‘We can shut down the city’: Lurie’s budget cuts spark a showdown with labor

Mayor Daniel Lurie may be setting the stage for a once-in-a-generation showdown with San Francisco’s public-sector labor unions. Faced with a $643 million deficit and the threat of hundreds of millions more in federal cuts, Lurie is slashing city jobs and squeezing public services — moves that are fueling anger among the unions he’ll soon face across the bargaining table. The timing couldn’t be more fraught. Next year, for the first time since 1976 , San Francisco’s public-sector workers will have the legal right to strike, after a recent decision by the California Public Employment Relations Board struck down the city’s ability to fire picketing workers. The last time a mayor pushed them this far, 5,000 city workers walked off the job, the streets filled with trash, the buses stopped running, and the city shook. Last month, Lurie sent pink slips to 127 city staffers. His draft budget is due in June, and hundreds more positions are threatened. While the mayor’s budget must be approved by the Board of Supervisors, a Lurie-friendly, moderate Democrat majority is poised to approve whatever cuts he proposes. The only person who can stop Lurie’s budget is Lurie himself. And he may have reason to pull his punches. Kristin Hardy, regional vice president of Service Employees International Union 1021 — which represents 16,000 San Francisco employees, nearly half of all city workers — said Lurie’s proposed layoffs will ensure workers are enraged by the time they meet him at the bargaining table in 2027. If that leads workers to strike, she said, “we can shut down the whole city.” “I really don’t think that the mayor wants this,” she added, but “that’s what it looks like it’s going toward.” SEIU 1021’s members hail from nearly all of San Francisco’s 50-odd departments, guaranteeing that a strike would kneecap services San Franciscans rely on every day, from permitting to public health. Bianca Polovina, president of IFPTE Local 21, which represents 6,400 city employees, told The Standard that city officials are disregarding alternative solutions to layoffs, including tapping reserves in the short term, before relying on the Overpaid CEO Tax, which will be on the ballot in June and, if passed, may raise as much as $300 million annually for the city’s general fund. “Our membership is alarmed at the impacts these layoffs are already having on public services. Shuttered clinics, reduced violence prevention programs, and community ambassadors pulled off the streets impact every San Franciscan,” they said. “It’s hard to imagine what’s in store if more service cuts are coming.” One thing is sure: Whatever action unions take next year depends on what action Lurie takes this year. “Our members will have the right to strike,” Polovina said. “That decision will be theirs to make.” Lurie hasn’t enjoyed strong relationships with public-sector unions, apparently by design. Bankrolling his own election to the tune of $9.5 million allowed Lurie to leapfrog the usual bridge-building between politicians and labor unions, traditionally hardened through years of campaigning and governing. Without those relationships to manage, Lurie’s administration has leaned into its argument that creating a friendly environment for downtown’s economic recovery will help refill city coffers. Sharky Laguana, a former small-business commissioner and CEO of the passenger van rental company Bandago , said Lurie’s policies are succeeding, including streamlining permits through his PermitSF program and creating joy with the success of the street festival, Downtown First Thursdays . “If we want to maintain the level of government we currently have, we’re going to have to find a way to raise tax revenue,” Laguana said. “The only way to do that is to convince people to do business here.” Yet, as Hardy tells it, some business-friendly policies helped build the wall between Lurie and labor. The mayor is against labor’s local Overpaid CEO Tax and the California Billionaire Tax, which are designed to shore up budget shortfalls. His proposed charter reform would weaken citizens’ ability to place initiatives on the ballot, a frequent tool for organized labor to spar with businesses over taxes. There are also ongoing, delicate negotiations over the future of a years-old San Francisco business fee to support workers’ healthcare. Lurie’s spokesperson, Charles Lutvak, said the mayor has taken a “collaborative” approach with labor. “We’re putting together a responsible budget that will protect the core services San Franciscans rely on, while managing spending long term to lay the groundwork for a broad and durable recovery,” Lutvak said. “That collaborative approach will continue to guide our work as we finalize the budget and deliver the high-quality services San Franciscans deserve.” But Mike Casey, president of the San Francisco Labor Council, which represents most unions in the city, said Lurie has had labor on the back foot since his first day in office. “We spend more time defending and holding onto what we fought for and won decades ago than advancing and moving forward things our members and working people need now,” he said. “If they want to keep stripping away what we’ve got, all the services, eliminate jobs, OK. But it ain’t gonna be people just sitting back and taking it.” That already frayed relationship may have further unraveled last week after Lurie codified 14% pay raises for police and firefighters, which will cost the city $100 million over the next two years. Local think tank SPUR issued a report this year warning that doing so would give other labor unions the ability to argue for raises of their own. Ed Harrington, a former San Francisco city controller, said the SPUR report was prescient. “When you go ahead and you give the police and fire big raises, of course, to us, some are going to say, ‘What about us?’” he said. Harrington said the situation mirrors the one that led to the city’s general strike in 1976. He hopes history doesn’t repeat itself. That year, more than 5,000 striking city workers shook San Francisco hard enough to register on the Richter scale: Street cleaning was halted, the main library and zoo were closed, and Muni buses lay dormant in their depots. Picket lines hit water pumping stations and the San Francisco Airport, according to an edition of the San Francisco Examiner from that year. Trash amassed in piles at San Francisco General Hospital, and a neglected Civic Center pool overflowed. If strikes rock San Francisco, it may endanger Lurie’s efforts to rebound the economy, according to Supervisor Myrna Melgar, a member of the board’s progressive Democrat wing who does not support the layoffs of city workers. “One thing that makes businesses nervous about investing in the city is unrest, so I really hope we don’t get there,” she said. “I hope that we take the path of labor peace.”

