How I’m Voting and You Can Too - November, 2026
I began writing this guide when I realized some people I know weren’t voting because they felt the ballot was too complicated. Now, I study the issues with dorky zeal and offer this guide to the public.
These views are mine, and mine alone. If you assume that my spouse shares all these views, you are wrong and possibly very sexist.
VOTE. Not voting is actually a vote for, “I don’t care, be corrupt, put money in your pockets and screw the people.”
PREPARE but DON’T PROCRASTINATE. You should have already received your ballot in the mail. Go ahead and fill it in now.
IGNORE the advertising. The way money affects politics is through advertising. Paid political advertising will always be misleading, by design. Throw those mailers straight into the recycling. Ignore promoted posts on social media. You will receive a stack of mailers right before election day. These will contain the worst lies — there will be no time for journalists to fact-check them.
Coit Tower on Telegraph Hill
acrylic on canvas, 18” x 24”, 2026
You can help by doing a little more to make sure everyone you know is ready to vote on the entire ballot.
Logistics
You should have received your ballot in the mail already. You can bring that to a drop box outside your local library branch or put it in the mail. The League of Women Voters of San Francisco has information about all of your voting logistics and even has a one-page zine of essential information you can print at home.
Fight Trump at home
Sure, we live in a “Blue” city in “Blue” state - but that doesn’t mean we’re not also on the front lines in the fight against oligarchy. The same billionaires who support Trumpism at the national level are investing heavily in California and San Francisco politics.
Please, help make sure everyone you know is an informed voter!
The big issues
The billionaire assault on San Francisco and California politics is at full steam. When you have Chris Larsen, CEO of Flock, giving half a million dollars to support one supervisor candidate (a new record!) you know things are out of whack. The League of Women Voters of San Francisco and SF Public Press teamed up on an event called “Money in San Francisco politics: Who’s spending big on the election?” which goes over the disheartening details. But we can overcome!
There are several issues that have made most choices very clear for this election - and which I think are important for everyone to be aware of:
If someone is against the billionaire tax, they cannot be trusted. The billionaires spending millions on local elections are the same ones supporting Trump.
Politicians who are against harm reduction are not trying to help people who are struggling with homelessness or addiction. Do you want people on the street to be more desperate? That’s what you do when you want to keep labor costs down.
Yes, we do need more affordable housing, but that’s not the real goal of YIMBY Action. They are really showing their true colors by opposing San Francisco Prop I. So called “YIMBYs” only support housing policies that can create more profit for developers.
Manny Yuketiel got credibly accused of sexual assault. The Democratic County Central Committee (DCCC) did not investigate, and then more accusers stepped forward. See: “SF Democratic Party Chair Apologizes After Sexual Assault Policy ‘Broke Down’”. Anyone who doesn’t think that Nancy Tung should step down as chair of the DCCC should not be trusted. See “We asked every SF politician: Should Dem Party Chair Nancy Tung step down?”
Two of the DCCC members are Flock lobbyists and the chair, Nancy Tung, took a $10,000 speaker fee from them. And the DCCC keeps voting in support of those Flock cameras in San Francisco even without real privacy protection or protection from ICE or accountability for police officers to not abuse them for personal reasons (see “How rogue officers turned a nationwide camera network into a tool for stalking”).
Also, the San Francisco DCCC went rogue, changing their by-laws so that they could oppose the state billionaire tax even though the state Democratic party is supporting it. Don’t trust “San Francisco Democratic Party” endorsements.
As usual, I mostly agree with the League of Pissed Off Voters, but sometimes I get a bit more specific with ranked choice. There’s also some propositions that they couldn’t reach consensus on and have no position - but I’m one person and get to decide.
Scroll down to see how I’m voting, my reasoning, and my open tabs
General strategies
Ranked-choice voting: With ranked-choice voting, you don’t need to run any game theory scenarios. We can just rank them in order of who we want to win. League of Women Voters of San Francisco explains in “Ranked-choice voting: You don't have to pick just one candidate.” This only matters for the supervisor races this time.
“Leave it blank:” When a candidate has no legitimate opponents and has been at all flawed at their job, I leave that spot on the ballot blank. It’s the only way to have a voice in that election.
Reach
acrylic on canvas, 11” x 17”, 2024
A smaller version of “Reaching” which is 2’ x 4’ from 2021.
How I’m voting:
For elsewhere in the Bay Area, go to Bay Rising Action's voter guide and put in your address for progressive endorsements with explanations.
When a candidate has no legitimate opponents and has been flawed at their job, I leave that spot on the ballot blank. It’s the only way to have a voice in that election.
A note on formatting: I try to line up my recommendations using the order and language that will be on the ballot to make things easier and avoid confusion as much as possible.
