Political Notes: SF mayoral candidates differ on trimming oversight bodies

  • by Matthew S. Bajko, Assistant Editor
  • Monday September 16, 2024
Share this Post:
A Yes on Prop D mailer features mayoral candidate Mark Farrell, who is a big backer and has an independent campaign committee to raise money for the passage of the charter amendment.
A Yes on Prop D mailer features mayoral candidate Mark Farrell, who is a big backer and has an independent campaign committee to raise money for the passage of the charter amendment.

Ensuring there is LGBTQ representation on San Francisco's myriad oversight bodies for city agencies and departments is a perennial concern. Out appointees not only can offer perspectives and experiences unique to the LGBTQ community, they often go on to seek elected office.

The mayor and supervisors share appointment powers to such commissions and panels, at times splitting up the seats between mayoral and supervisorial appointees who usually must seek confirmation from the Board of Supervisors. For those oversight bodies with solely mayoral appointees, the supervisors have confirmation powers where a majority of the 11 members can either accept or reject the nominee.

Because of various factors, some of the more high-profile commissions can end up with no LGBTQ members on them for stretches of time. Such has been the case this year with the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Board of Directors.

It has been without an LGBTQ member since last fall. Earlier this summer Mayor London Breed appointed gay transit advocate Mike Chen to a seat on it, but his confirmation was held up in late July by members of the supervisors' Rules Committee so he could meet with Chinatown leaders and others.

The board panel will take up Chen's nomination again Monday when it meets at 10 a.m. He is now expected to receive confirmation by the Board of Supervisors this month.

Two of the three supervisors now serving on the Rules Committee, Board President Aaron Peskin and District 11 Supervisor Ahsha Safaí, are among the candidates running on the November 5 ballot to oust Breed from Room 200 at City Hall. As part of its questionnaire for this year's mayoral contenders, the Bay Area Reporter asked each candidate what their philosophy would be on appointing LGBTQ commissioners.

They were also asked where they stand in regard to the effort backed by the group TogetherSF Action to slash the number of such oversight bodies down to 65 from the city's roughly 130 boards and commissions. Under Proposition D on the November 5 ballot, the city administrator would convene a five-member Commission Streamlining Task Force.

The mayor, the supervisors' board president, city administrator, city attorney, and controller would each name a person to serve on it. Within nine months of convening, it would need to submit a report to the mayor and supervisors on which existing commissions should be scrapped apart from those that Prop D specifically says should remain.

City leaders would have 15 months to enact the recommendations. Should they fail to do so, then all oversight bodies not required by state or federal law would cease to exist 30 days after that deadline.

Prop D would also strengthen mayoral powers by giving the mayor appointment prerogative of at least two-thirds of the members of the commissions. The supervisors would no longer confirm mayoral appointees, while the mayor would have sole authority to appoint and remove most city department heads.

It also would give the police chief sole authority to adopt rules governing police officers' conduct. The Police Commission would retain authority to discipline police officers and retain oversight over the Department of Police Accountability.

Peskin worked to put a competing measure on the fall ballot, Proposition E. The local charter amendment, which like Prop D needs a simple majority vote to pass, would establish the Commission Streamlining Task Force charged with making recommendations to the mayor and supervisors about ways to pare down the city's boards and commissions but with no mandate on how many there should be.

It would need to begin meeting by February 1 and would be comprised of five members. The city administrator, controller, and city attorney would each have a seat on it, while the board president would name a labor official to it and the mayor would appoint to it a person with expertise in open and accountable government.

If adopted, Prop E would require the Budget and Legislative Analyst to prepare a report by no later than September 1, 2025, analyzing the cost of the city's current system of boards and commissions, as well as the projected financial impact of eliminating or consolidating commissions. The task force would have until February 1, 2026, to present its recommendations to the mayor and supervisors.

Whichever measure receives the most votes will become effective. The dueling measures have divided the mayoral candidates, who all largely told the B.A.R. they believe in ensuring any city commissions represent the diversity of San Franciscans, including those from the LGBTQ community.

Former mayor Mark Farrell, who represented supervisorial district 2 and is a venture capitalist, is a main backer of Prop D. He has faced strong criticism for setting up an independent campaign committee in support of the charter amendment because of its ability to accept unlimited donations, unlike his mayoral campaign committee being capped at receiving $500 from donors.

He defended his support of Prop D to the B.A.R., calling it "one of the most important measures on the ballot for the future of San Francisco." Farrell added there is no need to have more than 1,200 unelected commissioners in a city the size of San Francisco, when larger municipalities like Los Angeles and San Diego have fewer such positions.

"These unelected commissions create unnecessary bureaucracy that prevents the government from effectively addressing the needs of residents. Over time, the Board of Supervisors has chipped away at the mayor's ability to effectively lead the city. The mayor can't fully hold departments accountable," contended Farrell.

He added, "In many cases, the mayor can't actually fully hire or fire department heads. The proposed reforms will streamline the commission system, eliminate unnecessary commissions, and deliver a more effective and responsive government."

LGBTQs on advisory panels

As for queer representation, Farrell told the B.A.R. he is committed to having "an administration that reflects San Francisco and our values. The LGBTQ community is a vital part of San Francisco, and I would absolutely commit to appointing LGBTQ individuals to city commissions."