PG&E failed to act on substation damage before crippling December blackout

Utility giant Pacific Gas & Electric on Friday released a long-awaited investigation into the December blackout that left 120,000 San Francisco residents without power, revealing that the multibillion-dollar company was aware of damage at the Mission substation responsible for the incident but left faulty equipment in place. The 70-page inquiry , conducted by the engineering firm Exponent, found that inclement weather before the Dec. 20 blackout spurred high humidity levels inside PG&E’s Mission substation and caused condensation buildup, resulting in a fire and the subsequent outage. PG&E personnel in November found a piece of equipment known as an “incident insulating board” with “burned spots” and warping that was partially responsible for the blackout, but they failed to replace or inspect it thoroughly, according to the report. The November damage was logged by PG&E as water issues, but Exponent investigators said it had other causes. The report found that the substation, built in the 1940s, was susceptible to rainwater and lacked an interior drainage system. Investigators from Exponent found pools of water in the site’s basement days after the December storm had passed. Exponent also found that ventilation fans in the substation’s basement had been broken for years and were not repaired until after the blackout. The report notes that while the precise contribution of basement water to the fire is unclear, standing water in the substation’s basement would have increased humidity and the likelihood of condensation in the switchgear room, where the fire began. The incident left homes without electricity for days and cost businesses and restaurants lost revenue during a crucial holiday weekend. Residents couldn’t flush toilets , holiday events were canceled, and restaurants were forced to throw out spoiled food . Making the situation worse, Waymo vehicles stalled more than 1,500 times during the outage, forcing the company to dispatch tow trucks to retrieve 64 cars while overwhelmed city dispatchers — kept on hold for as long as 53 minutes — scrambled to clear blocked intersections. Meanwhile, residents complained that PG&E estimates for power restoration were wildly inaccurate. In an interview with The Standard, Sumeet Singh, CEO of PG&E Co., expressed regret for the incident and asserted that the company would improve its operations to prevent a similar incident. A statement issued Friday did not mention the company’s knowledge of damaged equipment, and Singh said in the interview that there was no sign that PG&E could have known the substation was vulnerable to a fire. “We did not have any indications,” he said. “There were no early warning indicators.” He said no employees had been disciplined or terminated as a result of the incident. The company does not have an estimate of the economic impact of the blackout. PG&E customers were left infuriated by the blackout as they face increasingly high electricity bills that have added to the city and state’s affordability crisis. The situation has renewed long-standing calls for the city to break up with the multibillion-dollar company. It was not the first time the Mission substation had failed: In 2003, a fire at the site led to a $6.5 million fine by state regulators and the discovery through a subsequent investigation that a similar blaze had occurred in 1996. PG&E said it has taken action since the December incident, including conducting thousands of inspections at all 31 city substations and replacing equipment. In the wake of the outage, the company apologized and issued a $200 credit for residential customers and $2,500 for businesses. Singh said the credits and damage claims amount to roughly $50 million. The incident left local lawmakers exasperated, and supervisors quickly called for a hearing, demanding that PG&E explain why the blackout had occurred and how the company had responded. A February hearing revealed an avalanche of blunders by PG&E , including delayed responses and flawed restoration estimates. Also at the hearing, Singh said Mayor Daniel Lurie had personally directed PG&E to respond to the Opera House during the emergency, where his daughter was performing in a ballet, though the CEO retracted the statement hours later. December’s blackout has had ripple effects at the state level and has renewed calls for San Francisco to break up with PG&E, an effort that has been decades in the making. The city has pressed state regulators to investigate the December incident, claiming in a March letter signed by Lurie and others that the California Public Utilities Commission was dragging its feet on a probe. Meanwhile, state Sen. Scott Wiener, who is running to succeed Rep. Nancy Pelosi, introduced a bill earlier this year in response to the blackout that would have made it easier for San Francisco to pull away from PG&E. The bill failed to pass out of committee. But others are putting pressure on PG&E, including gubernatorial candidate Tom Steyer, who has blasted the utility for its high prices and the $17 million salary of Patti Poppe, CEO of PG&E Corp. Steyer has promised that if he’s elected, he will lower electricity costs by 25% and appoint voices critical of the utility to the CPUC, among other proposals. PG&E considers Steyer’s candidacy — which was buoyed by the exit of former Rep. Eric Swalwell — a major threat and has plowed millions of dollars into an anti-Steyer PAC . This week, Steyer’s campaign alleged that the utility breached campaign finance laws through its spending spree on statewide ads blasting the candidate.