State
Governor: Xavier Becerra
Lieutenant Governor: Fiona Ma
Secretary of State: Shirley Weber
State Controller: Malia M. Cohen
State Treasurer: Eleni Kounalakis
Attorney General: Rob Bonta
Insurance Commissioner: Jane Kim
Board of Equalization, District 2: Sally Lieber
Federal
US Congress, District 11: Connie Chan
US Congress, District 15: Leave it blank
State assembly
State Assembly, District 17: Leave it blank
State Assembly, District 19: Leave it blank
Nonpartisan Offices
Judicial
Judges, CA Supreme Court: Yes to all (Groban, Evans)
Judges, First Court of Appeals: No on Banke, Yes to the rest (Smiley, Wilson, Desautels, Stewart, Fujisaki, Petrou, Simons, Chou, Burns)
State
Superintendent of Public Instruction: Richard Barrera
City and County
Supervisor, District 2: Leave it blank
Supervisor, District 4: #1 Jeremy Greco
Supervisor, District 6: #1 Alex Behrand
Supervisor, District 8: #1 Michael Nguyen, #2 Gary McCoy
Supervisor, District 10: #1 DJ Brookter, #2 J.R. Eppler
Member, Board of Education: Reina Tello, Virginia Cheung, Ryan Hazelton
Trustee, Community College Board (term ending 2031): Bunny McFadden, Jeremy Lee, Leah LaCroix
Trustee, Community College Board (remainder of the current term ending 2029): Leave it blank
Assessor-Recorder: Leave it blank
Public Defender: Mano Raju
State Propositions
1 Authorizes Bonds for Housing Affordability Programs. Legislative Statute.: YES
2 Increases State's Rainy Day Fund. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.: YES
3 Provides Permanent Funding for Schools and Health Care by Extending Existing Tax on High Incomes. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.: YES
4 Repeals Prohibition Against Public Funding of Election Campaigns. Legislative Statute: YES
5 Changes Recall Election Process for Statewide Officers. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.: YES
37 Creates Loan Program for Middle-Income Buyers of Qualified New Homes. Initiative Statute.: NO
38 Authorizes Bonds for Immunology Medical Research. Initiative Statute.: YES
39 Prohibits Citizens from Voting Unless They Present Government-Issued Identification. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.: NO
40 Imposes One-Time Tax on Certain Taxpayers. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute.: YES
41 Prohibits New State Taxes That Exclude Revenues from State Spending Limit. Requires Audits for New State Special Taxes. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.: NO
42 Prohibits New State Personal Property Taxes and Certain Retroactive State Taxes. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.: NO.
43 Limits Voters' Ability to Raise Revenues for Local Government Services. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.: NO
44 Requires Community Health Clinics Spend 90% of Revenue on Program Services. Initiative Statute.: NO
45 Modifies Environmental Review for Certain Projects. Initiative Statute.: NO
Regional Measure
RTM - Regional Transit Measure (Bay Area Transportation Sales Tax): YES
City and County Propositions
A - Charter Changes Affecting Various City Departments and Commissions: “Shall the City amend the Charter to align it with how some City departments currently operate, change some processes, eliminate or reorganize certain commissions and advisory bodies, and require the Board of Supervisors to amend voter-approved laws to enact some of these changes?”: NO
B - Establishing a Municipal Finance Corporation and a Public Bank “Shall the City amend the Charter to authorize the City to establish a municipal finance corporation and a public bank?”: YES
C - Contributions to the Housing Fund: “Shall the City amend the Charter to change how the City’s annual contributions to the Housing Trust Fund are set, increase funding and expand programs for affordable housing, and extend the Fund to 2058?”: YES
D - Changes to Ballot Measure Process: “Shall the City amend the Charter to increase the requirements for signature initiatives from 2% to 8% of registered voters in San Francisco (currently from about 10,600 to about 42,500 signatures), increase the requirements for calling special elections, allow signature initiatives to be withdrawn before an election, and remove the ability of a minority of Board of Supervisors members or the Mayor to place measures on the ballot?”: NO
E - City Administrator’s Authority and Changes to City Contracting “Shall the City amend the Charter to give the City Administrator more authority by centralizing the City’s purchasing rules and processes, changing how the City approves purchasing rules, changing when contracts and leases require Board of Supervisors approval, and extending the City Administrator’s term?”: NO
F - Changes to Executive Branch Management “Shall the City amend the Charter to expand the Mayor’s authority to transfer responsibilities between departments, hire deputy mayors, and hire some and fire most department heads; and to allow City officials to remove members of boards and commissions without cause?”: NO
Ordinances
G - Allowing Private Vehicles on the Great Highway in Sunset Dunes Park: “Shall the City close Sunset Dunes Park from Monday at 4:00 a.m. through Friday at 6:00 p.m., unless a holiday falls on a weekday, in order to reopen the roadway known as the Upper Great Highway to private vehicles during that time?”: NO
H - Parcel Tax to Fund Public Muni Operations: “Shall the City fund Muni service through a new annual parcel tax on real estate at rates ranging from $129 per parcel up to a maximum of $400,000 per parcel, depending on the type of property and its size and adjusted annually for inflation, for estimated revenue of $177 million a year for 15 years?”: YES
I - Changes to Real Property Transfer Tax: “Shall the City amend the Charter to change how the City’s annual contributions to the Housing Trust Fund are set, increase funding and expand programs for affordable housing, and extend the Fund to 2058?”: YES
J - Removal of Foreclosure Exemption for Real Property Transfer Tax: “Shall the City permanently apply a transfer tax of between 0.5% and 6% of a property’s fair market value, on the transfer of properties such as commercial, industrial, and large residential properties, that are transferred to a lender because of foreclosure or to avoid foreclosure, for estimated annual revenue of $100 million to $150 million?”: YES
My Reasoning
State
Often I will leave a circle blank if a mediocre Democrat is a shoe-in to win against a Republican, but this time around I’m not going to go checking statewide polling and I’ll just vote for these hack politicians just to make sure the Republicans get soundly trounced.
