Ciudad de San Francisco
¿No en Ciudad de San Francisco? Encuentra la guía de tu estado.
Cajas de Depósito de Boletas
RETURN YOUR BALLOT BY TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5
Welcome to the Courage California Progressive Voters Guide! We compile the information that allows you to make informed decisions about the races on your ballot, based on your values. Please share this guide with your friends and family!
Voting has changed in San Francisco County this year. The Voter’s Choice Act was enacted in the county to make voting more convenient. Changes include an expanded period of in-person early voting, every registered voter in the county will receive a vote-by-mail ballot, and every registered voter in the county is able to vote in-person at any Vote Center in their county. Also, in-person voters in San Francisco County will have the opportunity to use the new voting system, Democracy Suite, a touchscreen tablet with audio features, to mark their ballots. Have questions about the changes to voting in San Francisco County? Find out how to vote in San Francisco County.
Federal
Courage California endorses Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Tim Walz for President and Vice President to keep America on the right track for progress.
Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Tim Walz have track records and policy positions that demonstrate that they will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse nation.
Progressive endorsements: Vice President Harris and Gov. Walz have the endorsement of many groups, including Courage California, Reproductive Freedom for All, Sierra Club, National Organization for Women PAC, League of Conservation Voters, Gen-Z for Change, Black Voters Matter, Congressional Black Caucus, and Congressional Progressive Caucus. Vice President Harris has also received the endorsement of a significant number of labor unions, including seven state AFL-CIO delegations, North America’s Building Trades Union, National Education Association, IATSE, National Nurses United, American Postal Workers Union, and American Federation of Teachers. She has the support of the Democratic National Committee, and an overwhelming number of Democratic leaders, including current President Joe Biden, former President Barack Obama, former President Bill Clinton, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, five current cabinet secretaries, 46 sitting U.S. senators, 200 members of the House of Representatives, and 23 Democratic state governors.
Priority policies: The Biden-Harris administration has had policy successes across diverse issue areas during their first term. Immediately after taking office during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, they worked to move the American Rescue Plan through Congress and successfully passed legislation to provide stimulus checks, boosts to unemployment payments, and increased funds for education and small-business loans. The plan also ramped up the distribution and administration of vaccines. This legislative effort was followed by the Bi-Partisan Infrastructure Law, which made a $1 billion investment in electric vehicle infrastructure, national road and bridge repair, clean drinking-water modifications, and power grid updates. In addition to these investments, the administration passed President Biden’s signature Inflation Reduction Act, an expansive bill to provide needed funding to cap prescription drug costs for the elderly, increase corporate taxes, invest in clean energy and climate protections, reduce the federal deficit, and increase tax accountability by provided additional funding to the IRS. Vice President Harris cast the tiebreaking vote in the Senate to move the bill forward, creating nearly 170,000 clean-energy jobs, increasing clean-energy investments by $110 billion, and capping insulin at $35 a month. After years of inaction from the federal government, President Biden tasked Vice President Harris with leading the newly created Office of Gun Violence Prevention, and their advocacy resulted in a significant new bill that strengthens background-check laws, incentivizes state-based red-flag laws, and expands limitations on the acquisition of firearms by perpetrators of domestic abuse. President Biden also signed the CHIPS Act into law to increase domestic production of the semiconductors used in the manufacturing of many of the products that Americans use daily.
The Biden-Harris administration’s economic policies have contributed to the lowest unemployment rate in over 50 years, at 3.4% in January 2024, economic growth of 3.1% in 2023, and an inflation rate that dropped below 3% at the end of December. The administration has led the U.S. back into the Paris Climate Accord, forgiven $144 billion in education debt, and provided consistent support to striking labor unions across the country. While many of these accomplishments came during the first two years of the administration, when Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress, President Biden and Vice President Harris have worked across the aisle to move impactful legislation forward for the American people with a divided Congress.
After the leaking of the Dobbs decision that overturned Roe v. Wade and curtailed a national right to abortion, Vice President Harris was tapped to act as a messenger for the administration on the importance of access to reproductive health care. She guided the development of executive action on the issue, has been an outspoken advocate of restoring the right to abortion care, and urged President Biden to make a public rhetorical connection between the rolling back of abortion rights and the conservative effort to limit access to infertility treatment.
While the administration’s legislative successes have been substantial, they have been subjected to significant criticism from progressives during this first term. While President Biden has maintained strong support for Israel during the October 7 Hamas attacks and the Israeli government’s retaliatory attacks on Palestinians in Gaza, the electorate and congressional representatives have expressed concerns about the U.S. government providing continued funding to the Israeli military, and activists and leaders called on the Biden administration to advocate sooner for a ceasefire in Gaza. Vice President Harris has reaffirmed her strong support for Israel, and has been more forceful in calling for a ceasefire, hostage release, increase in aid to Gazans, and the right to self-determination for Palestinians.
On immigration and the southern border, the federal government’s failure to act has effectively continued the anti-immigrant policies enacted under the Trump administration and caused big-city mayors and Democratic governors to publicly request that the White House and Congress pass meaningful legislation to reform an increasingly overwhelmed asylum and immigration system. Under Republican control, Congress has not passed any immigration reforms, and Republican leaders have advocated for more punitive and inhumane immigration policies. To advance this issue, Vice President Harris was tasked with addressing the root causes of migration in Mexico and Central America, including boosting economic growth and strengthening democracy in Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala. While these efforts have not made a meaningful difference in the number of migrants attempting to cross the U.S. border to date, they have resulted in a memorandum of understanding with the Mexican government that provided an initial $4 billion investment in root-cause work in the region and an additional $5.2 billion investment from private companies. This funding is supporting entrepreneurial projects, affordable housing, climate protections, access to health care, food security, and labor rights initiatives.
Governance and community leadership experience: Vice President Harris has served in the White House since 2020, when she was elected with President Joe Biden on a joint ticket with 306 electoral votes and over 51% of the national popular vote. Their campaign won six critical swing states—Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Georgia, Nevada, and Arizona—to secure the electoral college victory.
Prior to her election, Vice President Harris was the first woman of color elected to represent California in the United States Senate, winning her 2016 election with over 60% of the vote. During her time in the Senate, she sponsored legislation on climate and environmental protections, rental and housing protections, women’s health, and pandemic relief. She was also an original cosponsor of the progressive Green New Deal authored by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Ed Markey. Before serving in the Senate, Vice President Harris had a long legal career in California, serving for 8 years in the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office before transitioning to a role as a prosecutor in the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office. In 2003, she won her bid to become district attorney of the city and county of San Francisco, where she served two terms before being elected as the attorney general for the state of California in 2010. She was the first woman and the first person of color to hold this seat. Vice President Harris’s record was both progressive for the time and complicated by her moderate approach to policing and criminal justice. She has been criticized for failing to institute comprehensive police accountability measures, for not establishing meaningful prison reform, and for taking a hands-off approach to cases related to police misconduct. However, her lenient approach to policing was often punctuated by decidedly progressive support for social justice issues, including the establishment of an education- and workforce-reentry program designed to diminish recidivism.
Gov. Walz has served as governor of Minnesota since 2018, when he was elected with over 53% of the vote. In 2022, he won his reelection against a Republican challenger by seven points. He served six terms in Congress, representing the rural and moderate MN-1 district, and winning his last reelection in 2016 with 50% of the vote.
Gov. Walz has moved the state forward on a variety of issues, including codifying the right to abortion in the state, establishing a paid family-leave program, legalizing the recreational use of marijuana, expanding background-check requirements for firearm purchases, and creating a coverage mandate for gender-affirming care.
Gov. Walz joined the Army National Guard when he was 17 years old, and remained a reservist for 24 years, before retiring as a master sergeant in 2004 to run for Congress. While never deployed to a combat zone, Gov. Walz was stationed in a support role in Italy during Operation Iraqi Freedom. He remained a strong supporter of veterans and the military during his time in Congress, eventually serving as a ranking member of the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee. Prior to entering public service, Gov. Walz spent 15 years as a high school teacher, spending a year teaching in China before returning to Nebraska and eventually moving to a school district in Mankato, Minnesota. In addition to his teaching responsibilities, Gov. Walz served as an assistant coach on the football team, the faculty advisor for the school’s gay-straight alliance, and head of Educational Travel Adventures organization, where he helped organize annual student trips to China.
Other background: Vice President Harris grew up in Berkeley, CA, and was a longtime resident of Los Angeles. She is the daughter of a Jamaican father and an Indian mother, who both immigrated to the Bay Area in the 1960s.
Gov. Walz is from a small town in Nebraska, and has lived in Minnesota for nearly 30 years.
The Race
Primary election results: The March 2024 results included incumbent President Joe Biden (D) 89%, Marianne Williamson (D) 4%, and Dean Phillips (D) 3%. In July 2024, President Biden publicly announced his decision to end his presidential campaign, and endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris for President. Democrats swiftly coalesced around Vice President Harris’s candidacy, and she earned enough delegates for the formal party nomination during a virtual roll-call vote on August 2, 2024. On August 6, she selected Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz to serve as her running mate. They have been awarded California’s delegates and will appear as the Democratic nominees for president and vice president in the November 5 general election, running against the Republican ticket, former President Donald Trump and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Vice President Harris’s campaign has raised $488 million as of August 2024, including $247 million transferred from the Biden campaign after President Joe Biden departed the race.
Opposing candidate: Republican President Donald Trump
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: President Trump’s campaign has raised $264 million.
The Position
The president of the United States is the head of the executive branch of the federal government, and the commander-in-chief for all branches of the armed forces. A president has the power to make diplomatic, executive, and judicial appointments, and can sign into law or veto legislation. Presidential administrations are responsible for both foreign and domestic policy priorities. Presidents are limited to serving two four-year terms in office.
Courage California endorses Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Tim Walz for President and Vice President to keep America on the right track for progress.
Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Tim Walz have track records and policy positions that demonstrate that they will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse nation.
Progressive endorsements: Vice President Harris and Gov. Walz have the endorsement of many groups, including Courage California, Reproductive Freedom for All, Sierra Club, National Organization for Women PAC, League of Conservation Voters, Gen-Z for Change, Black Voters Matter, Congressional Black Caucus, and Congressional Progressive Caucus. Vice President Harris has also received the endorsement of a significant number of labor unions, including seven state AFL-CIO delegations, North America’s Building Trades Union, National Education Association, IATSE, National Nurses United, American Postal Workers Union, and American Federation of Teachers. She has the support of the Democratic National Committee, and an overwhelming number of Democratic leaders, including current President Joe Biden, former President Barack Obama, former President Bill Clinton, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, five current cabinet secretaries, 46 sitting U.S. senators, 200 members of the House of Representatives, and 23 Democratic state governors.
Priority policies: The Biden-Harris administration has had policy successes across diverse issue areas during their first term. Immediately after taking office during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, they worked to move the American Rescue Plan through Congress and successfully passed legislation to provide stimulus checks, boosts to unemployment payments, and increased funds for education and small-business loans. The plan also ramped up the distribution and administration of vaccines. This legislative effort was followed by the Bi-Partisan Infrastructure Law, which made a $1 billion investment in electric vehicle infrastructure, national road and bridge repair, clean drinking-water modifications, and power grid updates. In addition to these investments, the administration passed President Biden’s signature Inflation Reduction Act, an expansive bill to provide needed funding to cap prescription drug costs for the elderly, increase corporate taxes, invest in clean energy and climate protections, reduce the federal deficit, and increase tax accountability by provided additional funding to the IRS. Vice President Harris cast the tiebreaking vote in the Senate to move the bill forward, creating nearly 170,000 clean-energy jobs, increasing clean-energy investments by $110 billion, and capping insulin at $35 a month. After years of inaction from the federal government, President Biden tasked Vice President Harris with leading the newly created Office of Gun Violence Prevention, and their advocacy resulted in a significant new bill that strengthens background-check laws, incentivizes state-based red-flag laws, and expands limitations on the acquisition of firearms by perpetrators of domestic abuse. President Biden also signed the CHIPS Act into law to increase domestic production of the semiconductors used in the manufacturing of many of the products that Americans use daily.
The Biden-Harris administration’s economic policies have contributed to the lowest unemployment rate in over 50 years, at 3.4% in January 2024, economic growth of 3.1% in 2023, and an inflation rate that dropped below 3% at the end of December. The administration has led the U.S. back into the Paris Climate Accord, forgiven $144 billion in education debt, and provided consistent support to striking labor unions across the country. While many of these accomplishments came during the first two years of the administration, when Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress, President Biden and Vice President Harris have worked across the aisle to move impactful legislation forward for the American people with a divided Congress.
After the leaking of the Dobbs decision that overturned Roe v. Wade and curtailed a national right to abortion, Vice President Harris was tapped to act as a messenger for the administration on the importance of access to reproductive health care. She guided the development of executive action on the issue, has been an outspoken advocate of restoring the right to abortion care, and urged President Biden to make a public rhetorical connection between the rolling back of abortion rights and the conservative effort to limit access to infertility treatment.
While the administration’s legislative successes have been substantial, they have been subjected to significant criticism from progressives during this first term. While President Biden has maintained strong support for Israel during the October 7 Hamas attacks and the Israeli government’s retaliatory attacks on Palestinians in Gaza, the electorate and congressional representatives have expressed concerns about the U.S. government providing continued funding to the Israeli military, and activists and leaders called on the Biden administration to advocate sooner for a ceasefire in Gaza. Vice President Harris has reaffirmed her strong support for Israel, and has been more forceful in calling for a ceasefire, hostage release, increase in aid to Gazans, and the right to self-determination for Palestinians.
On immigration and the southern border, the federal government’s failure to act has effectively continued the anti-immigrant policies enacted under the Trump administration and caused big-city mayors and Democratic governors to publicly request that the White House and Congress pass meaningful legislation to reform an increasingly overwhelmed asylum and immigration system. Under Republican control, Congress has not passed any immigration reforms, and Republican leaders have advocated for more punitive and inhumane immigration policies. To advance this issue, Vice President Harris was tasked with addressing the root causes of migration in Mexico and Central America, including boosting economic growth and strengthening democracy in Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala. While these efforts have not made a meaningful difference in the number of migrants attempting to cross the U.S. border to date, they have resulted in a memorandum of understanding with the Mexican government that provided an initial $4 billion investment in root-cause work in the region and an additional $5.2 billion investment from private companies. This funding is supporting entrepreneurial projects, affordable housing, climate protections, access to health care, food security, and labor rights initiatives.
Governance and community leadership experience: Vice President Harris has served in the White House since 2020, when she was elected with President Joe Biden on a joint ticket with 306 electoral votes and over 51% of the national popular vote. Their campaign won six critical swing states—Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Georgia, Nevada, and Arizona—to secure the electoral college victory.
Prior to her election, Vice President Harris was the first woman of color elected to represent California in the United States Senate, winning her 2016 election with over 60% of the vote. During her time in the Senate, she sponsored legislation on climate and environmental protections, rental and housing protections, women’s health, and pandemic relief. She was also an original cosponsor of the progressive Green New Deal authored by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Ed Markey. Before serving in the Senate, Vice President Harris had a long legal career in California, serving for 8 years in the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office before transitioning to a role as a prosecutor in the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office. In 2003, she won her bid to become district attorney of the city and county of San Francisco, where she served two terms before being elected as the attorney general for the state of California in 2010. She was the first woman and the first person of color to hold this seat. Vice President Harris’s record was both progressive for the time and complicated by her moderate approach to policing and criminal justice. She has been criticized for failing to institute comprehensive police accountability measures, for not establishing meaningful prison reform, and for taking a hands-off approach to cases related to police misconduct. However, her lenient approach to policing was often punctuated by decidedly progressive support for social justice issues, including the establishment of an education- and workforce-reentry program designed to diminish recidivism.
Gov. Walz has served as governor of Minnesota since 2018, when he was elected with over 53% of the vote. In 2022, he won his reelection against a Republican challenger by seven points. He served six terms in Congress, representing the rural and moderate MN-1 district, and winning his last reelection in 2016 with 50% of the vote.
Gov. Walz has moved the state forward on a variety of issues, including codifying the right to abortion in the state, establishing a paid family-leave program, legalizing the recreational use of marijuana, expanding background-check requirements for firearm purchases, and creating a coverage mandate for gender-affirming care.
Gov. Walz joined the Army National Guard when he was 17 years old, and remained a reservist for 24 years, before retiring as a master sergeant in 2004 to run for Congress. While never deployed to a combat zone, Gov. Walz was stationed in a support role in Italy during Operation Iraqi Freedom. He remained a strong supporter of veterans and the military during his time in Congress, eventually serving as a ranking member of the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee. Prior to entering public service, Gov. Walz spent 15 years as a high school teacher, spending a year teaching in China before returning to Nebraska and eventually moving to a school district in Mankato, Minnesota. In addition to his teaching responsibilities, Gov. Walz served as an assistant coach on the football team, the faculty advisor for the school’s gay-straight alliance, and head of Educational Travel Adventures organization, where he helped organize annual student trips to China.
Other background: Vice President Harris grew up in Berkeley, CA, and was a longtime resident of Los Angeles. She is the daughter of a Jamaican father and an Indian mother, who both immigrated to the Bay Area in the 1960s.
Gov. Walz is from a small town in Nebraska, and has lived in Minnesota for nearly 30 years.
The Race
Primary election results: The March 2024 results included incumbent President Joe Biden (D) 89%, Marianne Williamson (D) 4%, and Dean Phillips (D) 3%. In July 2024, President Biden publicly announced his decision to end his presidential campaign, and endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris for President. Democrats swiftly coalesced around Vice President Harris’s candidacy, and she earned enough delegates for the formal party nomination during a virtual roll-call vote on August 2, 2024. On August 6, she selected Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz to serve as her running mate. They have been awarded California’s delegates and will appear as the Democratic nominees for president and vice president in the November 5 general election, running against the Republican ticket, former President Donald Trump and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Vice President Harris’s campaign has raised $488 million as of August 2024, including $247 million transferred from the Biden campaign after President Joe Biden departed the race.
Opposing candidate: Republican President Donald Trump
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: President Trump’s campaign has raised $264 million.
The Position
The president of the United States is the head of the executive branch of the federal government, and the commander-in-chief for all branches of the armed forces. A president has the power to make diplomatic, executive, and judicial appointments, and can sign into law or veto legislation. Presidential administrations are responsible for both foreign and domestic policy priorities. Presidents are limited to serving two four-year terms in office.
Courage California endorses Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Tim Walz for President and Vice President to keep America on the right track for progress.
Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Tim Walz have track records and policy positions that demonstrate that they will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse nation.
Progressive endorsements: Vice President Harris and Gov. Walz have the endorsement of many groups, including Courage California, Reproductive Freedom for All, Sierra Club, National Organization for Women PAC, League of Conservation Voters, Gen-Z for Change, Black Voters Matter, Congressional Black Caucus, and Congressional Progressive Caucus. Vice President Harris has also received the endorsement of a significant number of labor unions, including seven state AFL-CIO delegations, North America’s Building Trades Union, National Education Association, IATSE, National Nurses United, American Postal Workers Union, and American Federation of Teachers. She has the support of the Democratic National Committee, and an overwhelming number of Democratic leaders, including current President Joe Biden, former President Barack Obama, former President Bill Clinton, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, five current cabinet secretaries, 46 sitting U.S. senators, 200 members of the House of Representatives, and 23 Democratic state governors.
Priority policies: The Biden-Harris administration has had policy successes across diverse issue areas during their first term. Immediately after taking office during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, they worked to move the American Rescue Plan through Congress and successfully passed legislation to provide stimulus checks, boosts to unemployment payments, and increased funds for education and small-business loans. The plan also ramped up the distribution and administration of vaccines. This legislative effort was followed by the Bi-Partisan Infrastructure Law, which made a $1 billion investment in electric vehicle infrastructure, national road and bridge repair, clean drinking-water modifications, and power grid updates. In addition to these investments, the administration passed President Biden’s signature Inflation Reduction Act, an expansive bill to provide needed funding to cap prescription drug costs for the elderly, increase corporate taxes, invest in clean energy and climate protections, reduce the federal deficit, and increase tax accountability by provided additional funding to the IRS. Vice President Harris cast the tiebreaking vote in the Senate to move the bill forward, creating nearly 170,000 clean-energy jobs, increasing clean-energy investments by $110 billion, and capping insulin at $35 a month. After years of inaction from the federal government, President Biden tasked Vice President Harris with leading the newly created Office of Gun Violence Prevention, and their advocacy resulted in a significant new bill that strengthens background-check laws, incentivizes state-based red-flag laws, and expands limitations on the acquisition of firearms by perpetrators of domestic abuse. President Biden also signed the CHIPS Act into law to increase domestic production of the semiconductors used in the manufacturing of many of the products that Americans use daily.
The Biden-Harris administration’s economic policies have contributed to the lowest unemployment rate in over 50 years, at 3.4% in January 2024, economic growth of 3.1% in 2023, and an inflation rate that dropped below 3% at the end of December. The administration has led the U.S. back into the Paris Climate Accord, forgiven $144 billion in education debt, and provided consistent support to striking labor unions across the country. While many of these accomplishments came during the first two years of the administration, when Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress, President Biden and Vice President Harris have worked across the aisle to move impactful legislation forward for the American people with a divided Congress.
After the leaking of the Dobbs decision that overturned Roe v. Wade and curtailed a national right to abortion, Vice President Harris was tapped to act as a messenger for the administration on the importance of access to reproductive health care. She guided the development of executive action on the issue, has been an outspoken advocate of restoring the right to abortion care, and urged President Biden to make a public rhetorical connection between the rolling back of abortion rights and the conservative effort to limit access to infertility treatment.
While the administration’s legislative successes have been substantial, they have been subjected to significant criticism from progressives during this first term. While President Biden has maintained strong support for Israel during the October 7 Hamas attacks and the Israeli government’s retaliatory attacks on Palestinians in Gaza, the electorate and congressional representatives have expressed concerns about the U.S. government providing continued funding to the Israeli military, and activists and leaders called on the Biden administration to advocate sooner for a ceasefire in Gaza. Vice President Harris has reaffirmed her strong support for Israel, and has been more forceful in calling for a ceasefire, hostage release, increase in aid to Gazans, and the right to self-determination for Palestinians.
On immigration and the southern border, the federal government’s failure to act has effectively continued the anti-immigrant policies enacted under the Trump administration and caused big-city mayors and Democratic governors to publicly request that the White House and Congress pass meaningful legislation to reform an increasingly overwhelmed asylum and immigration system. Under Republican control, Congress has not passed any immigration reforms, and Republican leaders have advocated for more punitive and inhumane immigration policies. To advance this issue, Vice President Harris was tasked with addressing the root causes of migration in Mexico and Central America, including boosting economic growth and strengthening democracy in Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala. While these efforts have not made a meaningful difference in the number of migrants attempting to cross the U.S. border to date, they have resulted in a memorandum of understanding with the Mexican government that provided an initial $4 billion investment in root-cause work in the region and an additional $5.2 billion investment from private companies. This funding is supporting entrepreneurial projects, affordable housing, climate protections, access to health care, food security, and labor rights initiatives.
Governance and community leadership experience: Vice President Harris has served in the White House since 2020, when she was elected with President Joe Biden on a joint ticket with 306 electoral votes and over 51% of the national popular vote. Their campaign won six critical swing states—Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Georgia, Nevada, and Arizona—to secure the electoral college victory.
Prior to her election, Vice President Harris was the first woman of color elected to represent California in the United States Senate, winning her 2016 election with over 60% of the vote. During her time in the Senate, she sponsored legislation on climate and environmental protections, rental and housing protections, women’s health, and pandemic relief. She was also an original cosponsor of the progressive Green New Deal authored by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Ed Markey. Before serving in the Senate, Vice President Harris had a long legal career in California, serving for 8 years in the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office before transitioning to a role as a prosecutor in the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office. In 2003, she won her bid to become district attorney of the city and county of San Francisco, where she served two terms before being elected as the attorney general for the state of California in 2010. She was the first woman and the first person of color to hold this seat. Vice President Harris’s record was both progressive for the time and complicated by her moderate approach to policing and criminal justice. She has been criticized for failing to institute comprehensive police accountability measures, for not establishing meaningful prison reform, and for taking a hands-off approach to cases related to police misconduct. However, her lenient approach to policing was often punctuated by decidedly progressive support for social justice issues, including the establishment of an education- and workforce-reentry program designed to diminish recidivism.
Gov. Walz has served as governor of Minnesota since 2018, when he was elected with over 53% of the vote. In 2022, he won his reelection against a Republican challenger by seven points. He served six terms in Congress, representing the rural and moderate MN-1 district, and winning his last reelection in 2016 with 50% of the vote.
Gov. Walz has moved the state forward on a variety of issues, including codifying the right to abortion in the state, establishing a paid family-leave program, legalizing the recreational use of marijuana, expanding background-check requirements for firearm purchases, and creating a coverage mandate for gender-affirming care.
Gov. Walz joined the Army National Guard when he was 17 years old, and remained a reservist for 24 years, before retiring as a master sergeant in 2004 to run for Congress. While never deployed to a combat zone, Gov. Walz was stationed in a support role in Italy during Operation Iraqi Freedom. He remained a strong supporter of veterans and the military during his time in Congress, eventually serving as a ranking member of the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee. Prior to entering public service, Gov. Walz spent 15 years as a high school teacher, spending a year teaching in China before returning to Nebraska and eventually moving to a school district in Mankato, Minnesota. In addition to his teaching responsibilities, Gov. Walz served as an assistant coach on the football team, the faculty advisor for the school’s gay-straight alliance, and head of Educational Travel Adventures organization, where he helped organize annual student trips to China.
Other background: Vice President Harris grew up in Berkeley, CA, and was a longtime resident of Los Angeles. She is the daughter of a Jamaican father and an Indian mother, who both immigrated to the Bay Area in the 1960s.
Gov. Walz is from a small town in Nebraska, and has lived in Minnesota for nearly 30 years.
The Race
Primary election results: The March 2024 results included incumbent President Joe Biden (D) 89%, Marianne Williamson (D) 4%, and Dean Phillips (D) 3%. In July 2024, President Biden publicly announced his decision to end his presidential campaign, and endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris for President. Democrats swiftly coalesced around Vice President Harris’s candidacy, and she earned enough delegates for the formal party nomination during a virtual roll-call vote on August 2, 2024. On August 6, she selected Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz to serve as her running mate. They have been awarded California’s delegates and will appear as the Democratic nominees for president and vice president in the November 5 general election, running against the Republican ticket, former President Donald Trump and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Vice President Harris’s campaign has raised $488 million as of August 2024, including $247 million transferred from the Biden campaign after President Joe Biden departed the race.
Opposing candidate: Republican President Donald Trump
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: President Trump’s campaign has raised $264 million.
The Position
The president of the United States is the head of the executive branch of the federal government, and the commander-in-chief for all branches of the armed forces. A president has the power to make diplomatic, executive, and judicial appointments, and can sign into law or veto legislation. Presidential administrations are responsible for both foreign and domestic policy priorities. Presidents are limited to serving two four-year terms in office.
Elect Rep. Adam Schiff to the United States Senate to keep California on the right track for progress.
Rep. Adam Schiff’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for Californians and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse state.
Progressive endorsements: Rep. Schiff has the endorsement of many groups, including California Environmental Voters, East Area Progressive Democrats, Giffords PAC, Planned Parenthood Action Committee, Sierra Forward, and a large number of labor unions. He is also endorsed by an overwhelming number of leaders across local, state, and federal offices, including Sen. Alex Padilla; nearly the entire Democratic California Congressional delegation; Gov. Gavin Newsom; and a majority of the Democratic members of the state Senate and Assembly. Rep. Schiff’s endorsers include his primary opponents Rep. Katie Porter, and Rep. Barbara Lee.
Top issues: Health-care access, sustainability and climate action, press freedom, affordable housing development, reproductive justice, national security, and AI regulation.
Priority bills: Rep. Schiff is an attorney and a public official and has been a consistent legislator on issues of government accountability, voting access, and health care. He rose to prominence as the chair of the House Intelligence Committee who led the first impeachment inquiry of the Trump administration. During this Congress, he has sponsored 59 bills on housing affordability, national security, and press freedom, all of which remain in committee. He has had legislative success on bills to increase pension payments for teachers, expand labor-organizing protections, secure nearly $200 million in funding to address affordable-housing development and homelessness in the state, create the patient bill of rights, and limit corporate spending to influence elections. He is also the lead author of legislation to end the NRA and the gun industry’s immunity from liability, which prevented victims and their families from seeking legal recourse.
Rep. Schiff is a longtime supporter of progressive education, immigration, and environmental policies. However, he has been criticized for maintaining a moderate lean, including on issues pertaining to military spending and the use of military force, which resulted in his 2002 vote in favor of authorizing the use of military force against Iraq. He is a longtime loyalist of Speaker Emeritus Nancy Pelosi, who selected him over the more progressive Rep. Jerry Nadler for his appointment as chair of the House Intelligence Committee in 2015. Rep. Schiff has also been consistently hawkish on foreign policy, casting votes in favor of increases in military spending in the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act, and providing consistent support to Israel in the form of military funding and defense of expanded settlements. Rep. Schiff has been heavily criticized for his controversial approach to the Senate primary in March 2024, where his campaign ran millions of dollars in targeted ads that highlighted little-known Republican candidate Steve Garvey and ultimately helped elevate him to the general election over the two more progressive candidates, Rep. Katie Porter and Rep. Barbara Lee.
Committee leadership/membership: Rep. Schiff currently sits on the House Judiciary Committee.
Governance and community leadership experience: Rep. Schiff has served in Congress since 2000, when he was elected with over 52% of the vote. In 2022, he won his reelection against a Democratic challenger by 42 points.
Prior to his election to Congress, Rep. Schiff worked as a law clerk and then as an assistant United States attorney before being elected to California’s state Senate in 1996.
Other background: Rep. Schiff is from the Bay Area. He holds a law degree from Harvard University.
The Race
Primary election results: There were 31 candidates in the March 2024 primary and the results included Rep. Adam Schiff (D) 32%, Steve Garvey (R) 32%, Rep. Katie Porter (D) 15%, and Rep. Barbara Lee (D) 10%. Rep. Adam Schiff and Steve Garvey will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Rep. Schiff’s campaign has raised $37 million and is not funded by police or fossil fuel interests.
Opposing candidate: Republican Steve Garvey
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Garvey’s campaign has raised $10.9 million and is funded by real estate interests.
The District
State: California is the most populous state in the United States, and includes 58 counties and 39 million residents.
Voter registration: Of the 22 million registered voters in the state, 47% are Democrat, 24% are Republican, and 22% have no party preference. Democrats have held the governor’s seat in the state since 2011.
District demographics: 40% Latino, 16% Asian, and 7% Black
Recent election results: California voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 29 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 18 points. Sen. Feinstein won her 2018 reelection against now Los Angeles City Councilmember Kevin de León by 8 points.
The Position
Members of the Senate represent and advocate for the needs of their state constituency and share legislative responsibility with the House of Representatives. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues of national importance. Senators have the exclusive responsibility of providing advice and consent to the executive branch on treaties, and on the nomination and approval of cabinet secretaries, ambassadors, and federal judges. The Senate also has the sole authority to bring and try an impeachment of a high official, up to and including removal from office with a two-thirds majority vote.
