Updated for 2023!
San Francisco has a very, very extremely left group of people on the Board of Supervisors. And I think in some instances their focus is to not necessarily do what’s best for people in San Francisco, but do what’s best to stay in the good graces of this whole lefty movement.
Mayor London Breed, 11/11/2020
Below I rate and review San Francisco’s 11 Supervisors as of June, 2023.
Current grades:
| Supe | Grade |
| Joel Engardio, Matt Dorsey | A- |
| Rafael Mandelman, Catherine Stefani | B |
| Asha Safai | C |
| Myrna Melgar | D |
| Shamann Walton, Aaron Peskin, Connie Chan, Dean Preston, Hillary Ronen | F |
Here are the factors I used when grading:
Opposing “uniquely San Francisco” ideas – If every other city and town in America has rejected a policy, it’s probably something SF should stay away from too. Yet from cash allowances for addicts to “reparations” for long gone black citizens to “public banks” to welfare for pregnant women based on skin color to “universal basic incomes” for trans people to cash payments to “legacy businesses”, SF indulges in a slew of programs that well governed cities won’t go near. Good local leaders frown on these.
Doing the right thing over virtue signaling – Virtue signaling means statements or actions meant to burnish your persona in pointless or unethical ways. It could mean touting achievements that aren’t real, or shedding crocodile tears at a single traffic fatality while ignoring the hundreds of overdose deaths. A classic example is Connie Chan leading press conference over a drawing of Chesa Boudin in a Mao jacket. Or it could mean taking the side of a legal issue you know to be wrong: SF’s 2020 redistricting mess is an example – see Asha Safai below. Peskin’s resolution bring in the DOJ in the Banko Brown killing, when our DA stated clearly that there wasn’t enough evidence to charge the security guard, is another example:
Independence from special interests – Supes should accept minimal influence from PACs, unions, and other interest groups that seek to buy them. Individual donations, and SF’s generous 6X matching grants, are plenty of money to fund a campaign.
Awareness of our crime and drug issues – Open drug dealing, and many property crimes, from retail theft to car and home break-ins, are a pressing issue city leaders should focus on, not ignore. Repeating “crime is down” as retail businesses hire armed guards and put products behind plexiglass is a classic example.
Respect for our tax dollars – Given SF’s high levels of spending relative other cities, good Supes should be vigilant about spending our money carefully, be on the lookout for ways to save, and speak out against waste and corruption. Rubber stamping a $14B budget each year without a second thought is a red flag. Any supe proposing an expensive new idea should also state how they intend to pay for it.
Professional behavior – It’s no secret that SF attracts more than its share of America’s nut cases, who often drift here after being rejected by their home communities. Sometimes they slip into government. We need to vote out those with extreme views (see Preston below), unprofessional behavior, or just general looniness (see Ronen below). Abusive drunks should also be kept far from city hall.
None of our Supes deserve an”A” rating. For example, in March 2023, all 11 voiced enthusiastic support for exploring “reparations” for mostly former black residents (only our three worst supes are actually demanding money for it though). And all of the 2022 board voted to recite a speech about our being on “Ohlone land” at the beginning of every BOS meeting (Joel and Matt weren’t on the board yet). Here’s how voters feel about such nonsense:
And there are other such issues. Still, as we’ll see below, there’s tremendous range in quality between our better Supes and the deplorables at the bottom of the page.
Matt Dorsey (D6). Grade: A-
Prior career: 20 years SF city communications director, mostly for the city attorney’s office.
Status: Up for re-election, Nov. 2026.
Matt’s victory over Honey Mahogany was in some ways more impressive than Joel’s win. While Honey wasn’t an incumbent, she was the right hand man of incumbent Matt Haney. And as chair of the local Democratic party, she had the full backing of SF’s corrupt local political machine. But voters had had enough ACAB radicalism, and Matt won handily.
Dorsey is a long time city employee, recovering addict, and HIV+ gay man. He’s not a member of SF’s radical left, so his common sense views are probably similar to yours:
Dorsey and Stefani were the only two members of the pre-2022 Board to speak out in favor of the Chesa Boudin recall, with Dorsey offering bulletproof reasoning behind his decision. Matt also spent the past couple of years as a comm director for SFPD, providing a needed
Joel Engardio (D4). Grade: A-
Prior career: Journalist, start up and non profit employee.
Status: Up for re-election, Nov 2026.
Until we go back to part time supervisors (which will allow those with full time careers to run and serve), Joel is about the best Supe we’re going to get. His impressive win over incumbent Gordon Mar was a result of knocking on 14,000 doors and voter frustration with Mar’s hard left politicians.