Governor: Xavier Becerra
Becerra was probably the least impressive of our options in the primary, but he is way better than that loony Steve Hilton.
Hot Tuna at Hardly Strictly Bluegrass Festival
marker on paper, 8” x 10”, 10/3/2026
Lieutenant Governor: Fiona Ma
Better than the Republican.
Secretary of State: Shirley Weber
Weber has gotten great reviews for standing up for the integrity of our elections.
State Controller: Malia M. Cohen
Better than the Republican.
State Treasurer: Eleni Kounalakis
Better than the Republican.
Attorney General: Rob Bonta
Bonta had the opportunity to fight the Paramount/Warner Brothers merger, but instead allowed a Trumpian billionaire nepobaby to take over CNN along with CBS news. But, better than the Republican.
Insurance Commissioner: Jane Kim
Kim has been leader of the California Working Families Party organizing for the best progressive candidates across the state. She promises to be creative in how to use this position to fight for working people. It would be great to have a supporter of universal health care battling to get more from insurance companies. Her focus on making sure natural disaster coverage is affordable to comprehensive makes a lot of sense as we can expect climate change to continue to wreak havoc in the state. I do think that taking an aggressive stand with industry is the correct approach. Private companies don’t partner in good faith with public representatives - they will do whatever it takes to increase profits.
In this race, she is actually running against a Democrat. I do have some fondness for her opponent, Ben Allen. Allen has been a great advocate for arts education at the state level, and was usually the sponsor of legislation on behalf of Create CA and California for the Arts. Compared to Kim, he is the more conservative candidate, so is likely to win - and I won’t be too angry about that. But I would rather Allen stay in the legislature to continue as a champion for the arts.
Board of Equalization, District 2: Sally Lieber
Lieber earned the endorsement of the Working Families Party and other progressive organizations for doing a good job at managing taxes in California, especially making sure that affordable housing funds are actually used for affordable housing. She‘s running for reelection to represent all of coastal California north of LA on a 4 person board. Choose her over “Democrat” John Pimental who is endorsed by the very conservative Howard Jarvis group.
Federal
US Congress, District 11: Connie Chan
Artist Talk with Susan R. Kirshbaum at Black and White Projects
8" x 10", marker and paper, 9/19/2026
Susan R. Kirshbaum is an artist who digitally layers her figure drawings with her photography of nature and embroidery. Curator Rhiannon MacFadyen hosted an artist talk at Black and White gallery with Kirshbaum and one of her models.
Chan is the progressive choice for this race to replace Nancy Pelosi. She favors a moratorium on new data centers, actual affordable housing, worker rights, and all that good stuff. That said, she is a politician who has hedged on stances and made some disappointing votes (such as going along with Lurie in ousting Max Carter-Oberstone from the police commission). She is in favor of taxing the wealthy and backs proven strategies for dealing with homelessness. Chan has the endorsements of all the progressive organizations, but will need activist pressure to stay true to those values. I don’t trust her very much, but I sure do like her way better than Wiener.
Scott Wiener has been impressive at times. I appreciate that he has been a fierce supporter of rights for transgender people. He used to be savvy on tech matters, but now has drunk the AI kool-aid - as evidenced by his campaign’s Connie Chan chatbot fiasco. Even as the chatbot veered straight into racism, Wiener was slow to admit wrong-doing or shut it down. His unwillingness to support a moratorium on data centers is further evidence of his loyalty to his billionaire backers. In a recent debate, Wiener repeated three times, “There is no Anthropic money in this race.” Then, what do you know, an Anthropic-backed PAC puts up $3 million to elect Wiener to Congress. Sure, PACs are legally required to be independent from candidates, but Pelosi’s Potential Successor Is Pushing the Limits of Super PAC Coordination.
Wiener’s opposition to the billionaire tax rightly cost him the endorsement of the SEIU.
While Wiener’s housing legislation may have had a positive impact in promoting housing near transit in the suburbs, his support for housing always aligns with real estate industry donors. When it comes to bolstering tenants’ rights to keep people in their homes, he fails.
I like how AROC Action summed it up in their email: “Scott Wiener cannot credibly claim to oppose authoritarianism while championing expanded warrantless surveillance, supporting restrictions on campus protest and speech, attacking anti-genocide demonstrators, facilitating the unchecked expansion of data centers, and repeatedly siding with the wealthy interests driving ever-greater concentrations of political and economic power. Nor can the fight against racism and authoritarianism be reconciled with his crude and racist characterizations of political opponents.”
Sandow Birk Artist Talk with Catharine Clark
marker on paper, 8” x 10”, 8/29/2026
That Wiener now says he opposes the Israeli government’s genocide policies is a heartening sign of the strength of public support for Palestinian human rights, but it’s not credible. In the US Congress, he will be an effective proponent for continuing to use our tax dollars to fund and arm a force that targets hospitals, aid workers, journalists, and children. Wiener insists on equating Zionism with Judaism, which I find personally offensive.