Each state, regardless of population, is represented by two senators. Senate elections are statewide, and senators are elected to serve a six-year term. There is no term limit for this position.
Elect Rep. Adam Schiff to the United States Senate to keep California on the right track for progress.
Rep. Adam Schiff’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for Californians and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse state.
Progressive endorsements: Rep. Schiff has the endorsement of many groups, including California Environmental Voters, East Area Progressive Democrats, Giffords PAC, Planned Parenthood Action Committee, Sierra Forward, and a large number of labor unions. He is also endorsed by an overwhelming number of leaders across local, state, and federal offices, including Sen. Alex Padilla; nearly the entire Democratic California Congressional delegation; Gov. Gavin Newsom; and a majority of the Democratic members of the state Senate and Assembly. Rep. Schiff’s endorsers include his primary opponents Rep. Katie Porter, and Rep. Barbara Lee.
Top issues: Health-care access, sustainability and climate action, press freedom, affordable housing development, reproductive justice, national security, and AI regulation.
Priority bills: Rep. Schiff is an attorney and a public official and has been a consistent legislator on issues of government accountability, voting access, and health care. He rose to prominence as the chair of the House Intelligence Committee who led the first impeachment inquiry of the Trump administration. During this Congress, he has sponsored 59 bills on housing affordability, national security, and press freedom, all of which remain in committee. He has had legislative success on bills to increase pension payments for teachers, expand labor-organizing protections, secure nearly $200 million in funding to address affordable-housing development and homelessness in the state, create the patient bill of rights, and limit corporate spending to influence elections. He is also the lead author of legislation to end the NRA and the gun industry’s immunity from liability, which prevented victims and their families from seeking legal recourse.
Rep. Schiff is a longtime supporter of progressive education, immigration, and environmental policies. However, he has been criticized for maintaining a moderate lean, including on issues pertaining to military spending and the use of military force, which resulted in his 2002 vote in favor of authorizing the use of military force against Iraq. He is a longtime loyalist of Speaker Emeritus Nancy Pelosi, who selected him over the more progressive Rep. Jerry Nadler for his appointment as chair of the House Intelligence Committee in 2015. Rep. Schiff has also been consistently hawkish on foreign policy, casting votes in favor of increases in military spending in the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act, and providing consistent support to Israel in the form of military funding and defense of expanded settlements. Rep. Schiff has been heavily criticized for his controversial approach to the Senate primary in March 2024, where his campaign ran millions of dollars in targeted ads that highlighted little-known Republican candidate Steve Garvey and ultimately helped elevate him to the general election over the two more progressive candidates, Rep. Katie Porter and Rep. Barbara Lee.
Committee leadership/membership: Rep. Schiff currently sits on the House Judiciary Committee.
Governance and community leadership experience: Rep. Schiff has served in Congress since 2000, when he was elected with over 52% of the vote. In 2022, he won his reelection against a Democratic challenger by 42 points.
Prior to his election to Congress, Rep. Schiff worked as a law clerk and then as an assistant United States attorney before being elected to California’s state Senate in 1996.
Other background: Rep. Schiff is from the Bay Area. He holds a law degree from Harvard University.
The Race
Primary election results: There were 31 candidates in the March 2024 primary and the results included Rep. Adam Schiff (D) 32%, Steve Garvey (R) 32%, Rep. Katie Porter (D) 15%, and Rep. Barbara Lee (D) 10%. Rep. Adam Schiff and Steve Garvey will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Rep. Schiff’s campaign has raised $37 million and is not funded by police or fossil fuel interests.
Opposing candidate: Republican Steve Garvey
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Garvey’s campaign has raised $10.9 million and is funded by real estate interests.
The District
State: California is the most populous state in the United States, and includes 58 counties and 39 million residents.
Voter registration: Of the 22 million registered voters in the state, 47% are Democrat, 24% are Republican, and 22% have no party preference. Democrats have held the governor’s seat in the state since 2011.
District demographics: 40% Latino, 16% Asian, and 7% Black
Recent election results: California voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 29 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 18 points. Sen. Feinstein won her 2018 reelection against now Los Angeles City Councilmember Kevin de León by 8 points.
The Position
Members of the Senate represent and advocate for the needs of their state constituency and share legislative responsibility with the House of Representatives. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues of national importance. Senators have the exclusive responsibility of providing advice and consent to the executive branch on treaties, and on the nomination and approval of cabinet secretaries, ambassadors, and federal judges. The Senate also has the sole authority to bring and try an impeachment of a high official, up to and including removal from office with a two-thirds majority vote.
Each state, regardless of population, is represented by two senators. Senate elections are statewide, and senators are elected to serve a six-year term. There is no term limit for this position.
Elect Rep. Adam Schiff to the United States Senate to keep California on the right track for progress.
Rep. Adam Schiff’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for Californians and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse state.
Progressive endorsements: Rep. Schiff has the endorsement of many groups, including California Environmental Voters, East Area Progressive Democrats, Giffords PAC, Planned Parenthood Action Committee, Sierra Forward, and a large number of labor unions. He is also endorsed by an overwhelming number of leaders across local, state, and federal offices, including Sen. Alex Padilla; nearly the entire Democratic California Congressional delegation; Gov. Gavin Newsom; and a majority of the Democratic members of the state Senate and Assembly. Rep. Schiff’s endorsers include his primary opponents Rep. Katie Porter, and Rep. Barbara Lee.
Top issues: Health-care access, sustainability and climate action, press freedom, affordable housing development, reproductive justice, national security, and AI regulation.
Priority bills: Rep. Schiff is an attorney and a public official and has been a consistent legislator on issues of government accountability, voting access, and health care. He rose to prominence as the chair of the House Intelligence Committee who led the first impeachment inquiry of the Trump administration. During this Congress, he has sponsored 59 bills on housing affordability, national security, and press freedom, all of which remain in committee. He has had legislative success on bills to increase pension payments for teachers, expand labor-organizing protections, secure nearly $200 million in funding to address affordable-housing development and homelessness in the state, create the patient bill of rights, and limit corporate spending to influence elections. He is also the lead author of legislation to end the NRA and the gun industry’s immunity from liability, which prevented victims and their families from seeking legal recourse.
Rep. Schiff is a longtime supporter of progressive education, immigration, and environmental policies. However, he has been criticized for maintaining a moderate lean, including on issues pertaining to military spending and the use of military force, which resulted in his 2002 vote in favor of authorizing the use of military force against Iraq. He is a longtime loyalist of Speaker Emeritus Nancy Pelosi, who selected him over the more progressive Rep. Jerry Nadler for his appointment as chair of the House Intelligence Committee in 2015. Rep. Schiff has also been consistently hawkish on foreign policy, casting votes in favor of increases in military spending in the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act, and providing consistent support to Israel in the form of military funding and defense of expanded settlements. Rep. Schiff has been heavily criticized for his controversial approach to the Senate primary in March 2024, where his campaign ran millions of dollars in targeted ads that highlighted little-known Republican candidate Steve Garvey and ultimately helped elevate him to the general election over the two more progressive candidates, Rep. Katie Porter and Rep. Barbara Lee.
Committee leadership/membership: Rep. Schiff currently sits on the House Judiciary Committee.
Governance and community leadership experience: Rep. Schiff has served in Congress since 2000, when he was elected with over 52% of the vote. In 2022, he won his reelection against a Democratic challenger by 42 points.
Prior to his election to Congress, Rep. Schiff worked as a law clerk and then as an assistant United States attorney before being elected to California’s state Senate in 1996.
Other background: Rep. Schiff is from the Bay Area. He holds a law degree from Harvard University.
The Race
Primary election results: There were 31 candidates in the March 2024 primary and the results included Rep. Adam Schiff (D) 32%, Steve Garvey (R) 32%, Rep. Katie Porter (D) 15%, and Rep. Barbara Lee (D) 10%. Rep. Adam Schiff and Steve Garvey will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Rep. Schiff’s campaign has raised $37 million and is not funded by police or fossil fuel interests.
Opposing candidate: Republican Steve Garvey
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Garvey’s campaign has raised $10.9 million and is funded by real estate interests.
The District
State: California is the most populous state in the United States, and includes 58 counties and 39 million residents.
Voter registration: Of the 22 million registered voters in the state, 47% are Democrat, 24% are Republican, and 22% have no party preference. Democrats have held the governor’s seat in the state since 2011.
District demographics: 40% Latino, 16% Asian, and 7% Black
Recent election results: California voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 29 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 18 points. Sen. Feinstein won her 2018 reelection against now Los Angeles City Councilmember Kevin de León by 8 points.
The Position
Members of the Senate represent and advocate for the needs of their state constituency and share legislative responsibility with the House of Representatives. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues of national importance. Senators have the exclusive responsibility of providing advice and consent to the executive branch on treaties, and on the nomination and approval of cabinet secretaries, ambassadors, and federal judges. The Senate also has the sole authority to bring and try an impeachment of a high official, up to and including removal from office with a two-thirds majority vote.
Each state, regardless of population, is represented by two senators. Senate elections are statewide, and senators are elected to serve a six-year term. There is no term limit for this position.
Congress
Depending on where you live, you may have one of the below congressional districts on your ballot.
11th Distrito Congresional
Reelect Congressional Representative Nancy Pelosi to keep CD-11 on the right track for progress.
Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be an effective voice for the constituents of CD-11 and will govern in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Speaker Emerita Pelosi has the endorsement of some groups, including Equality California, California Environmental Voters, and Planned Parenthood Action Fund.
Top issues: Governmental accountability, health-care access, economic recovery, infrastructure, climate change and environmental protection, and human rights and social equity.
Priority bills: This year, Speaker Emerita Pelosi’s priorities for CD-11 have included two bills to establish a designated Tony Bennett Day, and to express institutional mourning for the death of Sen. Dianne Feinstein.
During her long career in Congress, Speaker Emerita Pelosi has been instrumental in advancing progressive legislation, including resetting the agenda on LGBTQIA+ rights, prioritizing resources and reducing stigma during the AIDS crisis, and serving as a key architect of the 1994 assault weapon ban, which remained in place for ten years. As speaker of the House, she played a critical role in moving forward several pieces of landmark legislation, including the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, and the repeal of the discriminatory Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Speaker Emerita Pelosi liaised with the Obama administration to maintain support for the Affordable Care Act, which expanded health-care access for millions of Americans. In her most recent term as speaker, she worked in collaboration with the Biden Administration to pass the American Rescue Plan, the Infrastructure and Investment Jobs Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, and the Respect for Marriage Act.
While she was an effective speaker and advocate for some progressive legislation, Speaker Emerita Pelosi struggled to balance recent shifts in the ideological poles of the House of Representatives. She was heavily criticized for her slow embrace of the impeachment of former President Donald Trump and her insistence on pursuing impeachment against him only on narrow grounds. She provided little support to the Green New Deal, although some substantial climate action was included in President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, which she pushed forward. Speaker Emerita Pelosi favored moderate leadership of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which often worked against progressive challengers in House races, agreed to narrow the scope of President Biden’s Build Back Better agenda by reducing social program funding, and clashed with the progressive caucus about the timeline for passing two Biden administration spending packages.
Member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus?: No.
Committee leadership/membership: Speaker Emerita Pelosi was the first woman to serve as speaker of the House of Representatives during two separate leadership stints: 2007–2011 and 2019–2023. She resigned from the speakership in January 2023 so that the party could elect new leadership, and is now recognized by Congress as Speaker Emerita. She does not currently serve on any House Committees.
Governance and community leadership experience: Speaker Emerita Pelosi has served in Congress since 1987, when she won a special election with over 63% of the vote. In 2022, she won her reelection against a Republican challenger by 68 points.
Prior to her election to Congress, Speaker Emerita Pelosi was a Democratic Party recruiter and fundraiser. Her father, Thomas D’Alesandro, Jr., served as the Democratic mayor of Baltimore, which exposed her to the political landscape at a young age. Her first run for office didn’t come until she was 47 and the youngest of her five children had left for college. Her fundraising background was critical in her 1987 special-election run for Congress, allowing her to raise over $1 million in just seven weeks.
Other background: Speaker Emerita Pelosi grew up in Baltimore and has lived in San Francisco most of her adult life. She has broken gender barriers in politics, and has paved the way for women leaders to engage at every level of American government.
The Race
Primary election results: The March 2024 results included incumbent Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D) 73%, Bruce Lou (R) 9%, Marjorie Mikels (D) 5%, Bianca Von Krieg (D) 4%, Jason Chuyuan Zeng (R) 4%, and Jason Boyce (D) 3%. Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Bruce Lou will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s campaign has raised $6.3 million and is not funded by police or fossil fuel interests.
Opposing candidate: Republican Bruce Lou
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Lou’s campaign has raised $118,000 and is primarily self-funded.
The District
Counties in district: California’s 11th Congressional District includes parts of San Francisco County.
Voter registration: 64% Democrat, 7% Republican, and 24% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this district.
District demographics: 11% Latino, 32% Asian, and 6% Black.
Recent election results: CD-11 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 75 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 72 points.
The Position
Congressmembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the United States Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.
The United States is divided into 435 congressional districts, each with a population of about 710,000 individuals. Each district elects a representative to the House of Representatives for a two-year term. California has 52 congressional representatives, the largest delegation in the country. There is no term limit for this position.
Reelect Congressional Representative Nancy Pelosi to keep CD-11 on the right track for progress.
Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be an effective voice for the constituents of CD-11 and will govern in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Speaker Emerita Pelosi has the endorsement of some groups, including Equality California, California Environmental Voters, and Planned Parenthood Action Fund.
Top issues: Governmental accountability, health-care access, economic recovery, infrastructure, climate change and environmental protection, and human rights and social equity.
Priority bills: This year, Speaker Emerita Pelosi’s priorities for CD-11 have included two bills to establish a designated Tony Bennett Day, and to express institutional mourning for the death of Sen. Dianne Feinstein.
During her long career in Congress, Speaker Emerita Pelosi has been instrumental in advancing progressive legislation, including resetting the agenda on LGBTQIA+ rights, prioritizing resources and reducing stigma during the AIDS crisis, and serving as a key architect of the 1994 assault weapon ban, which remained in place for ten years. As speaker of the House, she played a critical role in moving forward several pieces of landmark legislation, including the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, and the repeal of the discriminatory Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Speaker Emerita Pelosi liaised with the Obama administration to maintain support for the Affordable Care Act, which expanded health-care access for millions of Americans. In her most recent term as speaker, she worked in collaboration with the Biden Administration to pass the American Rescue Plan, the Infrastructure and Investment Jobs Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, and the Respect for Marriage Act.
While she was an effective speaker and advocate for some progressive legislation, Speaker Emerita Pelosi struggled to balance recent shifts in the ideological poles of the House of Representatives. She was heavily criticized for her slow embrace of the impeachment of former President Donald Trump and her insistence on pursuing impeachment against him only on narrow grounds. She provided little support to the Green New Deal, although some substantial climate action was included in President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, which she pushed forward. Speaker Emerita Pelosi favored moderate leadership of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which often worked against progressive challengers in House races, agreed to narrow the scope of President Biden’s Build Back Better agenda by reducing social program funding, and clashed with the progressive caucus about the timeline for passing two Biden administration spending packages.
Member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus?: No.
Committee leadership/membership: Speaker Emerita Pelosi was the first woman to serve as speaker of the House of Representatives during two separate leadership stints: 2007–2011 and 2019–2023. She resigned from the speakership in January 2023 so that the party could elect new leadership, and is now recognized by Congress as Speaker Emerita. She does not currently serve on any House Committees.
Governance and community leadership experience: Speaker Emerita Pelosi has served in Congress since 1987, when she won a special election with over 63% of the vote. In 2022, she won her reelection against a Republican challenger by 68 points.
Prior to her election to Congress, Speaker Emerita Pelosi was a Democratic Party recruiter and fundraiser. Her father, Thomas D’Alesandro, Jr., served as the Democratic mayor of Baltimore, which exposed her to the political landscape at a young age. Her first run for office didn’t come until she was 47 and the youngest of her five children had left for college. Her fundraising background was critical in her 1987 special-election run for Congress, allowing her to raise over $1 million in just seven weeks.
Other background: Speaker Emerita Pelosi grew up in Baltimore and has lived in San Francisco most of her adult life. She has broken gender barriers in politics, and has paved the way for women leaders to engage at every level of American government.
The Race
Primary election results: The March 2024 results included incumbent Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D) 73%, Bruce Lou (R) 9%, Marjorie Mikels (D) 5%, Bianca Von Krieg (D) 4%, Jason Chuyuan Zeng (R) 4%, and Jason Boyce (D) 3%. Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Bruce Lou will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s campaign has raised $6.3 million and is not funded by police or fossil fuel interests.
Opposing candidate: Republican Bruce Lou
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Lou’s campaign has raised $118,000 and is primarily self-funded.
The District
Counties in district: California’s 11th Congressional District includes parts of San Francisco County.
Voter registration: 64% Democrat, 7% Republican, and 24% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this district.
District demographics: 11% Latino, 32% Asian, and 6% Black.
Recent election results: CD-11 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 75 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 72 points.
The Position
Congressmembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the United States Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.
The United States is divided into 435 congressional districts, each with a population of about 710,000 individuals. Each district elects a representative to the House of Representatives for a two-year term. California has 52 congressional representatives, the largest delegation in the country. There is no term limit for this position.
Reelect Congressional Representative Nancy Pelosi to keep CD-11 on the right track for progress.
Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be an effective voice for the constituents of CD-11 and will govern in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Speaker Emerita Pelosi has the endorsement of some groups, including Equality California, California Environmental Voters, and Planned Parenthood Action Fund.
Top issues: Governmental accountability, health-care access, economic recovery, infrastructure, climate change and environmental protection, and human rights and social equity.
Priority bills: This year, Speaker Emerita Pelosi’s priorities for CD-11 have included two bills to establish a designated Tony Bennett Day, and to express institutional mourning for the death of Sen. Dianne Feinstein.
During her long career in Congress, Speaker Emerita Pelosi has been instrumental in advancing progressive legislation, including resetting the agenda on LGBTQIA+ rights, prioritizing resources and reducing stigma during the AIDS crisis, and serving as a key architect of the 1994 assault weapon ban, which remained in place for ten years. As speaker of the House, she played a critical role in moving forward several pieces of landmark legislation, including the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, and the repeal of the discriminatory Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Speaker Emerita Pelosi liaised with the Obama administration to maintain support for the Affordable Care Act, which expanded health-care access for millions of Americans. In her most recent term as speaker, she worked in collaboration with the Biden Administration to pass the American Rescue Plan, the Infrastructure and Investment Jobs Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, and the Respect for Marriage Act.
While she was an effective speaker and advocate for some progressive legislation, Speaker Emerita Pelosi struggled to balance recent shifts in the ideological poles of the House of Representatives. She was heavily criticized for her slow embrace of the impeachment of former President Donald Trump and her insistence on pursuing impeachment against him only on narrow grounds. She provided little support to the Green New Deal, although some substantial climate action was included in President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, which she pushed forward. Speaker Emerita Pelosi favored moderate leadership of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which often worked against progressive challengers in House races, agreed to narrow the scope of President Biden’s Build Back Better agenda by reducing social program funding, and clashed with the progressive caucus about the timeline for passing two Biden administration spending packages.
Member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus?: No.
Committee leadership/membership: Speaker Emerita Pelosi was the first woman to serve as speaker of the House of Representatives during two separate leadership stints: 2007–2011 and 2019–2023. She resigned from the speakership in January 2023 so that the party could elect new leadership, and is now recognized by Congress as Speaker Emerita. She does not currently serve on any House Committees.
Governance and community leadership experience: Speaker Emerita Pelosi has served in Congress since 1987, when she won a special election with over 63% of the vote. In 2022, she won her reelection against a Republican challenger by 68 points.
Prior to her election to Congress, Speaker Emerita Pelosi was a Democratic Party recruiter and fundraiser. Her father, Thomas D’Alesandro, Jr., served as the Democratic mayor of Baltimore, which exposed her to the political landscape at a young age. Her first run for office didn’t come until she was 47 and the youngest of her five children had left for college. Her fundraising background was critical in her 1987 special-election run for Congress, allowing her to raise over $1 million in just seven weeks.
Other background: Speaker Emerita Pelosi grew up in Baltimore and has lived in San Francisco most of her adult life. She has broken gender barriers in politics, and has paved the way for women leaders to engage at every level of American government.
The Race
Primary election results: The March 2024 results included incumbent Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D) 73%, Bruce Lou (R) 9%, Marjorie Mikels (D) 5%, Bianca Von Krieg (D) 4%, Jason Chuyuan Zeng (R) 4%, and Jason Boyce (D) 3%. Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Bruce Lou will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s campaign has raised $6.3 million and is not funded by police or fossil fuel interests.
Opposing candidate: Republican Bruce Lou
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Lou’s campaign has raised $118,000 and is primarily self-funded.
The District
Counties in district: California’s 11th Congressional District includes parts of San Francisco County.
Voter registration: 64% Democrat, 7% Republican, and 24% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this district.
District demographics: 11% Latino, 32% Asian, and 6% Black.
Recent election results: CD-11 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 75 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 72 points.
The Position
Congressmembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the United States Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.
The United States is divided into 435 congressional districts, each with a population of about 710,000 individuals. Each district elects a representative to the House of Representatives for a two-year term. California has 52 congressional representatives, the largest delegation in the country. There is no term limit for this position.
15th Distrito Congresional
Reelect Congressional Representative Kevin Mullin to keep CD-15 on the right track for progress.
Rep. Kevin Mullin’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of CD-15 and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Rep. Mullin has the endorsement of some groups, including Equality California, California Environmental Voters, and Clean Water Action as well as labor unions like AFL-CIO and United Healthcare Workers West.
Top issues: Climate change resilience.
Priority bills: This year, Rep. Mullin’s priorities for CD-15 have included 4 bills about assisting low-income individuals to outfit their homes for climate resilience, as well as expanding supports for underserved populations including veterans. All 4 bills currently remain in committee.
Member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus?: No.
Committee leadership/membership: Rep. Mullin currently sits on 2 committees, including the Natural Resources, and Science, Space, and Technology Committees.
Governance and community leadership experience: Rep. Kevin Mullin has served in this congressional seat since 2022, when he was elected with over 55% of the vote.
Prior to his election to Congress, Rep. Mullin was a San Mateo County Assemblymember first elected in 2012. He authored more than 60 bills that were eventually signed into law during his tenure, and was a longtime supporter of affordable housing, improving public transit, and election reform. He authored the nation’s first DISCLOSE Act to stop dark money and reveal the true backers of ballot measures and candidates. He also passed universal vote-by-mail legislation, which resulted in record participation and turnout. He also co-authored landmark legislation to automatically register Californians to vote. Rep. Mullin passed bills to prioritize local affordable housing for state housing funds and made it easier to build housing for teachers. As a member of the state legislature, he scored a lifetime 96 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Rep. Mullin has supported most progressive bills that made it to a vote during his term.
Other background: Rep. Mullin is from San Mateo County.
The Race
Primary election results: The March 2024 results included incumbent Rep. Kevin Mullin (D) 75%, and Anna Cheng Kramer (R) 25%. Rep. Kevin Mullin and Anna Cheng Kramer will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Rep. Kevin Mullin’s campaign has raised $632,000 and is not funded by police or fossil fuel interests.
Opposing candidate: Republican Anna Cheng Kramer
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Cheng Kramer’s campaign has raised $102,000 with over $85,000 contributed directly by the candidate.
The District
Counties in district: California’s 15th Congressional District includes parts of San Francisco and San Mateo Counties.
Voter registration: 56% Democrat, 13% Republican, and 26% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this district.
District demographics: 20% Latino, 37% Asian, and 4% Black.
Recent election results: CD-15 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 57 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 51 points.
The Position
Congressmembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the United States Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.
The United States is divided into 435 congressional districts, each with a population of about 710,000 individuals. Each district elects a representative to the House of Representatives for a two-year term. California has 52 congressional representatives, the largest delegation in the country. There is no term limit for this position.
Reelect Congressional Representative Kevin Mullin to keep CD-15 on the right track for progress.
Rep. Kevin Mullin’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of CD-15 and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Rep. Mullin has the endorsement of some groups, including Equality California, California Environmental Voters, and Clean Water Action as well as labor unions like AFL-CIO and United Healthcare Workers West.
Top issues: Climate change resilience.
Priority bills: This year, Rep. Mullin’s priorities for CD-15 have included 4 bills about assisting low-income individuals to outfit their homes for climate resilience, as well as expanding supports for underserved populations including veterans. All 4 bills currently remain in committee.
Member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus?: No.
Committee leadership/membership: Rep. Mullin currently sits on 2 committees, including the Natural Resources, and Science, Space, and Technology Committees.
Governance and community leadership experience: Rep. Kevin Mullin has served in this congressional seat since 2022, when he was elected with over 55% of the vote.
Prior to his election to Congress, Rep. Mullin was a San Mateo County Assemblymember first elected in 2012. He authored more than 60 bills that were eventually signed into law during his tenure, and was a longtime supporter of affordable housing, improving public transit, and election reform. He authored the nation’s first DISCLOSE Act to stop dark money and reveal the true backers of ballot measures and candidates. He also passed universal vote-by-mail legislation, which resulted in record participation and turnout. He also co-authored landmark legislation to automatically register Californians to vote. Rep. Mullin passed bills to prioritize local affordable housing for state housing funds and made it easier to build housing for teachers. As a member of the state legislature, he scored a lifetime 96 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Rep. Mullin has supported most progressive bills that made it to a vote during his term.
Other background: Rep. Mullin is from San Mateo County.
The Race
Primary election results: The March 2024 results included incumbent Rep. Kevin Mullin (D) 75%, and Anna Cheng Kramer (R) 25%. Rep. Kevin Mullin and Anna Cheng Kramer will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Rep. Kevin Mullin’s campaign has raised $632,000 and is not funded by police or fossil fuel interests.
Opposing candidate: Republican Anna Cheng Kramer
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Cheng Kramer’s campaign has raised $102,000 with over $85,000 contributed directly by the candidate.
The District
Counties in district: California’s 15th Congressional District includes parts of San Francisco and San Mateo Counties.
Voter registration: 56% Democrat, 13% Republican, and 26% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this district.
District demographics: 20% Latino, 37% Asian, and 4% Black.
Recent election results: CD-15 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 57 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 51 points.
The Position
Congressmembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the United States Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.
The United States is divided into 435 congressional districts, each with a population of about 710,000 individuals. Each district elects a representative to the House of Representatives for a two-year term. California has 52 congressional representatives, the largest delegation in the country. There is no term limit for this position.
Reelect Congressional Representative Kevin Mullin to keep CD-15 on the right track for progress.
Rep. Kevin Mullin’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of CD-15 and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Rep. Mullin has the endorsement of some groups, including Equality California, California Environmental Voters, and Clean Water Action as well as labor unions like AFL-CIO and United Healthcare Workers West.
Top issues: Climate change resilience.
Priority bills: This year, Rep. Mullin’s priorities for CD-15 have included 4 bills about assisting low-income individuals to outfit their homes for climate resilience, as well as expanding supports for underserved populations including veterans. All 4 bills currently remain in committee.
Member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus?: No.
Committee leadership/membership: Rep. Mullin currently sits on 2 committees, including the Natural Resources, and Science, Space, and Technology Committees.
Governance and community leadership experience: Rep. Kevin Mullin has served in this congressional seat since 2022, when he was elected with over 55% of the vote.
Prior to his election to Congress, Rep. Mullin was a San Mateo County Assemblymember first elected in 2012. He authored more than 60 bills that were eventually signed into law during his tenure, and was a longtime supporter of affordable housing, improving public transit, and election reform. He authored the nation’s first DISCLOSE Act to stop dark money and reveal the true backers of ballot measures and candidates. He also passed universal vote-by-mail legislation, which resulted in record participation and turnout. He also co-authored landmark legislation to automatically register Californians to vote. Rep. Mullin passed bills to prioritize local affordable housing for state housing funds and made it easier to build housing for teachers. As a member of the state legislature, he scored a lifetime 96 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Rep. Mullin has supported most progressive bills that made it to a vote during his term.
Other background: Rep. Mullin is from San Mateo County.
The Race
Primary election results: The March 2024 results included incumbent Rep. Kevin Mullin (D) 75%, and Anna Cheng Kramer (R) 25%. Rep. Kevin Mullin and Anna Cheng Kramer will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Rep. Kevin Mullin’s campaign has raised $632,000 and is not funded by police or fossil fuel interests.
Opposing candidate: Republican Anna Cheng Kramer
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Cheng Kramer’s campaign has raised $102,000 with over $85,000 contributed directly by the candidate.
The District
Counties in district: California’s 15th Congressional District includes parts of San Francisco and San Mateo Counties.
Voter registration: 56% Democrat, 13% Republican, and 26% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this district.
District demographics: 20% Latino, 37% Asian, and 4% Black.
Recent election results: CD-15 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 57 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 51 points.
The Position
Congressmembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the United States Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.
The United States is divided into 435 congressional districts, each with a population of about 710,000 individuals. Each district elects a representative to the House of Representatives for a two-year term. California has 52 congressional representatives, the largest delegation in the country. There is no term limit for this position.
State Assembly, 17th District
Reelect Assemblymember Matt Haney to keep AD-17 on the right track for progress.
Assm. Haney’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a representative voice for the constituents of AD-17 and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Assm. Haney has the endorsement of some groups, including Equality California, California Environmental Voters, and SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West.
Top issues: Labor and employment protections, homelessness and housing, behavioral health care, criminal justice reform, and substance abuse resources.
Priority bills: This legislative session, Assm. Haney’s priorities for AD-17 have included 51 bills about housing development, behavioral health and substance abuse treatment, and labor and employment. Of these, 11 have been successfully chaptered into law, 10 have died, 2 have been vetoed, and the rest remain in committee. In 2023, he sponsored and passed legislation to cap rental security deposit requirements at one month’s rent, improve pharmacy staffing and safety, ensure that incarcerated parents are placed at a facility in nearest proximity to their minor children, and expand addiction treatment options and access for minors who are 16 or older. In 2024, he has proposed legislation to allow tenants to opt to have their on-time rental payments included in their credit score, expand access to opioid addiction treatment, require overdose-prevention nasal spray to be included in all first-aid kits in the state, and authorize city governments to license Amsterdam-style cannabis cafes within the state. He scored a CS of 98 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Assm. Haney supported nearly all progressive bills that made it to a vote during his first year in the Assembly.
Member of the California Legislative Progressive Caucus?: Yes
Committee leadership/membership: Assm. Haney serves as the Democratic majority whip of the State Assembly. He currently sits on five standing committees, including Appropriations, Health, Judiciary, and Local Government. He serves as chair of the Select Committee on Fentanyl, Opioid Addiction, and Overdose Prevention and the California Legislative Renters’ Caucus. Assm. Haney is also a member of the California Legislative Jewish Caucus.
Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Haney has served in this assembly seat since February 2022, when he won a special election with over 62% of the vote. In November 2022, he won his race for a full term against a Republican challenger by 38 points.
