Adlah Chisti
- Office: Board of Supervisors, District 11
- Election Date: November 5, 2024
- Candidate: Adlah Chisti
- Due Date: February 28, 2024
- Printable Version
Thank you for seeking GrowSF's endorsement for the November 5, 2024 election! GrowSF believes in a growing, beautiful, vibrant, healthy, safe, and prosperous city via common sense solutions and effective government. Our work includes running public opinion polls to understand what voters want, advocating for those changes, and ensuring that the SF government represents the people.
The GrowSF endorsement committee will review all completed questionnaires and seek consensus on which candidates best align with our vision for San Francisco.
Please complete this questionnaire by February 28, 2024 so we have enough time to adequately review and discuss your answers.
Your Goals
We'd like to get some details about your high-level goals and how you intend to use your elected office to achieve them.
Why are you running for Board of Supervisors, District 11?
To ensure a vision where families, children and seniors thrive and that we have a plan for what our district will look like in the next 20 or 30 years.
What is your #1 policy goal?
Public Safety for children, families, women, and seniors.
How will you build the coalition and political capital to enact your #1 goal?
Listening to the Community for input is so vital for any idea related to the district. Frequent town hall events, weekly/monthly meetings with stakeholders and key community leaders, office hours for community members and in person updates from the office are so vital to transparency and accountability.
Will the power of the office of Board of Supervisors, District 11 be enough to achieve this goal?
What will make this work is a system of checks and balances that will foster collaboration and create a community to share ideas about our city.
What are your #2 and #3 policy goals?
Seniors, women, families and children are always the priority and are the lens we should use to address public safety, housing and business revitalization as well as climate change and education.
Will the power of the office of Board of Supervisors, District 11 be enough to achieve these goals?
Yes. As a City we fund our priorities. If we center seniors, women, families, and children we can achieve the goal of safety, housing, economic development, and a healthy community.
What is an existing policy you would like to reform?
I would support measures that update the CEQA housing and zoning policies so that we do a better for environmental justice, the essence of CEQA and for our housing shortage which is also vital for climate change.
What is an "out there" change that you would make to state/local government policy, if you could? (For example: adding at-large supervisors, changing how elections work, creating a Bay Area regional government, etc.)
I would like to see an oversight committee for how money is spent on local elections and ballot measures including independent expenditures.
Tell us one thing you think needs to change in SF that the average voter wouldn't know about.
I believe that people are frustrated with their elected officials, and may not be clear that this is due to a lack of oversight for tracking and spending money in the City.
The Issues
Next, we will cover the issues that voters tell us they care about. We hope to gain a better understanding of your policy positions, and we hope that you use this opportunity to communicate with voters.
Public Safety
What is the #1 public safety issue today?
The number #1 public safety issue is personal property crime. Our force was staffed up to 2100 officers pre-pandemic. Currently there are 300 vacancies.
San Francisco currently has about 1,500 sworn police officers. Some have argued that the City should try to match the per-capita staffing levels that other large cities have. If we matched cities like New York or Paris, we would need to have about 3,400 sworn officers. What do you think of this idea? If you support it, how would the City fund recruitment at SFPD to achieve this staffing level? If you don't support it, what would you propose to do instead?
We have an issue of retention and recruitment. I do feel that "sworn officers" may not be the full solution. We can also look to community safety and community policing, as well as neighborhood watch measures to supplement the force.
What solutions might exist to improve public safety that don't involve expanding the size of SFPD?
POST (Peace Officer Standards and Training) certification of street crisis response teams. would be a great solution to improve public safety.
What three things would you change about how SFPD operates?
Support recruitment and retention efforts.
Expand foot and bike patrols and Community Policing.
Extend patrols of commercial corridors for retail theft.
Do you support policies commonly referred to as "defund the police"? Why or why not?
No.
Please explain why you did or did not support the recall of DA Chesa Boudin. If you were ineligible to vote in that election, please explain how you would have voted.