Breed initially had backed Prop D but then switched her stance last month due to being concerned about the money Farrell was raising via his committee in support of it. One of the seven candidates in the mayoral race who returned the B.A.R.'s questionnaire, Breed expressed misgivings with both of the commission-trimming measures.

"I have concerns over the current proposed charter amendments on the ballot. Charter reform is a complex process that should be undertaken with care, attention, expertise, and the engagement of those impacted," wrote Breed.

As for LGBTQ commissioners, Breed noted she had appointed more than 46 LGBTQ people to serve as a department head or a commissioner since becoming mayor in 2018. She also told the B.A.R. that over half of her current policy team identifies as LGBTQ.

"I am a big believer in the government representing the people that it serves," wrote Breed. "Throughout my administration I have made it a priority to uplift and appoint LGBTQ leaders to positions of power including commissions and as leaders of our departments."

Peskin, who represents District 3, has been one of the most vocal opponents against Prop D. He wrote the ballot arguments for why voters should reject Prop D and pass Prop E.

"Unlike Mayor Breed and former Supervisor Farrell, I am opposing the misguided Together SF Commission Charter amendment that will take a meat ax to many important oversight bodies that are important to women, children and families, the LGBTQ community, and many more," wrote Peskin, who had submitted his questionnaire prior to Breed's coming out against Prop D. "Instead, I together with former city controller Ed Harrington have proposed a ballot measure for the November ballot to ensure the commission reform is undertaken in the light of day with public participation rather than in a backroom."

He added that the city "should be proud of its robust infrastructure of commissions and other public bodies that promote dialogue, transparency, and public engagement. Commissions are where questions are raised, problems are identified, and solutions are proposed. While I agree that there is room for commission reform, we need to go about it in the right way with public input and careful deliberation."

As for who should serve on them, Peskin told the B.A.R. that he is "proud" of his track record of LGBTQ commissioner appointments, which included the city's first transgender commissioner, Theresa Sparks.

"I believe that we need to appoint commissioners that truly reflect the diversity that makes our city strong and that includes a substantial number of LGBTQ commissioners as well as senior mayoral staff," wrote Peskin.

Safaí, who stepped in as chair of the rules committee in July and is now its vice chair, told the B.A.R. his philosophy on LGBTQ commission representation "has always been that we need to have representative commissioners that are reflective of San Francisco."

He opposes Prop D.

"I do not support the ballot measure that would limit the city to 65 commissions. Much of the work that commissions do is to provide oversight for our city government. I would not support lessening the amount of citizen oversight at this time," wrote Safaí.

Daniel Lurie, an heir to the Levi's fortune who later became founder and CEO of the nonprofit Tipping Point Community aimed at addressing the Bay Area's homelessness epidemic, told the B.A.R. that most of the city's boards and commissions "have unclear or redundant duties" and should be culled.

"Any time you have a commission overseeing a department that no longer exists, you have a problem. I believe this dilutes the intent of the voters who clearly want accountability and oversight inside City Hall," wrote Lurie. "Commissions can be valuable to the public process by bringing in citizens with different areas of expertise and life experiences, but that doesn't happen when the structure is so byzantine that even people on the inside have trouble navigating it. I believe we need commission reform with an inclusive public process to reshape the bureaucracy to be more responsive to residents and deliver results."

As for who should serve on those commissions that remain, Lurie told the B.A.R. he "would prioritize appointing LGBTQ commissioners who reflect the community's diversity and bring relevant expertise and experience" if elected mayor.

"San Francisco has a rich history of being a safe haven and a center for LGBTQ+ rights, and it's vital that the city's leadership reflects that legacy," wrote Lurie, noting that city commissioners "should be actively engaged with the community and committed to advocating for policies that promote equality and address issues like discrimination and homelessness."

Travel business entrepreneur Keith Freedman, a gay Castro resident, told the B.A.R. his philosophy as mayor would be to "appoint people based on their qualifications for the job. As an employer I do not discriminate and let the employee's skills and abilities drive the decision. I think this is the kind of consideration all members of our community want: equality and equity and a level playing field."

He supports reducing the number of city commissions to 65 or fewer.

"I support such a ballot measure and may consider even fewer," wrote Freedman. "Most of these commissions are simply ways for elected officials to repay political debt or curry political favor."

Transit engineer Shahram Shariati, who also works as a residential property manager, told the B.A.R. he also backs Prop D and would like to see fewer than the 65 commissions it would allow.

"This is one of the reasons why the city's processes are so cumbersome. My goal is to appoint qualified individuals to commissioner positions, including members of the LGBTQ community," he wrote. "I also advocate for a hiring process that is based purely on skills and experience, without consideration of names, religion, sexual orientation, or other irrelevant factors."

Keep abreast of the latest LGBTQ political news by following the Political Notebook on Threads @ https://www.threads.net/@matthewbajko.

Got a tip on LGBTQ politics? Call Matthew S. Bajko at (415) 829-8836 or email [email protected]

Never miss a story! Keep up to date on the latest news, arts, politics, entertainment, and nightlife.

Sign up for the Bay Area Reporter's free weekday email newsletter. You'll receive our newsletters and special offers from our community partners.

Support California's largest LGBTQ newsroom. Your one-time, monthly, or annual contribution advocates for LGBTQ communities. Amplify a trusted voice providing news, information, and cultural coverage to all members of our community, regardless of their ability to pay -- Donate today!