Prior to his election to the Assembly, Assm. Haney served as San Francisco supervisor, helping to lead Mental Health SF to guarantee mental health care for all San Franciscans. He also authored the Overpaid Executive Tax, targeting the pay gap between worker and CEO, legislation to house over 2,000 unhoused people in hotels during the pandemic, and laws to protect frontline workers. Assm. Haney also helped build more housing and affordable housing in his district. He was an at-large representative for the San Francisco Unified School District, where he fought for affordable teacher housing, expanded computer science education, and cut suspensions that overwhelmingly targeted students of color.
Other background: Assm. Haney is from the Bay Area. He co-founded #cut50 with Van Jones and Jessica Jackson to end mass incarceration, and has been a longtime advocate for social justice issues in his community.
The Race
Primary election results: The March 2024 results included incumbent Assm. Matt Haney (D) 82%, Manuel Noris-Barrera (R) 12%, and Otto Duke (D) 6%. Assm. Matt Haney and Manuel Noris-Barrera will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Haney’s campaign has raised $1 million and is not funded by police interests. He has received problematic donations from fossil fuel, corporate PAC, and real estate interests, including from Nike Inc., Google LLC, Edison International, and California Real Estate PAC.
Opposing candidate: Republican Manual Noris-Barrera
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Noris-Barrera’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the Secretary of State as of August 2024.
The District
Counties in district: California’s 17th Assembly District includes parts of San Francisco County.
Voter registration: 65% Democrat, 6% Republican, and 24% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this seat.
District demographics: 14% Latino, 32% Asian, and 8% Black.
Recent election results: AD-17 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 75 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 75 points.
The Position
State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.
The California State Assembly has 80 districts. Each represents a population of at least 465,000 Californians. Representatives are elected to the Assembly for a two-year term. Every two years, all 80 seats are subject to election. Members elected before 2012 are restricted to three two-year terms (six years) in the Assembly. Those elected in or after 2012 are allowed to serve 12 years total across both the state Senate or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 62 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 17 seats and one seat is vacant.
Reelect Assemblymember Matt Haney to keep AD-17 on the right track for progress.
Assm. Haney’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a representative voice for the constituents of AD-17 and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Assm. Haney has the endorsement of some groups, including Equality California, California Environmental Voters, and SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West.
Top issues: Labor and employment protections, homelessness and housing, behavioral health care, criminal justice reform, and substance abuse resources.
Priority bills: This legislative session, Assm. Haney’s priorities for AD-17 have included 51 bills about housing development, behavioral health and substance abuse treatment, and labor and employment. Of these, 11 have been successfully chaptered into law, 10 have died, 2 have been vetoed, and the rest remain in committee. In 2023, he sponsored and passed legislation to cap rental security deposit requirements at one month’s rent, improve pharmacy staffing and safety, ensure that incarcerated parents are placed at a facility in nearest proximity to their minor children, and expand addiction treatment options and access for minors who are 16 or older. In 2024, he has proposed legislation to allow tenants to opt to have their on-time rental payments included in their credit score, expand access to opioid addiction treatment, require overdose-prevention nasal spray to be included in all first-aid kits in the state, and authorize city governments to license Amsterdam-style cannabis cafes within the state. He scored a CS of 98 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Assm. Haney supported nearly all progressive bills that made it to a vote during his first year in the Assembly.
Member of the California Legislative Progressive Caucus?: Yes
Committee leadership/membership: Assm. Haney serves as the Democratic majority whip of the State Assembly. He currently sits on five standing committees, including Appropriations, Health, Judiciary, and Local Government. He serves as chair of the Select Committee on Fentanyl, Opioid Addiction, and Overdose Prevention and the California Legislative Renters’ Caucus. Assm. Haney is also a member of the California Legislative Jewish Caucus.
Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Haney has served in this assembly seat since February 2022, when he won a special election with over 62% of the vote. In November 2022, he won his race for a full term against a Republican challenger by 38 points.
Prior to his election to the Assembly, Assm. Haney served as San Francisco supervisor, helping to lead Mental Health SF to guarantee mental health care for all San Franciscans. He also authored the Overpaid Executive Tax, targeting the pay gap between worker and CEO, legislation to house over 2,000 unhoused people in hotels during the pandemic, and laws to protect frontline workers. Assm. Haney also helped build more housing and affordable housing in his district. He was an at-large representative for the San Francisco Unified School District, where he fought for affordable teacher housing, expanded computer science education, and cut suspensions that overwhelmingly targeted students of color.
Other background: Assm. Haney is from the Bay Area. He co-founded #cut50 with Van Jones and Jessica Jackson to end mass incarceration, and has been a longtime advocate for social justice issues in his community.
The Race
Primary election results: The March 2024 results included incumbent Assm. Matt Haney (D) 82%, Manuel Noris-Barrera (R) 12%, and Otto Duke (D) 6%. Assm. Matt Haney and Manuel Noris-Barrera will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Haney’s campaign has raised $1 million and is not funded by police interests. He has received problematic donations from fossil fuel, corporate PAC, and real estate interests, including from Nike Inc., Google LLC, Edison International, and California Real Estate PAC.
Opposing candidate: Republican Manual Noris-Barrera
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Noris-Barrera’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the Secretary of State as of August 2024.
The District
Counties in district: California’s 17th Assembly District includes parts of San Francisco County.
Voter registration: 65% Democrat, 6% Republican, and 24% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this seat.
District demographics: 14% Latino, 32% Asian, and 8% Black.
Recent election results: AD-17 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 75 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 75 points.
The Position
State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.
The California State Assembly has 80 districts. Each represents a population of at least 465,000 Californians. Representatives are elected to the Assembly for a two-year term. Every two years, all 80 seats are subject to election. Members elected before 2012 are restricted to three two-year terms (six years) in the Assembly. Those elected in or after 2012 are allowed to serve 12 years total across both the state Senate or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 62 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 17 seats and one seat is vacant.
Reelect Assemblymember Matt Haney to keep AD-17 on the right track for progress.
Assm. Haney’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a representative voice for the constituents of AD-17 and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Assm. Haney has the endorsement of some groups, including Equality California, California Environmental Voters, and SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West.
Top issues: Labor and employment protections, homelessness and housing, behavioral health care, criminal justice reform, and substance abuse resources.
Priority bills: This legislative session, Assm. Haney’s priorities for AD-17 have included 51 bills about housing development, behavioral health and substance abuse treatment, and labor and employment. Of these, 11 have been successfully chaptered into law, 10 have died, 2 have been vetoed, and the rest remain in committee. In 2023, he sponsored and passed legislation to cap rental security deposit requirements at one month’s rent, improve pharmacy staffing and safety, ensure that incarcerated parents are placed at a facility in nearest proximity to their minor children, and expand addiction treatment options and access for minors who are 16 or older. In 2024, he has proposed legislation to allow tenants to opt to have their on-time rental payments included in their credit score, expand access to opioid addiction treatment, require overdose-prevention nasal spray to be included in all first-aid kits in the state, and authorize city governments to license Amsterdam-style cannabis cafes within the state. He scored a CS of 98 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Assm. Haney supported nearly all progressive bills that made it to a vote during his first year in the Assembly.
Member of the California Legislative Progressive Caucus?: Yes
Committee leadership/membership: Assm. Haney serves as the Democratic majority whip of the State Assembly. He currently sits on five standing committees, including Appropriations, Health, Judiciary, and Local Government. He serves as chair of the Select Committee on Fentanyl, Opioid Addiction, and Overdose Prevention and the California Legislative Renters’ Caucus. Assm. Haney is also a member of the California Legislative Jewish Caucus.
Governance and community leadership experience: Assm. Haney has served in this assembly seat since February 2022, when he won a special election with over 62% of the vote. In November 2022, he won his race for a full term against a Republican challenger by 38 points.
Prior to his election to the Assembly, Assm. Haney served as San Francisco supervisor, helping to lead Mental Health SF to guarantee mental health care for all San Franciscans. He also authored the Overpaid Executive Tax, targeting the pay gap between worker and CEO, legislation to house over 2,000 unhoused people in hotels during the pandemic, and laws to protect frontline workers. Assm. Haney also helped build more housing and affordable housing in his district. He was an at-large representative for the San Francisco Unified School District, where he fought for affordable teacher housing, expanded computer science education, and cut suspensions that overwhelmingly targeted students of color.
Other background: Assm. Haney is from the Bay Area. He co-founded #cut50 with Van Jones and Jessica Jackson to end mass incarceration, and has been a longtime advocate for social justice issues in his community.
The Race
Primary election results: The March 2024 results included incumbent Assm. Matt Haney (D) 82%, Manuel Noris-Barrera (R) 12%, and Otto Duke (D) 6%. Assm. Matt Haney and Manuel Noris-Barrera will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Assm. Haney’s campaign has raised $1 million and is not funded by police interests. He has received problematic donations from fossil fuel, corporate PAC, and real estate interests, including from Nike Inc., Google LLC, Edison International, and California Real Estate PAC.
Opposing candidate: Republican Manual Noris-Barrera
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Noris-Barrera’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the Secretary of State as of August 2024.
The District
Counties in district: California’s 17th Assembly District includes parts of San Francisco County.
Voter registration: 65% Democrat, 6% Republican, and 24% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this seat.
District demographics: 14% Latino, 32% Asian, and 8% Black.
Recent election results: AD-17 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 75 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 75 points.
The Position
State assemblymembers represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.
The California State Assembly has 80 districts. Each represents a population of at least 465,000 Californians. Representatives are elected to the Assembly for a two-year term. Every two years, all 80 seats are subject to election. Members elected before 2012 are restricted to three two-year terms (six years) in the Assembly. Those elected in or after 2012 are allowed to serve 12 years total across both the state Senate or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a three-quarters supermajority of 62 seats in the California State Assembly, while Republicans hold 17 seats and one seat is vacant.
State Senator, 11th District
Reelect State Senator Scott Wiener to keep SD-11 on the right track for progress.
Sen. Scott Wiener’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of SD-11 and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Sen. Wiener has the endorsement of many groups, including Equality California, California Environmental Voters, and SEIU United Healthcare Workers West. He has also received the endorsement of many elected leaders, including Gov. Gavin Newsom, Sen. Alex Padilla, and Attorney General Rob Bonta.
Top issues: Homelessness and housing, climate and environmental protections, criminal justice reform and reducing incarceration, health care, workforce protections and equity, public transportation, and consumer protection and transparency.
Priority bills: This legislative session, Sen. Wiener’s priorities for SD-11 have included 52 bills about wildfire prevention, housing development, corporate climate accountability, and health care. Of these, 18 have been successfully chaptered into law, three have died, two have been vetoed, and the rest remain in committee. In 2023, he sponsored and passed legislation to decriminalize possession of some psychedelic drugs, place a cap of $35 on the out-of-pocket cost of insulin for CalCare recipients, remove barriers to mental health-care access for youth, and increase the provision of therapy to incarcerated individuals. In 2024, he proposed legislation to double the amount of time that people who have been granted asylum can receive case-management services, establish sustainable and long-term funding for Bay Area public transportation, reduce the cost of prescription drugs by requiring more transparency from price-gouging pharmacy benefit managers, and eliminate some barriers to the development of new housing projects. He scored a CS of 100 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records, and has earned the Courage All-Star distinction every year since 2017. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Sen. Wiener has supported nearly all progressive bills that made it to a vote during his time in the state Senate.
Committee leadership/membership: Sen. Wiener currently sits on seven committees, including Ethics, Judiciary, Health, Public Safety, Appropriations, and Government & Finance. He serves as chair of the Housing Committee, chair of the Select Committee on Mental Health, and chair of the Select Committee on Bay Area Public Transit.
Governance and community leadership experience: Sen. Wiener has served in this state Senate seat since 2016, when he was narrowly elected with over 50% of the vote. In 2020, he won his reelection against a Democratic challenger by 14 points.
Prior to his election to the state Senate, Sen. Wiener sat on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, where he focused on improving housing and public transit, and water and solar energy protections. He is also an attorney and spent 15 years practicing law in private practice, and as a deputy city attorney in the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office. He is a longtime supporter of the San Francisco LGBT Community Center, and served on the national board of directors for the Human Rights Campaign.
Other background: Sen. Wiener is originally from New Jersey and has lived in San Francisco’s Castro neighborhood for over 25 years. He holds a law degree from Harvard University and was a Fulbright Scholar.
The Race
Primary election results: The March 2024 results included incumbent Sen. Scott Wiener (D) 73%, Yvette Corkrean (R) 15%, Cynthia Cravens (D) 8%, and Jing Chao Xiong (NPP) 4%. Sen. Scott Wiener and Yvette Corkrean will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Sen. Wiener’s campaign has raised $2 million and is not funded by fossil fuel interests. He has received problematic donations from real estate, corporate PAC, and police interests, including State Coalition of Probation Organizations PAC, NBCUniversal Media LLC, LF George Properties Corporation, Google LLC, and AirBnB Inc.
Opposing candidate: Republican Yvette Corkrean
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Corkrean’s campaign has raised $58,000 and is funded almost entirely by individual donors.
The District
Counties in district: California’s 11th State Senate District includes parts of San Francisco and San Mateo Counties.
Voter registration: 62% Democrat, 7% Republican, and 25% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this district.
District demographics: 13% Latino, 38% Asian, and 6% Black.
Recent election results: SD-11 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 70 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 68 points.
The Position
State senators represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.
The California State Senate has 40 districts. Each represents a population of about 930,000 Californians. Representatives are elected to the Senate for a four-year term. Every two years, half of the Senate’s 40 seats are subject to election. Members elected before 2012 are restricted to two four-year terms (eight years) in the Senate. Those elected in or after 2012 are allowed to serve 12 years total across both the state Senate or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a two-thirds supermajority of 31 seats in the California State Senate, while Republicans hold 9 seats.
Reelect State Senator Scott Wiener to keep SD-11 on the right track for progress.
Sen. Scott Wiener’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of SD-11 and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Sen. Wiener has the endorsement of many groups, including Equality California, California Environmental Voters, and SEIU United Healthcare Workers West. He has also received the endorsement of many elected leaders, including Gov. Gavin Newsom, Sen. Alex Padilla, and Attorney General Rob Bonta.
Top issues: Homelessness and housing, climate and environmental protections, criminal justice reform and reducing incarceration, health care, workforce protections and equity, public transportation, and consumer protection and transparency.
Priority bills: This legislative session, Sen. Wiener’s priorities for SD-11 have included 52 bills about wildfire prevention, housing development, corporate climate accountability, and health care. Of these, 18 have been successfully chaptered into law, three have died, two have been vetoed, and the rest remain in committee. In 2023, he sponsored and passed legislation to decriminalize possession of some psychedelic drugs, place a cap of $35 on the out-of-pocket cost of insulin for CalCare recipients, remove barriers to mental health-care access for youth, and increase the provision of therapy to incarcerated individuals. In 2024, he proposed legislation to double the amount of time that people who have been granted asylum can receive case-management services, establish sustainable and long-term funding for Bay Area public transportation, reduce the cost of prescription drugs by requiring more transparency from price-gouging pharmacy benefit managers, and eliminate some barriers to the development of new housing projects. He scored a CS of 100 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records, and has earned the Courage All-Star distinction every year since 2017. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Sen. Wiener has supported nearly all progressive bills that made it to a vote during his time in the state Senate.
Committee leadership/membership: Sen. Wiener currently sits on seven committees, including Ethics, Judiciary, Health, Public Safety, Appropriations, and Government & Finance. He serves as chair of the Housing Committee, chair of the Select Committee on Mental Health, and chair of the Select Committee on Bay Area Public Transit.
Governance and community leadership experience: Sen. Wiener has served in this state Senate seat since 2016, when he was narrowly elected with over 50% of the vote. In 2020, he won his reelection against a Democratic challenger by 14 points.
Prior to his election to the state Senate, Sen. Wiener sat on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, where he focused on improving housing and public transit, and water and solar energy protections. He is also an attorney and spent 15 years practicing law in private practice, and as a deputy city attorney in the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office. He is a longtime supporter of the San Francisco LGBT Community Center, and served on the national board of directors for the Human Rights Campaign.
Other background: Sen. Wiener is originally from New Jersey and has lived in San Francisco’s Castro neighborhood for over 25 years. He holds a law degree from Harvard University and was a Fulbright Scholar.
The Race
Primary election results: The March 2024 results included incumbent Sen. Scott Wiener (D) 73%, Yvette Corkrean (R) 15%, Cynthia Cravens (D) 8%, and Jing Chao Xiong (NPP) 4%. Sen. Scott Wiener and Yvette Corkrean will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Sen. Wiener’s campaign has raised $2 million and is not funded by fossil fuel interests. He has received problematic donations from real estate, corporate PAC, and police interests, including State Coalition of Probation Organizations PAC, NBCUniversal Media LLC, LF George Properties Corporation, Google LLC, and AirBnB Inc.
Opposing candidate: Republican Yvette Corkrean
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Corkrean’s campaign has raised $58,000 and is funded almost entirely by individual donors.
The District
Counties in district: California’s 11th State Senate District includes parts of San Francisco and San Mateo Counties.
Voter registration: 62% Democrat, 7% Republican, and 25% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this district.
District demographics: 13% Latino, 38% Asian, and 6% Black.
Recent election results: SD-11 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 70 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 68 points.
The Position
State senators represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.
The California State Senate has 40 districts. Each represents a population of about 930,000 Californians. Representatives are elected to the Senate for a four-year term. Every two years, half of the Senate’s 40 seats are subject to election. Members elected before 2012 are restricted to two four-year terms (eight years) in the Senate. Those elected in or after 2012 are allowed to serve 12 years total across both the state Senate or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a two-thirds supermajority of 31 seats in the California State Senate, while Republicans hold 9 seats.
Reelect State Senator Scott Wiener to keep SD-11 on the right track for progress.
Sen. Scott Wiener’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of SD-11 and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Sen. Wiener has the endorsement of many groups, including Equality California, California Environmental Voters, and SEIU United Healthcare Workers West. He has also received the endorsement of many elected leaders, including Gov. Gavin Newsom, Sen. Alex Padilla, and Attorney General Rob Bonta.
Top issues: Homelessness and housing, climate and environmental protections, criminal justice reform and reducing incarceration, health care, workforce protections and equity, public transportation, and consumer protection and transparency.
Priority bills: This legislative session, Sen. Wiener’s priorities for SD-11 have included 52 bills about wildfire prevention, housing development, corporate climate accountability, and health care. Of these, 18 have been successfully chaptered into law, three have died, two have been vetoed, and the rest remain in committee. In 2023, he sponsored and passed legislation to decriminalize possession of some psychedelic drugs, place a cap of $35 on the out-of-pocket cost of insulin for CalCare recipients, remove barriers to mental health-care access for youth, and increase the provision of therapy to incarcerated individuals. In 2024, he proposed legislation to double the amount of time that people who have been granted asylum can receive case-management services, establish sustainable and long-term funding for Bay Area public transportation, reduce the cost of prescription drugs by requiring more transparency from price-gouging pharmacy benefit managers, and eliminate some barriers to the development of new housing projects. He scored a CS of 100 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of legislators’ progressive voting records, and has earned the Courage All-Star distinction every year since 2017. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Sen. Wiener has supported nearly all progressive bills that made it to a vote during his time in the state Senate.
Committee leadership/membership: Sen. Wiener currently sits on seven committees, including Ethics, Judiciary, Health, Public Safety, Appropriations, and Government & Finance. He serves as chair of the Housing Committee, chair of the Select Committee on Mental Health, and chair of the Select Committee on Bay Area Public Transit.
Governance and community leadership experience: Sen. Wiener has served in this state Senate seat since 2016, when he was narrowly elected with over 50% of the vote. In 2020, he won his reelection against a Democratic challenger by 14 points.
Prior to his election to the state Senate, Sen. Wiener sat on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, where he focused on improving housing and public transit, and water and solar energy protections. He is also an attorney and spent 15 years practicing law in private practice, and as a deputy city attorney in the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office. He is a longtime supporter of the San Francisco LGBT Community Center, and served on the national board of directors for the Human Rights Campaign.
Other background: Sen. Wiener is originally from New Jersey and has lived in San Francisco’s Castro neighborhood for over 25 years. He holds a law degree from Harvard University and was a Fulbright Scholar.
The Race
Primary election results: The March 2024 results included incumbent Sen. Scott Wiener (D) 73%, Yvette Corkrean (R) 15%, Cynthia Cravens (D) 8%, and Jing Chao Xiong (NPP) 4%. Sen. Scott Wiener and Yvette Corkrean will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Sen. Wiener’s campaign has raised $2 million and is not funded by fossil fuel interests. He has received problematic donations from real estate, corporate PAC, and police interests, including State Coalition of Probation Organizations PAC, NBCUniversal Media LLC, LF George Properties Corporation, Google LLC, and AirBnB Inc.
Opposing candidate: Republican Yvette Corkrean
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Corkrean’s campaign has raised $58,000 and is funded almost entirely by individual donors.
The District
Counties in district: California’s 11th State Senate District includes parts of San Francisco and San Mateo Counties.
Voter registration: 62% Democrat, 7% Republican, and 25% No Party Preference. Democrats typically hold this district.
District demographics: 13% Latino, 38% Asian, and 6% Black.
Recent election results: SD-11 voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 70 points and Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 68 points.
The Position
State senators represent and advocate for the needs of their district constituents at the California State Capitol. They are responsible for creating, debating, and voting on legislation that addresses issues within their district.
The California State Senate has 40 districts. Each represents a population of about 930,000 Californians. Representatives are elected to the Senate for a four-year term. Every two years, half of the Senate’s 40 seats are subject to election. Members elected before 2012 are restricted to two four-year terms (eight years) in the Senate. Those elected in or after 2012 are allowed to serve 12 years total across both the state Senate or Assembly. This term, Democrats currently hold a two-thirds supermajority of 31 seats in the California State Senate, while Republicans hold 9 seats.
County District Races
Depending on where you live, you may have the below county-districted races on your ballot.
San Francisco County, District 1
Reelect Supervisor Connie Chan to keep San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Supervisor Chan’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Supervisor Chan has the endorsement of some groups, including the Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club, California Working Families Party, SF Rising Action Fund, Bay Rising Action, and San Francisco Tenants Union. She has also received the endorsement of many elected leaders, including Rep. Ted Lieu, Assm. Phil Ting, and six current members of the Board of Supervisors.
Top issues: Public safety, renter and small landlord protections, small-business support, worker protections, climate change, transportation and infrastructure, and tax revenue distribution.
Key initiatives: Supervisor Chan has supported efforts to increase Street Crisis Response teams in the community, increase resources for local police stations, provide outreach to unhoused community members, establish more protected bike lanes, and improve protections for local workers. She has maintained a strong commitment to creating 100% affordable housing developments, often putting her at odds with developers who would prefer more profitable projects. She currently serves as chair of the Budget Committee, and a member of the Government Audit and Oversight Committee. Supervisor Chan also holds membership with the San Francisco County Transit Authority.
Governance and community leadership experience: Supervisor Chan has served in this seat since 2020, when she was elected with over 50% of the vote.
Prior to her election to the Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Chan established herself as a committed public servant and community member. She served as an translator and interpreter for the San Francisco Bar Association, and as an organizer for two local nonprofit organizations. She then served as a legislative aide and communications professional in a series of positions, including with the Board of Supervisors, former District Attorney Kamala Harris, and a member of the State Assembly. Supervisor Chan has also served as the deputy director of Public Affairs for the San Francisco Recreation and Park Department.
Other background: Supervisor Chan is from Hong Kong, and has lived in San Francisco since immigrating to the United States when she was 13.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are five candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including incumbent Sup. Connie Chan, Jeremiah Boehner, Jen Nossokoff, Marjan Philhour, and Sherman D’Silva.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Supervisor Chan’s campaign has raised $28,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Jeremiah Boehner
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Boehner’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county.
Opposing candidate: Jen Nossokoff
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Nossokoff’s campaign has raised $4,800 and is not funded by police, corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or real estate interests.
Opposing candidate: Marjan Philhour
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Philhour’s campaign has raised $92,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, corporate PAC interests..
Opposing candidate: Sherman D’Silva
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: D’Silva’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county..
The District
County: San Francisco County is California's 13th most populous county. District 1 includes the Richmond, Golden Gate Park, the Lake District, Lincoln Park, and Sea Cliff.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
Reelect Supervisor Connie Chan to keep San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Supervisor Chan’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Supervisor Chan has the endorsement of some groups, including the Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club, California Working Families Party, SF Rising Action Fund, Bay Rising Action, and San Francisco Tenants Union. She has also received the endorsement of many elected leaders, including Rep. Ted Lieu, Assm. Phil Ting, and six current members of the Board of Supervisors.
Top issues: Public safety, renter and small landlord protections, small-business support, worker protections, climate change, transportation and infrastructure, and tax revenue distribution.
Key initiatives: Supervisor Chan has supported efforts to increase Street Crisis Response teams in the community, increase resources for local police stations, provide outreach to unhoused community members, establish more protected bike lanes, and improve protections for local workers. She has maintained a strong commitment to creating 100% affordable housing developments, often putting her at odds with developers who would prefer more profitable projects. She currently serves as chair of the Budget Committee, and a member of the Government Audit and Oversight Committee. Supervisor Chan also holds membership with the San Francisco County Transit Authority.
Governance and community leadership experience: Supervisor Chan has served in this seat since 2020, when she was elected with over 50% of the vote.
Prior to her election to the Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Chan established herself as a committed public servant and community member. She served as an translator and interpreter for the San Francisco Bar Association, and as an organizer for two local nonprofit organizations. She then served as a legislative aide and communications professional in a series of positions, including with the Board of Supervisors, former District Attorney Kamala Harris, and a member of the State Assembly. Supervisor Chan has also served as the deputy director of Public Affairs for the San Francisco Recreation and Park Department.
Other background: Supervisor Chan is from Hong Kong, and has lived in San Francisco since immigrating to the United States when she was 13.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are five candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including incumbent Sup. Connie Chan, Jeremiah Boehner, Jen Nossokoff, Marjan Philhour, and Sherman D’Silva.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Supervisor Chan’s campaign has raised $28,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Jeremiah Boehner
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Boehner’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county.
Opposing candidate: Jen Nossokoff
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Nossokoff’s campaign has raised $4,800 and is not funded by police, corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or real estate interests.
Opposing candidate: Marjan Philhour
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Philhour’s campaign has raised $92,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, corporate PAC interests..
Opposing candidate: Sherman D’Silva
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: D’Silva’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county..
The District
County: San Francisco County is California's 13th most populous county. District 1 includes the Richmond, Golden Gate Park, the Lake District, Lincoln Park, and Sea Cliff.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
Reelect Supervisor Connie Chan to keep San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Supervisor Chan’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Supervisor Chan has the endorsement of some groups, including the Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club, California Working Families Party, SF Rising Action Fund, Bay Rising Action, and San Francisco Tenants Union. She has also received the endorsement of many elected leaders, including Rep. Ted Lieu, Assm. Phil Ting, and six current members of the Board of Supervisors.
Top issues: Public safety, renter and small landlord protections, small-business support, worker protections, climate change, transportation and infrastructure, and tax revenue distribution.
Key initiatives: Supervisor Chan has supported efforts to increase Street Crisis Response teams in the community, increase resources for local police stations, provide outreach to unhoused community members, establish more protected bike lanes, and improve protections for local workers. She has maintained a strong commitment to creating 100% affordable housing developments, often putting her at odds with developers who would prefer more profitable projects. She currently serves as chair of the Budget Committee, and a member of the Government Audit and Oversight Committee. Supervisor Chan also holds membership with the San Francisco County Transit Authority.
Governance and community leadership experience: Supervisor Chan has served in this seat since 2020, when she was elected with over 50% of the vote.
Prior to her election to the Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Chan established herself as a committed public servant and community member. She served as an translator and interpreter for the San Francisco Bar Association, and as an organizer for two local nonprofit organizations. She then served as a legislative aide and communications professional in a series of positions, including with the Board of Supervisors, former District Attorney Kamala Harris, and a member of the State Assembly. Supervisor Chan has also served as the deputy director of Public Affairs for the San Francisco Recreation and Park Department.
Other background: Supervisor Chan is from Hong Kong, and has lived in San Francisco since immigrating to the United States when she was 13.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are five candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including incumbent Sup. Connie Chan, Jeremiah Boehner, Jen Nossokoff, Marjan Philhour, and Sherman D’Silva.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Supervisor Chan’s campaign has raised $28,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Jeremiah Boehner
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Boehner’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county.
Opposing candidate: Jen Nossokoff
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Nossokoff’s campaign has raised $4,800 and is not funded by police, corporate PAC, fossil fuel, or real estate interests.
Opposing candidate: Marjan Philhour
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Philhour’s campaign has raised $92,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, corporate PAC interests..
Opposing candidate: Sherman D’Silva
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: D’Silva’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county..
The District
County: San Francisco County is California's 13th most populous county. District 1 includes the Richmond, Golden Gate Park, the Lake District, Lincoln Park, and Sea Cliff.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
San Francisco County, District 3
Elect Sharon Lai for Supervisor to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Sharon Lai’s policy positions demonstrate that she will be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco County and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Lai has the endorsement of some groups, including California Working Families Party, SF Tenants Union, Bay Rising Action, Tenant Associations Coalition PAC, and many labor unions. She has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including Assm. Phil Ting, seven current members of the Board of Supervisors, and former State Controller Betty Yee. Lai has also received an endorsement from current San Francisco County Sheriff Paul Miyamoto.
Electoral history: Lai has not run for public office before.
Top issues: Public safety, police reform, affordable housing preservation, tenants’ rights and protections, expanding homeless and mental health services, transportation infrastructure, and economic development.
Governance and community leadership experience: Lai is a facilitator and strategist in public policy, which she does to contribute her expertise in urban planning and economic development to create local solutions. She spent ten years as a land-use planner in and around San Francisco, and has since served in senior and executive roles with DignityMoves, World Economic Forum, and HKS Government Performance Lab, where she worked on homelessness and housing solutions, economic growth and sustainability, and increasing efficiency in local government. She has a master of public administration degree from Harvard Kennedy School of Government, and has worked across sectors and policy areas throughout her career.
Other background: Lai is from Hong Kong, and lived in Canada before immigrating to the United States. She has lived in San Francisco for nearly two decades.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are six candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Sharon Lai, Wendy Ha Chau, Moe Jamil, Eduard Navarro, Danny Sauter, and Matthew Susk.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Lai’s campaign has raised $133,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
Opposing candidate: Wendy Ha Chau
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Ha Chau’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
Opposing candidate: Moe Jamil
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Jamil’s campaign has raised $141,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
Opposing candidate: Eduard Navarro
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Navarro’s campaign has raised $13,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
Opposing candidate: Danny Sauter
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Sauter’s campaign has raised $140,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
Opposing candidate: Matthew Susk
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Susk’s campaign has raised $46,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California's 13th most populous county. District 3 includes North Beach, Chinatown, Fisherman’s Wharf, Polk Gulch, Union Square/Financial District, Russian Hill, Telegraph Hill, and Nob Hill.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
Elect Sharon Lai for Supervisor to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Sharon Lai’s policy positions demonstrate that she will be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco County and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Lai has the endorsement of some groups, including California Working Families Party, SF Tenants Union, Bay Rising Action, Tenant Associations Coalition PAC, and many labor unions. She has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including Assm. Phil Ting, seven current members of the Board of Supervisors, and former State Controller Betty Yee. Lai has also received an endorsement from current San Francisco County Sheriff Paul Miyamoto.