Do you know about Rupa Marya? She’s a local musician hero who won the lawsuit to free the Happy Birthday song from copyright control. She is also a doctor who has been one of the most eloquent speakers about the proven impact of racism in medicine. When she posted in support of Palestinians on twitter, Wiener publicly called for Dr. Marya to be fired. UCSF fired her without a proper process. I don’t know the status of the lawsuit.
And then there’s the incident at the Trans March in June. Wiener should know that politicians have never been welcome at the Trans March. He was there in 2016 when “SF Trans Celebration Boos Pols and Says No to More Police”. But this year he went anyway and got yelled at for his support for Israel. He then claimed victimhood and used it for a big national fundraising push while saying nothing about the police officers who attacked marchers - drawing a statement of condemnation by Trans March organizers.
Chan is definitely the clear choice in this contest.
United States Representative, District 15: Leave it blank
If you’re in Kevin Mullin’s district (a small chunk of southern San Francisco and south of the city) best to just leave it blank. He’s the lack-luster incumbent serving the tech industry.
State assembly
State Assembly Member, District 17: Leave it blank
I was really into what Matt Haney was doing 6 years ago, but he has often disappointed me since then. His push for sober-only public housing at the expense of more proven supportive housing models goes against the evidence. He’s fine in other ways. He’s running unopposed.
State Assembly AD 19: Leave it blank
Catherine Stefani is barely being opposed. She’s an enemy of rent control.
Yasmin Williams and William Tyler at Hardly Strictly Bluegrass Festival
marker and pencil on paper, 8” x 12”, 10/4/2026
Nonpartisan Offices
Judicial
Judges, CA Supreme Court: Yes to all (Groban, Evans)
Judges, First Court of Appeals: No to Banke, Yes to the rest (Smiley, Wilson, Desautels, Stewart, Fujisaki, Petrou, Simons, Chou, Burns)
We occasionally have to vote to say these state judges should keep their jobs. I tried to find information about whether any of the ones on this ballot have made any questionable decisions. At the last moment I found that Dean Preston is recommending a No vote for Kathleen Banke, an appointee of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. She wrote the opinion blocking a voter-approved San Francisco real estate vacancy tax (Prop M, 2022) from taking effect.
State
Superintendent of Public Instruction: Richard Barrera
The League of Pissed Off Voters says, “In his 18 years on the San Diego school board, Richard Barrera has led the charge to reject austerity narratives, direct district leaders to stop hoarding taxpayer money in reserves, increase teacher pay, and improve outcomes for low-income and BIPOC students.” And he’s running against Sonja Shaw, a conservative transphobe.
City and County
With ranked-choice voting, you don’t need to run any game theory scenarios. We can just rank candidates in most local races in order of who we want to win. League of Women Voters of San Francisco explains with this guide: Ranked-choice voting: You don't have to pick just one candidate
Gumbys Junk at the Chapel
marker and pencil on paper, 8” x 10”, 8/28/2026
Supervisor, District 2: Leave it blank
Stephen Sherrill is a conservative democrat running unopposed to represent one of the most consistently conservative districts in the city.
Supervisor, District 4: #1 Jeremy Greco
There isn’t much serious opposition to Alan Wong, a faithful Lurie appointee. That’s a shame, District 4 deserves legitimate independent representation. Greco has the endorsement of the SF Tenants Union. Albert Chow is also running, but seems pretty bad.
Supervisor, District 6: #1 Alex Behrand
Alex Behrand is barely a candidate, but I like all of his positions. He’s running against Matt Dorsey who wants to use police to tackle all of San Francisco’s problems.
Supervisor, District 8: #1 Michael Nguyen, #2 Gary McCoy
Michael Nguyen is a thoroughly good and sweet person. I met him a few years ago right after he had performed in a drag queen story hour as Juicy Liu. He will be there for renters and the working class. Tom Ammiano is the person I have always trusted the most about local politics, so it means a lot that he has been campaigning hard for Nguyen.
Gary McCoy is the current front-runner in the race (after Manny Yuketiel was forced to end his campaign). I think he got a lot of his most progressive endorsements as a strategy to block Manny - but he has also been aligned with SF YIMBY, which makes me suspicious.
I liked Darshini Patel’s answers to Mission Local, but then she went after the GROW SF endorsement (and got it) so she lost all my trust.
Manny is still on the ballot, make sure not to rank him. You can see a candidate forum here.
Supervisor, District 10: #1 DJ Brookter, #2 J.R. Eppler
The important thing is to defeat Theo Ellington, the billionaires’ choice. Many progressive groups are endorsing Brookter and Eppler without ranking them. SF Tenants Union chose Brookter as did Juanita More and I think his answers to Mission Local were the best of the three. You can watch a forum here.
Member, Board of Education: Reina Tello, Ryan Hazelton, and Virginia Cheung
The overarching issue at the school board in recent years has been how to respond to falling enrollment and funding. Should the district cut programs and close schools - which will lead to further loss of enrollment - or should it reject the austerity mindset and reinvest in schools to get enrollment back on the upswing?