Post-Swalwell Democrats push for consensus. Plus: Was London Breed passed over for job?

This article is from Power Play, a twice-weekly newsletter rounding up the latest City Hall and local politics gossip. To sign up, visit The Standard’s newsletter page . In late February, the California Democratic Party wound itself into knots deciding which of the eight leading candidates to endorse in the gubernatorial contest. Now, with disgraced ex-congressman Eric Swalwell very much out of the race, efforts are percolating to reconvene the Dems for one last go-round at an endorsement vote. California Democratic Party executive committee member Christine Pelosi told Power Play she was approached by a “variety of campaigns” in the hopes she’d give her Jane Hancock to a petition demanding a new vote. She declined. The petition pushers’ logic goes like this: With Democrats across the state and country united behind removing Swalwell from political life, can’t state Dems harness that same unity to coalesce behind a candidate for the primary? Especially as the split-seven-ways ticket risks allowing a Republican like Fox News host Steve Hilton the opportunity to reach the governor’s office. California Democratic Party chair Rusty Hicks declined to comment on any overtures being made by people inside the party. Pelosi isn’t convinced. “ There’s a difference between indicating that we have to stand with survivors and then turning that into saying we’re going to coalesce around a particular person,” she said. “I just don’t see that happening.” The Democratic Party’s roughly 400-person executive board meets three times a year, and it would take the vote of 100 members and three statewide officers to convene a meeting, according to party bylaws. Pelosi said that’s a long shot. (The next meeting isn’t scheduled yet but will take place after the June primary.) And while Swalwell received the most support during February’s party convention, it was only 24%. Even if all that backing transferred to the next runner-up, Betty Yee, who netted 17%, that’s leagues away from the 60% threshold needed for an endorsement. “Frankly,” Pelosi said, “I don’t think there’s a consensus candidate right now. — Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez Got tips? Send to us at powerplay@sfstandard.com . SCHAAFTED: The Bay Area Council, which lobbies for policies embraced by the business community, is celebrating the appointment of two-term Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf as president and CEO . But Power Play has learned that another familiar political player was under consideration: London Breed . Sources with knowledge of the Bay Area Council’s outreach confirmed that the former San Francisco mayor was approached about the position, though she apparently declined to apply. It’s unclear how Breed’s candidacy would’ve impacted Schaaf’s chances of leading an organization known for promoting denser housing and robust transit funding. Both former mayors made these issues top priorities of their administrations. The council itself was mum on whether it actively recruited Breed, with spokesperson Rufus Jeffris saying, “The recruitment process was confidential.” Breed declined to comment. If you, dear reader, heard any other interesting names that were in the mix, we’re all ears . — J.F.R. DEM WORRIES : Workers at the Department of Emergency Management are raising concerns about the city’s public-safety staff in light of a handful of layoffs at the agency. DEM, which coordinates the response to emergencies like blackouts or tsunami warnings, was not spared in the 127 layoffs Mayor Daniel Lurie announced April 6. Cuts at the DEM include a watch center position, an important job for keeping city officials informed of emergencies and sending alerts when something bad is going down. The watch center staff has some overlapping responsibilities with 911 dispatch and on-call agency employees, according to DEM. Two staffers from DEM’s Division of Emergency Services — the division coordinator and the assistant deputy director — also got axed. In total, the department saw six layoffs. Current and former employees said that while the layoffs don’t gut the city’s public-safety response, they do put a strain on the staff. The watch center, for instance, was in touch with Pacific Gas & Electric during the December blackouts, relaying information to the mayor and Board of Supervisors about the effects of the outage and the estimated time of power restoration. The team also helps on big events, like when the business summit APEC comes to town or for the forthcoming FIFA World Cup events. Are you a City Hall employee? We want to hear from you. Email powerplay@sfstandard.com to get in touch. “It’s a risk to the public,” said one former employee. “With short staffing, you’re wondering how this is going to impact long-term operations.” DEM spokesperson Jackie Thornhill said, “Our proposed budget protects DEM’s core operational services, preserving emergency preparedness and response by consolidating administrative functions, eliminating redundancies, and prioritizing operational coordination.” — Gabe Greschler NEW CHAPTER : One of the loudest parent voices in the San Francisco Unified School District is putting down the bullhorn. Meredith Dodson is stepping down from her executive role at SF Parents, the organization she founded, though she will remain active in the group’s political arm, SF Parents Action, which handles endorsements . “Six years in, and I’m more hopeful about SF Parents than ever,” Dodson said. “I’m moving into a deeper focus on our political and elections work.” Dodson confirmed she is not running for the school board and said she wants to spend more time with her family. Dodson launched SF Parents during the pandemic amid widespread frustration with SFUSD’s remote learning policy. The group went on to play a key role in supporting the 2022 school board recall and is now a major moderate force in SFUSD politics, often countering the progressive views of the United Educators of San Francisco, the city’s powerful teachers union . SF Parents is beginning a search for a new executive director. It operates with an annual budget of about $1 million, backed by major donors that include Crankstart, the foundation of Michael Moritz , chairman of The Standard. — Han Li

To protect and prosecute: The tough-love doctrine of Brooke Jenkins

Heated district race shows the lengths — and limits — of Lurie’s big-money network