Electoral history: Lai has not run for public office before.
Top issues: Public safety, police reform, affordable housing preservation, tenants’ rights and protections, expanding homeless and mental health services, transportation infrastructure, and economic development.
Governance and community leadership experience: Lai is a facilitator and strategist in public policy, which she does to contribute her expertise in urban planning and economic development to create local solutions. She spent ten years as a land-use planner in and around San Francisco, and has since served in senior and executive roles with DignityMoves, World Economic Forum, and HKS Government Performance Lab, where she worked on homelessness and housing solutions, economic growth and sustainability, and increasing efficiency in local government. She has a master of public administration degree from Harvard Kennedy School of Government, and has worked across sectors and policy areas throughout her career.
Other background: Lai is from Hong Kong, and lived in Canada before immigrating to the United States. She has lived in San Francisco for nearly two decades.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are six candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Sharon Lai, Wendy Ha Chau, Moe Jamil, Eduard Navarro, Danny Sauter, and Matthew Susk.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Lai’s campaign has raised $133,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
Opposing candidate: Wendy Ha Chau
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Ha Chau’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
Opposing candidate: Moe Jamil
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Jamil’s campaign has raised $141,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
Opposing candidate: Eduard Navarro
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Navarro’s campaign has raised $13,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
Opposing candidate: Danny Sauter
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Sauter’s campaign has raised $140,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
Opposing candidate: Matthew Susk
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Susk’s campaign has raised $46,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California's 13th most populous county. District 3 includes North Beach, Chinatown, Fisherman’s Wharf, Polk Gulch, Union Square/Financial District, Russian Hill, Telegraph Hill, and Nob Hill.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
Elect Sharon Lai for Supervisor to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Sharon Lai’s policy positions demonstrate that she will be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco County and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Lai has the endorsement of some groups, including California Working Families Party, SF Tenants Union, Bay Rising Action, Tenant Associations Coalition PAC, and many labor unions. She has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including Assm. Phil Ting, seven current members of the Board of Supervisors, and former State Controller Betty Yee. Lai has also received an endorsement from current San Francisco County Sheriff Paul Miyamoto.
Electoral history: Lai has not run for public office before.
Top issues: Public safety, police reform, affordable housing preservation, tenants’ rights and protections, expanding homeless and mental health services, transportation infrastructure, and economic development.
Governance and community leadership experience: Lai is a facilitator and strategist in public policy, which she does to contribute her expertise in urban planning and economic development to create local solutions. She spent ten years as a land-use planner in and around San Francisco, and has since served in senior and executive roles with DignityMoves, World Economic Forum, and HKS Government Performance Lab, where she worked on homelessness and housing solutions, economic growth and sustainability, and increasing efficiency in local government. She has a master of public administration degree from Harvard Kennedy School of Government, and has worked across sectors and policy areas throughout her career.
Other background: Lai is from Hong Kong, and lived in Canada before immigrating to the United States. She has lived in San Francisco for nearly two decades.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are six candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Sharon Lai, Wendy Ha Chau, Moe Jamil, Eduard Navarro, Danny Sauter, and Matthew Susk.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Lai’s campaign has raised $133,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
Opposing candidate: Wendy Ha Chau
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Ha Chau’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
Opposing candidate: Moe Jamil
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Jamil’s campaign has raised $141,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
Opposing candidate: Eduard Navarro
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Navarro’s campaign has raised $13,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
Opposing candidate: Danny Sauter
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Sauter’s campaign has raised $140,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
Opposing candidate: Matthew Susk
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Susk’s campaign has raised $46,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California's 13th most populous county. District 3 includes North Beach, Chinatown, Fisherman’s Wharf, Polk Gulch, Union Square/Financial District, Russian Hill, Telegraph Hill, and Nob Hill.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
San Francisco County, District 5
Reelect Supervisor Dean Preston to keep San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Supervisor Preston’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Supervisor Preston has the endorsement of many groups, including California Working Families Party, San Francisco Tenants Union, SF Rising, Democratic Socialists of America, and Evolve California. He has also received the endorsement of many elected leaders, including Sen. Bernie Sanders, Assm. Phil Ting, and four current members of the Board of Supervisors.
Top issues: Housing and affordable development, tenants’ rights, economic growth, transportation, small-business protections, and Medicare for all.
Key initiatives: Supervisor Preston has been a dedicated supporter of housing and tenant protections, including laws to prohibit pandemic evictions, provide $40 million in rent relief, increase the number of crisis-response teams, and establish supportive housing at the Gotham Hotel and Oasis Inn. Along with these initiatives, he has been a strong supporter of improving the city’s bike and pedestrian infrastructure, establishing a public bank, creating alternatives to policing, and providing protections for small businesses impacted by pandemic closures. He currently serves as chair of the Government Audit & Oversight Committee, vice chair of the Land Use & Transportation Committee, and a member of the San Francisco County Transportation Authority. Supervisor Preston’s Democratic Socialist policy approach has made him a target of criticism from the wealthy tech community and motivated significant fundraising for more conservative candidates.
Governance and community leadership experience: Supervisor Preston has served in this seat since 2019, when he was elected with 50% of the vote. In 2020, he won reelection by 10 points.
Prior to his election to the Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Preston was an attorney focused on housing law in the Tenderloin. In 2008, he founded Tenants Together, the only statewide tenant organization in California, and has used his influence to advocate for rent control, eviction protections, mental health care, and affordable housing development.
Other background: Supervisor Preston is from New York City, and has lived in San Francisco for over 30 years.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are four candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including incumbent Supervisor Dean Preston, Bilal Mahmood, Allen Jones, and Autumn Looijen.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Supervisor Preston’s campaign has raised $96,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Bilal Mahmood
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Mahmood’s campaign has raised $175,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Allen Jones
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Jones’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county.
Opposing candidate: Autumn Looijen
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Looijen’s campaign has raised $28,000 and is funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California's 13th most populous county. District 5 includes the Tenderloin, Fillmore, Western Addition, Hayes Valley, Lower Pacific Heights, Japantown, Alamo Square, NoPa, and Upper & Lower Haight.
Governance structure: San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
Reelect Supervisor Dean Preston to keep San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Supervisor Preston’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Supervisor Preston has the endorsement of many groups, including California Working Families Party, San Francisco Tenants Union, SF Rising, Democratic Socialists of America, and Evolve California. He has also received the endorsement of many elected leaders, including Sen. Bernie Sanders, Assm. Phil Ting, and four current members of the Board of Supervisors.
Top issues: Housing and affordable development, tenants’ rights, economic growth, transportation, small-business protections, and Medicare for all.
Key initiatives: Supervisor Preston has been a dedicated supporter of housing and tenant protections, including laws to prohibit pandemic evictions, provide $40 million in rent relief, increase the number of crisis-response teams, and establish supportive housing at the Gotham Hotel and Oasis Inn. Along with these initiatives, he has been a strong supporter of improving the city’s bike and pedestrian infrastructure, establishing a public bank, creating alternatives to policing, and providing protections for small businesses impacted by pandemic closures. He currently serves as chair of the Government Audit & Oversight Committee, vice chair of the Land Use & Transportation Committee, and a member of the San Francisco County Transportation Authority. Supervisor Preston’s Democratic Socialist policy approach has made him a target of criticism from the wealthy tech community and motivated significant fundraising for more conservative candidates.
Governance and community leadership experience: Supervisor Preston has served in this seat since 2019, when he was elected with 50% of the vote. In 2020, he won reelection by 10 points.
Prior to his election to the Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Preston was an attorney focused on housing law in the Tenderloin. In 2008, he founded Tenants Together, the only statewide tenant organization in California, and has used his influence to advocate for rent control, eviction protections, mental health care, and affordable housing development.
Other background: Supervisor Preston is from New York City, and has lived in San Francisco for over 30 years.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are four candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including incumbent Supervisor Dean Preston, Bilal Mahmood, Allen Jones, and Autumn Looijen.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Supervisor Preston’s campaign has raised $96,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Bilal Mahmood
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Mahmood’s campaign has raised $175,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Allen Jones
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Jones’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county.
Opposing candidate: Autumn Looijen
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Looijen’s campaign has raised $28,000 and is funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California's 13th most populous county. District 5 includes the Tenderloin, Fillmore, Western Addition, Hayes Valley, Lower Pacific Heights, Japantown, Alamo Square, NoPa, and Upper & Lower Haight.
Governance structure: San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
Reelect Supervisor Dean Preston to keep San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Supervisor Preston’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Supervisor Preston has the endorsement of many groups, including California Working Families Party, San Francisco Tenants Union, SF Rising, Democratic Socialists of America, and Evolve California. He has also received the endorsement of many elected leaders, including Sen. Bernie Sanders, Assm. Phil Ting, and four current members of the Board of Supervisors.
Top issues: Housing and affordable development, tenants’ rights, economic growth, transportation, small-business protections, and Medicare for all.
Key initiatives: Supervisor Preston has been a dedicated supporter of housing and tenant protections, including laws to prohibit pandemic evictions, provide $40 million in rent relief, increase the number of crisis-response teams, and establish supportive housing at the Gotham Hotel and Oasis Inn. Along with these initiatives, he has been a strong supporter of improving the city’s bike and pedestrian infrastructure, establishing a public bank, creating alternatives to policing, and providing protections for small businesses impacted by pandemic closures. He currently serves as chair of the Government Audit & Oversight Committee, vice chair of the Land Use & Transportation Committee, and a member of the San Francisco County Transportation Authority. Supervisor Preston’s Democratic Socialist policy approach has made him a target of criticism from the wealthy tech community and motivated significant fundraising for more conservative candidates.
Governance and community leadership experience: Supervisor Preston has served in this seat since 2019, when he was elected with 50% of the vote. In 2020, he won reelection by 10 points.
Prior to his election to the Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Preston was an attorney focused on housing law in the Tenderloin. In 2008, he founded Tenants Together, the only statewide tenant organization in California, and has used his influence to advocate for rent control, eviction protections, mental health care, and affordable housing development.
Other background: Supervisor Preston is from New York City, and has lived in San Francisco for over 30 years.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are four candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including incumbent Supervisor Dean Preston, Bilal Mahmood, Allen Jones, and Autumn Looijen.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Supervisor Preston’s campaign has raised $96,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Bilal Mahmood
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Mahmood’s campaign has raised $175,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Allen Jones
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Jones’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county.
Opposing candidate: Autumn Looijen
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Looijen’s campaign has raised $28,000 and is funded by police, fossil fuel, corporate PAC, or real estate interests.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California's 13th most populous county. District 5 includes the Tenderloin, Fillmore, Western Addition, Hayes Valley, Lower Pacific Heights, Japantown, Alamo Square, NoPa, and Upper & Lower Haight.
Governance structure: San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
San Francisco County, District 7
Reelect Supervisor Myrna Melgar to keep San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Supervisor Myrna Melgar’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco County and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Supervisor Melgar has the endorsement of many groups, including SF League of Conservation Voters, SF Rising Action, SF YIMBY, and California Working Families Party. She has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, State Sen. Scott Wiener, Assm. Phil Ting, and Mayor London Breed. However, Supervisor Melgar has received endorsements from several individuals connected to law enforcement, including San Francisco Sheriff Paul Miyamoto, and three San Francisco Police Commissioners.
Top issues: Public safety, affordable housing and development, public transit, healthcare access, and westside community investment.
Key initiatives: Supervisor Melgar has been a strong supporter of increasing affordable housing density, and has successfully supported several housing projects in her district, made long-term amendments to streamline multifamily housing development over the next decade, worked to reduce the red tape of the building permit process, and allowed conversion of single-family homes to multifamily units. She has also supported a $25 million investment in increased foot patrols and SFPD overtime pay to improve public safety, increased surveillance cameras along commercial streets, and created a retired-officer ambassador program to help fill staffing gaps. Supervisor Melgar has lived on the westside for most of her life and has a deep commitment to the established institutions in her district, which she has demonstrated by working to maintain Laguna Honda Hospital, securing funding for local schools and enrichment programs, and improving car and pedestrian infrastructure. She is chair of the Land Use and Transportation Committee, and vice chair of the San Francisco County Transportation Authority.
Governance and community leadership experience: Supervisor Melgar has served in this seat since 2020, when she was elected with over 53% of the vote.
Prior to her election to the Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Melgar spent the early part of her career in public service as president of the City Planning Commission, vice president of the Building Inspection Commission, and director of Homeownership Programs in the Housing Office during the Newsom Administration. She worked in nonprofit leadership at Jamestown Community Center and Mission Economic Development Agency before entering governmental work. She has a master’s in Urban Planning with a concentration in Housing Development from Columbia University, and is a longtime advocate of housing policy.
Other background: Supervisor Melgar grew up in San Francisco after her family immigrated there from El Salvador. She is a longtime resident of Ingleside Terraces.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are four candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Supervisor Myrna Melgar, Matthew Boschetto, Stephen Martin-Pinto, and Edward Yee.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Supervisor Melgar’s campaign has raised $266,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Matthew Boschetto
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Boschetto’s campaign has raised $356,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Stephen Martin-Pinto
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Martin-Pinto’s campaign has raised $81,000 and not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Edward Yee
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Yee’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California’s 13th most populous county. District 7 includes West Portal, Westwood Park, Forest Hill, Parkmerced, Golden Gate Heights, Inner Sunset, St. Francis Woods, Miraloma, and Monterey Heights.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
Reelect Supervisor Myrna Melgar to keep San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Supervisor Myrna Melgar’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco County and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Supervisor Melgar has the endorsement of many groups, including SF League of Conservation Voters, SF Rising Action, SF YIMBY, and California Working Families Party. She has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, State Sen. Scott Wiener, Assm. Phil Ting, and Mayor London Breed. However, Supervisor Melgar has received endorsements from several individuals connected to law enforcement, including San Francisco Sheriff Paul Miyamoto, and three San Francisco Police Commissioners.
Top issues: Public safety, affordable housing and development, public transit, healthcare access, and westside community investment.
Key initiatives: Supervisor Melgar has been a strong supporter of increasing affordable housing density, and has successfully supported several housing projects in her district, made long-term amendments to streamline multifamily housing development over the next decade, worked to reduce the red tape of the building permit process, and allowed conversion of single-family homes to multifamily units. She has also supported a $25 million investment in increased foot patrols and SFPD overtime pay to improve public safety, increased surveillance cameras along commercial streets, and created a retired-officer ambassador program to help fill staffing gaps. Supervisor Melgar has lived on the westside for most of her life and has a deep commitment to the established institutions in her district, which she has demonstrated by working to maintain Laguna Honda Hospital, securing funding for local schools and enrichment programs, and improving car and pedestrian infrastructure. She is chair of the Land Use and Transportation Committee, and vice chair of the San Francisco County Transportation Authority.
Governance and community leadership experience: Supervisor Melgar has served in this seat since 2020, when she was elected with over 53% of the vote.
Prior to her election to the Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Melgar spent the early part of her career in public service as president of the City Planning Commission, vice president of the Building Inspection Commission, and director of Homeownership Programs in the Housing Office during the Newsom Administration. She worked in nonprofit leadership at Jamestown Community Center and Mission Economic Development Agency before entering governmental work. She has a master’s in Urban Planning with a concentration in Housing Development from Columbia University, and is a longtime advocate of housing policy.
Other background: Supervisor Melgar grew up in San Francisco after her family immigrated there from El Salvador. She is a longtime resident of Ingleside Terraces.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are four candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Supervisor Myrna Melgar, Matthew Boschetto, Stephen Martin-Pinto, and Edward Yee.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Supervisor Melgar’s campaign has raised $266,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Matthew Boschetto
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Boschetto’s campaign has raised $356,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Stephen Martin-Pinto
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Martin-Pinto’s campaign has raised $81,000 and not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Edward Yee
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Yee’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California’s 13th most populous county. District 7 includes West Portal, Westwood Park, Forest Hill, Parkmerced, Golden Gate Heights, Inner Sunset, St. Francis Woods, Miraloma, and Monterey Heights.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
Reelect Supervisor Myrna Melgar to keep San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Supervisor Myrna Melgar’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that she will continue to be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco County and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Supervisor Melgar has the endorsement of many groups, including SF League of Conservation Voters, SF Rising Action, SF YIMBY, and California Working Families Party. She has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, State Sen. Scott Wiener, Assm. Phil Ting, and Mayor London Breed. However, Supervisor Melgar has received endorsements from several individuals connected to law enforcement, including San Francisco Sheriff Paul Miyamoto, and three San Francisco Police Commissioners.
Top issues: Public safety, affordable housing and development, public transit, healthcare access, and westside community investment.
Key initiatives: Supervisor Melgar has been a strong supporter of increasing affordable housing density, and has successfully supported several housing projects in her district, made long-term amendments to streamline multifamily housing development over the next decade, worked to reduce the red tape of the building permit process, and allowed conversion of single-family homes to multifamily units. She has also supported a $25 million investment in increased foot patrols and SFPD overtime pay to improve public safety, increased surveillance cameras along commercial streets, and created a retired-officer ambassador program to help fill staffing gaps. Supervisor Melgar has lived on the westside for most of her life and has a deep commitment to the established institutions in her district, which she has demonstrated by working to maintain Laguna Honda Hospital, securing funding for local schools and enrichment programs, and improving car and pedestrian infrastructure. She is chair of the Land Use and Transportation Committee, and vice chair of the San Francisco County Transportation Authority.
Governance and community leadership experience: Supervisor Melgar has served in this seat since 2020, when she was elected with over 53% of the vote.
Prior to her election to the Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Melgar spent the early part of her career in public service as president of the City Planning Commission, vice president of the Building Inspection Commission, and director of Homeownership Programs in the Housing Office during the Newsom Administration. She worked in nonprofit leadership at Jamestown Community Center and Mission Economic Development Agency before entering governmental work. She has a master’s in Urban Planning with a concentration in Housing Development from Columbia University, and is a longtime advocate of housing policy.
Other background: Supervisor Melgar grew up in San Francisco after her family immigrated there from El Salvador. She is a longtime resident of Ingleside Terraces.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are four candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Supervisor Myrna Melgar, Matthew Boschetto, Stephen Martin-Pinto, and Edward Yee.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Supervisor Melgar’s campaign has raised $266,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Matthew Boschetto
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Boschetto’s campaign has raised $356,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Stephen Martin-Pinto
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Martin-Pinto’s campaign has raised $81,000 and not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Edward Yee
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Yee’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California’s 13th most populous county. District 7 includes West Portal, Westwood Park, Forest Hill, Parkmerced, Golden Gate Heights, Inner Sunset, St. Francis Woods, Miraloma, and Monterey Heights.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
San Francisco County, District 9
San Francisco uses a ranked-choice voting system. We recommend that you vote Jackie Fielder as the first choice and Stephen Jon Torres as second choice for Supervisor to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Endorsements: Jackie Fielder has the endorsement of many groups, including San Francisco Tenants Union, Friends of the Earth Action, California Working Families Party, and San Francisco Rising Action Fund. She has also received the endorsement of some elected leaders, including Supervisor Aaron Peskin, outgoing District 9 Supervisor Hilary Ronen, and Assm. Phil Ting.
Stephen Jon Torres has the endorsement of some groups, including San Francisco Tenants Union, California Working Families Party, and Rose Pak Democratic Club. He has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including outgoing District 9 Supervisor Hilary Ronen, Supervisor Aaron Peskin, and many queer activists.
Key initiatives: Fielder is an activist and a nonprofit leader. She co-founded the San Francisco Public Bank Coalition, and is co-director of the Stop the Money Pipeline movement to hold financial institutions accountable for their role in environmental racism. She has worked to oppose use of force policies in the SFPD, and founded Daybreak Political Action Committee after her failed 2020 state Senate run to support other candidates committed to running corporate-free campaigns. She is a citizen of the Three Affiliated Tribes of North Dakota, protested with her relatives at Standing Rock, and helped found the San Francisco Defund Dakota Access Pipeline Coalition.
Torres is a journalist and community leader in the Castro. He has served as co-chair of the Castro LGBTQ Cultural District, and served on the board of the Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club. He has successfully advocated for increased availability of Narcan, and was a member of the Board of the Drug Policy Alliance of California. As an Entertainment Commissioner for the city and a working bartender in the Castro, he has supported initiatives to assess cost of living and pandemic recovery for nightlife industry workers. His writing has been published in a number of local publications, including the Bay Guardian, 7x7 Magazine, and Bold Italic.
Governance and community leadership experience: Fielder ran for state Senate in 2020, but lost to incumbent Sen. Scott Wiener in the general election by 14 points.
Torres has not run for public office before.
Other background: Fielder is from Long Beach, and lives in Yelamu. She is Latina and Indigenous.
Torres is from Los Angeles, and has lived in San Francisco for over 20 years.
The Race
Primary election: Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are seven candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Jackie Fielder, Stephen Jon Torres, Julian Bermudez, H. Brown, Trevor Chandler, Jaime Guttierez, and Roberto Hernandez.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Fielder’s campaign has raised $178,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Torres’s campaign has raised $23,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Julian Bermudez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Bermudez’s campaign has raised $1,200 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: H. Brown
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Brown’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
Opposing candidate: Trevor Chandler
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Chandler’s campaign has raised $117,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Jaime Guttierez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Guttierez’s campaign has raised $10,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Roberto Hernandez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Hernandez’s campaign has raised $119,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California’s 13th most populous county. District 9 includes the Mission, the Portola, Bernal Heights, and St. Mary’s Park.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
San Francisco uses a ranked-choice voting system. We recommend that you vote Jackie Fielder as the first choice and Stephen Jon Torres as second choice for Supervisor to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Endorsements: Jackie Fielder has the endorsement of many groups, including San Francisco Tenants Union, Friends of the Earth Action, California Working Families Party, and San Francisco Rising Action Fund. She has also received the endorsement of some elected leaders, including Supervisor Aaron Peskin, outgoing District 9 Supervisor Hilary Ronen, and Assm. Phil Ting.
Stephen Jon Torres has the endorsement of some groups, including San Francisco Tenants Union, California Working Families Party, and Rose Pak Democratic Club. He has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including outgoing District 9 Supervisor Hilary Ronen, Supervisor Aaron Peskin, and many queer activists.
Key initiatives: Fielder is an activist and a nonprofit leader. She co-founded the San Francisco Public Bank Coalition, and is co-director of the Stop the Money Pipeline movement to hold financial institutions accountable for their role in environmental racism. She has worked to oppose use of force policies in the SFPD, and founded Daybreak Political Action Committee after her failed 2020 state Senate run to support other candidates committed to running corporate-free campaigns. She is a citizen of the Three Affiliated Tribes of North Dakota, protested with her relatives at Standing Rock, and helped found the San Francisco Defund Dakota Access Pipeline Coalition.
Torres is a journalist and community leader in the Castro. He has served as co-chair of the Castro LGBTQ Cultural District, and served on the board of the Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club. He has successfully advocated for increased availability of Narcan, and was a member of the Board of the Drug Policy Alliance of California. As an Entertainment Commissioner for the city and a working bartender in the Castro, he has supported initiatives to assess cost of living and pandemic recovery for nightlife industry workers. His writing has been published in a number of local publications, including the Bay Guardian, 7x7 Magazine, and Bold Italic.
Governance and community leadership experience: Fielder ran for state Senate in 2020, but lost to incumbent Sen. Scott Wiener in the general election by 14 points.
Torres has not run for public office before.
Other background: Fielder is from Long Beach, and lives in Yelamu. She is Latina and Indigenous.
Torres is from Los Angeles, and has lived in San Francisco for over 20 years.
The Race
Primary election: Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are seven candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Jackie Fielder, Stephen Jon Torres, Julian Bermudez, H. Brown, Trevor Chandler, Jaime Guttierez, and Roberto Hernandez.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Fielder’s campaign has raised $178,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Torres’s campaign has raised $23,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Julian Bermudez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Bermudez’s campaign has raised $1,200 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: H. Brown
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Brown’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
Opposing candidate: Trevor Chandler
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Chandler’s campaign has raised $117,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Jaime Guttierez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Guttierez’s campaign has raised $10,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Roberto Hernandez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Hernandez’s campaign has raised $119,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California’s 13th most populous county. District 9 includes the Mission, the Portola, Bernal Heights, and St. Mary’s Park.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
San Francisco uses a ranked-choice voting system. We recommend that you vote Jackie Fielder as the first choice and Stephen Jon Torres as second choice for Supervisor to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Endorsements: Jackie Fielder has the endorsement of many groups, including San Francisco Tenants Union, Friends of the Earth Action, California Working Families Party, and San Francisco Rising Action Fund. She has also received the endorsement of some elected leaders, including Supervisor Aaron Peskin, outgoing District 9 Supervisor Hilary Ronen, and Assm. Phil Ting.
Stephen Jon Torres has the endorsement of some groups, including San Francisco Tenants Union, California Working Families Party, and Rose Pak Democratic Club. He has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including outgoing District 9 Supervisor Hilary Ronen, Supervisor Aaron Peskin, and many queer activists.
Key initiatives: Fielder is an activist and a nonprofit leader. She co-founded the San Francisco Public Bank Coalition, and is co-director of the Stop the Money Pipeline movement to hold financial institutions accountable for their role in environmental racism. She has worked to oppose use of force policies in the SFPD, and founded Daybreak Political Action Committee after her failed 2020 state Senate run to support other candidates committed to running corporate-free campaigns. She is a citizen of the Three Affiliated Tribes of North Dakota, protested with her relatives at Standing Rock, and helped found the San Francisco Defund Dakota Access Pipeline Coalition.
Torres is a journalist and community leader in the Castro. He has served as co-chair of the Castro LGBTQ Cultural District, and served on the board of the Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club. He has successfully advocated for increased availability of Narcan, and was a member of the Board of the Drug Policy Alliance of California. As an Entertainment Commissioner for the city and a working bartender in the Castro, he has supported initiatives to assess cost of living and pandemic recovery for nightlife industry workers. His writing has been published in a number of local publications, including the Bay Guardian, 7x7 Magazine, and Bold Italic.
Governance and community leadership experience: Fielder ran for state Senate in 2020, but lost to incumbent Sen. Scott Wiener in the general election by 14 points.
Torres has not run for public office before.
Other background: Fielder is from Long Beach, and lives in Yelamu. She is Latina and Indigenous.
Torres is from Los Angeles, and has lived in San Francisco for over 20 years.
The Race
Primary election: Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are seven candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Jackie Fielder, Stephen Jon Torres, Julian Bermudez, H. Brown, Trevor Chandler, Jaime Guttierez, and Roberto Hernandez.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Fielder’s campaign has raised $178,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Torres’s campaign has raised $23,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Julian Bermudez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Bermudez’s campaign has raised $1,200 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: H. Brown
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Brown’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
Opposing candidate: Trevor Chandler
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Chandler’s campaign has raised $117,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Jaime Guttierez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Guttierez’s campaign has raised $10,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Roberto Hernandez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Hernandez’s campaign has raised $119,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California’s 13th most populous county. District 9 includes the Mission, the Portola, Bernal Heights, and St. Mary’s Park.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
San Francisco uses a ranked-choice voting system. We recommend that you vote Jackie Fielder as the first choice and Stephen Jon Torres as second choice for Supervisor to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Endorsements: Jackie Fielder has the endorsement of many groups, including San Francisco Tenants Union, Friends of the Earth Action, California Working Families Party, and San Francisco Rising Action Fund. She has also received the endorsement of some elected leaders, including Supervisor Aaron Peskin, outgoing District 9 Supervisor Hilary Ronen, and Assm. Phil Ting.
Stephen Jon Torres has the endorsement of some groups, including San Francisco Tenants Union, California Working Families Party, and Rose Pak Democratic Club. He has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including outgoing District 9 Supervisor Hilary Ronen, Supervisor Aaron Peskin, and many queer activists.
Key initiatives: Fielder is an activist and a nonprofit leader. She co-founded the San Francisco Public Bank Coalition, and is co-director of the Stop the Money Pipeline movement to hold financial institutions accountable for their role in environmental racism. She has worked to oppose use of force policies in the SFPD, and founded Daybreak Political Action Committee after her failed 2020 state Senate run to support other candidates committed to running corporate-free campaigns. She is a citizen of the Three Affiliated Tribes of North Dakota, protested with her relatives at Standing Rock, and helped found the San Francisco Defund Dakota Access Pipeline Coalition.
Torres is a journalist and community leader in the Castro. He has served as co-chair of the Castro LGBTQ Cultural District, and served on the board of the Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club. He has successfully advocated for increased availability of Narcan, and was a member of the Board of the Drug Policy Alliance of California. As an Entertainment Commissioner for the city and a working bartender in the Castro, he has supported initiatives to assess cost of living and pandemic recovery for nightlife industry workers. His writing has been published in a number of local publications, including the Bay Guardian, 7x7 Magazine, and Bold Italic.
Governance and community leadership experience: Fielder ran for state Senate in 2020, but lost to incumbent Sen. Scott Wiener in the general election by 14 points.
Torres has not run for public office before.
Other background: Fielder is from Long Beach, and lives in Yelamu. She is Latina and Indigenous.
Torres is from Los Angeles, and has lived in San Francisco for over 20 years.
The Race
Primary election: Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are seven candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Jackie Fielder, Stephen Jon Torres, Julian Bermudez, H. Brown, Trevor Chandler, Jaime Guttierez, and Roberto Hernandez.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Fielder’s campaign has raised $178,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Torres’s campaign has raised $23,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Julian Bermudez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Bermudez’s campaign has raised $1,200 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: H. Brown
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Brown’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
Opposing candidate: Trevor Chandler
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Chandler’s campaign has raised $117,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Jaime Guttierez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Guttierez’s campaign has raised $10,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Roberto Hernandez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Hernandez’s campaign has raised $119,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California’s 13th most populous county. District 9 includes the Mission, the Portola, Bernal Heights, and St. Mary’s Park.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
San Francisco uses a ranked-choice voting system. We recommend that you vote Jackie Fielder as the first choice and Stephen Jon Torres as second choice for Supervisor to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Endorsements: Jackie Fielder has the endorsement of many groups, including San Francisco Tenants Union, Friends of the Earth Action, California Working Families Party, and San Francisco Rising Action Fund. She has also received the endorsement of some elected leaders, including Supervisor Aaron Peskin, outgoing District 9 Supervisor Hilary Ronen, and Assm. Phil Ting.
Stephen Jon Torres has the endorsement of some groups, including San Francisco Tenants Union, California Working Families Party, and Rose Pak Democratic Club. He has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including outgoing District 9 Supervisor Hilary Ronen, Supervisor Aaron Peskin, and many queer activists.
Key initiatives: Fielder is an activist and a nonprofit leader. She co-founded the San Francisco Public Bank Coalition, and is co-director of the Stop the Money Pipeline movement to hold financial institutions accountable for their role in environmental racism. She has worked to oppose use of force policies in the SFPD, and founded Daybreak Political Action Committee after her failed 2020 state Senate run to support other candidates committed to running corporate-free campaigns. She is a citizen of the Three Affiliated Tribes of North Dakota, protested with her relatives at Standing Rock, and helped found the San Francisco Defund Dakota Access Pipeline Coalition.