Sketchnotes of a Board of Education Candidate Forum
marker on paper, 8” x 10”, 9/23/2026
Phil Kim, the current school board president, comes from a charter school background. When he was first appointed to the school board by then-Mayor London Breed, the fear was that he would want to close schools so that those properties could then be taken over by charters. He has done nothing to allay those fears. The district started a process to close schools in during the 2024-25 school year, but backed off when it became clear how inequitable that process would be. Then the district dragged its feet on negotiations with the teacher union even after the previous contract expired in spring 2025. They didn’t seriously negotiate until teachers went on strike for a week in February of this year.
Now the board is revamping the school placement process in ways that, as Parents for Public Schools and Coleman Advocates argues, will make for more segregated inequitable schools.
We need to put members on the Board of Education with deeper community roots that can better represent the families this district serves. I’m talking about Reina Tello, a San Francisco native and an organizer with PODER. I trust her more than anyone else to do what’s right for SFUSD students.
I’m also going to vote for Ryan Hazelton and Virginia Cheung. Hazelton, who worked with charter schools before moving into early childhood education, impressed me with his answers at the candidate forum I attended. I appreciated his understanding of the role of the board in managing the Superintendent. He firmly rejected the austerity narrative and has ideas for increasing enrollment starting with the youngest students.
I continue to be cautiously optimistic about Virginia Cheung who did get the endorsement from Coleman Action in June. At the forum, she didn’t seem very impressive (she was under the weather that evening) but did win me over a bit when she cited School of Rock as her favorite movie about education. That was the closest anyone came to recognizing the importance of arts education that night.
These three candidates have the support of the United Educators of San Francisco for their policy and stood with teachers during the strike.
In the past, I have endorsed Alida Fisher for her years of advocacy for students with learning differences, but she sided with Superintendent Maria Su’s disingenuous bargaining stances during the strike and endorsed Phil Kim in the last election.
Trustee, Community College Board (term ending 2031): Bunny McFadden, Jeremy Lee, and Leah LaCroix
You may have seen Bunny McFadden’s insightful commentaries on Broke-Ass Stuart’s website and social media. I love her takes on “Denim Dan” and all sorts of local political issues. She also has a doctorate in education research and plenty of education experience.
Leah LaCroix is a rising star who was a great advocate for free Muni for youth while on the city’s Youth Commission.
Also on this progressive slate is Jeremy Lee. I saw Lee in action on the Redistricting Task Force as one of the members committed to a principled conscientious process, even as the majority of the board came in with their own agenda disregarding public input.
In recent years, City College has closed important programs and campuses at the detriment to English Language Learners and their arts programs. This slate will bring a positive mindset back to the board.
I do want to give a shout-out to Monroe Lace, a 6th grade teacher who I worked with at Dr. Martin Luther King Academic Middle School last year. Lace is a creative teacher working hard to help students form their own political voice. I admire her for getting into politics and hope she will develop a clearer perspective about the importance of unions and the issues at stake in local elections. I believe we’ll see her do great things in the future.
Trustee, Community College Board (remainder of the current term ending 2029): Leave it blank
Ruth Ferguson was appointed by Lurie to replace Alan Wong. She’s running unopposed for this seat and the shady, billionaire-backed conservative propaganda machine called GrowSF is one of her most enthusiastic endorsers, so I’m leaving that spot blank.
Assessor-Recorder: Leave it blank
Glide Ensemble at Stern Grove
marker and pencil on paper, 8” x 10”, 8/10/2026
I don’t know that there’s anything wrong with the job that Joaquín Torres is doing. He’s gotten endorsements from all over the political spectrum and he’s running unopposed.
Public Defender: Mano Raju
Raju has been fantastic at protecting civil rights and calling out corruption and unethical behavior among the police, the sheriffs, and Brooke Jenkin’s District Attorney office. He deserves a strong vote of confidence.
State Propositions
1. Authorizes Bonds for Housing Affordability Programs. Legislative Statute.: YES
Money for homes is a good investment.
2. Increases State's Rainy Day Fund. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.: YES
This allows the state to save more for the future. I guess that will be good for when the AI bubble pops and natural disasters hit. Usually, though, money spent now is an investment in the state and the people in the state that will lead to more future revenue.
3. Provides Permanent Funding for Schools and Health Care by Extending Existing Tax on High Incomes. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.: YES
This extends a tax to keep schools funded. IT IS ESSENTIAL.
League of Women Voters of California says, “California should not give its highest-income residents a multi-billion-dollar tax cut while schools, health care, and other essential services face serious financial pressure. Prop 3 simply asks the top 2 percent to keep paying the same rates they already pay. The League strongly supports the measure because it protects vital services, helps California weather economic downturns, and keeps the state’s tax system fair.”
4. Repeals Prohibition Against Public Funding of Election Campaigns. Legislative Statute.: YES
Public funding of campaigns gets us better candidates. Can you imagine making the commitment to run for office as a champion for the people and then you’ve got to spend all your time raising money? Public funding gives us a little more of a chance of overcoming the oligarchs with democracy.
5. Changes Recall Election Process for Statewide Officers. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.: YES
Remember when Governor Gray Davis got recalled and was replaced with freakin’ Arnold Schwarzenegger all in one election? The state Democratic party pressured all the experienced Democrats to stay out of it as part of the “No” on the recall campaign. That left things wide open for the governator to win. It’s about time we fixed the system in this one small way.