Democracy allows for recalls. Recalling an election requires 51,235 valid signatures. There were 229,760 and 55% voted yes on the recall. $7million was spent on the efforts.
| Should San Francisco… | Yes | No |
|---|---|---|
| Try to achieve "full staffing" for SFPD? (Defined as about 2,100 officers, according to the City) | x | |
| Change the cite-and-release policy so officers can arrest suspects of misdemeanors like shoplifting and car break-ins? | ||
| Arrest and prosecute street-level fentanyl dealers? | ||
| Prioritize diversion instead of incarceration for street-level fentanyl dealers? | ||
| Investigate, arrest, and prosecute fentanyl distribution ringleaders (like organized crime and cartel members)? | x | |
| Arrest and prosecute street-level vendors of suspected stolen goods? | ||
| Investigate, arrest, and prosecute the leaders of theft rings and fencing operations? | x | |
| Arrest and prosecute street food vendors operating without a permit? | x | |
| Fine street food vendors operating without a permit? | x |
If you want to explain any positions above, please feel free:
Some of the questions above are not adequate for a yes or no response and have been left blank. The drug issue should focus on suppliers not street level since this is an issue of equity. For districts like District 11 we have different issues dealing with crime, drugs, theft, homelessness and it is an issue of equity in our community since we have many different communities from the working class and the middle class. Our main public safety issue in District 11 is personal property crimes. We have a number of stolen vehicles, retail theft, catalytic converter thefts.
Accordingly, I support legislation to create a targeted system from law enforcement to address rampant fencing on City streets, which has brought up serious public safety challenges and hurt local businesses. And where people can still sell goods with a permit and sell goods on the list of frequently stolen items with a permit and proof of purchase.
As such we should implement policies that take account of unintended consequences especially for our vulnerable communities and that could result in racial bias. We need to consider the Three Strikes Law and how we handle small crimes. The three Strikes law in the 90's led to disproportionate incarceration of Latino and African American adults.
The cite and release also means that there are less arrests being made and enforcement of the law is not adequate. We have to strike a balance for our communities and we must have a fair judicial system and enforcement for our families and communities to feel safe especially in districts like District 11. Community policing is important for districts like 11 and to have relationships with the community.
This is why we should have community policing and police staffed at pre-pandemic levels for enforcement, deterrence and visibility.
Drugs
In general, how should the City handle people who are abusing drugs on City sidewalks?
First responders need additional training on how to handle people on the streets who have mental health issues and drug addiction. We also need to support the Street Crisis Response Team and ensure that they have the resources they need first in order to address those who are on the streets with drug addiction issues.
Do you support the creation of safe consumption sites in San Francisco? If so, please detail how they should be run. If not, please explain a viable alternative.
Safe consumption sites have potential benefits, their implementation requires a nuanced approach. They are not federally approved. We need a balance between treatment, and public safety. I do support safe consumption sites as they have been shown to work, we would just need to assure the safety of the staff and the individual seeking help.
Some have argued that safe consumption sites (or sobering centers) are only viable if they are paired with implementing zero-tolerance for public consumption of illegal drugs like fentanyl and heroin. Do you agree or disagree with this view?
I think it is important to set a goal of limiting public consumption of illegal drugs, but until the safe consumption site is fully staffed and running, one of the best ways to achieve harm reduction is to collect those using illegal drugs and direct them to the safe consumption site. In simpler terms, the carrot has to exist before the stick.
Should fentanyl dealing be penalized differently from dealing other drugs?
We have to look at increased penalties for distribution or selling of 1kg or greater.
Mental Health
Should San Francisco amend our current laws around mental health crisis intervention to better help people suffering on the streets? If yes, why and how? If not, why not?
Yes. Our first responders should be adequately trained to de-escalate any situation. First responders need additional training on how to handle people on the streets who have mental health issues and drug addiction. We also need to support the Street Crisis Response Team and ensure that they have the resources they need first in order to address those who are on the streets with drug addiction issues.
What is the role of government in providing care for those who cannot care for themselves?
Conservatorship is an important step for those with severe mental health issues that can harm themselves or others. This further has to be handled with caution and handled without taking advantage of those who can't help themselves and are not harming anyone.
Some have argued that San Francisco should place people who are experiencing mental health crises on the streets into involuntary mental health holds at psychiatric facilities. Do you agree or disagree with this view? Please explain why or why not.
I value community input on this and we should carefully consider the consequences of this before I can lend my support. There is also a big issue of funding and how we need to be transparent and accountable in funding for mental health, drug addiction and homelessness.
If you agree with this view, please outline some guardrails and oversight the City must provide to prevent abuse.
During the pandemic we have spent over $1 billion and yet our direct services to mental health and drug addiction were inadequate. I support Supervisor Stefani's legislation on oversight of nonprofits that handle mental health, drug addiction and homelessness especially those that promised to provide services and have not done so adequately in the downtown area.
If you disagree with this view, please outline your preferred alternative solution as well as any drawbacks it might have and oversight it might need.