Supervisor Stephen Sherrill has been appointed by one mayor and received the endorsement of another. He’s an incumbent with more than a year of experience inside City Hall. And he’s got four PACs — four — supporting him, with a combined $1 million in the bank, making him perhaps the most lavishly funded candidate in board history. So why does Cow Hollow neighborhood organizer Lori Brooke think she has a shot at toppling Sherrill in the June contest for District 2? “I am absolutely grassroots, bottom-up perspective,” Brooke said over coffee at Rose’s Cafe on Union Street. “And City Hall does not always have that, and Stephen doesn’t have that.” The race for District 2, which covers posh enclaves like the Marina, Presidio Heights, and Cow Hollow, is shaping up to be a true David-versus-Goliath fight. It doesn’t necessarily carry the same political implications as, say, the election in District 4 — where the outcome could tilt the ideological scales of the moderate-majority Board of Supervisors — but it will say much about whether money can sway hearts and minds in a wealthy and traditionally conservative corner of the city. The truth is, Sherrill and Brooke aren’t terribly dissimilar — they both hold moderate views on issues like public safety and homelessness, positions that aren’t going to ruffle feathers in their district. This race is all about housing: an incumbent who leans urbanist and is open to more development in the district versus a challenger who is intensely skeptical of its impact on affordability. The production of residential development in the city remains slow, and even if Brooke is victorious, recent state laws have reduced local officials’ ability to stop projects from being built. That doesn’t mean the NIMBYs can’t try to flex their muscles: A Brooke-founded group helped sue the city in January over its state-mandated housing plan. Sherrill, 39, entered office after being appointed in December 2024 by former Mayor London Breed , succeeding Catherine Stefani, who was elected to the Assembly. Early in his career, he interned in the George W. Bush administration and later worked in the office of former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. He registered as a Democrat in 2023. Formerly director of the Mayor’s Office of Innovation, a Bloomberg Philanthropies project, Sherrill has been a close ally of Mayor Daniel Lurie, supporting his Family Zoning Plan and calls for more cops and for loosening the city’s bureaucracy. During a recent afternoon door-knocking session in Anza Vista, Sherrill was asked by constituents about the traffic impacts from the incoming T&T Supermarket at the shopping center at Geary and Masonic and the never-ending drama surrounding the San Francisco Unified School District (which the Board of Supervisors does not oversee). He was quick to mention his endorsement from Lurie and pressed hard on making the neighborhood safer and more welcoming to families. He didn’t mention his support for housing at the top of the conversation, only once he’d established a connection. In interviews with The Standard, however, he did not shy away from his stance that San Francisco has a housing shortage. He said he is “very proud” of his vote on Lurie’s upzoning plan, a response to state-mandated requirements to rezone large swaths of the city to encourage more housing. While Sherrill faced some opposition from his constituents on the proposal, he argued that if the city did not adopt it, the state could impose severe penalties. “For all the people who may still disagree with the choice that I made to vote for the plan, which I‘m very proud of — they can’t say that I didn’t show up; they can’t say that I didn’t engage with them,” said Sherrill. “They can’t say that I didn’t listen to them. I may not have done what they wanted. Listening doesn’t mean doing what people