Both before and after his election, Joel has been a voice of sanity and moderation on our BOS. He has detailed and thoughtful positions on important issues. He shies away from virtue signalling and focuses on bread and butter issues big…
…and small. He’s owned by no special interests, and so is focused on fighting for you and me. As of 2023, he’s the standard by which other supes should be judged.
Catherine Stefani (D2). Grade: B
Prior career: Deputy District Attorney, legislative aide.
Status: Terming out, Nov. 2026.
Stefani is an asset to to BOS. For one thing, she has been by far the most vocal opponent of crime in the city. She’s directly refuted the “crime is down” gaslighting other board members have promoted. And while some city leaders encourage drug use under the guise of “harm reduction”, Stefani has spoken out against this practice .
Stefani is also the only current supervisor who’s tried to bring our oversized city spending in line with normal cities. For example, she refused to support our $13.6 billion 2021 budget, calling it, correctly, “fiscally irresponsible”. She’s may be the only Supe who advocates treating tax dollars with respect.
While continuously engaged with the needs of her district, Stefani has refused to stoop to the performative virtue signaling and identity politics that plague the more radical members of the board. And there’s no evidence of corruption or ownership by special interests.
She’s not perfect though. Giving in to union corruption on automated vehicles versus moving us forward puts her on the wrong side of history. And her support for the “Coalition for the Homeless”, which has done more than just about any org to destroy our city, is appalling.
In short, there’s nothing special about Stefani. In Denver or Charlotte she’d be a typical liberal hardworking city leader. But by SF standards, she’s one of our best.
ally for law enforcement on the BOS.
Rafael Mandelman (D8). Grade: B
Prior career: None known.
Status: Terming out in 2026.
I originally gave Rafael a C grade, but he’s managed to impress me over the past year with mostly sound tweets, votes, and ideas.
His signature plan is called “A Place For All“, a scheme to provide a shelter bed to all SF’s homeless. While this may seem like just more expensive services, it’s actually the key to cleaning up our streets, as the court’s Martin v. Boise ruling requires adequate shelter beds before homeless can be removed from sidewalk encampments. More than anyone, Mandelman seems to understand why our current approach homelessness isn’t working.
Mandelman’s got other virtues. In some cases, he swats down irresponsible ideas, for example for making Muni free. He’s generally supportive of law enforcement especially after reading my tweets. He behaves professionally, and is not a core member of the band of crazies with failing grades below.
An example of this his good judgement is the implementation of SB 1031 in 2019, which would have required mandatory treatment for some of SF’s mentally ill and drug addicted homeless. Stefani and Mandelman sponsored the legislation, while Ronen, Walton, and Mar managed to kill the bill because, apparently, mandatory treatment for addicts is un-progressive. The bill failed, and the result is the human misery you see on the streets three years later.
Now on to the bad. Mandelman sometimes chooses grandstanding over ethical behavior. Take the case of Cleve Jones. Cleve lost the below-market rent on his apartment when he violated the terms of the contract in all sorts of ways, mainly by moving to Guerneville. In response, the landlord began charging the market rate for the unit, as she’s allowed to.
The adult thing to do here would recognize that rental laws must be followed, or to at least wait and see what the Rent Board (which was currently hearing the case) decided. Instead, Mandelman held a “rally” to support Cleve, and to vilify the landlord. I asked Mandelman if he could clarify who is and is not above the law, but he didn’t respond. Shortly thereafter, Jones admitted defeat and gave up the apartment.
And Mandelman’s got other warts, for example he’s championed friendly-sounding tax increases that distort markets and ultimately drive up prices here. And he’s aligned himself with some of our most radical pols, including radical David Campos and Scott Wiener. Like Safai below, he claimed to have supported the recall of Boudin, but only after the fact. Regrettably, he also supported 2018’s Prop C, which the adults in the room agreed was bad policy. Kowtowing to unions over progress is another black mark.
Despite these past mistakes, he’s firmly aligned himself with the good guys in 2023 – as I write this on June 9, 2023, for example, his last two tweets were retweets of Stefani and Dorsey. As of today, I’m a supporter.
Ahsha Safai (D11): Grade: C
Prior career: None really, “union director”.
Status: Terming out in 2024 and running for mayor.
It’s hard to know what to make of Safai, but he generally comes across as a muddled thinker without a value system. He’s either a hard left progressive or a sensible moderate, depending on how the political winds are blowing. Consider Asha, 2021:
“Massive systemic reforms.” “Life changing policies.” Here Safai sounds determined to upend the social order and construct a new reality (which is about the last thing I want my local politicians to do). Get that man a Che Guevara cap!