Torres is a journalist and community leader in the Castro. He has served as co-chair of the Castro LGBTQ Cultural District, and served on the board of the Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club. He has successfully advocated for increased availability of Narcan, and was a member of the Board of the Drug Policy Alliance of California. As an Entertainment Commissioner for the city and a working bartender in the Castro, he has supported initiatives to assess cost of living and pandemic recovery for nightlife industry workers. His writing has been published in a number of local publications, including the Bay Guardian, 7x7 Magazine, and Bold Italic.
Governance and community leadership experience: Fielder ran for state Senate in 2020, but lost to incumbent Sen. Scott Wiener in the general election by 14 points.
Torres has not run for public office before.
Other background: Fielder is from Long Beach, and lives in Yelamu. She is Latina and Indigenous.
Torres is from Los Angeles, and has lived in San Francisco for over 20 years.
The Race
Primary election: Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are seven candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Jackie Fielder, Stephen Jon Torres, Julian Bermudez, H. Brown, Trevor Chandler, Jaime Guttierez, and Roberto Hernandez.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Fielder’s campaign has raised $178,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Torres’s campaign has raised $23,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Julian Bermudez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Bermudez’s campaign has raised $1,200 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: H. Brown
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Brown’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
Opposing candidate: Trevor Chandler
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Chandler’s campaign has raised $117,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Jaime Guttierez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Guttierez’s campaign has raised $10,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Roberto Hernandez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Hernandez’s campaign has raised $119,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California’s 13th most populous county. District 9 includes the Mission, the Portola, Bernal Heights, and St. Mary’s Park.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
San Francisco uses a ranked-choice voting system. We recommend that you vote Jackie Fielder as the first choice and Stephen Jon Torres as second choice for Supervisor to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Endorsements: Jackie Fielder has the endorsement of many groups, including San Francisco Tenants Union, Friends of the Earth Action, California Working Families Party, and San Francisco Rising Action Fund. She has also received the endorsement of some elected leaders, including Supervisor Aaron Peskin, outgoing District 9 Supervisor Hilary Ronen, and Assm. Phil Ting.
Stephen Jon Torres has the endorsement of some groups, including San Francisco Tenants Union, California Working Families Party, and Rose Pak Democratic Club. He has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including outgoing District 9 Supervisor Hilary Ronen, Supervisor Aaron Peskin, and many queer activists.
Key initiatives: Fielder is an activist and a nonprofit leader. She co-founded the San Francisco Public Bank Coalition, and is co-director of the Stop the Money Pipeline movement to hold financial institutions accountable for their role in environmental racism. She has worked to oppose use of force policies in the SFPD, and founded Daybreak Political Action Committee after her failed 2020 state Senate run to support other candidates committed to running corporate-free campaigns. She is a citizen of the Three Affiliated Tribes of North Dakota, protested with her relatives at Standing Rock, and helped found the San Francisco Defund Dakota Access Pipeline Coalition.
Torres is a journalist and community leader in the Castro. He has served as co-chair of the Castro LGBTQ Cultural District, and served on the board of the Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club. He has successfully advocated for increased availability of Narcan, and was a member of the Board of the Drug Policy Alliance of California. As an Entertainment Commissioner for the city and a working bartender in the Castro, he has supported initiatives to assess cost of living and pandemic recovery for nightlife industry workers. His writing has been published in a number of local publications, including the Bay Guardian, 7x7 Magazine, and Bold Italic.
Governance and community leadership experience: Fielder ran for state Senate in 2020, but lost to incumbent Sen. Scott Wiener in the general election by 14 points.
Torres has not run for public office before.
Other background: Fielder is from Long Beach, and lives in Yelamu. She is Latina and Indigenous.
Torres is from Los Angeles, and has lived in San Francisco for over 20 years.
The Race
Primary election: Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are seven candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Jackie Fielder, Stephen Jon Torres, Julian Bermudez, H. Brown, Trevor Chandler, Jaime Guttierez, and Roberto Hernandez.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Fielder’s campaign has raised $178,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Torres’s campaign has raised $23,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Julian Bermudez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Bermudez’s campaign has raised $1,200 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: H. Brown
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Brown’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
Opposing candidate: Trevor Chandler
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Chandler’s campaign has raised $117,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Jaime Guttierez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Guttierez’s campaign has raised $10,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Roberto Hernandez
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Hernandez’s campaign has raised $119,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California’s 13th most populous county. District 9 includes the Mission, the Portola, Bernal Heights, and St. Mary’s Park.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
San Francisco County, District 11
San Francisco uses a ranked-choice voting system. We recommend that you vote Chyanne Chen as the first choice and Ernest Jones as second choice for Supervisor to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Endorsements: Chyanne Chen has the endorsement of some groups, including California Working Families Party, San Francisco Rising Action Fund, Community Tenants Association, San Francisco Tenants Union, and several labor unions. She has also received the endorsement of many local leaders, including Supervisor Aaron Peskin, Supervisor Connie Chan, Supervisor Myrna Melgar, and Assm. Phil Ting.
Ernest Jones has the endorsement of some groups, including Bay Rising Action, League of Conservation Voters, San Francisco YIMBY, San Francisco Tenants Union, and many labor organizations. He has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including Assm. Matt Haney, former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown Jr., Supervisor Aaron Peskin, Supervisor Dean Preston, and Supervisor Myrna Melgar. He has also received an endorsement from San Francisco Sheriff Paul Miyamoto.
Key initiatives: Chen is a community advocate, and spent 13 years as a labor organizer for SEIU. She successfully worked on initiatives to improve care and health programs, inflation-based pay increases, and funding for career advancement training in the healthcare industry. She is also a founding member and Executive leader for United Chinese Americans, and has worked to level the playing field for immigrants, and encourage cross-racial solidarity across communities. During the COVID-19 pandemic, she worked on mutual aid initiatives, and local resources to support ongoing collaboration among neighbors. She is currently pursuing a doctoral degree in education.
Jones is a community leader and policy advocate. He has worked for San Francisco Unified School District where he supported administrative data management, and Bernal Heights Neighborhood Center and Bernal Heights Housing Corporation where he worked on affordable housing and cultural equity initiatives. He is a founding partner of the City Eats, a nonprofit that distributes meals and hosts community events for less-fortunate residents of the city. Jones has also worked in city leadership, with time spent as a legislative aide with the City and County of San Francisco.
Governance and community leadership experience: Chen has not run for public office before.
Jones has not run for public office before
Other background: Chen is from China, and immigrated to San Francisco 25 years ago.
Jones is a fourth-generation San Franciscan.
The Race
Primary election: Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are seven candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Chyanne Chen, Ernest Jones, Adlah Chisti, Oscar Flores, Michael Lai, Roger Marenco, and Jose Morales.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Chen’s campaign has raised $101,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Jones’s campaign has raised $101,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Adlah Chisti
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Chisti’s campaign has raised $18,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Oscar Flores
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Flores’s campaign has raised $1,200 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Michael Lai
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Lai’s campaign has raised $153,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Roger Marenco
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Marenco’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
Opposing candidate: Jose Morales
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Morales’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California’s 13th most populous county. District 11 includes Excelsior District, Outer Mission, Ocean View, and Crocker-Amazon.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
San Francisco uses a ranked-choice voting system. We recommend that you vote Chyanne Chen as the first choice and Ernest Jones as second choice for Supervisor to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Endorsements: Chyanne Chen has the endorsement of some groups, including California Working Families Party, San Francisco Rising Action Fund, Community Tenants Association, San Francisco Tenants Union, and several labor unions. She has also received the endorsement of many local leaders, including Supervisor Aaron Peskin, Supervisor Connie Chan, Supervisor Myrna Melgar, and Assm. Phil Ting.
Ernest Jones has the endorsement of some groups, including Bay Rising Action, League of Conservation Voters, San Francisco YIMBY, San Francisco Tenants Union, and many labor organizations. He has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including Assm. Matt Haney, former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown Jr., Supervisor Aaron Peskin, Supervisor Dean Preston, and Supervisor Myrna Melgar. He has also received an endorsement from San Francisco Sheriff Paul Miyamoto.
Key initiatives: Chen is a community advocate, and spent 13 years as a labor organizer for SEIU. She successfully worked on initiatives to improve care and health programs, inflation-based pay increases, and funding for career advancement training in the healthcare industry. She is also a founding member and Executive leader for United Chinese Americans, and has worked to level the playing field for immigrants, and encourage cross-racial solidarity across communities. During the COVID-19 pandemic, she worked on mutual aid initiatives, and local resources to support ongoing collaboration among neighbors. She is currently pursuing a doctoral degree in education.
Jones is a community leader and policy advocate. He has worked for San Francisco Unified School District where he supported administrative data management, and Bernal Heights Neighborhood Center and Bernal Heights Housing Corporation where he worked on affordable housing and cultural equity initiatives. He is a founding partner of the City Eats, a nonprofit that distributes meals and hosts community events for less-fortunate residents of the city. Jones has also worked in city leadership, with time spent as a legislative aide with the City and County of San Francisco.
Governance and community leadership experience: Chen has not run for public office before.
Jones has not run for public office before
Other background: Chen is from China, and immigrated to San Francisco 25 years ago.
Jones is a fourth-generation San Franciscan.
The Race
Primary election: Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are seven candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Chyanne Chen, Ernest Jones, Adlah Chisti, Oscar Flores, Michael Lai, Roger Marenco, and Jose Morales.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Chen’s campaign has raised $101,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Jones’s campaign has raised $101,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Adlah Chisti
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Chisti’s campaign has raised $18,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Oscar Flores
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Flores’s campaign has raised $1,200 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Michael Lai
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Lai’s campaign has raised $153,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Roger Marenco
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Marenco’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
Opposing candidate: Jose Morales
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Morales’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California’s 13th most populous county. District 11 includes Excelsior District, Outer Mission, Ocean View, and Crocker-Amazon.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
San Francisco uses a ranked-choice voting system. We recommend that you vote Chyanne Chen as the first choice and Ernest Jones as second choice for Supervisor to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Endorsements: Chyanne Chen has the endorsement of some groups, including California Working Families Party, San Francisco Rising Action Fund, Community Tenants Association, San Francisco Tenants Union, and several labor unions. She has also received the endorsement of many local leaders, including Supervisor Aaron Peskin, Supervisor Connie Chan, Supervisor Myrna Melgar, and Assm. Phil Ting.
Ernest Jones has the endorsement of some groups, including Bay Rising Action, League of Conservation Voters, San Francisco YIMBY, San Francisco Tenants Union, and many labor organizations. He has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including Assm. Matt Haney, former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown Jr., Supervisor Aaron Peskin, Supervisor Dean Preston, and Supervisor Myrna Melgar. He has also received an endorsement from San Francisco Sheriff Paul Miyamoto.
Key initiatives: Chen is a community advocate, and spent 13 years as a labor organizer for SEIU. She successfully worked on initiatives to improve care and health programs, inflation-based pay increases, and funding for career advancement training in the healthcare industry. She is also a founding member and Executive leader for United Chinese Americans, and has worked to level the playing field for immigrants, and encourage cross-racial solidarity across communities. During the COVID-19 pandemic, she worked on mutual aid initiatives, and local resources to support ongoing collaboration among neighbors. She is currently pursuing a doctoral degree in education.
Jones is a community leader and policy advocate. He has worked for San Francisco Unified School District where he supported administrative data management, and Bernal Heights Neighborhood Center and Bernal Heights Housing Corporation where he worked on affordable housing and cultural equity initiatives. He is a founding partner of the City Eats, a nonprofit that distributes meals and hosts community events for less-fortunate residents of the city. Jones has also worked in city leadership, with time spent as a legislative aide with the City and County of San Francisco.
Governance and community leadership experience: Chen has not run for public office before.
Jones has not run for public office before
Other background: Chen is from China, and immigrated to San Francisco 25 years ago.
Jones is a fourth-generation San Franciscan.
The Race
Primary election: Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are seven candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Chyanne Chen, Ernest Jones, Adlah Chisti, Oscar Flores, Michael Lai, Roger Marenco, and Jose Morales.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Chen’s campaign has raised $101,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Jones’s campaign has raised $101,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Adlah Chisti
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Chisti’s campaign has raised $18,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Oscar Flores
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Flores’s campaign has raised $1,200 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Michael Lai
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Lai’s campaign has raised $153,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Roger Marenco
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Marenco’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
Opposing candidate: Jose Morales
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Morales’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California’s 13th most populous county. District 11 includes Excelsior District, Outer Mission, Ocean View, and Crocker-Amazon.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
San Francisco uses a ranked-choice voting system. We recommend that you vote Chyanne Chen as the first choice and Ernest Jones as second choice for Supervisor to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Endorsements: Chyanne Chen has the endorsement of some groups, including California Working Families Party, San Francisco Rising Action Fund, Community Tenants Association, San Francisco Tenants Union, and several labor unions. She has also received the endorsement of many local leaders, including Supervisor Aaron Peskin, Supervisor Connie Chan, Supervisor Myrna Melgar, and Assm. Phil Ting.
Ernest Jones has the endorsement of some groups, including Bay Rising Action, League of Conservation Voters, San Francisco YIMBY, San Francisco Tenants Union, and many labor organizations. He has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including Assm. Matt Haney, former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown Jr., Supervisor Aaron Peskin, Supervisor Dean Preston, and Supervisor Myrna Melgar. He has also received an endorsement from San Francisco Sheriff Paul Miyamoto.
Key initiatives: Chen is a community advocate, and spent 13 years as a labor organizer for SEIU. She successfully worked on initiatives to improve care and health programs, inflation-based pay increases, and funding for career advancement training in the healthcare industry. She is also a founding member and Executive leader for United Chinese Americans, and has worked to level the playing field for immigrants, and encourage cross-racial solidarity across communities. During the COVID-19 pandemic, she worked on mutual aid initiatives, and local resources to support ongoing collaboration among neighbors. She is currently pursuing a doctoral degree in education.
Jones is a community leader and policy advocate. He has worked for San Francisco Unified School District where he supported administrative data management, and Bernal Heights Neighborhood Center and Bernal Heights Housing Corporation where he worked on affordable housing and cultural equity initiatives. He is a founding partner of the City Eats, a nonprofit that distributes meals and hosts community events for less-fortunate residents of the city. Jones has also worked in city leadership, with time spent as a legislative aide with the City and County of San Francisco.
Governance and community leadership experience: Chen has not run for public office before.
Jones has not run for public office before
Other background: Chen is from China, and immigrated to San Francisco 25 years ago.
Jones is a fourth-generation San Franciscan.
The Race
Primary election: Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are seven candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Chyanne Chen, Ernest Jones, Adlah Chisti, Oscar Flores, Michael Lai, Roger Marenco, and Jose Morales.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Chen’s campaign has raised $101,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Jones’s campaign has raised $101,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Adlah Chisti
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Chisti’s campaign has raised $18,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Oscar Flores
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Flores’s campaign has raised $1,200 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Michael Lai
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Lai’s campaign has raised $153,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Roger Marenco
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Marenco’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
Opposing candidate: Jose Morales
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Morales’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California’s 13th most populous county. District 11 includes Excelsior District, Outer Mission, Ocean View, and Crocker-Amazon.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
San Francisco uses a ranked-choice voting system. We recommend that you vote Chyanne Chen as the first choice and Ernest Jones as second choice for Supervisor to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Endorsements: Chyanne Chen has the endorsement of some groups, including California Working Families Party, San Francisco Rising Action Fund, Community Tenants Association, San Francisco Tenants Union, and several labor unions. She has also received the endorsement of many local leaders, including Supervisor Aaron Peskin, Supervisor Connie Chan, Supervisor Myrna Melgar, and Assm. Phil Ting.
Ernest Jones has the endorsement of some groups, including Bay Rising Action, League of Conservation Voters, San Francisco YIMBY, San Francisco Tenants Union, and many labor organizations. He has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including Assm. Matt Haney, former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown Jr., Supervisor Aaron Peskin, Supervisor Dean Preston, and Supervisor Myrna Melgar. He has also received an endorsement from San Francisco Sheriff Paul Miyamoto.
Key initiatives: Chen is a community advocate, and spent 13 years as a labor organizer for SEIU. She successfully worked on initiatives to improve care and health programs, inflation-based pay increases, and funding for career advancement training in the healthcare industry. She is also a founding member and Executive leader for United Chinese Americans, and has worked to level the playing field for immigrants, and encourage cross-racial solidarity across communities. During the COVID-19 pandemic, she worked on mutual aid initiatives, and local resources to support ongoing collaboration among neighbors. She is currently pursuing a doctoral degree in education.
Jones is a community leader and policy advocate. He has worked for San Francisco Unified School District where he supported administrative data management, and Bernal Heights Neighborhood Center and Bernal Heights Housing Corporation where he worked on affordable housing and cultural equity initiatives. He is a founding partner of the City Eats, a nonprofit that distributes meals and hosts community events for less-fortunate residents of the city. Jones has also worked in city leadership, with time spent as a legislative aide with the City and County of San Francisco.
Governance and community leadership experience: Chen has not run for public office before.
Jones has not run for public office before
Other background: Chen is from China, and immigrated to San Francisco 25 years ago.
Jones is a fourth-generation San Franciscan.
The Race
Primary election: Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are seven candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Chyanne Chen, Ernest Jones, Adlah Chisti, Oscar Flores, Michael Lai, Roger Marenco, and Jose Morales.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Chen’s campaign has raised $101,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Jones’s campaign has raised $101,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Adlah Chisti
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Chisti’s campaign has raised $18,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Oscar Flores
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Flores’s campaign has raised $1,200 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Michael Lai
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Lai’s campaign has raised $153,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Roger Marenco
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Marenco’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
Opposing candidate: Jose Morales
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Morales’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California’s 13th most populous county. District 11 includes Excelsior District, Outer Mission, Ocean View, and Crocker-Amazon.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
San Francisco uses a ranked-choice voting system. We recommend that you vote Chyanne Chen as the first choice and Ernest Jones as second choice for Supervisor to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Endorsements: Chyanne Chen has the endorsement of some groups, including California Working Families Party, San Francisco Rising Action Fund, Community Tenants Association, San Francisco Tenants Union, and several labor unions. She has also received the endorsement of many local leaders, including Supervisor Aaron Peskin, Supervisor Connie Chan, Supervisor Myrna Melgar, and Assm. Phil Ting.
Ernest Jones has the endorsement of some groups, including Bay Rising Action, League of Conservation Voters, San Francisco YIMBY, San Francisco Tenants Union, and many labor organizations. He has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including Assm. Matt Haney, former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown Jr., Supervisor Aaron Peskin, Supervisor Dean Preston, and Supervisor Myrna Melgar. He has also received an endorsement from San Francisco Sheriff Paul Miyamoto.
Key initiatives: Chen is a community advocate, and spent 13 years as a labor organizer for SEIU. She successfully worked on initiatives to improve care and health programs, inflation-based pay increases, and funding for career advancement training in the healthcare industry. She is also a founding member and Executive leader for United Chinese Americans, and has worked to level the playing field for immigrants, and encourage cross-racial solidarity across communities. During the COVID-19 pandemic, she worked on mutual aid initiatives, and local resources to support ongoing collaboration among neighbors. She is currently pursuing a doctoral degree in education.
Jones is a community leader and policy advocate. He has worked for San Francisco Unified School District where he supported administrative data management, and Bernal Heights Neighborhood Center and Bernal Heights Housing Corporation where he worked on affordable housing and cultural equity initiatives. He is a founding partner of the City Eats, a nonprofit that distributes meals and hosts community events for less-fortunate residents of the city. Jones has also worked in city leadership, with time spent as a legislative aide with the City and County of San Francisco.
Governance and community leadership experience: Chen has not run for public office before.
Jones has not run for public office before
Other background: Chen is from China, and immigrated to San Francisco 25 years ago.
Jones is a fourth-generation San Franciscan.
The Race
Primary election: Primary election results: There was no primary for this race. There are seven candidates running in the nonpartisan November general election, including Chyanne Chen, Ernest Jones, Adlah Chisti, Oscar Flores, Michael Lai, Roger Marenco, and Jose Morales.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Chen’s campaign has raised $101,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Jones’s campaign has raised $101,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Adlah Chisti
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Chisti’s campaign has raised $18,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Oscar Flores
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Flores’s campaign has raised $1,200 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Michael Lai
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Lai’s campaign has raised $153,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: Roger Marenco
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Marenco’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
Opposing candidate: Jose Morales
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Morales’s campaign has not filed any campaign fundraising receipts with the county as of September 2024.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California’s 13th most populous county. District 11 includes Excelsior District, Outer Mission, Ocean View, and Crocker-Amazon.
Governance structure: San Francisco's Board of Supervisors oversees the needs of 875,000 people and manages an estimated budget of $14 billion annually. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 6% Black. According to the County Charter, San Francisco County is governed by an 11-member Board of Supervisors.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California is governed by a five-person Board of Supervisors, although San Francisco maintains an 11-member Board. A Board of Supervisors has legislative and executive power to manage county services and resources, including courts, jails, public health, and public lands. They also have quasi-judicial powers, which gives them the right to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and make decisions in a manner similar to judicial courts. Laws passed by Boards of Supervisors are generally called ordinances. Because counties include both incorporated cities which are administered by their own city councils and unincorporated areas which are directly administered by the county, ordinances may or may not apply in different areas of the county. Supervisors are typically limited to 3 terms, or 12 years in office total.
Statewide Ballot Measures
Proposition 2 is a $10 billion bond measure to fund repairs and facilities upgrades for public K–12 buildings and community colleges within the state. Based on our analysis, there are distinct perspectives on the initiative. We recommend that you choose the position that best aligns to your values on this issue.
Proposition 2 aims to replenish the funds needed to continue ongoing building updates in public-education buildings, many of which have stalled since funds from the last bond measure in 2016 ran out. This measure will distribute funds across two buckets of public education: $8.5 billion for K–12 institutions and $1.5 billion for community colleges. The proposition dictates a model for fund distribution that would require local districts to raise 35% to 40% of the project costs through a local bond or other financing before requesting a match from the state. The exact match requirement depends on a formula that includes factors such as the socioeconomic status of students, the wealth of the district, the size of the district, and other considerations. Districts can apply for matching funds to be used for renovation or new construction projects, with an intent to ensure that public-education structures provide all learners with safe environmental conditions. A similar bond measure for $15 billion failed in 2020 after receiving only 47% of the vote. After much discussion in the state legislature, Proposition 2 requests that a simple majority of voters pass a smaller bond measure to renew this funding stream for public-school facility maintenance and upkeep.
Equity and Proposition 2:
- Proposition 2 was placed on the ballot by the state legislature as a result of passing id=202320240AB247" target="blank">AB 247 (Muratsuchi). Over 30 allied equity and community-based organizations and impacted school districts opposed AB 247, arguing that the matching formula and first-come first-served funding process favors better-resourced districts. To their point, studies have shown that the matching fund formula has delivered four times as much in state bond funds to wealthy districts as low-wealth districts over decades.
What voting YES on Proposition 2 means:
- Research indicates that student learning is boosted when education facilities are modernized, climate-controlled, and have updated electrical infrastructure. Voting YES on Proposition 2 will provide a meaningful funding stream to allow more students to have access to technology and classroom environments that will improve learning outcomes. Yet, due to the equity concerns identified above, it is not clear whether this funding will reach students who need it the most.
- Due to delays in repair and renovation, many districts have resorted to repurposing gymnasiums as cafeterias, and using auxiliary classrooms. Recent data shows that over one third of California students are enrolled in a school that doesn’t meet minimum facility standards. These conditions can diminish student access to technology, adequate learning space, and physical education classes. Voting YES on Proposition 2 will provide more districts with the resources they need to expand facilities and ensure comprehensive learning opportunities for students.
What voting NO on Proposition 2 means:
- If Prop 2 passes, there likely will not be another school-funding bond opportunity for 5–10 years. An alternative to voting yes for this bond would be to support education equity advocates in pursuing legislative and legal avenues to make the funding and distribution rules more equitable and serve the highest-need school districts.
Top supporters of Proposition 2:
- Proposition 2 has received support from many school districts in the state, including the nation’s second-largest public district, Los Angeles Unified School District, which has an enrollment of over 660,000 students. It has also been popular with education administrators and leaders, and has earned the support of the Association of California School Administrators, and the California School Boards Association.
- The powerful education advocacy group Coalition for Adequate School Housing has also provided its support to Proposition 2.
Top opponents of Proposition 2:
- Proposition 2 is opposed by the anti-tax Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.
Proposition 2 is a $10 billion bond measure to fund repairs and facilities upgrades for public K–12 buildings and community colleges within the state. Based on our analysis, there are distinct perspectives on the initiative. We recommend that you choose the position that best aligns to your values on this issue.
Proposition 2 aims to replenish the funds needed to continue ongoing building updates in public-education buildings, many of which have stalled since funds from the last bond measure in 2016 ran out. This measure will distribute funds across two buckets of public education: $8.5 billion for K–12 institutions and $1.5 billion for community colleges. The proposition dictates a model for fund distribution that would require local districts to raise 35% to 40% of the project costs through a local bond or other financing before requesting a match from the state. The exact match requirement depends on a formula that includes factors such as the socioeconomic status of students, the wealth of the district, the size of the district, and other considerations. Districts can apply for matching funds to be used for renovation or new construction projects, with an intent to ensure that public-education structures provide all learners with safe environmental conditions. A similar bond measure for $15 billion failed in 2020 after receiving only 47% of the vote. After much discussion in the state legislature, Proposition 2 requests that a simple majority of voters pass a smaller bond measure to renew this funding stream for public-school facility maintenance and upkeep.
Equity and Proposition 2:
- Proposition 2 was placed on the ballot by the state legislature as a result of passing id=202320240AB247" target="blank">AB 247 (Muratsuchi). Over 30 allied equity and community-based organizations and impacted school districts opposed AB 247, arguing that the matching formula and first-come first-served funding process favors better-resourced districts. To their point, studies have shown that the matching fund formula has delivered four times as much in state bond funds to wealthy districts as low-wealth districts over decades.
What voting YES on Proposition 2 means:
- Research indicates that student learning is boosted when education facilities are modernized, climate-controlled, and have updated electrical infrastructure. Voting YES on Proposition 2 will provide a meaningful funding stream to allow more students to have access to technology and classroom environments that will improve learning outcomes. Yet, due to the equity concerns identified above, it is not clear whether this funding will reach students who need it the most.
- Due to delays in repair and renovation, many districts have resorted to repurposing gymnasiums as cafeterias, and using auxiliary classrooms. Recent data shows that over one third of California students are enrolled in a school that doesn’t meet minimum facility standards. These conditions can diminish student access to technology, adequate learning space, and physical education classes. Voting YES on Proposition 2 will provide more districts with the resources they need to expand facilities and ensure comprehensive learning opportunities for students.
What voting NO on Proposition 2 means:
- If Prop 2 passes, there likely will not be another school-funding bond opportunity for 5–10 years. An alternative to voting yes for this bond would be to support education equity advocates in pursuing legislative and legal avenues to make the funding and distribution rules more equitable and serve the highest-need school districts.
Top supporters of Proposition 2:
- Proposition 2 has received support from many school districts in the state, including the nation’s second-largest public district, Los Angeles Unified School District, which has an enrollment of over 660,000 students. It has also been popular with education administrators and leaders, and has earned the support of the Association of California School Administrators, and the California School Boards Association.
- The powerful education advocacy group Coalition for Adequate School Housing has also provided its support to Proposition 2.
Top opponents of Proposition 2:
- Proposition 2 is opposed by the anti-tax Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.
Vote YES on Proposition 3 to protect marriage equality in the state constitution.
In 2008, California voters passed Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment that defined the only valid and recognized marriages in the state as those between a man and a woman, with 52% of the vote. Although Proposition 8 remains in the state constitution, it was overturned by the state Supreme Court in a decision that went into effect in 2013, and was further overruled by the federal Supreme Court’s 2015 when same-sex marriage was legalized nationally in the Obergefell v. Hodges decision. Proposition 3 would formally repeal Proposition 8, remove the constitutional language indicating that marriage is between a man and a woman, and affirm the fundamental right to marry.
Why voting YES on Proposition 3 matters:
- While marriage equality is protected nationally, LGBTQIA+ communities continue to be targeted by discriminatory legislation across the country. A YES vote would reaffirm California’s commitment to protecting the rights of these communities.
- The Supreme Court’s current right-wing majority has vocalized their interest in overturning the Obergefell v. Hodges decision and recently voted in favor of a website designer’s refusal to create online wedding pages for LGBTQIA+ couples because she claimed it infringed on her right to free speech. A YES vote would ensure that marriage equality is protected in California even if the Supreme Court eventually overturns the national legalization.
- To date, Nevada is the only state that has amended its state constitution to create protection for marriage equality. A YES vote will make California a progressive leader on this issue and create significant protections for the 2.7 million state residents who identify as LGBTQIA+.
Top supporters of Proposition 3:
- This proposition originated as a bill, ACA 5, which was authored by State Senator Scott Wiener and Assemblymember Evan Low, passed both chambers of the legislature with bipartisan support, and has received vocal support from Gov. Gavin Newsom and several other elected officials.
- Many LGBTQIA+ and progressive groups support this constitutional amendment, including ACLU California Action, Courage California, Equality California, Human Rights Campaign, National Center for Lesbian Rights, and Reproductive Freedom for All California.
Top opponents of Proposition 3:
- California Capitol Connection, a Baptist lobbying group, leads the opposition to ACA 5 and argues that the Bible defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
- The opposition has also been supported by other groups with religious affiliations, including California Family Council, Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee, Freedom in Action, and Real Impact.
- Notably, Proposition 3 has not encountered resistance from many of the groups that worked tirelessly to pass the discriminatory Proposition 8 sixteen years ago. Prop 8 was supported by various religious groups, including the Roman Catholic Church, Knights of Columbus, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the San Diego branch of the Church of Scientology. These groups have not issued a stance or made significant financial contributions to deter Proposition 3.
Vote YES on Proposition 3 to protect marriage equality in the state constitution.
In 2008, California voters passed Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment that defined the only valid and recognized marriages in the state as those between a man and a woman, with 52% of the vote. Although Proposition 8 remains in the state constitution, it was overturned by the state Supreme Court in a decision that went into effect in 2013, and was further overruled by the federal Supreme Court’s 2015 when same-sex marriage was legalized nationally in the Obergefell v. Hodges decision. Proposition 3 would formally repeal Proposition 8, remove the constitutional language indicating that marriage is between a man and a woman, and affirm the fundamental right to marry.
Why voting YES on Proposition 3 matters:
- While marriage equality is protected nationally, LGBTQIA+ communities continue to be targeted by discriminatory legislation across the country. A YES vote would reaffirm California’s commitment to protecting the rights of these communities.
- The Supreme Court’s current right-wing majority has vocalized their interest in overturning the Obergefell v. Hodges decision and recently voted in favor of a website designer’s refusal to create online wedding pages for LGBTQIA+ couples because she claimed it infringed on her right to free speech. A YES vote would ensure that marriage equality is protected in California even if the Supreme Court eventually overturns the national legalization.
- To date, Nevada is the only state that has amended its state constitution to create protection for marriage equality. A YES vote will make California a progressive leader on this issue and create significant protections for the 2.7 million state residents who identify as LGBTQIA+.