want.” Sherrill’s housing views were tested late last year, when Align Real Estate released plans for a 25-story development complex at the Marina Safeway. The supervisor called the design “outrageous” and “cartoonish.” He said residents were blindsided by Align’s proposal, and the project could stymie additional construction. “If we do things that erode trust with residents, it makes it harder to do all the other things that mean progress,” he said. Sherrill’s campaign, headquartered at a cavernous office on Union Street, has raised $396,000 for both the June election, which will allow him to fill out the term of his predecessor, Stefani, and a follow-up in November, when a new four-year term would commence. But that’s just a part of the moneyed machine behind him. Lurie’s well-heeled donor base created an independent expenditure committee in support of Sherrill and District 4 incumbent Alan Wong called “ SF Believes ,” which has raised an eye-popping $802,000. The PAC was cofounded by financier Alec Perkins, who also set up the pro-Lurie PAC that helped the mayor zoom to victory in 2024 with a cool $6.6 million. There’s another pro-Sherrill PAC backed by GrowSF, which has raised $252,000 toward its $500,000 goal , as well as one linked to the consulting firm BMWL, which has raised $26,000. A fourth, set up by a handful of unions, is still collecting donations. It’s a tremendous amount of money for an off-season district race, and far more support than any supervisor had in support or opposition in 2024. It is likely the largest number of PACs to ever support a Board of Supervisors member. Brooke, 62, has zero PACs. But she is embracing the uphill battle and thinks Sherrill’s PAC money can go only so far. “What we‘re up against is a money juggernaut,” she said. “But there’s a point of diminishing returns in a district race.” A longtime neighborhood activist, Brooke has been president of the Cow Hollow Association’s leadership for nearly two decades and in 2023 cofounded Neighborhoods United SF, which has been fiercely critical of the state’s efforts to force cities to build more housing. She has raised $160,000 for the June race, just opened an account for a November sequel, and has formed a campaign team with links to former Supervisor Aaron Peskin and the recall campaign of ousted Supervisor Joel Engardio. Her office, located on Lombard Street, is maybe a fifth of the size of Sherrill’s. She contends that the Family Zoning Plan is driven by a false narrative — that building more will drive down prices — and winces at the term “housing crisis,” instead calling it an “affordability crisis.” Even though the city was required to comply with the state’s housing requirements, the board members, she said, didn’t offer sufficient opposition. “Even if legally they had to do something, you can at least go kicking and fighting,” she said. “Instead, they rolled over like a Labrador, let them rub the belly.” While door-knocking last month in Cow Hollow, she came across residents who were disturbed at the idea of more development in the area. She admitted to potential constituents that she and Sherrill aren’t all that different, but that their big red line is on housing. (Brooke is also against Lurie’s proposed parcel tax to fund Muni, which Sherrill supports. “The voters in D2 do not want that,” she said. “They do not want more taxing.”) While meeting her neighbors, she got a few excited about her views, especially when she mentioned that her opponent was appointed by Breed; some residents frowned when they heard the former mayor’s name. She sees herself as the outsider, going up against a supervisor who hasn’t been knee-deep in the community like she has. “He comes from Bush, Bloomberg,” Brooke said about Sherrill. “His motivation and where he cut his teeth is at the administrative level. I cut my teeth at street level.”