Except, he has no specifics, doesn’t appear to know exactly what he’s fighting for, and seems to have promptly forgotten this urgent struggle when the moment passed.
Safai sides with everyone, on every issue. He’s praised right leaning bloggers, and the hardest of the hard left.
Yes you are, Ahsha, and for everything else!
Or take this one:
It’s a nice sounding jumble of words that no one can disagree with, and that convey nothing concrete or meaningful. Trademark Safai.
Perhaps because of his asinine views, Safai is one of our less prominent Supes, with a 2022 Twitter following of only 5,000 or so users. But there are some good things about him. For example, he appears to take crime seriously, especially after viewing this video taken by a quick thinking SF resident. He hasn’t made a career vilifying the police, even partnering with them on occasion. He didn’t join deplorables like Peskin and Preston in attempting to influence the 2022 redistricting saga, which is supposed to be independent. And Safai has, at times, hinted that he cares about spending your tax dollars.
On the other hand, he’s prone to pointless virtue signalling. Here he is wasting time attempting to repeal language of Prop 8. The problem? Prop 8 was passed by voters at the state level, and individual cities have no way to change it.
Unfortunately, Safai also appears to be influenced by special interests. His campaign contributions come heavily from construction-related unions and real estate developers. As a result, he’s fought common-sense affordable housing ideas that don’t line his backer’s pockets, such as the modular housing initiative. He also, bizarrely, attended the election night party for recalling Chesa Boudin, despite failing to publicly endorse it. And he’s proposed destructive ideas, like a local “guaranteed income” that rewards those who don’t work, and attracts them to our city.
Safai is a vague, fuzzy, question mark of a politician, but he never comes across as truly awful or incompetent, which is more than we can say for some of the nutty folks below.
Myrna Melgar (D7). Grade: D
Prior career: Murky. Some non-profit and city work.
Status: Up for re-election, Nov 2024.
I looked for positive things to say about each of our Supes, and with Melgar, came up empty.
Breaking news! I found something good to say. Melgar declined to vote with the deplorable Supes on SF Prop C, which would have made it practically impossible to recall elected officials, moving her up in the rankings:
And now the bad stuff: She’s aligned with some of the darker forces in local politics. She doesn’t seem to care much about the serious problems plaguing our city. She’s never mentioned our city budget, or spending taxpayer money with care. Crime? Drugs and drug dealers? The sideshows taking over her district some nights? Melgar evades questions about them.
So, what does she care about? Drawings, apparently. Melgar exposed herself as a virtue signaling opportunist by taking part in the recent “Chesa as Mao” non-issue, whereby a picture of DA Chesa Boudin in a Chairman Mao jacket brought crocodile tears to progressive eyes. The adult thing to do would have been to ignore this non-event, and focus on the city’s serious problems, which, as we’ve seen, Melgar just doesn’t seem to care about.
She tends to be slippery, rather than forthright. When asked a direct question, for example, about her advocacy of abolishing the police, she’s refused to answer. She’s also been unprofessional at times, tweeting sarcastically about other supervisors who care about law enforcement. And she’s shown she’s pathetically out of touch, proposing, for example, public electric charging outlets in a city where any such item will be destroyed within days of being installed.
Finally, she represents the worst of “us vs them” identity politics, the ideas that attempt to fragment Americans based on ethnical or racial lines. One example:
Gross.
Connie Chan (D2). Grade: F
Prior Career: City worker, Peskin’s legislative aide.
Status: Up for re-election, Nov 2024.
Connie, bless her heart, isn’t the brightest bulb in the tulip garden. And from this undersized brain comes some interesting thoughts….
…and a weird obsession with plastic bottles. But the endless bleats of racism are what makes her truly unqualified to lead our city. She speaks forcefully against crime…as long as the victim is Asian. The banking system? Racist. Small business issues? That’s racism too. When actual racist acts occur, however, she’s nowhere to be found.
She’s a big supporter of Chesa Boudin, and, true to form, took the “Chesa as Mao” (see Melgar above) incident to absurd theatrical heights, actually sponsoring a pointless BOS resolution to “condemn anti-Asian imagery”. I suppose political cartoons will be banned in “Women Land”. When I called Connie out on this stupidity, she, shockingly turned to the darkest internet trolls, who spend their days harassing anyone they disagree with.
Otherwise, she’s the typical me-too progressive with no real values. For example, she wants to defund the police due to “racial bias” one minute, then demands their help the next.