Larry Campbell and Teresa Williams at Hardly Strictly Bluegrass Festival
marker and pencil on paper, 8” x 10”, 10/2/2026
37 Creates Loan Program for Middle-Income Buyers of Qualified New Homes. Initiative Statute.: NO
Loans for middle-income first-time home-buyers - but only for new homes. A lot of that will be exurban sprawl. Real estate developers are always finding a new way to work the system.
I am tempted to say “yes” because I generally do like when the government is able to give real support to middle class constituents, but this might actually not be so great for them. The League of Women Voters of California says, “Prop 37 could help a family buy a home without making it affordable to keep. Buyers generally would repay the Prop 37 loan each month in addition to their first mortgage, property taxes, insurance, repairs, and other costs.” This could be a sort of sub-prime mortgage deal.
38 Authorizes Bonds for Immunology Medical Research. Initiative Statute.: YES
A billionaire got this on the ballot to provide a government-backed bond that will fund research only for his company. That’s brazen!
But I’m feeling really pessimistic about the whole medical research situation as RFK Jr. guts the federal research establishment. And let’s not kid ourselves - government-funded research usually ends up with private profits. In a better world, I say “no” to this. But these days, I just want this research to happen for the chance at breakthroughs in treatments for cancer and Alzheimer's.
I am going against arguments by the League of Women Voters of California and SF League of Pissed Off Voters on this one. Maybe you’ll want to vote no.
39 Prohibits Citizens from Voting Unless They Present Government-Issued Identification. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.: NO!!!
This is some flagrant anti-democracy in line with Trump’s push for fascism. No freakin’ way.
40 Imposes One-Time Tax on Certain Taxpayers. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute. YES!!!
These billionaires support Trump and don’t pay taxes.
The League of Pissed Off Voters explains, “Prop. 40 would ask the state’s estimated 200 billionaires to pay a one-time 5% tax on their enormous wealth (a minimum of $50 million apiece, leaving them more than enough for generations) while raising tens of billions to offset the drastic cuts from Trump’s “Big Beautiful (cough BULLSHIT) Bill.” The tax money would go toward things California families and communities depend on, like health care, hospitals and emergency rooms, schools and community colleges, and food assistance. The tax wouldn’t touch everyday taxpayers or small business owners or even multi-millionaires, and it wouldn’t even apply to the annual income or primary property of billionaires. Prop 40 simply asks those who have “earned” such Scrooge McDuck-scale fortunes within California’s economy to toss a modest, one-time lifeline back to the public infrastructure and systems that they “definitely didn’t exploit” in pursuit of their success.”
Arguments that this one-time tax isn’t a permanent fix are correct, of course, but that is a horrible excuse to not vote yes. If someone shoots you, a band-aid isn’t going to fix the problem, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t stop the bleeding until you can get to a hospital.
View of Grande Water Tower
acrylic on canvas, 18” x 24”, 2026
This Cal Matters article explains why there’s no way that the wealth tax would be applied to your retirement and dispels some of the other scare tactics in the anti-40 advertisements: “Billionaire tax explained: What you need to know about Prop. 40.”
41 Prohibits New State Taxes That Exclude Revenues from State Spending Limit. Requires Audits for New State Special Taxes. Initiative Constitutional Amendment. NO
42 Prohibits New State Personal Property Taxes and Certain Retroactive State Taxes. Initiative Constitutional Amendment. NO
#41 and #42 are both there as poison pills for #40. Yes on 40, and no on 41 and 42.
43 Limits Voters' Ability to Raise Revenues for Local Government Services. Legislative Constitutional Amendment. NO
This would be a disaster for local governments. There are already categories of taxes that require a supermajority vote to pass. Municipalities need to be able to fund transit and schools and services.
44 Requires Community Health Clinics Spend 90% of Revenue on Program Services. Initiative Statute. NO
To quote the League of Pissed Off Voters: “...this also applies to smaller community clinics like La Clinica de la Raza, Lyon-Martin, and neighborhood health centers. Advocates for these vital health care facilities are opposing Prop 44 because they’re concerned that a lot of what they spend their money on to serve their patients and keep their doors open, like translation, janitorial services, and billing, wouldn’t count as “patient care.” If that’s the case, they could end up having to pay large fines at a time when they’re facing MAGA’s drastic federal cuts to Medicaid and health-care funding thanks to the “Big Beautiful Bill”🤮🤮🤮. Even if those activities do get to count toward the 90%, Prop 44 adds additional paperwork and bureaucratic burden to prove it. Oh, and these determinations would be made not by medical or public health experts but by the CA Attorney General. These clinics are barely keeping their doors open and we need them more than ever.”
45 Modifies Environmental Review for Certain Projects. Initiative Statute. NO
I’ll just quote the League of Pissed Off Voters again, “This measure would limit the environmental review process for new building projects across the state and restrict the timelines for public comment to 45 days. While we certainly believe that environmental reviews have been disingenuously leveraged by NIMBYs in the past to subvert much needed green energy and housing projects (looking at you, Berkeley), there is nothing in this measure that would prioritize the stuff we need and protect people from being railroaded by data centers and fossil fuel projects. Without those specifics, it’s hard to believe that this measure won’t chip away at necessary environmental protections. Both the Sierra Club and the Building Trades are urging “no” votes, and when those two see eye to eye on something, we should all pay attention. Vote No.”