City to bail out ailing San Francisco Zoo with  up to $8.5 million loan

The struggling San Francisco Zoo may soon receive a financial lifeline from the city, as a new report warns that alternatives — including shutting the zoo permanently — could cost far more than keeping it afloat under the current nonprofit operator. Supervisor Myrna Melgar, who represents the southwestern neighborhoods where the zoo is located, asked the Board of Supervisors’ budget analysts to study the potential costs of three scenarios: the city taking over the zoo’s operations, finding a new nonprofit operator, or closing it down. The report , which was obtained exclusively by The Standard, concluded that each of the options would cost tens of millions of dollars. Given that finding, Melgar, working with Mayor Daniel Lurie and zoo leaders, is introducing legislation to provide the zoo with a $8.5 million loan as a turnaround fund to help stabilize and rebuild. The figure is based on the zoo’s internal strategic plan; few details were disclosed on how it was calculated. “I don’t think we have a choice,” Melgar said. “People don’t realize these animals and this land belong to the city. If the zoo operator no longer exists, it becomes our responsibility to feed the animals three times a day.” The zoo, which is operated by the nonprofit San Francisco Zoological Society, reported a $6.4 million loss in fiscal year 2025 on an annual operating budget of about $30 million, according to officials. Zoo attendance in 2025 was about 700,000, according to a financial report, down 40% from 2019 . The Board of Supervisors ordered an audit of the zoo in late 2024 ; the findings will be released in a few weeks. The $8.5 million loan — $6.5 million guaranteed in the next few fiscal years, with an additional $2 million tied to performance — would support financial stabilization, operational improvements, and efforts to rebuild confidence among donors and visitors. The loan would be repaid through reductions in the city’s annual funding to the zoo. The zoo has had a tumultuous few years , including mismanagement scandals involving former CEO Tanya Peterson and a high-profile, unresolved deal to borrow a pair of giant pandas from China. Though rumors persist that the panda deal has been nixed, zoo sources have told The Standard that the effort continues, and the facility is trying to raise the estimated $8 million needed for new habitats. Melgar, Supervisor Connie Chan, and City Administrator Carmen Chu met Tuesday with a delegation from the Chinese Consulate for a briefing on the loan plan, a sign that the city officials are confident in their ability to support the zoo and move forward with the panda project. Melgar said the Chinese government remains committed to the panda plans. Lurie is scheduled to travel to China this month. The proposed loan is separate from the efforts to secure the pandas and would not directly support that project, according to Melgar. Cassandra Costello, who took over this year as zoo CEO, said she has moved quickly to develop a turnaround plan for the money-losing attraction. “This bridge loan is one piece of a much larger story: new leadership, a clear strategic direction, and a team that is deeply committed to the animals in our care and the community we serve,” she said. The price of closing Melgar acknowledged that the timing of the loan is difficult, with the city implementing hundreds of layoffs amid a $800 million budget deficit, but she argued that inaction would be even more costly. If the San Francisco Zoological Society were to cease operations, the city would have to assume responsibility, because it owns both the land and the animals. This would cost the city $109 million over three years, offset by $45 million in revenue. If the zoo were to close altogether, San Francisco would spend about $45 million over three years to relocate animals and maintain the site, without any revenue to offset costs. The third scenario, recruiting a new operator, would cost about $42 million, analysts estimated. Expenses include ongoing animal care and essential staffing during the transition. Relocating animals alone could cost up to $1.2 million, with uncertainty for species that are difficult to place. The city would also face legal, human resources, and administrative costs tied to layoffs and logistics. Even after a closure, there would be costs to secure and maintain the property. The report’s bottom line: Shutting down the zoo would not save money and would leave the city with significant long-term financial obligations. Melgar’s legislation will go through the board’s budget committee before heading to the full board for a majority vote.