When an unhinged Hillary Ronen posted and offensive tweet that was condemned by virtually everyone, Connie defended her. She’s endorsed by Jane Kim, and others on the far left. In terms of financial stewardship, Connie doesn’t care much about the $14 billion the city spends per year, unless more of if goes to Asians. For a while she wrote a column for the SF Examiner. The column name, unsurprisingly, was Politically Asian.
I could give Connie a D for dumb, but I think she’s earned our first F grade.
Hillary Ronen (D9). Grade: F
Prior Career: Attorney at non-profit, legislative aide.
Status: Up for re-election, Nov 2024.
Where to begin with this wild-eyed progressive? Ronen’s judgement is atrocious. Take for example, a 75 unit apartment building providing new housing to the Mission. Instead of encouraging its development, Ronen did everything she could to stall the project, eventually claiming a laundromat in the building it would replace was a “historic business“. Her reasoning for battling this new housing? She believed it would “gentrify” the neighborhood.
Another example: It was clear to anyone living in SF that crime was increasing during 2020, but Hillary insisted it was down (she’s flanked here by fellow radicals Dean Preston and Chesa Boudin).
For a taste Hillary’s unique brand of crazy, watch this clip. Here’s another favorite. And a third bit of insanity. It’s endless.
Do you think reciting a speech about San Francisco residents trespassing on “unceeded Ohlone Indian Land” at the beginning of each Board of Supervisors’ meeting is a good use of time? If so, Ronen, and fellow deplorable Peskin, see below, may be the city leaders you’re looking for.
Ronen could care less about victims of crime (especially drug dealing) in our city, but she’s on a lifelong vendetta against the police. Defunding and demoralizing SFPD seems to be about the only thing she cares about. When it comes to city budgets, cutting the police is her only goal.
If an issue exists, Ronen’s on the wrong side of it, from making everything free to taxing empty homes. She promotes the worst in identity politics, failing to support London Breed for Mayor because she was supported by “rich, white men“.
Another prime example of how Ronen weakens our city: Mayor Breed’s original Emergency Declaration to reduce drugs and crime in the Tenderloin, actually had some teeth, as it relied on a greater police presence there. But Ronen prevented this:
“Between now and January, if they use a cent to increase [the San Francisco Police Department budget], we can cancel this order on the spot,” Ronen said. “I’m going to vote to approve this order today, but I’m going to watch this thing like a hawk.”
Hillary Ronen, 12/23/21
The First Amendment? Ronen and fellow deplorable Dean Preston just aren’t fans.
Each time I think Ronen has achieved peak crazy, she outdoes herself. What a mess.
Shamann Walton (D10). Grade: F
Prior career: None known.
Status: Terming out Nov 2026.
Does Walton even live in San Francisco? Most of the evidence points to a home in Vallejo, which he listed as his primary residence on mortgage documents in 2019, during his first term as supervisor.
Four years later, Vallejo’s finest is best know for berating a black Sheriff’s cadet, and attacking him with racial slurs. It’s the sort of behavior that would get you fired as a manager at Wendy’s. The idea that the president of our BOS behaved in such a manner shows just how poor SF’s leadership is.
Beyond this awful event, there’s not much you can say about him. When he appears to care about something, it’s usually around race, or defunding the police, or both. He seems most proud of promoting and passing the KAREN Act, which fines people for calling 911 on Black people. I’m not aware of anyone having been fined since the act was passed.
Unlike, most other supes, who may just be virtue signaling, Shamann seems serious about our $100B “reparations” scheme, demanding a $50M immediate down payment, along with fellow deplorables Dean Preston and Hillary Ronen which, happily, our mayor opposed. This, of course, despite the fact that there was no slavery in California, or even many Black people in SF before 1940. You can scroll through his press releases here, and see if you think he’s done anything to improve our city.
Walton occasionally brings up important issues, then immediately forgets them. For example, he championed “Vision Zero“, and ambitious plan to end violent crime…for about 5 minutes, until moving on to the Next Important Thing.
Even his supporter can’t seem to find anything good to say about him. The best the SF Chronicle could come up with for endorsing him in 2018 was that he, uh, “has some good ideas”. Great. So does my seven year old.
There’s more: Appointing members of SF’s many city boards is an important part of a supervisor’s job, and Walton shows poor judgement here, for example in nominating cop hater Alex Lemberg to the SF Board of Appeals. Lemberg is a radical attorney who, among other things, files frivolous lawsuits over Twitter posts.
Regarding spending taxpayer money carefully, I see no evidence Walton cares. As far as I can tell, he’s never questioned our budget, or looked for ways to bring it in line with other cities, other than defunding the police, of course. Walton was reelected in 2022, perpetuating SF’s leadership crisis.