Top supporters of Proposition 3:
- This proposition originated as a bill, ACA 5, which was authored by State Senator Scott Wiener and Assemblymember Evan Low, passed both chambers of the legislature with bipartisan support, and has received vocal support from Gov. Gavin Newsom and several other elected officials.
- Many LGBTQIA+ and progressive groups support this constitutional amendment, including ACLU California Action, Courage California, Equality California, Human Rights Campaign, National Center for Lesbian Rights, and Reproductive Freedom for All California.
Top opponents of Proposition 3:
- California Capitol Connection, a Baptist lobbying group, leads the opposition to ACA 5 and argues that the Bible defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
- The opposition has also been supported by other groups with religious affiliations, including California Family Council, Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee, Freedom in Action, and Real Impact.
- Notably, Proposition 3 has not encountered resistance from many of the groups that worked tirelessly to pass the discriminatory Proposition 8 sixteen years ago. Prop 8 was supported by various religious groups, including the Roman Catholic Church, Knights of Columbus, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the San Diego branch of the Church of Scientology. These groups have not issued a stance or made significant financial contributions to deter Proposition 3.
Vote YES on Proposition 4 to increase funding for critical climate protections and environmental infrastructure projects.
In 2022, Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration made a commitment to spend $54 billion on climate protections, some of which were cut to balance the state’s budget. Proposition 4, the Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparedness, and Clean Air Bond Act, would allow the state to borrow $10 billion to be urgently allocated across a variety of climate projects and reimbursed by taxpayers through a bond. The bill outlines allocations for these funds that include $3.8 billion for safe drinking and groundwater projects, $1.5 billion for wildfire protections, $1.2 billion for coastal infrastructure efforts, $1.2 billion to protect biodiversity, and $450 million for extreme heat mitigation. With a focus on water, wildfire, and the coast, this funding is designed to create present-day solutions that will stop or reverse existing climate challenges and mitigate the need for more expensive projects in the future.
Why voting YES on Proposition 4 matters:
- Proposition 4 mandates that 40% of funding must benefit disadvantaged communities, which it defines as areas where the median household income is less than 80% of the region’s average. Voting YES will ensure that the communities most negatively impacted by environmental disinvestment will benefit from these climate projects.
- Along with providing benefits for water, wildfire, and coastal areas, Proposition 4 will also allocate funds to address wildlife habitat preservation, build public parks, increase sustainable farming operations, and fight air pollution. Voting YES will provide for these initiatives for wide-ranging community benefits across the state.
- An analysis from the California Natural Resources Agency indicates that without action today, the state’s climate-related expenses could rise to $113 billion annually by 2050. Voting YES on Proposition 4 will allow the state to take immediate action to establish more protections and adaptability to avert high annual expenses in the coming decades.
Top supporters of Proposition 4:
- Proposition 4 has the support of many environmental, labor, and justice groups, including Environmental Defense Fund, California Coastal Protection Network, California Water Impact Network, and WateReuse California.
- SB867, which moved Proposition 4 forward to the ballot, was introduced in February 2023 and authored by Sen. Ben Allen, Sen. Josh Becker, Assm. Eduardo Garcia, Sen. Lena Gonzalez, Sen. Monique Limón, Sen. Anthony Portatino, Sen. Henry Stern, and Assm. Lori Wilson. It received over 82% support in final floor votes in both the Assembly and the Senate.
Top opposition to Proposition 4:
- Proposition 4 has been publicly opposed by Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, which argues that repayment of the bond with interest will result in an overall taxpayer cost in excess of $19 billion over 30 years. They argue that asking future generations to shoulder a financial burden they did not have the opportunity to vote on directly is unjust, though the prevailing analysis is that inaction will cost the state more money. Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association generally opposes raising public revenue to pay for critical infrastructure, programs, and services, including bonds that have been popular with voters.
Vote YES on Proposition 4 to increase funding for critical climate protections and environmental infrastructure projects.
In 2022, Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration made a commitment to spend $54 billion on climate protections, some of which were cut to balance the state’s budget. Proposition 4, the Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparedness, and Clean Air Bond Act, would allow the state to borrow $10 billion to be urgently allocated across a variety of climate projects and reimbursed by taxpayers through a bond. The bill outlines allocations for these funds that include $3.8 billion for safe drinking and groundwater projects, $1.5 billion for wildfire protections, $1.2 billion for coastal infrastructure efforts, $1.2 billion to protect biodiversity, and $450 million for extreme heat mitigation. With a focus on water, wildfire, and the coast, this funding is designed to create present-day solutions that will stop or reverse existing climate challenges and mitigate the need for more expensive projects in the future.
Why voting YES on Proposition 4 matters:
- Proposition 4 mandates that 40% of funding must benefit disadvantaged communities, which it defines as areas where the median household income is less than 80% of the region’s average. Voting YES will ensure that the communities most negatively impacted by environmental disinvestment will benefit from these climate projects.
- Along with providing benefits for water, wildfire, and coastal areas, Proposition 4 will also allocate funds to address wildlife habitat preservation, build public parks, increase sustainable farming operations, and fight air pollution. Voting YES will provide for these initiatives for wide-ranging community benefits across the state.
- An analysis from the California Natural Resources Agency indicates that without action today, the state’s climate-related expenses could rise to $113 billion annually by 2050. Voting YES on Proposition 4 will allow the state to take immediate action to establish more protections and adaptability to avert high annual expenses in the coming decades.
Top supporters of Proposition 4:
- Proposition 4 has the support of many environmental, labor, and justice groups, including Environmental Defense Fund, California Coastal Protection Network, California Water Impact Network, and WateReuse California.
- SB867, which moved Proposition 4 forward to the ballot, was introduced in February 2023 and authored by Sen. Ben Allen, Sen. Josh Becker, Assm. Eduardo Garcia, Sen. Lena Gonzalez, Sen. Monique Limón, Sen. Anthony Portatino, Sen. Henry Stern, and Assm. Lori Wilson. It received over 82% support in final floor votes in both the Assembly and the Senate.
Top opposition to Proposition 4:
- Proposition 4 has been publicly opposed by Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, which argues that repayment of the bond with interest will result in an overall taxpayer cost in excess of $19 billion over 30 years. They argue that asking future generations to shoulder a financial burden they did not have the opportunity to vote on directly is unjust, though the prevailing analysis is that inaction will cost the state more money. Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association generally opposes raising public revenue to pay for critical infrastructure, programs, and services, including bonds that have been popular with voters.
Vote YES on Proposition 5 to make it easier to pass local bonds and taxes to fund affordable housing and public infrastructure development.
At the local level, the California Constitution currently requires that general obligation bonds and special taxes for both affordable housing and public infrastructure projects earn a two-thirds supermajority vote, or 67%, to pass. Proposition 5 seeks to reduce that vote threshold to 55% of the popular vote to provide local governments with a better opportunity to move forward on these local service and development projects using public funds. The proposition also establishes accountability standards to require annual, independent audits of the use of funds, and create citizen oversight committees to evaluate spending.
Why voting YES on Proposition 5 matters:
- Over the last several years, California has seen a growing population of unhoused people, chronically high housing costs, and the highest rate of poverty in the country. Each of these issues are directly tied to a lack of affordable housing development across communities. Reducing the vote threshold to a more attainable level by voting YES on Proposition 5 would improve the likelihood that local governments could pass funding measures to address these issues.
- Since Proposition 39 passed in 2000, local school districts have been able to pass bond measures with the lower 55% requirement. The effectiveness of this vote threshold reduction establishes a strong precedent for the changes proposed in Proposition 5. Voting YES on Proposition 5 would expand this principle to fund housing and infrastructure projects.
- Infrastructure improvements, like upgrades to roads, water systems, public parks, and libraries, improve quality of life in a community and increase existing property values. Voting YES on Proposition 5 would make it easier for municipalities to fund projects to expand broadband access, improve public safety, amend water sanitation and quality, protect property against flooding and sea level changes, and build hospitals.
Top supporters of Proposition 5:
- Proposition 5 has the endorsement of many groups, including California Association of Housing Authorities, California State Association of Counties, California Transit Association, California State Council of Laborers, Santa Clara Valley Water District, and Urban Counties of California. It has also received the support of several cities, including Camarillo, Davis, Gustine, Laguna Beach, Lathrop, Lodi, Moorpark, and San Luis Obispo.
- Proposition 5 was authored in the state legislature as ACA 1 by Assm. Cecelia Aguiar-Curry, Assm. Marc Berman, Assm. Matt Haney, Assm. Alex Lee, and Assm. Buffy Wicks. It received over 65% support from floor votes in both the Assembly and the state Senate.
Top opposition to Proposition 5:
- Proposition 5 has been heavily opposed by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association (HJTA), whose stated mission is to protect Proposition 13 and ensure the right to limited taxation. Howard and Estelle Jarvis participated in the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, before founding HJTA to continue to advocate against tax increases. HJTA argues that Proposition 5 threatens Proposition 13 and existing protections for taxpayers, and that it will ultimately result in increased taxation in the state.
Misinformation about Proposition 5 includes:
- Opponents of Proposition 5 claim that it is a direct attack on Proposition 13, which passed in 1978 and restricted property tax increases by capping a homeowners’ general levy tax to just 1% of their home’s assessed value. This is FALSE. Proposition 5 modernizes the process by which a passing vote can be achieved for specific categories of funding but does not repeal Proposition 13.
- Opponents claim that Proposition 5 will make California less affordable for working families and renters. This is FALSE. Creating an easier process for municipalities to fund housing and infrastructure development will increase the availability of housing units and effectively draw down an inflated cost of living that has been exacerbated by housing scarcity.
Vote YES on Proposition 5 to make it easier to pass local bonds and taxes to fund affordable housing and public infrastructure development.
At the local level, the California Constitution currently requires that general obligation bonds and special taxes for both affordable housing and public infrastructure projects earn a two-thirds supermajority vote, or 67%, to pass. Proposition 5 seeks to reduce that vote threshold to 55% of the popular vote to provide local governments with a better opportunity to move forward on these local service and development projects using public funds. The proposition also establishes accountability standards to require annual, independent audits of the use of funds, and create citizen oversight committees to evaluate spending.
Why voting YES on Proposition 5 matters:
- Over the last several years, California has seen a growing population of unhoused people, chronically high housing costs, and the highest rate of poverty in the country. Each of these issues are directly tied to a lack of affordable housing development across communities. Reducing the vote threshold to a more attainable level by voting YES on Proposition 5 would improve the likelihood that local governments could pass funding measures to address these issues.
- Since Proposition 39 passed in 2000, local school districts have been able to pass bond measures with the lower 55% requirement. The effectiveness of this vote threshold reduction establishes a strong precedent for the changes proposed in Proposition 5. Voting YES on Proposition 5 would expand this principle to fund housing and infrastructure projects.
- Infrastructure improvements, like upgrades to roads, water systems, public parks, and libraries, improve quality of life in a community and increase existing property values. Voting YES on Proposition 5 would make it easier for municipalities to fund projects to expand broadband access, improve public safety, amend water sanitation and quality, protect property against flooding and sea level changes, and build hospitals.
Top supporters of Proposition 5:
- Proposition 5 has the endorsement of many groups, including California Association of Housing Authorities, California State Association of Counties, California Transit Association, California State Council of Laborers, Santa Clara Valley Water District, and Urban Counties of California. It has also received the support of several cities, including Camarillo, Davis, Gustine, Laguna Beach, Lathrop, Lodi, Moorpark, and San Luis Obispo.
- Proposition 5 was authored in the state legislature as ACA 1 by Assm. Cecelia Aguiar-Curry, Assm. Marc Berman, Assm. Matt Haney, Assm. Alex Lee, and Assm. Buffy Wicks. It received over 65% support from floor votes in both the Assembly and the state Senate.
Top opposition to Proposition 5:
- Proposition 5 has been heavily opposed by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association (HJTA), whose stated mission is to protect Proposition 13 and ensure the right to limited taxation. Howard and Estelle Jarvis participated in the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, before founding HJTA to continue to advocate against tax increases. HJTA argues that Proposition 5 threatens Proposition 13 and existing protections for taxpayers, and that it will ultimately result in increased taxation in the state.
Misinformation about Proposition 5 includes:
- Opponents of Proposition 5 claim that it is a direct attack on Proposition 13, which passed in 1978 and restricted property tax increases by capping a homeowners’ general levy tax to just 1% of their home’s assessed value. This is FALSE. Proposition 5 modernizes the process by which a passing vote can be achieved for specific categories of funding but does not repeal Proposition 13.
- Opponents claim that Proposition 5 will make California less affordable for working families and renters. This is FALSE. Creating an easier process for municipalities to fund housing and infrastructure development will increase the availability of housing units and effectively draw down an inflated cost of living that has been exacerbated by housing scarcity.
Vote YES on Proposition 6 to eliminate involuntary servitude or slavery of any form as a criminal punishment that can be used by the state.
California’s state constitution outlaws slavery but maintains language that allows for involuntary servitude to be used as punishment for a crime. Proposition 6 would repeal that language and replace it with language that clearly outlaws the use of involuntary servitude under any circumstances, and allows the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to instead issue credits to incarcerated people for the acceptance of voluntary work assignments during their incarceration. This bill was strongly supported by the Legislative Black Caucus, which included it as part of a larger package designed to move the state forward on reparations.
Why voting YES on Proposition 6 matters:
- Voting YES on Proposition 6 would join California with over 30 other states that have struck down the archaic practice of involuntary servitude in their state constitutions.
- The current policy further enriches prisons by allowing them to require inmates to work for wages as low as eight cents an hour. Voting YES on Proposition 6 will eliminate forced labor in the state prison system and provide for more dignity in the earning capacity and rehabilitation process of incarcerated people.
- The incarcerated population in California is disproportionately made up of Black and Latino men. Voting YES on Proposition 6 will disrupt the ongoing legacy of slavery and exploitation that has historically impacted these populations.
- Voting YES on Proposition 6 will allow incarcerated people to exercise more autonomy in shaping their rehabilitation and pursuit of voluntary work experience during their time in the prison system.
Top supporters of Proposition 6:
- Proposition 6 has the support of many social justice advocacy organizations, including Courage California, ACLU California Action, the California Immigrant Policy Center, and League of Women Voters California. It has also received the endorsement of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors.
- ACA 8, the bill associated with Proposition 6, was authored by Assm. Lori Wilson, and introduced in February 2023. It received over 82% support in final floor votes in both the Assembly and the state Senate.
Misinformation about Proposition 6 includes:
- While there has been no public opposition to Proposition 6, there have been some expressed concerns from Republican lawmakers that this bill would result in the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation being required to compensate incarcerated people at minimum-wage rates for their voluntary work contributions. This is FALSE. AB 628, a new law related to Proposition 6, directly contradicts this argument, stating that it does not require that the state supply minimum wage to incarcerated workers. AB 628 dictates that the Department of Corrections would have the authority to set compensation standards within the prison system.
Vote YES on Proposition 6 to eliminate involuntary servitude or slavery of any form as a criminal punishment that can be used by the state.
California’s state constitution outlaws slavery but maintains language that allows for involuntary servitude to be used as punishment for a crime. Proposition 6 would repeal that language and replace it with language that clearly outlaws the use of involuntary servitude under any circumstances, and allows the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to instead issue credits to incarcerated people for the acceptance of voluntary work assignments during their incarceration. This bill was strongly supported by the Legislative Black Caucus, which included it as part of a larger package designed to move the state forward on reparations.
Why voting YES on Proposition 6 matters:
- Voting YES on Proposition 6 would join California with over 30 other states that have struck down the archaic practice of involuntary servitude in their state constitutions.
- The current policy further enriches prisons by allowing them to require inmates to work for wages as low as eight cents an hour. Voting YES on Proposition 6 will eliminate forced labor in the state prison system and provide for more dignity in the earning capacity and rehabilitation process of incarcerated people.
- The incarcerated population in California is disproportionately made up of Black and Latino men. Voting YES on Proposition 6 will disrupt the ongoing legacy of slavery and exploitation that has historically impacted these populations.
- Voting YES on Proposition 6 will allow incarcerated people to exercise more autonomy in shaping their rehabilitation and pursuit of voluntary work experience during their time in the prison system.
Top supporters of Proposition 6:
- Proposition 6 has the support of many social justice advocacy organizations, including Courage California, ACLU California Action, the California Immigrant Policy Center, and League of Women Voters California. It has also received the endorsement of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors.
- ACA 8, the bill associated with Proposition 6, was authored by Assm. Lori Wilson, and introduced in February 2023. It received over 82% support in final floor votes in both the Assembly and the state Senate.
Misinformation about Proposition 6 includes:
- While there has been no public opposition to Proposition 6, there have been some expressed concerns from Republican lawmakers that this bill would result in the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation being required to compensate incarcerated people at minimum-wage rates for their voluntary work contributions. This is FALSE. AB 628, a new law related to Proposition 6, directly contradicts this argument, stating that it does not require that the state supply minimum wage to incarcerated workers. AB 628 dictates that the Department of Corrections would have the authority to set compensation standards within the prison system.
Vote YES on Proposition 32 to raise the state’s minimum wage to $18 per hour by 2026.
In 2016, the California state legislature passed SB 3 to raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour by 2023, and mandated adjustments for inflation tied to the Consumer Price Index (CPI). SB 3 also established unique timelines for businesses to provide wage increases based on the number of people employed. Proposition 32 would follow a similar format to continue to increase the statewide minimum wage to $18 per hour by 2026, with a required CPI-based increase after $18/hour has been reached. The proposition also includes a provision that would allow the governor to delay the increases up to two times in response to an unexpected economic downturn.
Why voting YES on Proposition 32 matters:
- While California maintains a higher minimum wage than other states, the current standard still puts workers earning minimum wage far below the state’s average cost of living. Voting YES on Proposition 32 will move California forward in closing this socioeconomic gap for workers.
- Some industries in the state have secured union-negotiated wage increases over the last few years, including a move to $25/hour for health-care workers, and $20/hour for fast-food workers. Voting YES on Proposition 32 will advance the earning power of workers who do not benefit from the protection and advocacy of labor unions.
- Static wages can make it difficult for individuals and families to maintain stable housing, health care, and access to quality food. These limitations can have long-term impacts on the health and safety of households and communities. Voting YES on Proposition 32 will help level the playing field and mitigate some of these challenges across the state.
- Recent estimates have shown that the minimum wage would be over $25 per hour if it had kept pace with economic productivity since the 1960s. Voting YES will move California closer to providing this realistic living wage to workers.
Top supporters of Proposition 32:
- Proposition 32 has received support from Golden State Opportunity, a nonprofit group that advocates for anti-poverty initiatives. The group is led by progressive entrepreneur Joe Sanberg, who has also supported earned income tax credits for low-income families, and founded the state’s largest anti-poverty program, CalEITC4Me.
- After recent success in raising wages in health care and fast-food service, there is some debate in some labor unions about whether this blanket approach to wage increases is as strategic as pursuing industry-based efforts.
Top opposition to Proposition 32:
- The California Republican Party has formally opposed Proposition 32, citing concerns about the negative financial impacts on business within the state.
- Some business leaders have been critical of Proposition 32, expressing concerns that allowing political winds to determine this element of economic growth is irresponsible. They argue that markets should dictate wage growth, and that this increase will squeeze business owners, who will then shift the cost burden to consumers.
Vote YES on Proposition 32 to raise the state’s minimum wage to $18 per hour by 2026.
In 2016, the California state legislature passed SB 3 to raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour by 2023, and mandated adjustments for inflation tied to the Consumer Price Index (CPI). SB 3 also established unique timelines for businesses to provide wage increases based on the number of people employed. Proposition 32 would follow a similar format to continue to increase the statewide minimum wage to $18 per hour by 2026, with a required CPI-based increase after $18/hour has been reached. The proposition also includes a provision that would allow the governor to delay the increases up to two times in response to an unexpected economic downturn.
Why voting YES on Proposition 32 matters:
- While California maintains a higher minimum wage than other states, the current standard still puts workers earning minimum wage far below the state’s average cost of living. Voting YES on Proposition 32 will move California forward in closing this socioeconomic gap for workers.
- Some industries in the state have secured union-negotiated wage increases over the last few years, including a move to $25/hour for health-care workers, and $20/hour for fast-food workers. Voting YES on Proposition 32 will advance the earning power of workers who do not benefit from the protection and advocacy of labor unions.
- Static wages can make it difficult for individuals and families to maintain stable housing, health care, and access to quality food. These limitations can have long-term impacts on the health and safety of households and communities. Voting YES on Proposition 32 will help level the playing field and mitigate some of these challenges across the state.
- Recent estimates have shown that the minimum wage would be over $25 per hour if it had kept pace with economic productivity since the 1960s. Voting YES will move California closer to providing this realistic living wage to workers.
Top supporters of Proposition 32:
- Proposition 32 has received support from Golden State Opportunity, a nonprofit group that advocates for anti-poverty initiatives. The group is led by progressive entrepreneur Joe Sanberg, who has also supported earned income tax credits for low-income families, and founded the state’s largest anti-poverty program, CalEITC4Me.
- After recent success in raising wages in health care and fast-food service, there is some debate in some labor unions about whether this blanket approach to wage increases is as strategic as pursuing industry-based efforts.
Top opposition to Proposition 32:
- The California Republican Party has formally opposed Proposition 32, citing concerns about the negative financial impacts on business within the state.
- Some business leaders have been critical of Proposition 32, expressing concerns that allowing political winds to determine this element of economic growth is irresponsible. They argue that markets should dictate wage growth, and that this increase will squeeze business owners, who will then shift the cost burden to consumers.
Vote YES on Proposition 33 to give cities and counties the authority to rein in high rental prices through rent control measures.
In 1995, the state legislature passed the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, which prohibited rent control in single-family homes, condominium units, and newly built rental properties. In cities that already had rent control in place at the time of Costa-Hawkins, like Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Berkeley, the definition of “new” was backdated to those earlier ordinances. Proposition 33 would repeal Costa-Hawkins, allow municipalities to reestablish rent limits on any housing in their jurisdiction, and prohibit the state from limiting any later establishment or expansion of rent control. Similar ballot initiatives, Proposition 10 in 2018 and Proposition 21 in 2020, failed by a margin of nearly 20 points.
Why voting YES on Proposition 33 matters:
- California is experiencing a faster rate increase in homelessness than any other state in the country. Recent data shows an annual increase of up to 7% in statewide homelessness between 2022 and 2023, and partially attributes this ongoing crisis to increasing rents and housing unaffordability. Voting YES on this initiative will allow local governments to prevent homelessness and support unhoused neighbors by putting measures in place to regulate costs in the housing market and strengthen renter protections.
- Community development and growth is aided by the long-term investment in housing security of local residents who establish a personal network, professional ties, and social connections in a neighborhood. Voting YES on this initiative will help ensure that individuals and families investing in their local community will not be priced out of their home by unchecked rental price increases.
- Recent Zillow data indicates that rental costs across the state have increased by as much as 40% since the start of the pandemic in 2020. This data includes striking increases in inland regions of the state that have previously been considered more affordable, including 39% in Bakersfield, 38% in Fresno, and 37% in Riverside. Voting YES on this initiative will limit these inflated year-over-year rental-cost increases across the state.
Top supporters of Proposition 33:
- This initiative is sponsored by AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) and their associated initiative, Housing Is a Human Right. These organizations work at the intersection of health, social equity, and human rights, and have been strong advocates of communities impacted by the unsustainable increase in housing costs within the state. They sponsored the previous ballot-measure efforts to repeal Costa-Hawkins. Notably, AHF has a track record of being a problematic landlord, especially as one the the biggest landlords in Skid Row in Los Angeles.
- Additional endorsers of this effort include Pomona United Stable Housing Coalition, Housing Now! California, Healing and Justice Center, SLO Rent Coalition, Oakland Tenants Union, ACCE, and IE Votes. This initiative has also received the endorsement of many elected leaders, including Rep. Ro Khanna, Rep. Barbara Lee, Assm. Alex Lee, State Sen. María Elena Durazo, and many local mayors and council members.
- Stakeholders in support of this initiative raised $13.9 million as of the first quarter of 2024, with the majority of those dollars contributed directly by AIDS Healthcare Foundation.
Top opposition to Proposition 33:
- Committees in opposition to this initiative, Californians for Responsible Housing and Californians to Protect Affordable Housing, have raised $2.9 million as of the first quarter of 2024. These committees have received direct sponsorship, and the majority of their funding, from the California Apartment Association that represents landlords, including corporations that own rental properties.
Misinformation about Proposition 33 includes:
- Stakeholders who oppose this initiative claim that it will reduce housing supply by forcing landlords to convert their rental apartments into sellable condos, and creating local housing ordinances that make affordable housing development more difficult. This is FALSE. While this initiative would limit corporate landlords from imposing skyrocketing rent increases on families, it does not dictate that rents must be held below market rate, and it does not suggest that local building or development standards would be directly impacted.
- Objectors have also argued that this initiative would impose rent control on privately owned residences, limiting an owner’s ability to set the rent for their property. This is FALSE. This initiative does not contain special restrictions for private owners, but it would make them subject to the same equitable market-rate expectations that apply to rental apartment owners.
Vote YES on Proposition 33 to give cities and counties the authority to rein in high rental prices through rent control measures.
In 1995, the state legislature passed the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, which prohibited rent control in single-family homes, condominium units, and newly built rental properties. In cities that already had rent control in place at the time of Costa-Hawkins, like Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Berkeley, the definition of “new” was backdated to those earlier ordinances. Proposition 33 would repeal Costa-Hawkins, allow municipalities to reestablish rent limits on any housing in their jurisdiction, and prohibit the state from limiting any later establishment or expansion of rent control. Similar ballot initiatives, Proposition 10 in 2018 and Proposition 21 in 2020, failed by a margin of nearly 20 points.
Why voting YES on Proposition 33 matters:
- California is experiencing a faster rate increase in homelessness than any other state in the country. Recent data shows an annual increase of up to 7% in statewide homelessness between 2022 and 2023, and partially attributes this ongoing crisis to increasing rents and housing unaffordability. Voting YES on this initiative will allow local governments to prevent homelessness and support unhoused neighbors by putting measures in place to regulate costs in the housing market and strengthen renter protections.
- Community development and growth is aided by the long-term investment in housing security of local residents who establish a personal network, professional ties, and social connections in a neighborhood. Voting YES on this initiative will help ensure that individuals and families investing in their local community will not be priced out of their home by unchecked rental price increases.
- Recent Zillow data indicates that rental costs across the state have increased by as much as 40% since the start of the pandemic in 2020. This data includes striking increases in inland regions of the state that have previously been considered more affordable, including 39% in Bakersfield, 38% in Fresno, and 37% in Riverside. Voting YES on this initiative will limit these inflated year-over-year rental-cost increases across the state.
Top supporters of Proposition 33:
- This initiative is sponsored by AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) and their associated initiative, Housing Is a Human Right. These organizations work at the intersection of health, social equity, and human rights, and have been strong advocates of communities impacted by the unsustainable increase in housing costs within the state. They sponsored the previous ballot-measure efforts to repeal Costa-Hawkins. Notably, AHF has a track record of being a problematic landlord, especially as one the the biggest landlords in Skid Row in Los Angeles.
- Additional endorsers of this effort include Pomona United Stable Housing Coalition, Housing Now! California, Healing and Justice Center, SLO Rent Coalition, Oakland Tenants Union, ACCE, and IE Votes. This initiative has also received the endorsement of many elected leaders, including Rep. Ro Khanna, Rep. Barbara Lee, Assm. Alex Lee, State Sen. María Elena Durazo, and many local mayors and council members.
- Stakeholders in support of this initiative raised $13.9 million as of the first quarter of 2024, with the majority of those dollars contributed directly by AIDS Healthcare Foundation.
Top opposition to Proposition 33:
- Committees in opposition to this initiative, Californians for Responsible Housing and Californians to Protect Affordable Housing, have raised $2.9 million as of the first quarter of 2024. These committees have received direct sponsorship, and the majority of their funding, from the California Apartment Association that represents landlords, including corporations that own rental properties.
Misinformation about Proposition 33 includes:
- Stakeholders who oppose this initiative claim that it will reduce housing supply by forcing landlords to convert their rental apartments into sellable condos, and creating local housing ordinances that make affordable housing development more difficult. This is FALSE. While this initiative would limit corporate landlords from imposing skyrocketing rent increases on families, it does not dictate that rents must be held below market rate, and it does not suggest that local building or development standards would be directly impacted.
- Objectors have also argued that this initiative would impose rent control on privately owned residences, limiting an owner’s ability to set the rent for their property. This is FALSE. This initiative does not contain special restrictions for private owners, but it would make them subject to the same equitable market-rate expectations that apply to rental apartment owners.
Vote NO on Proposition 34 to continue to permit health-care providers to have autonomy in deciding how to use revenue earned through the federal discount prescription drug program.
Proposition 34 is a real estate industry effort to limit organizations that receive federal drug program funding—especially the AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF)—from funding ballot initiatives, including supporting Proposition 33 on rent control on this general election ballot.
The initiative seeks to create a new category of state entities called “prescription drug price manipulators,” and to place tight restrictions on the requirements those organizations must meet to maintain their tax-exempt status. The initiative defines prescription drug price manipulators as any entity that is an active participant in the federal 340B drug price discount program, is licensed to act as a health-care provider in the state, contracts with Medi-Cal as a provider, has contributed over $100 million over the last 10 years to initiatives unrelated to direct patient care, and has owned multifamily properties that have received a minimum of 500 government violations. If passed, Proposition 34 would require organizations designated as prescription drug price manipulators to spend a minimum of 98% of their revenues from the federal prescription drug program on direct patient care activities, and also abstain from any conduct that could be viewed as in opposition to public health and safety. In addition, Proposition 34 would codify the Medi-Cal Rx program, which was established in 2019 via an executive order from Gov. Gavin Newsom.
In recent years, AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF), which meets all the criteria for a prescription drug price manipulator, has provided extensive funding and advocacy support to ballot initiatives intended to support low-income housing development. Proposition 34, which is supported by a variety of actors with real estate interests, would curtail this organization’s capacity to distribute its funds in support of affordable housing initiatives.
Why voting NO on Proposition 34 matters:
- Real estate interests and their benefactors across the state are responsible for rental increases that have exceeded 35% in some regions since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Voting NO on Proposition 34 will ensure that organizations like AHF can continue to allocate funding to disrupt the cynical and greedy business practices of the real estate industry.
- The California Apartment Association and similar groups frequently provide financial support to state and local initiatives and candidates. Voting NO on Proposition 34 will prevent the creation of a new and narrow restricted category of funder, and would rebuke a hypocritical attempt by a wealthy industry lobbyist to restrict their opposition.
Top opposition to Proposition 34:
- The stated target of Proposition 34, AIDS Healthcare Foundation, has publicly opposed the initiative, arguing that their efforts to purchase single-occupancy hotels and other multi-unit structures has resulted in the permanent housing of over 1,000 people over the years and has been instrumental in supporting California’s unhoused population. Notably, recent investigations have revealed that many of AHF’s housing units are in disrepair and have not been properly maintained.
- Consumer Watchdog and National Organization for Women have also come out in opposition to Proposition 34.