City layoffs begin: Lurie hands out 127 pink slips

Facing a mounting budget deficit, Mayor Daniel Lurie on Monday sent out 127 layoff notices to city employees across 18 departments, The Standard has learned. The layoff notices — in the city administrator’s office, Department of Public Health, San Francisco Police Department, Office of Economic and Workforce Development, Human Services Agency, and other departments — are the first phase in a larger set of cuts by Lurie. A complete list of departments affected was not immediately available. The mayor said he intends to eliminate 500 positions across the city. The second phase of layoffs could come around the time he releases his proposed budget, at the end of May or early June. Additionally, the mayor’s office has frozen about 2,000 vacant positions. The layoffs come as the city reckons with a $643 million budget deficit over the next two years. City officials have blamed the fiscal issues primarily on President Donald Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill, which gutted local coffers of healthcare funding. In December, the mayor announced $400 million in budget cuts , with $100 million from personnel reductions. “Facing a budget deficit that will rise to $1 billion, alongside significant cuts in federal and state funding, we have a choice: take action now or be forced to do twice as much in the coming years,” Lurie said in a statement. “The steps we’re taking today are a painful but necessary continuation of the work we’ve been doing since last year to manage taxpayer dollars responsibly and deliver the best possible services for San Franciscans. That work will continue as we prepare a responsible budget that sets up our city for a broad and durable economic recovery.” Lurie’s strategy differs from the less aggressive approach he took to staff eliminations last year. In 2025, Lurie announced around 150 layoffs, but those were eventually reduced to around 40 workers losing their jobs after negotiations with members of the Board of Supervisors as the budget wrapped up in the summer. This time, layoffs are happening earlier in the year to save the city more money down the road, according to the mayor’s office. Are you a City Hall worker? We want to hear from you. Email powerplay@sfstandard.com to get in touch. Still, this year’s reductions represent a small slice of the city’s workforce of about 34,000. If all 500 employee cuts are implemented, it will represent a 1.5% reduction of the city workforce. The announcement Monday drew strong condemnation from the city’s public-sector unions, SEIU 1021 and IFPTE Local 21. The unions are trying to fend off employee cuts through their Overpaid CEO Tax measure on the June 2 ballot, which labor says could raise around $200 million for the city’s general fund. Monday’s layoffs are likely to increase animosity between the mayor and labor, which fiercely protested last year’s employee cuts. One labor leader was arrested last summer in the Board of Supervisors’ chambers. “What we know so far is that the cuts are drastic and are going to be felt in every corner of San Francisco,” a joint statement from the two unions stated. “City workers are deeply concerned that these cuts will further strain already understaffed departments that keep San Francisco clean, safe, and livable.” Supervisor Connie Chan, who is the chair of the board’s budget committees, said cutting vacant positions should be a priority. “I expect the mayor and his budget team to continue their conversations with labor leaders and to ensure we do not balance the city budget on the backs of our workers and sacrificing critical city services,” said Chan. In March, the controller’s office released a rosier outlook on the city’s budget deficit, reducing the shortfall from $936 million. The better fiscal outlook was attributed to a decrease in retirement fund payments and better-than-expected hotel and sales tax revenue.