Dean Preston (D5). Grade: F
Prior Career: Generally none. Living off family wealth. Worked at a law firm long ago.
Status: Up for re-election, Nov 2024.
To call Preston crazy would libel the insane. Where to begin? He’s is not a Republican or Democrat, but a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, a fringe group which, among much other madness, vilifies NATO countries like the US. A taste of his value system:
Preston literally, seriously, wants to eliminate law enforcement in America. No police, no prisons, no consequences for raping a child, or robbing a bank. Think about that.
As the tweet above alludes to, Preston’s in favor of socialist revolution, not improving things via current democratic institutions. He calls government takeover of the private sector “municipalization“. Far from handling citizens’ money with care, Preston finds joy in new taxes of every variety. His wild ideas, like “cancelling rent“, are fortunately not taken seriously by the adults in the room.
Preston is unique in that he sometimes manages to be on *both* wrong sides of an issue. For example, he demanded for a “vacancy tax” on unoccupied homes, then called the perfectly legal actions by Cleve Jones’ landlords to raise his rent when he left his apartment unoccupied “outrageous“.
There are very few ethical depths he won’t sink to, including funding a fake news site promoting himself.
The irony is, Preston and his family are the ultimate capitalist speculators.
Dean likes to trade tech stocks, while he’s made a fortunate off his wife’s real estate empire. But continues to vilify investors like himself as “speculators” with a straight face.
Preston’s divided the world into good and evil, with landlords being evil. He advocates for making everything “free“, failing to point out that there is no such thing – somebody has to pay.
Apparently unsure how the law works, Preston’s plan to stop legal evictions was to declare his district an “eviction free zone“.
Bizarrely, while tweeting endlessly about the need for housing (“social housing” in most cases, a code word for government-owned), Preston has done more than anyone to prevent new housing in SF.
Dean’s the king of complaining about current events, without offering solutions. A classic example here, or here, where he promotes “solutions to crime that work” without stating what those might be. Unsurprisingly, he’s on an endless jihad against SFPD, seeking to defund and demoralize them at every turn.
Fortunately, SF has had enough of this nonsense. The well funded GrowSF has published an exhaustive 30 Reasons to Dump Dean Preston which highlights the points here and many others. Kicking Dean out of office in 2024 – which we will do – won’t solve all of SF’s problems, but it will eliminate one persistent obstacle to a clean, safe, city.
Aaron Peskin (D3). Grade: F
Prior Career: None known. Former “Environmental Activist“.
Status: Terms out (again), Nov 2024.
Peskin embodies the worst of San Francisco, and humanity generally. He’s a bully. Both on the internet:
And in real life.
Peskin’s also a sleazy double dealer, as this article notes. There are endless examples of this: In an attempt to keep an anti-cop majority on the police commission, Peskin attempted to reappoint radical former public defender Cindy Elias four months before her term expired, a slimy move to prevent other candidates for applying. His attempt to circumvent the District Attorney’s office in the Banko Brown case, as noted above, is another example.
After coming to work drunk and abusing his colleagues, you’d think Peskin might understand the need to recall malfunctioning elected officials from time to time. Quite the opposite – he’s created and championed legislation that would make it effectively impossible to recall deficient politicians – denying voters a key element of control over bad actors like him. In June 2022, voters rejected this egregious power grab.
Peskin also lies like no other politician I’ve ever encountered. I was involved in an attempt to get a lower cost grocery store, a Whole Foods 365, in the old Lombardi Sports building at 1932 Polk St. Polls showed 85% of the neighborhood was in favor of it, but Peskin battled hard to not only to prevent the store, but ban all “chain stores” on Polk St. generally. Here’s what he told the media on the topic:
“Whole Foods has spent a ridiculous amount of money going door-to-door organizing residents and creating a huge astroturf movement in their favor,” said Peskin.
SF Chronicle, 6/1/2016
The problem is, this was all a complete fabrication. I was in touch with Whole Foods VP Rob Twyman, who led the process to get this store approved. No Whole Foods representative went door to door, or spent even a dollar with organizing or “astroturfing”. Peskin wasn’t merely exaggerating here, he was pulling whole narratives out of thin air.
Helped by a radical Planning Commission board that demanded affordable housing in the store, Peskin won, voters lost, and five years later, the building sits empty, decaying, frequently vandalized and broken into.
Peskin shouldn’t be a supervisor at all – they’re supposed to only serve two terms, and this is his third, exploiting a loophole that the terms only had to be “consecutive”. I hope D3’s next supe is a decent, honest person. Peskin has set the bar so low that it shouldn’t be a hard thing to accomplish.
Eye on SF 