Top supporters of Proposition 34:
- California Apartment Association is the lead sponsor of Proposition 34 and the associated Protect Patients Now campaign, and has dishonestly framed the initiative as a patient care protection measure. In their view, limiting AHF’s political spending will require the organization to reinvest funds in low-income patient care, and will prevent them from overcharging the government for prescription drugs through the Medi-Cal Rx program. In reality, their sponsorship of Proposition 34 is a direct attack on a political opponent, and they have not prioritized patient protection in any way prior to this ballot measure. California Apartment Association has contributed over $11 million in support of Proposition 34.
- Proposition 34 has also received support from the California Republican Party, ALS Association, and San Francisco Women’s Cancer Network.
Vote NO on Proposition 34 to continue to permit health-care providers to have autonomy in deciding how to use revenue earned through the federal discount prescription drug program.
Proposition 34 is a real estate industry effort to limit organizations that receive federal drug program funding—especially the AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF)—from funding ballot initiatives, including supporting Proposition 33 on rent control on this general election ballot.
The initiative seeks to create a new category of state entities called “prescription drug price manipulators,” and to place tight restrictions on the requirements those organizations must meet to maintain their tax-exempt status. The initiative defines prescription drug price manipulators as any entity that is an active participant in the federal 340B drug price discount program, is licensed to act as a health-care provider in the state, contracts with Medi-Cal as a provider, has contributed over $100 million over the last 10 years to initiatives unrelated to direct patient care, and has owned multifamily properties that have received a minimum of 500 government violations. If passed, Proposition 34 would require organizations designated as prescription drug price manipulators to spend a minimum of 98% of their revenues from the federal prescription drug program on direct patient care activities, and also abstain from any conduct that could be viewed as in opposition to public health and safety. In addition, Proposition 34 would codify the Medi-Cal Rx program, which was established in 2019 via an executive order from Gov. Gavin Newsom.
In recent years, AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF), which meets all the criteria for a prescription drug price manipulator, has provided extensive funding and advocacy support to ballot initiatives intended to support low-income housing development. Proposition 34, which is supported by a variety of actors with real estate interests, would curtail this organization’s capacity to distribute its funds in support of affordable housing initiatives.
Why voting NO on Proposition 34 matters:
- Real estate interests and their benefactors across the state are responsible for rental increases that have exceeded 35% in some regions since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Voting NO on Proposition 34 will ensure that organizations like AHF can continue to allocate funding to disrupt the cynical and greedy business practices of the real estate industry.
- The California Apartment Association and similar groups frequently provide financial support to state and local initiatives and candidates. Voting NO on Proposition 34 will prevent the creation of a new and narrow restricted category of funder, and would rebuke a hypocritical attempt by a wealthy industry lobbyist to restrict their opposition.
Top opposition to Proposition 34:
- The stated target of Proposition 34, AIDS Healthcare Foundation, has publicly opposed the initiative, arguing that their efforts to purchase single-occupancy hotels and other multi-unit structures has resulted in the permanent housing of over 1,000 people over the years and has been instrumental in supporting California’s unhoused population. Notably, recent investigations have revealed that many of AHF’s housing units are in disrepair and have not been properly maintained.
- Consumer Watchdog and National Organization for Women have also come out in opposition to Proposition 34.
Top supporters of Proposition 34:
- California Apartment Association is the lead sponsor of Proposition 34 and the associated Protect Patients Now campaign, and has dishonestly framed the initiative as a patient care protection measure. In their view, limiting AHF’s political spending will require the organization to reinvest funds in low-income patient care, and will prevent them from overcharging the government for prescription drugs through the Medi-Cal Rx program. In reality, their sponsorship of Proposition 34 is a direct attack on a political opponent, and they have not prioritized patient protection in any way prior to this ballot measure. California Apartment Association has contributed over $11 million in support of Proposition 34.
- Proposition 34 has also received support from the California Republican Party, ALS Association, and San Francisco Women’s Cancer Network.
Vote NO on Proposition 35 to protect investments in critical community health programs, retain higher funding allocations for Medi-Cal, and give the state legislature more flexibility to respond to community needs.
In 2023, the state legislature passed AB 119 to reimpose a tax on managed care organizations (MCO) in the state that had been dormant since 2012. MCOs provide health insurance coverage to their enrollees at a fixed monthly cost, and the tax is based on the number of monthly enrollees that a given MCO has. Commercial plans pay a lower rate ($1.75/member) than Medi-Cal health plans ($274/member). The renewed tax is in effect through December 2026. Proposition 35 would make the tax permanent and place a ceiling on the amount of tax that commercial health plans would be required to pay ($2.75/member). Proposition 35 would also redirect billions of dollars that support the Medi-Cal program and the state general fund to specified provider rate increases, and effectively reduce Medi-Cal investments by $1 billion to $2 billion a year, including in the current 2024/2025 budget.
In the 2024/2025 state budget signed by Governor Newsom, important health groups and services—including emergency department physician services, abortion care and family planning, ground emergency medical transportation, community health workers, private duty nurses, and adult and pediatric day health centers—receive investments and Medi-Cal rate increases. Children who qualify for Medi-Cal but are at risk of automatic disenrollment (80% annually) because of administrative or procedural issues are also supported for continued coverage in the state budget. If Prop 35 passes, these groups will not receive any of the MCO tax funds, which will go to rate increases in other areas.
Top supporters of Proposition 35:
- Proposition 35 has received support from a wide array of health-care stakeholders, including California Hospital Association, California Medical Association, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, and the Coalition to Protect Access to Care. Health-care providers have supported the expansion of Medi-Cal eligibility in the state, and view this initiative as an opportunity to further expand the services they provide and the patient population they engage with and prevent state leaders from repurposing the funds, as Governor Newsom has sought to do.
- Proposition 35 has also received the support of the California Republican Party and the California Democratic Party. AB 119 received bipartisan support when it was passed in 2023, earning over 85% of the vote in final floor votes in both the Assembly and the state Senate.
- Supporters have raised over $19 million for Proposition 35, including donations from California Hospitals Committee on Issues, and Global Medical Response Inc.
Top opposition to Proposition 35:
- While there is not currently a committee working in opposition to Proposition 35, Courage California joins health-equity advocates, like the California Pan-Ethnic Health Network, California Alliance for Retired Americans, the Children’s Partnership, and League of Women Voters, in opposition to this ballot measure.
Vote NO on Proposition 35 to protect investments in critical community health programs, retain higher funding allocations for Medi-Cal, and give the state legislature more flexibility to respond to community needs.
In 2023, the state legislature passed AB 119 to reimpose a tax on managed care organizations (MCO) in the state that had been dormant since 2012. MCOs provide health insurance coverage to their enrollees at a fixed monthly cost, and the tax is based on the number of monthly enrollees that a given MCO has. Commercial plans pay a lower rate ($1.75/member) than Medi-Cal health plans ($274/member). The renewed tax is in effect through December 2026. Proposition 35 would make the tax permanent and place a ceiling on the amount of tax that commercial health plans would be required to pay ($2.75/member). Proposition 35 would also redirect billions of dollars that support the Medi-Cal program and the state general fund to specified provider rate increases, and effectively reduce Medi-Cal investments by $1 billion to $2 billion a year, including in the current 2024/2025 budget.
In the 2024/2025 state budget signed by Governor Newsom, important health groups and services—including emergency department physician services, abortion care and family planning, ground emergency medical transportation, community health workers, private duty nurses, and adult and pediatric day health centers—receive investments and Medi-Cal rate increases. Children who qualify for Medi-Cal but are at risk of automatic disenrollment (80% annually) because of administrative or procedural issues are also supported for continued coverage in the state budget. If Prop 35 passes, these groups will not receive any of the MCO tax funds, which will go to rate increases in other areas.
Top supporters of Proposition 35:
- Proposition 35 has received support from a wide array of health-care stakeholders, including California Hospital Association, California Medical Association, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, and the Coalition to Protect Access to Care. Health-care providers have supported the expansion of Medi-Cal eligibility in the state, and view this initiative as an opportunity to further expand the services they provide and the patient population they engage with and prevent state leaders from repurposing the funds, as Governor Newsom has sought to do.
- Proposition 35 has also received the support of the California Republican Party and the California Democratic Party. AB 119 received bipartisan support when it was passed in 2023, earning over 85% of the vote in final floor votes in both the Assembly and the state Senate.
- Supporters have raised over $19 million for Proposition 35, including donations from California Hospitals Committee on Issues, and Global Medical Response Inc.
Top opposition to Proposition 35:
- While there is not currently a committee working in opposition to Proposition 35, Courage California joins health-equity advocates, like the California Pan-Ethnic Health Network, California Alliance for Retired Americans, the Children’s Partnership, and League of Women Voters, in opposition to this ballot measure.
Vote NO on Proposition 36 to prevent a return to over-incarceration and maintain the investment in rehabilitation services, reentry programs, and lowered incarceration rates established by Proposition 47.
In 2014, California voters passed Proposition 47 with over 59% of the vote to reclassify some nonviolent crimes from felonies to misdemeanors, including low-value shoplifting, grand theft, forgery, fraud, and the personal use of illegal drugs. This change effectively reduced the state’s prison burden, and allowed the government to divert millions of dollars in funds previously used for incarceration to rehabilitation and reentry programs. Proposition 36 would make changes to Proposition 47 by increasing the sentence for possession of certain quantities of illegal drugs, adding fentanyl to the list of illegal drugs that can warrant a felony charge, and making low-value property theft a felony for repeat offenders.
Why voting NO on Proposition 36 matters:
- Proposition 36 would upend the progress that Proposition 47 established to increase community investment in mental health services, substance use treatment, and diversion programs, and refocusing on mass incarceration. Voting NO will ensure that California remains focused on effective rehabilitation and reentry programs for individuals involved in low-level crimes.
- A fiscal-impact statement associated with Proposition 36 estimates that it will ultimately result in a price tag of hundreds of millions of dollars annually in court costs and the expense of housing an increased prison population. Voting NO will allow these critical funds to continue to be spent on truancy, youth services, rehabilitation, and substance-use treatment programs.
- Recent data suggests that criminalizing personal drug use is largely ineffective, and tends to disproportionately impact marginalized groups. Additionally, it often results in destabilizing long-term consequences, like the disruption of family relationships, and difficulty in accessing employment opportunities and public assistance. Voting NO on Proposition 36 will maintain the misdemeanor status for these crimes while continuing to support social programs in addressing the root causes of addiction and criminal behavior.
Top opposition to Proposition 36:
- Gov. Gavin Newsom spoke out against modifications to Proposition 47 in early 2024, and opposes Proposition 36. He and other Democratic lawmakers briefly worked on a more moderate measure to address fentanyl and retail theft, but ultimately withdrew it.
- The Stop the Prison Spending Scam campaign opposing Proposition 36 is led by Californians for Safety and Justice and includes ACLU California, Smart Justice California, and Courage California.
Top supporters of Proposition 36:
- Proposition 36 has received the support of many law-enforcement agencies, including California Sheriffs’ Association, San Francisco Police Officers Association Issues PAC, Kern County Prosecutors Association PAC, California District Attorneys Association, and Association of Deputy District Attorneys PAC. These groups view this initiative as a way to reduce crime rates and curb drug use by returning to the problematic theory that crime can be collectively deterred through the establishment of strong punitive consequences.
- Proposition 36 has also received the support of San Francisco Mayor London Breed and San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, conservative Democrats who both lead cities in the Bay Area where drug use and property crime have been significant political issues over the last several years. It has also received the support of the California Republican Party.
- Supporters have raised over $9 million, and include business stakeholders who have made exaggerated claims of being negatively impacted by the low-value theft and property crime that Proposition 36 seeks to reclassify – claims that have since been retracted and refuted by more accurate data. Donors include Target Corporation, Walmart, 7-Eleven, American Petroleum and Convenience Store Association, and California Fuels and Convenience Alliance.
Misinformation about Proposition 36:
- Proposition 36 will NOT get more people into drug and mental health treatment and does NOT provide any funding for that treatment. Instead, it will reduce $850 million of funding for rehabilitation and treatment services over the next decade.
- Proposition 36 will NOT solve homelessness. There is no funding for housing in the proposition, and studies show that people who have been incarcerated are nearly 10 times more likely to be homeless. It costs $132,000 per year to incarcerate someone, but less to provide permanent supportive housing.
Vote NO on Proposition 36 to prevent a return to over-incarceration and maintain the investment in rehabilitation services, reentry programs, and lowered incarceration rates established by Proposition 47.
In 2014, California voters passed Proposition 47 with over 59% of the vote to reclassify some nonviolent crimes from felonies to misdemeanors, including low-value shoplifting, grand theft, forgery, fraud, and the personal use of illegal drugs. This change effectively reduced the state’s prison burden, and allowed the government to divert millions of dollars in funds previously used for incarceration to rehabilitation and reentry programs. Proposition 36 would make changes to Proposition 47 by increasing the sentence for possession of certain quantities of illegal drugs, adding fentanyl to the list of illegal drugs that can warrant a felony charge, and making low-value property theft a felony for repeat offenders.
Why voting NO on Proposition 36 matters:
- Proposition 36 would upend the progress that Proposition 47 established to increase community investment in mental health services, substance use treatment, and diversion programs, and refocusing on mass incarceration. Voting NO will ensure that California remains focused on effective rehabilitation and reentry programs for individuals involved in low-level crimes.
- A fiscal-impact statement associated with Proposition 36 estimates that it will ultimately result in a price tag of hundreds of millions of dollars annually in court costs and the expense of housing an increased prison population. Voting NO will allow these critical funds to continue to be spent on truancy, youth services, rehabilitation, and substance-use treatment programs.
- Recent data suggests that criminalizing personal drug use is largely ineffective, and tends to disproportionately impact marginalized groups. Additionally, it often results in destabilizing long-term consequences, like the disruption of family relationships, and difficulty in accessing employment opportunities and public assistance. Voting NO on Proposition 36 will maintain the misdemeanor status for these crimes while continuing to support social programs in addressing the root causes of addiction and criminal behavior.
Top opposition to Proposition 36:
- Gov. Gavin Newsom spoke out against modifications to Proposition 47 in early 2024, and opposes Proposition 36. He and other Democratic lawmakers briefly worked on a more moderate measure to address fentanyl and retail theft, but ultimately withdrew it.
- The Stop the Prison Spending Scam campaign opposing Proposition 36 is led by Californians for Safety and Justice and includes ACLU California, Smart Justice California, and Courage California.
Top supporters of Proposition 36:
- Proposition 36 has received the support of many law-enforcement agencies, including California Sheriffs’ Association, San Francisco Police Officers Association Issues PAC, Kern County Prosecutors Association PAC, California District Attorneys Association, and Association of Deputy District Attorneys PAC. These groups view this initiative as a way to reduce crime rates and curb drug use by returning to the problematic theory that crime can be collectively deterred through the establishment of strong punitive consequences.
- Proposition 36 has also received the support of San Francisco Mayor London Breed and San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, conservative Democrats who both lead cities in the Bay Area where drug use and property crime have been significant political issues over the last several years. It has also received the support of the California Republican Party.
- Supporters have raised over $9 million, and include business stakeholders who have made exaggerated claims of being negatively impacted by the low-value theft and property crime that Proposition 36 seeks to reclassify – claims that have since been retracted and refuted by more accurate data. Donors include Target Corporation, Walmart, 7-Eleven, American Petroleum and Convenience Store Association, and California Fuels and Convenience Alliance.
Misinformation about Proposition 36:
- Proposition 36 will NOT get more people into drug and mental health treatment and does NOT provide any funding for that treatment. Instead, it will reduce $850 million of funding for rehabilitation and treatment services over the next decade.
- Proposition 36 will NOT solve homelessness. There is no funding for housing in the proposition, and studies show that people who have been incarcerated are nearly 10 times more likely to be homeless. It costs $132,000 per year to incarcerate someone, but less to provide permanent supportive housing.
Temas en la Votación de la Ciudad San Francisco
Vote NO on Proposition D to maintain the existing city commission structure and limit the Mayor’s authority over city department leadership.
The city of San Francisco has around 130 commissions, of which 44 are established by charter, and the remainder have been added by ordinance. Commissions in the city provide oversight to city departments, recommendations on personnel and city leadership changes, and guidance on how city services should be provided to residents. In some cases, a commission is responsible for making recommendations on departmental leadership, and the Mayor and Board are required to confirm a candidate from the list of those recommended by the commission. For law enforcement, the Police Commission establishes rules that govern the conduct of members of the SFPD.
Proposition D asks voters to reduce the city to only 65 commissions, to give the Mayor sole authority to appoint and remove city department heads, and to allow the Police Chief full authority to adopt the rules that govern officer conduct. A simple majority, or 50%+1% of votes, is required to pass Proposition D.
Why voting NO on Proposition D matters:
- San Francisco’s current commission structure provides broad oversight and accountability, with multiple tiers of influence and authority. Voting NO on Proposition D will maintain that structure across city departments.
- The existing structure requires that commission appointments are a collaborative process shared between the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors. Proposition D would place the authority of appointing two-thirds of the city’s commissioners in the hands of the Mayor with no input from the Board of Supervisors. Voting NO on Proposition D will prevent the establishment of this strong-Mayor format, and retain checks and balances in the appointment process.
- The 25 commissions slated for elimination under Proposition D include Arts, Library, Health, Youth, and Environment, which voters had approved. Voting NO on Proposition D will maintain these commissions and support the services managed by these city departments.
- The culture of policing has been an important issue in San Francisco in recent years, and actions to reform and improve accountability for SFPD should be available to the public. Voting NO on Proposition D will maintain the transparency and accountability of the Police Commission and their decisions around the expectations of police conduct.
Top opposition to Proposition D:
- Current Sup. Aaron Peskin, who is also running for Mayor, has been an outspoken critic of Proposition D and the way that it would eliminate accountability structures and strip power away from voters.
- A vote of NO on Proposition D is supported by many progressive groups, including Coalition for San Francisco Neighborhoods, San Francisco Tenants Union, Affordable Housing Alliance, and United Educators of San Francisco.
Top funders in support of Proposition D:
- Proposition D has received more funding support than any other ballot measure in the 2024 election. Mayoral candidate Mark Farrell, a venture capitalist, has contributed $2.4 million from his campaign war chest.
- TogetherSF, a conservative group of tech investors, spearheaded the signature gathering process to put Proposition D on the ballot. This organization also funded the 2022 recall of former San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin, who was working to implement a progressive agenda.
- Supporters of Proposition D have argued that the existing commissions are ineffective in resolving serious social issues, like homelessness and the fentanyl crisis, although Proposition D offers no meaningful solution to address those issues.
Vote NO on Proposition D to maintain the existing city commission structure and limit the Mayor’s authority over city department leadership.
The city of San Francisco has around 130 commissions, of which 44 are established by charter, and the remainder have been added by ordinance. Commissions in the city provide oversight to city departments, recommendations on personnel and city leadership changes, and guidance on how city services should be provided to residents. In some cases, a commission is responsible for making recommendations on departmental leadership, and the Mayor and Board are required to confirm a candidate from the list of those recommended by the commission. For law enforcement, the Police Commission establishes rules that govern the conduct of members of the SFPD.
Proposition D asks voters to reduce the city to only 65 commissions, to give the Mayor sole authority to appoint and remove city department heads, and to allow the Police Chief full authority to adopt the rules that govern officer conduct. A simple majority, or 50%+1% of votes, is required to pass Proposition D.
Why voting NO on Proposition D matters:
- San Francisco’s current commission structure provides broad oversight and accountability, with multiple tiers of influence and authority. Voting NO on Proposition D will maintain that structure across city departments.
- The existing structure requires that commission appointments are a collaborative process shared between the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors. Proposition D would place the authority of appointing two-thirds of the city’s commissioners in the hands of the Mayor with no input from the Board of Supervisors. Voting NO on Proposition D will prevent the establishment of this strong-Mayor format, and retain checks and balances in the appointment process.
- The 25 commissions slated for elimination under Proposition D include Arts, Library, Health, Youth, and Environment, which voters had approved. Voting NO on Proposition D will maintain these commissions and support the services managed by these city departments.
- The culture of policing has been an important issue in San Francisco in recent years, and actions to reform and improve accountability for SFPD should be available to the public. Voting NO on Proposition D will maintain the transparency and accountability of the Police Commission and their decisions around the expectations of police conduct.
Top opposition to Proposition D:
- Current Sup. Aaron Peskin, who is also running for Mayor, has been an outspoken critic of Proposition D and the way that it would eliminate accountability structures and strip power away from voters.
- A vote of NO on Proposition D is supported by many progressive groups, including Coalition for San Francisco Neighborhoods, San Francisco Tenants Union, Affordable Housing Alliance, and United Educators of San Francisco.
Top funders in support of Proposition D:
- Proposition D has received more funding support than any other ballot measure in the 2024 election. Mayoral candidate Mark Farrell, a venture capitalist, has contributed $2.4 million from his campaign war chest.
- TogetherSF, a conservative group of tech investors, spearheaded the signature gathering process to put Proposition D on the ballot. This organization also funded the 2022 recall of former San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin, who was working to implement a progressive agenda.
- Supporters of Proposition D have argued that the existing commissions are ineffective in resolving serious social issues, like homelessness and the fentanyl crisis, although Proposition D offers no meaningful solution to address those issues.
Vote YES on Proposition E to create a task force to streamline the city commission system to improve local governance.
The city of San Francisco has around 130 commissions, of which 44 are established by charter, and the remainder have been added by ordinance. Commissions in the city provide oversight to city departments, recommendations on personnel and city leadership changes, and guidance on how city services should be provided to residents. In some cases, a commission is responsible for making recommendations on departmental leadership, and the Mayor and Board are required to confirm a candidate from the list of those recommended by the commission. For law enforcement, the Police Commission establishes rules that govern the conduct of members of the SFPD. Proposition D, which will also appear on the 2024 general election ballot, seeks to arbitrarily slash the existing structure down to just 65 commissions, and does not offer significant guidance on how to maintain government transparency in their absence. Proposition E has been written to counter Proposition D.
Proposition E would create a Commission Streamlining Task Force to evaluate the existing structure of commissions in the city, and make recommendations to the Mayor and Board of Supervisors about how to consolidate or amend that structure to best support city functions. Proposition E would also require a Budget and Legislative Analyst to prepare a report on the current cost of supporting all existing commissions. The Task Force would have a little over a year to complete their evaluation and recommendations. The Task Force would include five members–one each from the offices of the City Attorney, City Controller, and City Administrator, a public sector labor organizer, and an expert in open and accountable government. A simple majority, or 50%+1% of votes, is required to pass Proposition E.
Why voting YES on Proposition E matters:
- Establishing a Task Force would increase accountability by allowing the public to vote on its creation, and requiring that it conduct public hearings. Voting YES on Proposition E will implement this transparent process.
- Proposition D has proposed the elimination of commissions that support Arts, Library, Health, Youth, and Environmental services across the city. Voting YES on Proposition E will protect these critical commissions and the work of their corresponding city departments.
- The existing structure requires that commission appointments are a collaborative process shared between the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors. Voting YES on Proposition E will retain these checks and balances in the appointment process until the Task Force can issue its report in 2026.
Top support for Proposition E:
- The primary author of Proposition E is Sup. Aaron Peskin, who is also running for Mayor.
- Proposition E has the support of many progressive groups, including Coalition for San Francisco Neighborhoods, San Francisco Tenants Union, Affordable Housing Alliance, and United Educators of San Francisco.
Top opposition to Proposition E:
- Proposition E is opposed by TogetherSF, the group behind the competing city commission ballot measure, Proposition D. TogetherSF is a conservative group made up of tech investors, and also funded the 2022 recall of former San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin, who was working to implement a progressive agenda.
- Opponents have argued that Proposition E is a delay tactic, but have failed to address the arbitrary and hasty nature of Proposition D’s plan to eliminate over half of the existing commissions while putting unchecked power in the hands of the Mayor and Chief of Police.
Vote YES on Proposition E to create a task force to streamline the city commission system to improve local governance.
The city of San Francisco has around 130 commissions, of which 44 are established by charter, and the remainder have been added by ordinance. Commissions in the city provide oversight to city departments, recommendations on personnel and city leadership changes, and guidance on how city services should be provided to residents. In some cases, a commission is responsible for making recommendations on departmental leadership, and the Mayor and Board are required to confirm a candidate from the list of those recommended by the commission. For law enforcement, the Police Commission establishes rules that govern the conduct of members of the SFPD. Proposition D, which will also appear on the 2024 general election ballot, seeks to arbitrarily slash the existing structure down to just 65 commissions, and does not offer significant guidance on how to maintain government transparency in their absence. Proposition E has been written to counter Proposition D.
Proposition E would create a Commission Streamlining Task Force to evaluate the existing structure of commissions in the city, and make recommendations to the Mayor and Board of Supervisors about how to consolidate or amend that structure to best support city functions. Proposition E would also require a Budget and Legislative Analyst to prepare a report on the current cost of supporting all existing commissions. The Task Force would have a little over a year to complete their evaluation and recommendations. The Task Force would include five members–one each from the offices of the City Attorney, City Controller, and City Administrator, a public sector labor organizer, and an expert in open and accountable government. A simple majority, or 50%+1% of votes, is required to pass Proposition E.
Why voting YES on Proposition E matters:
- Establishing a Task Force would increase accountability by allowing the public to vote on its creation, and requiring that it conduct public hearings. Voting YES on Proposition E will implement this transparent process.
- Proposition D has proposed the elimination of commissions that support Arts, Library, Health, Youth, and Environmental services across the city. Voting YES on Proposition E will protect these critical commissions and the work of their corresponding city departments.
- The existing structure requires that commission appointments are a collaborative process shared between the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors. Voting YES on Proposition E will retain these checks and balances in the appointment process until the Task Force can issue its report in 2026.
Top support for Proposition E:
- The primary author of Proposition E is Sup. Aaron Peskin, who is also running for Mayor.
- Proposition E has the support of many progressive groups, including Coalition for San Francisco Neighborhoods, San Francisco Tenants Union, Affordable Housing Alliance, and United Educators of San Francisco.
Top opposition to Proposition E:
- Proposition E is opposed by TogetherSF, the group behind the competing city commission ballot measure, Proposition D. TogetherSF is a conservative group made up of tech investors, and also funded the 2022 recall of former San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin, who was working to implement a progressive agenda.
- Opponents have argued that Proposition E is a delay tactic, but have failed to address the arbitrary and hasty nature of Proposition D’s plan to eliminate over half of the existing commissions while putting unchecked power in the hands of the Mayor and Chief of Police.
Vote NO on Proposition F to maintain the existing SFPD staffing process, and to prevent a doubling of the pension contribution for some eligible officers.
In accordance with the City Charter, the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) staffing levels are communicated every two years to the Police Commission by the Police Chief. This report details the number of full-duty sworn officers on the force, and makes a recommendation about staffing levels that the Police Commission then evaluates and acts on. The Charter does not define what qualifies as a full-duty sworn officer, which has introduced ambiguity into the process of making year-over-year staffing recommendations. Additionally, the recent amplification of concern around public safety has put a spotlight on SFPD staffing levels, although the prevalence of crime has often been misrepresented and exploited for political gain.
Proposition F would define a full-duty sworn officer as any full-time officer who is not on an extended leave, training at the Police Academy, or assigned to the airport, and would reduce the frequency of the staffing report prepared by the Police Chief to once every three years. Proposition F would also create the Deferred Retirement Option Program (DROP) for high-ranking full-duty officers who are at least 50 years old and have 25 years of police service. For the five years before their retirement, DROP would allow these officers to collect the equivalent of a pension payment in a tax-deferred, interest-bearing account, essentially doubling their compensation for the duration of their enrollment in the program. Proposition F would create the DROP program for an initial 5-year period, and then would allow the Board of Supervisors to renew it for additional 5-year cycles.
Why voting NO on Proposition F matters:
- While supporters of Proposition F tout it as a solution to understaffing, it does not propose any measures to build up the ranks of the SFPD. Instead, it would exponentially increase payment to a select group of existing officers. Voting NO on Proposition F will prevent this irresponsible use of city funding.
- As of November 2023, SFPD had around 300 positions vacant in its budget, although funds were available to fill those positions with qualified applicants. As Sup. Aaron Peskin pointed out at the time, the staffing issue is tied more to a lack of applicants than to a failure to retain or adequately compensate officers. Voting NO on Proposition F will require city leaders to find a more direct way to address open positions and recruitment efforts in the SFPD.
- Opponents of Proposition F have correctly pointed out that other safety and social service workers in the city–members of the fire department, social workers, 911 dispatchers–are also working with diminished staffing levels but have not been offered comparable incentive payments. Voting NO on Proposition F will prevent the SFPD from creating a benefit that is unavailable to city employees in similar roles.
Top opposition to Proposition F:
- Proposition F is opposed by the ACLU of Northern California. It has also been opposed by Sup. Hillary Ronen, Sup. Dean Preston, Sup. Shamann Walton, and Police Commissioner Jesus Yañez.
Top support for Proposition F:
- Proposition F has the endorsement of the eight remaining members of the Board of Supervisors, including board president and mayoral candidate Aaron Peskin. It has also been endorsed by Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, State Sen. Scott Wiener, Assm. Matt Haney, and SF Mayor London Breed.
- Proposition F has also received the endorsement of many problematic groups, including GrowSF, TogetherSF Action, and San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs’ Association.
Vote NO on Proposition F to maintain the existing SFPD staffing process, and to prevent a doubling of the pension contribution for some eligible officers.
In accordance with the City Charter, the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) staffing levels are communicated every two years to the Police Commission by the Police Chief. This report details the number of full-duty sworn officers on the force, and makes a recommendation about staffing levels that the Police Commission then evaluates and acts on. The Charter does not define what qualifies as a full-duty sworn officer, which has introduced ambiguity into the process of making year-over-year staffing recommendations. Additionally, the recent amplification of concern around public safety has put a spotlight on SFPD staffing levels, although the prevalence of crime has often been misrepresented and exploited for political gain.
Proposition F would define a full-duty sworn officer as any full-time officer who is not on an extended leave, training at the Police Academy, or assigned to the airport, and would reduce the frequency of the staffing report prepared by the Police Chief to once every three years. Proposition F would also create the Deferred Retirement Option Program (DROP) for high-ranking full-duty officers who are at least 50 years old and have 25 years of police service. For the five years before their retirement, DROP would allow these officers to collect the equivalent of a pension payment in a tax-deferred, interest-bearing account, essentially doubling their compensation for the duration of their enrollment in the program. Proposition F would create the DROP program for an initial 5-year period, and then would allow the Board of Supervisors to renew it for additional 5-year cycles.
Why voting NO on Proposition F matters:
- While supporters of Proposition F tout it as a solution to understaffing, it does not propose any measures to build up the ranks of the SFPD. Instead, it would exponentially increase payment to a select group of existing officers. Voting NO on Proposition F will prevent this irresponsible use of city funding.
- As of November 2023, SFPD had around 300 positions vacant in its budget, although funds were available to fill those positions with qualified applicants. As Sup. Aaron Peskin pointed out at the time, the staffing issue is tied more to a lack of applicants than to a failure to retain or adequately compensate officers. Voting NO on Proposition F will require city leaders to find a more direct way to address open positions and recruitment efforts in the SFPD.