San Rafael’s city manager is out. Controversial homeless shelter may have pushed her

A plan to build 65 tiny cabins for homeless residents of San Rafael has torn the community apart, spawned lawsuits, rattled city leadership — and, The Standard has learned, may have driven out the city manager. Cristine Alilovich, who resigned as city manager in February, and other San Rafael officials began discussing acquiring the property in closed session as early as March 2025 but did not publicly disclose their intentions for the site. Plans to use the site for homeless housing were not announced until October, after negotiations to buy the property from a private seller were complete. The lack of transparency angered residents of Marin County’s largest city, who attended public meetings en masse and formed an ad-hoc group called Marin Citizens for Solutions Not Secrecy. The group accused the city of violating California’s open-meeting law, the Brown Act, and sent a cease-and-desist letter through an attorney. The Marin Independent Journal published an op-ed criticizing the city for its lack of transparency. Despite fierce public opposition at a town hall meeting in November, the City Council voted unanimously to move forward with the project and approved the $7 million property purchase, funded in part by county housing dollars. Construction of the cabins is expected to cost $1 million. A January performance review of Alilovich, obtained through a public records request, paints a picture of concern within city government over how the project was handled. The tiny house project, planned for Merrydale Road, was a “symbol of chaos,” according to the report from consultant Daniel Keen, which was drawn from interviews with a dozen senior city staffers, who described rushed timelines, mounting legal and financial risks, and crumbling morale. Public agendas and minutes show the City Council met for two hours in a special Feb. 9 closed session to discuss Alilovich‘s performance. She took a two-week leave of absence the following day and ultimately resigned, ending her 11-year tenure working for the city. Her departure, announced in a joint statement with the city, said they had “mutually decided to part ways.” She received a $471,832 severance package, equal to a year’s salary. She has since been named interim city manager in Sonoma. The performance review shows that senior city staffers — including the community and economic development director, finance director, fire and police chiefs, public works director, and human resources director — frequently referenced the project in raising concerns about Alilovich’s performance. Even interviewees who gave positive feedback on Alilovich cited her work on the project as “problematic.” Staff described a rushed process with insufficient planning, limited public outreach, and unclear financial and operational implications, according to the report. “There were frequent references to ‘chaos,’ ‘a tornado,’ and ‘Tasmanian-devil energy,’” Keen wrote. “That project is the definition of a fire drill,” one city staffer said in the report. In February, the city hired Swinerton Management & Consulting to erect 65 temporary small cabins for up to 70 people as soon as this spring. After three or four years, a city-contracted housing developer will build permanent affordable housing on the site. It was framed as an urgent response to Marin County’s housing and homelessness crises, but the effort has rapidly become a flashpoint as San Rafael wrestles with its first effort to build a shelter in a residential neighborhood. San Rafael accounts for 30% of Marin’s unhoused population, with 326 individuals counted in 2024 — the most recent data available. Supporters say the 350 Merrydale project would reduce the number of encampments, such as a persistent site on Andersen Drive. Crime at these encampments, like last month’s fatal stabbing of a 28-year-old homeless woman, has residents worried. The Merrydale site will follow a “housing-first” model that does not require sobriety or treatment as a condition of entry — a policy tied to the city’s declaration last year of a shelter crisis. “Tackling the homelessness crisis is something that needs a sense of urgency so, in some respects, I can understand the feedback,” Alilovich told The Standard. “A lot of people worked really hard under intense deadlines and exceptional circumstances to help move that project forward, so things were definitely hectic at times. I’m grateful to have led that team during the time I was city manager and wish my colleagues and the project nothing but the best.” Alilovich declined to provide a reason for her resignation. The performance review, which was heavily redacted, states that “staff repeatedly said that Merrydale was not fully discussed with the director team early, and they lacked a shared understanding of the scope, risks and constraints of the property and project.” Another portion says that “many interviewees said key departments were brought in late to discussions of the project, after major decisions (i.e., acquisition of land) or public commitments were already underway.” Despite city leaders expressing concerns about the project, elected officials have emphasized the need for speed. “The sooner we can open it, the better,” Vice Mayor Rachel Kertz told the Marin Independent Journal last week. San Rafael Mayor Kate Colin and City Council members did not respond to requests for comment.

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

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

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

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

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