Regional Measure
RTM - Regional Transit Measure: Yes
Have you experienced traffic on the Bay Bridge recently? It’s going to get much much worse if this doesn’t pass.
This measure will create a sales tax for 14 years to maintain public transportation services in Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa Clara, San Mateo, and San Francisco counties - especially BART. Transit is essential to our economy, our culture, and our quality of life. There should be better state and federal funding for transit, but that’s not happening.
A sales tax is not the best way to support transit, but businesses and billionaires have controlled this process, so that’s the option we’re stuck with.
The League of Women Voters of the Bay area provides more details about why this is so necessary.
City and County Propositions
A - Charter Changes Affecting Various City Departments and Commissions: “Shall the City amend the Charter to align it with how some City departments currently operate, change some processes, eliminate or reorganize certain commissions and advisory bodies, and require the Board of Supervisors to amend voter-approved laws to enact some of these changes?”: NO
Reckless Kelly at Hardly Strictly Bluegrass Festival
marker and pencil on paper, 8” x 10”, 10/2/2026
Lurie wants the mayor to have complete control over the commissions who provide public oversight for city departments the mayor is in charge of. That’s a recipe for more disaster. Lurie wants to be able to make more appointments while removing requirements that appointees have certain qualifications or represent certain communities.
How has Lurie done with his appointments so far? Remember when he appointed Isabella "Beya" Alcaraz as Supervisor of District 4, seemingly without googling her? (It’s quite the story.) Or more recently, when Lurie appointed only private school students to the city’s Youth Commission, when 70% of kids in San Francisco go to public school. Think about what a thoughtless, clueless, spoiled brat thing that is to do. And that means the city will be making policy decisions regarding young people with only input from the most privileged youth.
The League of Pissed Off Voters explains how Prop A would gut the Our City, Our Home Oversight Committee. The League of Women Voters of San Francisco gets more into the context of Prop A and how it opens the door to further deterioration of good governance in the future.
Prop A would be a travesty. Make sure all your friends know to vote “no”.
B - Establishing a Municipal Finance Corporation and a Public Bank “Shall the City amend the Charter to authorize the City to establish a municipal finance corporation and a public bank?”: YES
This lets San Francisco take one more step to move toward having a public bank, so that instead of the city storing its money in Wall Street, the city would be able to keep our investments right here at home. That could include financing new housing. There are many housing developments that are stalled because of a lack of investment because institutional investors demand large quick profits. A public bank could make more long-term investments such as affordable housing that provides steady rent for decades.
For-profit banks want rents to be high so that the property has a higher value on paper. So they will triple the rent on successful businesses and now we can’t get great dumplings in the Castro anymore. A public bank would never do that, because it would be invested in the community, not just the property.
C - Contributions to the Housing Fund: “Shall the City amend the Charter to change how the City’s annual contributions to the Housing Trust Fund are set, increase funding and expand programs for affordable housing, and extend the Fund to 2058?”: YES
League of Women Voters of San Francisco says, “Voters created the Housing Trust Fund in 2012 to help pay for building and repairing affordable housing, and this proposition grows the government’s commitment to a program that works. The proposition would require the city government to put more money into the Housing Trust Fund, slowly raising that amount from today's $52 million to $125 million each year, without raising taxes. If there’s a major budget crunch, the Board of Supervisors can temporarily lower or pause that contribution.
The proposition allows more San Franciscans to qualify for down-payment assistance for buying a home, and lets our local government use the fund to pay for more things, like social housing, co-ops, and the street, sidewalk, and utility projects that affordable housing needs. The fund sticks around longer too, but still has an end date, which we like to see.”
D - Changes to Ballot Measure Process: “Shall the City amend the Charter to increase the requirements for signature initiatives from 2% to 8% of registered voters in San Francisco (currently from about 10,600 to about 42,500 signatures), increase the requirements for calling special elections, allow signature initiatives to be withdrawn before an election, and remove the ability of a minority of Board of Supervisors members or the Mayor to place measures on the ballot?”: NO
Susan y su Orquestra Adelante at Bernal Heights Fiesta on the Hill
marker and pencil on paper, 8” x 10”, 9/20/2026
Calito Franco y su Tumbao Anejo at Fiesta on the Hill
marker on paper, 8” x 12“, 9/20/2026
Salsa in the streets on Cortland avenue
This is more of Lurie’s shenanigans. I know long lists of propositions are annoying, but they are worth it for the good ones - like Prop I this year. This measure would quadruple the number of signatures it takes to get a proposition on the ballot - which would be too much for volunteer campaigns to collect, but within reach of special interests that can afford to use paid signature gatherers. LWVSF says, “Fair elections depend on an inclusive process, one where the cost of participation does not determine who gets to be heard. Proposition D puts an expensive paywall on our ballot process, one few San Franciscans can afford.”
