizer Shanti Singh . “We can’t tax property reasonably in this state, and we can’t tax income locally, so a lot of San Francisco’s and other municipal economies’ services are funded through transfer and parcel taxes.” Lurie and Supervisor Bilal Mahmood this week hit pause on an effort to halve the transfer tax for high-ticket sales, as Power Play reported, and days later introduced a ballot measure to close a loophole that exempted foreclosed properties from the tax. Meanwhile, a separate measure backed by the local Democratic Socialists of America is close to qualifying for the ballot. This measure would direct transfer tax revenue from 2020’s Proposition I to affordable housing. And at the state level, Assemblymember Buffy Wicks is rumored to be working on a transfer tax effort of her own. If you have an appetite for further reading on the transfer tax, read more here . — Max Harrison-Caldwell NEXT CHAPTER : Hi, Power Play lovers! This is Han, with some bittersweet news to share: I’ll be leaving The Standard and heading to the East Coast for a new role. Over the past four and a half years, I’ve had the privilege of writing about recalls , geopolitics , Chinese Americans , food , concerts , movies , travel , and fishing trips . I don’t think I’ll ever truly leave San Francisco behind after spending nine years reporting here. I’ll forever be that boy living on the foggy west side. My curiosity about pandas , the Great Highway , and Rose Pak ’s birthplace will stay with me. For those political insiders who keep mistaking me for the other Han at City Hall, please keep sending me your messages. I genuinely enjoy reading them. And one day, The Standard will break a big story because of it. I feel incredibly honored and lucky to have been part of this journey. To everyone who has read Power Play, shared tips, answered my calls, or tolerated my questions — thank you. If you know me and want to say goodbye, we’ll be gathering at a bar after work Tuesday. Text me for the location. And if I don’t see you, I’ll see you in Washington, D.C. (Connie and Scott: I’ll be seeing one of you there, too.) — Han Li

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

SF Superior Court

SF Superior Court Presiding Judge

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

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

Abatement Appeals Board

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 1

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 2

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 3

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 4

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 5

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 6

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 7

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

Access Appeals Commission

Access Appeals Commission Commissioner 1

Access Appeals Commission Commissioner 2

Access Appeals Commission Commissioner 3

Access Appeals Commission Commissioner 4

Access Appeals Commission Commissioner 5

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

Adult Day Health Care Planning Council

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

Cristel Tullock

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

Advisory Committee of Street Artists and Crafts Examiners

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

Advisory Council on Human Rights

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

Mike Nakornkhet

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

Airport Commission

Airport Commission Commissioner 1

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