- Opponents of Proposition F have correctly pointed out that other safety and social service workers in the city–members of the fire department, social workers, 911 dispatchers–are also working with diminished staffing levels but have not been offered comparable incentive payments. Voting NO on Proposition F will prevent the SFPD from creating a benefit that is unavailable to city employees in similar roles.
Top opposition to Proposition F:
- Proposition F is opposed by the ACLU of Northern California. It has also been opposed by Sup. Hillary Ronen, Sup. Dean Preston, Sup. Shamann Walton, and Police Commissioner Jesus Yañez.
Top support for Proposition F:
- Proposition F has the endorsement of the eight remaining members of the Board of Supervisors, including board president and mayoral candidate Aaron Peskin. It has also been endorsed by Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, State Sen. Scott Wiener, Assm. Matt Haney, and SF Mayor London Breed.
- Proposition F has also received the endorsement of many problematic groups, including GrowSF, TogetherSF Action, and San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs’ Association.
City of San Francisco
Elect Ryan Khojasteh for District Attorney to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Ryan Khojasteh’s policy positions demonstrate that he will be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco County and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Khojasteh has the endorsement of some groups, including Bay Rising Action Fund, United Educators of San Francisco, Affordable Housing Alliance, and Tenant Associations Coalition of San Francisco. He has also received the endorsement of some elected leaders, including organizer Dolores Huerta, SF Supervisor Dean Preston, SF Board of Education Member Matt Alexander, and LA DA George Gascón.
Electoral history: In 2018, Khojasteh ran for CD-12, Speaker Emeritus Nancy Pelosi’s seat, but failed to advance out of the primary after receiving only 4% of the vote.
Top issues: Collaboration between law-enforcement and violence-prevention professionals, prosecuting violent and repeat offenders, crime-prevention programs, juvenile justice, victim support, and improving community policing.
Governance and community leadership experience: Khojasteh is an attorney, and has worked as a public defender, a prosecutor, and an assistant district attorney in both San Francisco and Alameda Counties. In San Francisco, he served as a community liaison, worked with the Juvenile and General Felonies Units, and focused on efforts to reduce neighborhood crime through evidence-based programs. When he advocated for those programs under interim DA Brooke Jenkins’s administration, he was terminated from the office. He has also worked on parole restitution and revocation, and on collaborative courts in Alameda County. Khojasteh is a longtime advocate for immigrant rights and policies that reduce hate crimes. He served for six years as a commissioner of immigrant rights for San Francisco.
Other background: Khojasteh is from the Bay Area. He is a first-generation American.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no March 2024 primary election for this race. Ryan Khojasteh and incumbent District Attorney Brooke Jenkins will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
DA Jenkins was appointed to serve as the interim district attorney by San Francisco Mayor London Breed after the successful recall of progressive former DA Chesa Boudin in June 2022. Both Mayor Breed and Interim DA Jenkins worked in support of the recall, which was primarily funded by Republican donors, and DA Jenkins was also a paid contractor of three nonprofit organizations with connections to the recall effort and the main recall funder. In November 2022, DA Jenkins won a special election to fulfill the remainder of the term.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Khojasteh’s campaign has raised $101,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: District Attorney Brooke Jenkins
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: District Attorney Jenkins’s campaign has raised $203,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California's 13th most populous county. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 15% Latino, 34% Asian, 5% Black.
Governance structure: San Francisco County’s district attorney oversees an office of deputy district attorneys, and the prosecution of criminal offenses across the county and unincorporated areas.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California elects a district attorney to manage the prosecution of criminal offenses related to the violation of state and county law. The district attorney has investigative authority, manages the apprehension of individuals identified through the investigative process, and holds charging and prosecutorial power. The work of the district attorney includes Municipal and Superior court operations, and serving as a legal liaison to the grand jury. The county Board of Supervisors provides financial oversight to the district attorney’s office, but holds no operational power over their work. District attorneys are elected to four-year terms in office.
Elect Ryan Khojasteh for District Attorney to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Ryan Khojasteh’s policy positions demonstrate that he will be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco County and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Khojasteh has the endorsement of some groups, including Bay Rising Action Fund, United Educators of San Francisco, Affordable Housing Alliance, and Tenant Associations Coalition of San Francisco. He has also received the endorsement of some elected leaders, including organizer Dolores Huerta, SF Supervisor Dean Preston, SF Board of Education Member Matt Alexander, and LA DA George Gascón.
Electoral history: In 2018, Khojasteh ran for CD-12, Speaker Emeritus Nancy Pelosi’s seat, but failed to advance out of the primary after receiving only 4% of the vote.
Top issues: Collaboration between law-enforcement and violence-prevention professionals, prosecuting violent and repeat offenders, crime-prevention programs, juvenile justice, victim support, and improving community policing.
Governance and community leadership experience: Khojasteh is an attorney, and has worked as a public defender, a prosecutor, and an assistant district attorney in both San Francisco and Alameda Counties. In San Francisco, he served as a community liaison, worked with the Juvenile and General Felonies Units, and focused on efforts to reduce neighborhood crime through evidence-based programs. When he advocated for those programs under interim DA Brooke Jenkins’s administration, he was terminated from the office. He has also worked on parole restitution and revocation, and on collaborative courts in Alameda County. Khojasteh is a longtime advocate for immigrant rights and policies that reduce hate crimes. He served for six years as a commissioner of immigrant rights for San Francisco.
Other background: Khojasteh is from the Bay Area. He is a first-generation American.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no March 2024 primary election for this race. Ryan Khojasteh and incumbent District Attorney Brooke Jenkins will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
DA Jenkins was appointed to serve as the interim district attorney by San Francisco Mayor London Breed after the successful recall of progressive former DA Chesa Boudin in June 2022. Both Mayor Breed and Interim DA Jenkins worked in support of the recall, which was primarily funded by Republican donors, and DA Jenkins was also a paid contractor of three nonprofit organizations with connections to the recall effort and the main recall funder. In November 2022, DA Jenkins won a special election to fulfill the remainder of the term.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Khojasteh’s campaign has raised $101,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: District Attorney Brooke Jenkins
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: District Attorney Jenkins’s campaign has raised $203,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California's 13th most populous county. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 15% Latino, 34% Asian, 5% Black.
Governance structure: San Francisco County’s district attorney oversees an office of deputy district attorneys, and the prosecution of criminal offenses across the county and unincorporated areas.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California elects a district attorney to manage the prosecution of criminal offenses related to the violation of state and county law. The district attorney has investigative authority, manages the apprehension of individuals identified through the investigative process, and holds charging and prosecutorial power. The work of the district attorney includes Municipal and Superior court operations, and serving as a legal liaison to the grand jury. The county Board of Supervisors provides financial oversight to the district attorney’s office, but holds no operational power over their work. District attorneys are elected to four-year terms in office.
Elect Ryan Khojasteh for District Attorney to put San Francisco County on the right track for progress.
Ryan Khojasteh’s policy positions demonstrate that he will be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco County and will govern effectively in the best interests of this diverse district.
Progressive endorsements: Khojasteh has the endorsement of some groups, including Bay Rising Action Fund, United Educators of San Francisco, Affordable Housing Alliance, and Tenant Associations Coalition of San Francisco. He has also received the endorsement of some elected leaders, including organizer Dolores Huerta, SF Supervisor Dean Preston, SF Board of Education Member Matt Alexander, and LA DA George Gascón.
Electoral history: In 2018, Khojasteh ran for CD-12, Speaker Emeritus Nancy Pelosi’s seat, but failed to advance out of the primary after receiving only 4% of the vote.
Top issues: Collaboration between law-enforcement and violence-prevention professionals, prosecuting violent and repeat offenders, crime-prevention programs, juvenile justice, victim support, and improving community policing.
Governance and community leadership experience: Khojasteh is an attorney, and has worked as a public defender, a prosecutor, and an assistant district attorney in both San Francisco and Alameda Counties. In San Francisco, he served as a community liaison, worked with the Juvenile and General Felonies Units, and focused on efforts to reduce neighborhood crime through evidence-based programs. When he advocated for those programs under interim DA Brooke Jenkins’s administration, he was terminated from the office. He has also worked on parole restitution and revocation, and on collaborative courts in Alameda County. Khojasteh is a longtime advocate for immigrant rights and policies that reduce hate crimes. He served for six years as a commissioner of immigrant rights for San Francisco.
Other background: Khojasteh is from the Bay Area. He is a first-generation American.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no March 2024 primary election for this race. Ryan Khojasteh and incumbent District Attorney Brooke Jenkins will contend in a run-off in the November 5 general election.
DA Jenkins was appointed to serve as the interim district attorney by San Francisco Mayor London Breed after the successful recall of progressive former DA Chesa Boudin in June 2022. Both Mayor Breed and Interim DA Jenkins worked in support of the recall, which was primarily funded by Republican donors, and DA Jenkins was also a paid contractor of three nonprofit organizations with connections to the recall effort and the main recall funder. In November 2022, DA Jenkins won a special election to fulfill the remainder of the term.
Candidate fundraising and pledges: Khojasteh’s campaign has raised $101,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
Opposing candidate: District Attorney Brooke Jenkins
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: District Attorney Jenkins’s campaign has raised $203,000 and is not funded by police, fossil fuel, real estate, or corporate PAC interests.
The District
County: San Francisco County is California's 13th most populous county. San Francisco County has a demographic breakdown of 15% Latino, 34% Asian, 5% Black.
Governance structure: San Francisco County’s district attorney oversees an office of deputy district attorneys, and the prosecution of criminal offenses across the county and unincorporated areas.
The Position
Each of the 58 counties in California elects a district attorney to manage the prosecution of criminal offenses related to the violation of state and county law. The district attorney has investigative authority, manages the apprehension of individuals identified through the investigative process, and holds charging and prosecutorial power. The work of the district attorney includes Municipal and Superior court operations, and serving as a legal liaison to the grand jury. The county Board of Supervisors provides financial oversight to the district attorney’s office, but holds no operational power over their work. District attorneys are elected to four-year terms in office.
Elect Aaron Peskin for Mayor to put San Francisco on the right track for progress.
Supervisor Aaron Peskin’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse city. San Francisco uses a ranked-choice voting system. We recommend that you vote for Aaron Peskin as the number one and only progressive choice in this race.
Endorsements: Supervisor Aaron Peskin has received some endorsements, including San Francisco Tenants Union, San Francisco Women’s Political Committee, Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club, California Working Families Party, Bay Rising Action, and many labor unions. He has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including Assm. Phil Ting, Supervisor Connie Chan, Supervisor Dean Preston, and former State Assemblymember Tom Ammiano.
Electoral History: Supervisor Peskin has served on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors representing District 3 since 2015, when he was elected with over 52% of the vote in a special election. In 2016, he won a full term on the board with over 71% of the vote. He was reelected in 2020, when he won his race by 13 points. While San Francisco maintains a limit of two consecutive terms, it does permit non-consecutive elected terms. In keeping with that standard, this is Supervisor Peskin’s second period of service on the Board of Supervisors, where he previously represented District 3 from 2001 to 2009. He is currently serving his third term as president of the Board.
Key initiatives: As a member of the Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Peskin has been an effective and influential leader during his two decades of public service. He has championed initiatives to increase funding for Muni, establish a 100-foot buffer zone around abortion clinics, create a commercial vacancy tax, and protect tenants’ rights to organize. He has passed initiatives to require the establishment of affordable housing in new private developments, ease the process for converting downtown office buildings to housing, and put a successful $300 million housing bond to voters in March 2024.
Governance and community leadership experience: Supervisor Peskin is a commissioner on the Bay Conservation and Development Commission and the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority. He previously served on the California Coastal Commission.
Supervisor Peskin attended UC Santa Cruz, where he worked on student initiatives to limit enrollment growth and campus housing development. He also served as president of his local neighborhood association, Telegraph Hill Dwellers, where he pursued efforts to limit building development and the conversion of local buildings. He served as head of the San Francisco Democratic Party between supervisor terms.
Other background: Supervisor Peskin is from Berkeley, and is a longtime resident of Telegraph Hill.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary for this race in the March 2024 election. There are 53 candidates who have filed to run in the nonpartisan November general election, including incumbent Mayor London Breed, Supervisor Aaron Peskin, Daniel Lurie, and Supervisor Ahsha SafaÍ.
Candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Supervisor Peskin’s campaign has raised $1.1 million.
Opposing candidate: Mayor London Breed
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Breed’s campaign has raised $4 million.
Opposing candidate: Daniel Lurie
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Lurie’s campaign has raised $6.6 million.
Opposing candidate: Supervisor Ahsha Safaí
Candidate’s fundraising and pledges: SafaÍ’s campaign has raised $980,000.
Opposing candidate: Mark Farrell
Candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Farrell’s campaign has raised $2.2 million.
During his second term on the Board of Supervisors, an ethics investigation found that Farrell’s 2010 campaign had inappropriately coordinated with an independent political committee. While he was ordered to pay a substantial fine of $191,000, he challenged the lawsuit and ultimately settled with the city for $25,000. Similarly, his ties to the billionaire-funded PAC TogetherSF and his history of soliciting donations from companies that had business with the city for a nonprofit for which his wife serves on the board have drawn criticism.
The District
City: San Francisco is San Francisco County’s only city. San Francisco’s mayor and city council oversee the needs of 800,000 people and manage an estimated operating budget of $14.6 billion annually.
District demographics: As of the 2020 Census, San Francisco had a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 7% Black.
Recent election results: San Francisco County, which includes San Francisco, voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 72 points and for Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 15 points.
The Position
San Francisco uses a mayor–board of supervisors government structure, in which the mayor is elected at large and acts as the head of the city and county government and as the chief executive officer. The 11-person Board of Supervisors, which also acts as a city council, is responsible for establishing policy, passing local laws (called ordinances), voting on budget appropriations, and developing an overall vision for the city. The mayor of San Francisco has veto and emergency powers and is responsible for managing many departments and agencies. They also carry out ordinances, ensure coordination among different branches of city government, and submit the city’s annual budget proposal. In San Francisco, a mayor is elected to a 4-year term, with a limit of two consecutive terms.
Elect Aaron Peskin for Mayor to put San Francisco on the right track for progress.
Supervisor Aaron Peskin’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse city. San Francisco uses a ranked-choice voting system. We recommend that you vote for Aaron Peskin as the number one and only progressive choice in this race.
Endorsements: Supervisor Aaron Peskin has received some endorsements, including San Francisco Tenants Union, San Francisco Women’s Political Committee, Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club, California Working Families Party, Bay Rising Action, and many labor unions. He has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including Assm. Phil Ting, Supervisor Connie Chan, Supervisor Dean Preston, and former State Assemblymember Tom Ammiano.
Electoral History: Supervisor Peskin has served on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors representing District 3 since 2015, when he was elected with over 52% of the vote in a special election. In 2016, he won a full term on the board with over 71% of the vote. He was reelected in 2020, when he won his race by 13 points. While San Francisco maintains a limit of two consecutive terms, it does permit non-consecutive elected terms. In keeping with that standard, this is Supervisor Peskin’s second period of service on the Board of Supervisors, where he previously represented District 3 from 2001 to 2009. He is currently serving his third term as president of the Board.
Key initiatives: As a member of the Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Peskin has been an effective and influential leader during his two decades of public service. He has championed initiatives to increase funding for Muni, establish a 100-foot buffer zone around abortion clinics, create a commercial vacancy tax, and protect tenants’ rights to organize. He has passed initiatives to require the establishment of affordable housing in new private developments, ease the process for converting downtown office buildings to housing, and put a successful $300 million housing bond to voters in March 2024.
Governance and community leadership experience: Supervisor Peskin is a commissioner on the Bay Conservation and Development Commission and the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority. He previously served on the California Coastal Commission.
Supervisor Peskin attended UC Santa Cruz, where he worked on student initiatives to limit enrollment growth and campus housing development. He also served as president of his local neighborhood association, Telegraph Hill Dwellers, where he pursued efforts to limit building development and the conversion of local buildings. He served as head of the San Francisco Democratic Party between supervisor terms.
Other background: Supervisor Peskin is from Berkeley, and is a longtime resident of Telegraph Hill.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary for this race in the March 2024 election. There are 53 candidates who have filed to run in the nonpartisan November general election, including incumbent Mayor London Breed, Supervisor Aaron Peskin, Daniel Lurie, and Supervisor Ahsha SafaÍ.
Candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Supervisor Peskin’s campaign has raised $1.1 million.
Opposing candidate: Mayor London Breed
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Breed’s campaign has raised $4 million.
Opposing candidate: Daniel Lurie
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Lurie’s campaign has raised $6.6 million.
Opposing candidate: Supervisor Ahsha Safaí
Candidate’s fundraising and pledges: SafaÍ’s campaign has raised $980,000.
Opposing candidate: Mark Farrell
Candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Farrell’s campaign has raised $2.2 million.
During his second term on the Board of Supervisors, an ethics investigation found that Farrell’s 2010 campaign had inappropriately coordinated with an independent political committee. While he was ordered to pay a substantial fine of $191,000, he challenged the lawsuit and ultimately settled with the city for $25,000. Similarly, his ties to the billionaire-funded PAC TogetherSF and his history of soliciting donations from companies that had business with the city for a nonprofit for which his wife serves on the board have drawn criticism.
The District
City: San Francisco is San Francisco County’s only city. San Francisco’s mayor and city council oversee the needs of 800,000 people and manage an estimated operating budget of $14.6 billion annually.
District demographics: As of the 2020 Census, San Francisco had a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 7% Black.
Recent election results: San Francisco County, which includes San Francisco, voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 72 points and for Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 15 points.
The Position
San Francisco uses a mayor–board of supervisors government structure, in which the mayor is elected at large and acts as the head of the city and county government and as the chief executive officer. The 11-person Board of Supervisors, which also acts as a city council, is responsible for establishing policy, passing local laws (called ordinances), voting on budget appropriations, and developing an overall vision for the city. The mayor of San Francisco has veto and emergency powers and is responsible for managing many departments and agencies. They also carry out ordinances, ensure coordination among different branches of city government, and submit the city’s annual budget proposal. In San Francisco, a mayor is elected to a 4-year term, with a limit of two consecutive terms.
Elect Aaron Peskin for Mayor to put San Francisco on the right track for progress.
Supervisor Aaron Peskin’s track record and policy positions demonstrate that he will be a progressive voice for the constituents of San Francisco and will govern effectively in the best interest of this diverse city. San Francisco uses a ranked-choice voting system. We recommend that you vote for Aaron Peskin as the number one and only progressive choice in this race.
Endorsements: Supervisor Aaron Peskin has received some endorsements, including San Francisco Tenants Union, San Francisco Women’s Political Committee, Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club, California Working Families Party, Bay Rising Action, and many labor unions. He has also received the endorsement of some local leaders, including Assm. Phil Ting, Supervisor Connie Chan, Supervisor Dean Preston, and former State Assemblymember Tom Ammiano.
Electoral History: Supervisor Peskin has served on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors representing District 3 since 2015, when he was elected with over 52% of the vote in a special election. In 2016, he won a full term on the board with over 71% of the vote. He was reelected in 2020, when he won his race by 13 points. While San Francisco maintains a limit of two consecutive terms, it does permit non-consecutive elected terms. In keeping with that standard, this is Supervisor Peskin’s second period of service on the Board of Supervisors, where he previously represented District 3 from 2001 to 2009. He is currently serving his third term as president of the Board.
Key initiatives: As a member of the Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Peskin has been an effective and influential leader during his two decades of public service. He has championed initiatives to increase funding for Muni, establish a 100-foot buffer zone around abortion clinics, create a commercial vacancy tax, and protect tenants’ rights to organize. He has passed initiatives to require the establishment of affordable housing in new private developments, ease the process for converting downtown office buildings to housing, and put a successful $300 million housing bond to voters in March 2024.
Governance and community leadership experience: Supervisor Peskin is a commissioner on the Bay Conservation and Development Commission and the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority. He previously served on the California Coastal Commission.
Supervisor Peskin attended UC Santa Cruz, where he worked on student initiatives to limit enrollment growth and campus housing development. He also served as president of his local neighborhood association, Telegraph Hill Dwellers, where he pursued efforts to limit building development and the conversion of local buildings. He served as head of the San Francisco Democratic Party between supervisor terms.
Other background: Supervisor Peskin is from Berkeley, and is a longtime resident of Telegraph Hill.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary for this race in the March 2024 election. There are 53 candidates who have filed to run in the nonpartisan November general election, including incumbent Mayor London Breed, Supervisor Aaron Peskin, Daniel Lurie, and Supervisor Ahsha SafaÍ.
Candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Supervisor Peskin’s campaign has raised $1.1 million.
Opposing candidate: Mayor London Breed
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Breed’s campaign has raised $4 million.
Opposing candidate: Daniel Lurie
Opposing candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Lurie’s campaign has raised $6.6 million.
Opposing candidate: Supervisor Ahsha Safaí
Candidate’s fundraising and pledges: SafaÍ’s campaign has raised $980,000.
Opposing candidate: Mark Farrell
Candidate’s fundraising and pledges: Farrell’s campaign has raised $2.2 million.
During his second term on the Board of Supervisors, an ethics investigation found that Farrell’s 2010 campaign had inappropriately coordinated with an independent political committee. While he was ordered to pay a substantial fine of $191,000, he challenged the lawsuit and ultimately settled with the city for $25,000. Similarly, his ties to the billionaire-funded PAC TogetherSF and his history of soliciting donations from companies that had business with the city for a nonprofit for which his wife serves on the board have drawn criticism.
The District
City: San Francisco is San Francisco County’s only city. San Francisco’s mayor and city council oversee the needs of 800,000 people and manage an estimated operating budget of $14.6 billion annually.
District demographics: As of the 2020 Census, San Francisco had a demographic breakdown of 16% Latino, 37% Asian, and 7% Black.
Recent election results: San Francisco County, which includes San Francisco, voted for Joe Biden for president in 2020 by 72 points and for Gavin Newsom for governor in 2022 by 15 points.
The Position
San Francisco uses a mayor–board of supervisors government structure, in which the mayor is elected at large and acts as the head of the city and county government and as the chief executive officer. The 11-person Board of Supervisors, which also acts as a city council, is responsible for establishing policy, passing local laws (called ordinances), voting on budget appropriations, and developing an overall vision for the city. The mayor of San Francisco has veto and emergency powers and is responsible for managing many departments and agencies. They also carry out ordinances, ensure coordination among different branches of city government, and submit the city’s annual budget proposal. In San Francisco, a mayor is elected to a 4-year term, with a limit of two consecutive terms.
Community College Board
Depending on where you live, you may have one of the below races on your ballot.
San Francisco Board of Education Board
Courage California joins our progressive partners, including California Working Families Party, in encouraging voters to reelect Board Trustee Aliya Christi to City College of San Francisco Board of Trustees.
Governance and community leadership experience: Board Trustee Christi has served in this seat since 2020, when she won 11% of the vote and was one of the top four candidates elected to office.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary election for this race. Board Trustee Aliya Christi, Board President Alan Wong, Ruth Ferguson, Ben Kaplan, Leanna Louie, Heather McCarty, Julio Ramos, and Luis Zamora will contend in the November 5 general election.
The District
School system: City College of San Francisco (CCSF) is located in San Francisco County, which is California’s 13th most populous county. CCSF includes eight centers, and offers over 250 degree and certificate programs. It is the first community college in the country to offer free tuition to all students who reside in San Francisco.
Governance structure: CCSF has a seven-person board that provides administrative oversight and manages a budget of $304 million annually.
The Position
Members of the CCSF Board of Trustees are elected in an at-large race where the top four candidates go on to serve. Terms last four years.
Courage California joins our progressive partners, including California Working Families Party, in encouraging voters to reelect Board Trustee Aliya Christi to City College of San Francisco Board of Trustees.
Governance and community leadership experience: Board Trustee Christi has served in this seat since 2020, when she won 11% of the vote and was one of the top four candidates elected to office.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary election for this race. Board Trustee Aliya Christi, Board President Alan Wong, Ruth Ferguson, Ben Kaplan, Leanna Louie, Heather McCarty, Julio Ramos, and Luis Zamora will contend in the November 5 general election.
The District
School system: City College of San Francisco (CCSF) is located in San Francisco County, which is California’s 13th most populous county. CCSF includes eight centers, and offers over 250 degree and certificate programs. It is the first community college in the country to offer free tuition to all students who reside in San Francisco.
Governance structure: CCSF has a seven-person board that provides administrative oversight and manages a budget of $304 million annually.
The Position
Members of the CCSF Board of Trustees are elected in an at-large race where the top four candidates go on to serve. Terms last four years.
Courage California joins our progressive partners, including California Working Families Party, in encouraging voters to reelect Board Trustee Aliya Christi to City College of San Francisco Board of Trustees.
Governance and community leadership experience: Board Trustee Christi has served in this seat since 2020, when she won 11% of the vote and was one of the top four candidates elected to office.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary election for this race. Board Trustee Aliya Christi, Board President Alan Wong, Ruth Ferguson, Ben Kaplan, Leanna Louie, Heather McCarty, Julio Ramos, and Luis Zamora will contend in the November 5 general election.
The District
School system: City College of San Francisco (CCSF) is located in San Francisco County, which is California’s 13th most populous county. CCSF includes eight centers, and offers over 250 degree and certificate programs. It is the first community college in the country to offer free tuition to all students who reside in San Francisco.
Governance structure: CCSF has a seven-person board that provides administrative oversight and manages a budget of $304 million annually.
The Position
Members of the CCSF Board of Trustees are elected in an at-large race where the top four candidates go on to serve. Terms last four years.
Elect Ruth Ferguson to keep San Francisco City Colleges on the right track for progress.
More information about this race is coming soon!
Elect Ruth Ferguson to keep San Francisco City Colleges on the right track for progress.
More information about this race is coming soon!
Elect Ruth Ferguson to keep San Francisco City Colleges on the right track for progress.
More information about this race is coming soon!
San Francisco City College Board Board
Elect Kelsey Iino to keep Los Angeles Community Colleges on the right track for progress.
More information about this race is coming soon!
Elect Kelsey Iino to keep Los Angeles Community Colleges on the right track for progress.
More information about this race is coming soon!
Elect Kelsey Iino to keep Los Angeles Community Colleges on the right track for progress.
More information about this race is coming soon!
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Board
Courage California joins our progressive partners, including California Working Families Party, in encouraging voters to elect Edward Wright to the Bay Area Rapid Transit Board of Directors.
Electoral history: Wright has not run for public office previously.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary election for this race. Edward Wright and Joe Sangirardi will contend in the November 5 general election.
The District
Transit system: Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) spans five counties, including Alameda, Contra Costa, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara. BART includes 50 stations and over 130 miles of track, and serves around 180,000 riders each day.
Governance structure: BART has a nine-person board that provides administrative oversight and manages a budget of $2.4 billion annually.
The Position
Members of the BART Board of Directors are elected in districted races. Terms last four years.
Courage California joins our progressive partners, including California Working Families Party, in encouraging voters to elect Edward Wright to the Bay Area Rapid Transit Board of Directors.
Electoral history: Wright has not run for public office previously.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary election for this race. Edward Wright and Joe Sangirardi will contend in the November 5 general election.
The District
Transit system: Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) spans five counties, including Alameda, Contra Costa, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara. BART includes 50 stations and over 130 miles of track, and serves around 180,000 riders each day.
Governance structure: BART has a nine-person board that provides administrative oversight and manages a budget of $2.4 billion annually.
The Position
Members of the BART Board of Directors are elected in districted races. Terms last four years.
Courage California joins our progressive partners, including California Working Families Party, in encouraging voters to elect Edward Wright to the Bay Area Rapid Transit Board of Directors.
Electoral history: Wright has not run for public office previously.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary election for this race. Edward Wright and Joe Sangirardi will contend in the November 5 general election.
The District
Transit system: Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) spans five counties, including Alameda, Contra Costa, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara. BART includes 50 stations and over 130 miles of track, and serves around 180,000 riders each day.
Governance structure: BART has a nine-person board that provides administrative oversight and manages a budget of $2.4 billion annually.
The Position
Members of the BART Board of Directors are elected in districted races. Terms last four years.
San Francisco Unified School District
Courage California joins our progressive partners, including California Working Families Party, in encouraging voters to reelect Board President Matt Alexander to San Francisco Unified School District Board of Education.
Governance and community leadership experience: Board President Alexander has served in this seat since 2020, when he won 13% of the vote and was one of the top four candidates elected to office.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary election for this race. Board President Matt Alexander, Min Chang, Virginia Cheung, Lefteris Eleftheriou, Parag Gupta, Ann Hsu, Jaime Huling, John Jersin, Maddy Krantz, Laurance Lem Lee, and Supryia Marie Ray will contend in the November 5 general election.
The District
School system: San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) is located in San Francisco County, which is California’s 13th most populous county. SFUSD includes 17 high schools, 21 middle schools, 77 elementary schools serving a population of roughly 49,000 Californians.
Governance structure: SFUSD has a seven-person board that provides administrative oversight and manages a budget of $1.3 billion annually.
The Position
Members of the SFUSD are elected in an at-large race where the top four candidates go on to serve. Terms last four years, and there are no term limits.
Courage California joins our progressive partners, including California Working Families Party, in encouraging voters to reelect Board President Matt Alexander to San Francisco Unified School District Board of Education.
Governance and community leadership experience: Board President Alexander has served in this seat since 2020, when he won 13% of the vote and was one of the top four candidates elected to office.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary election for this race. Board President Matt Alexander, Min Chang, Virginia Cheung, Lefteris Eleftheriou, Parag Gupta, Ann Hsu, Jaime Huling, John Jersin, Maddy Krantz, Laurance Lem Lee, and Supryia Marie Ray will contend in the November 5 general election.
The District
School system: San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) is located in San Francisco County, which is California’s 13th most populous county. SFUSD includes 17 high schools, 21 middle schools, 77 elementary schools serving a population of roughly 49,000 Californians.
Governance structure: SFUSD has a seven-person board that provides administrative oversight and manages a budget of $1.3 billion annually.
The Position
Members of the SFUSD are elected in an at-large race where the top four candidates go on to serve. Terms last four years, and there are no term limits.
Courage California joins our progressive partners, including California Working Families Party, in encouraging voters to reelect Board President Matt Alexander to San Francisco Unified School District Board of Education.
Governance and community leadership experience: Board President Alexander has served in this seat since 2020, when he won 13% of the vote and was one of the top four candidates elected to office.
The Race
Primary election results: There was no primary election for this race. Board President Matt Alexander, Min Chang, Virginia Cheung, Lefteris Eleftheriou, Parag Gupta, Ann Hsu, Jaime Huling, John Jersin, Maddy Krantz, Laurance Lem Lee, and Supryia Marie Ray will contend in the November 5 general election.
The District
School system: San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) is located in San Francisco County, which is California’s 13th most populous county. SFUSD includes 17 high schools, 21 middle schools, 77 elementary schools serving a population of roughly 49,000 Californians.
Governance structure: SFUSD has a seven-person board that provides administrative oversight and manages a budget of $1.3 billion annually.
The Position
Members of the SFUSD are elected in an at-large race where the top four candidates go on to serve. Terms last four years, and there are no term limits.