E - City Administrator’s Authority and Changes to City Contracting “Shall the City amend the Charter to give the City Administrator more authority by centralizing the City’s purchasing rules and processes, changing how the City approves purchasing rules, changing when contracts and leases require Board of Supervisors approval, and extending the City Administrator’s term?” : NO
Lurie wants less oversight over city contracts. Let’s look at how that has worked out. He spent $5.9 million on a contract with OpenGov, which happens to have old ties with his family. Mission Local reports, “It was installed with no formal bidding process by the Mayor’s office in October, despite a competitor scoring higher in evaluations and over the objections of departmental staffers.” Instead of getting a streamlined online permitting portal, the city has a mess. Now, the Board of Supervisors has had to approve another $22 million to try to make the system selected by the Mayor work. Under Prop E, Lurie’s city administrator could spend $25 million without approval.
This is so shady and undemocratic.
F - Changes to Executive Branch Management “Shall the City amend the Charter to expand the Mayor’s authority to transfer responsibilities between departments, hire deputy mayors, and hire some and fire most department heads; and to allow City officials to remove members of boards and commissions without cause?”: NO
This one has a lot of details to it, each chipping away at real accountability. As I said with Prop A, Lurie — nor any Mayor — should not have more power to control commissions. The League of Women Voters gets into the problems with a lot of those details and links to lots of articles to back up their “NO on Prop F” argument. Under Prop F, the mayor would be able to remove any commissioner without cause. When it came out that Mayor London Breed was requiring appointees to provide a resignation letter she could use if she was ever displeased with them, that was considered a scandal - how can a commission provide effective oversight if they have to pledge loyalty in this way? Lurie wants to skip that step and make what was once a scandal into codified policy.
What does it say about someone’s leadership when they only want to surround themselves with subservient “yes-men”?
Ordinances
G - Allowing Private Vehicles on the Great Highway in Sunset Dunes Park: “Shall the City close Sunset Dunes Park from Monday at 4:00 a.m. through Friday at 6:00 p.m., unless a holiday falls on a weekday, in order to reopen the roadway known as the Upper Great Highway to private vehicles during that time?”: NO
Looking up at Little Coit Blue
acrylic on canvas, 18" x 24", 2026
Every time I’ve been to the new Sunset Dunes Park, I have seen a little kid learning to ride a bike (except for during the annual Great Hauntway Halloween party when it’s too crowded with people having a great time).
Yes, we did already vote on this in 2022 and 2024. SPUR actually has a good timeline about what has happened on this issue. Using this seaside area as a park aligns with the city’s Climate Action Plan and the reality of soil erosion.
So why have so many progressive voter guides avoided an endorsement for Prop G? Because this is a wedge issue. There has always been a contingent of west side drivers who have felt railroaded by the process (but only metaphorically - the lack of transit in the avenues is the real problem).
Sitting in traffic can break our brains. See what the data says about the effects on traffic.
Meanwhile, Sunset Dunes has been adding art and playgrounds. Let’s keep the park and watch it become another special iconic beautiful San Francisco place.
H - Parcel Tax to Fund Public Muni Operations: “Shall the City fund Muni service through a new annual parcel tax on real estate at rates ranging from $129 per parcel up to a maximum of $400,000 per parcel, depending on the type of property and its size and adjusted annually for inflation, for estimated revenue of $177 million a year for 15 years?”: YES
Public transportation ties the city together. It gets people to work, it gets kids to school. It gets customers to businesses. If you cut services, the wait times get longer, ridership suffers, and then you have a downward spiral. There should be more state funding for it and more federal funding for transit, but that’s not happening. We’drather not use a parcel tax, but a strong Muni does add a lot to property value, so there is some fairness there.
I - Changes to Real Property Transfer Tax: “Shall the City amend the Charter to change how the City’s annual contributions to the Housing Trust Fund are set, increase funding and expand programs for affordable housing, and extend the Fund to 2058?”: YES
When we passed the transfer tax a few years ago, it was designed to fund affordable housing, but that use wasn’t required by law. The opposition to this proposition is unhinged. As Mission Local reports, “Lurie described Prop. I as an ‘unaccountable slush fund.’ Well, that’s odd: The entity responsible for administering the funds amassed by Prop. I would be none other than the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development. Yes, the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development.”
The Council of Community Housing Organizations really digs into the details in this article: “San Francisco's Own Number: $25.1 Billion.”
J - Removal of Foreclosure Exemption for Real Property Transfer Tax: “Shall the City permanently apply a transfer tax of between 0.5% and 6% of a property’s fair market value, on the transfer of properties such as commercial, industrial, and large residential properties, that are transferred to a lender because of foreclosure or to avoid foreclosure, for estimated annual revenue of $100 million to $150 million?”: YES
This one has a consensus support. Close the loophole on luxury real estate foreclosures and raise more money for city services.
My open tabs
Some of the sources I referred to while preparing this guide: OpenBallot comparison tool, League of Women Voters of San Francisco endorsements, LWV of California, LWV of the Bay Area, League of Pissed Off Voters, AROC action endorsements, San Francisco Bay Guardian, UESF, SF Green Party, SF Tenants Union, Bay Area Rising Action, Working Families Party, Juanita More’s Queer Agenda Voting Guide, Vote Alix, Dean’s List, Parents for Public Schools and Coleman Advocates
San Francisco Public Press, Mission Local news coverage and their election coverage and meet the candidates feature, and KQED.