N/A
Education
Should the Board of Education be reformed to bring more accountability and better performance to the Board, and boost public school performance? If so, how; if not, why not?
State funding is so vital and we must look at supporting the Student Success Fund and the Workforce Economic Recovery Fund and the Board of Education should do more to secure state and local funding.
Some parents prefer their children attend religious schools, others prefer magnet schools for specific skills (like the Ruth Asawa School for the Arts or Lowell), and others prefer charter schools with nontraditional curricula. Do you think all of these educational options should be available to students in San Francisco?
Yes.
Did you support the recall of Board of Education members Collins, López, and Moliga? Please explain why you did or did not support the recall of each member.
Collins - Yes 79% voters
Lopez - Yes 75% voters
Moliga - No he distanced himself and called for the resignation of Collins and Lopez and often appeared by himself in forums with recall supporters. It is also important to note that that sentiment at the time was for the recall of all seven board members but only three were eligible to be recalled.
It's important that while the recall efforts were democratically done and it's what the sentiment of the time was for the majority of the voters. 1.9 million was spent on the recalls. Most of the city's 115 schools, which serve 50,0000 students, were closed for over a year, from March 2020 to August 2021.
| Should San Francisco… | Yes | No |
|---|---|---|
| Offer Algebra in 8th grade to students who want it? | x | |
| Offer Algebra in 7th grade to students who want it? | x | |
| Offer AP courses to high school students who want them? | x | |
| Require schools to improve student performance, and fire teachers who consistently underperform? | x |
If you want to explain any positions above, please feel free:
State level funding is vital to our education. We significantly need more resources for our schools overall.
We also need more funding:
For school facilities,
To increase teacher salaries,
To stabilize teacher pension system
To improve mental health resources for teachers and students.
We need consistent metrics for student success, school culture and school equity to ensure schools have the necessary resources to improve performance. Afterschool and summer school is vital for our children.
Small Business
What would you change about the process of new retail business formation in San Francisco?
Streamline the process and reduce the fees.
Should all businesses be permitted by-right? If not, which business categories do you think should require special government approval?
Diversification of our industries is so vital to a thriving economy.
Some in the Small Business community have argued that San Francisco should increase the number of available ABC permits (also known as a liquor license) to lower the cost of running a business and increase customer revenues from alcohol sales. Others have argued against increasing the number of permits because they don't want more competition, or have already paid a lot of money for their liquor license. What do you think the City should do?
I would have to review any proposals to increase or not increase ABC permits before lending my support. I believe the community has a huge role with its input as well as business owners to play in the creation of new permits. I want to ensure everyone's voice is heard throughout the process of changing existing processes.
Similarly, some in the legal cannabis retailer community have lobbied to reduce the number of available permits. Economists have argued that this reduces competition, raises prices for consumers, and raises profits for retailers. What do you think the City should do?
I would have to review any proposals to increasing or not increasing permits before lending my support. I believe the community has a huge role with its input as well as business owners to play in the creation of new permits. I want to ensure everyone's voice is heard throughout the process of changing existing processes.
| Should San Francisco… | Yes | No |
|---|---|---|
| Reduce the time to obtain all permits to open a new business to no more than 3 months | x | |
| Reduce the cost of obtaining permits to open a new business | x | |
| Reduce the number of activities which must obtain permits, and expand the number of by-right activities | x | |
| Try to attract businesses of all sizes to the City? | x |
If you want to explain any positions above, please feel free:
Community driven results are so important for many of these positions and before I consider I will look to District 11 community members to get the input of my community.
Housing
Do you believe that San Francisco has a shortage of homes? Why or why not?
Yes. We need more housing, mixed use, affordable, market rate, all of it, in San Francisco and the current high rents reflect the shortage of housing.
As Supervisor I would support the Mayor's current legislation for density along the business and neighborhood corridors.
San Francisco's current housing requirements fees used to set aside for affordable housing, are the highest in the country. I support the Inclusionary Housing legislation to reduce fees for projects that are already approved by the City and new housing projects.
Do you believe that housing prices are set by supply and demand constraints? Why or why not?
Housing prices are set by multiple factors and include both environmental justice and supply and demand constraints from an economic stance point. In policy there is no one way to address an issue. It has multiple factors to consider for equity and affordability as well as the available housing stock.
** San Francisco will almost certainly fail its Housing Element certification, which will cause the State to take over local land use regulation. What should we do now?**
We need state funding to boost our current stock of housing. What is concerning is that in San Francisco, we have chosen to fund affordable housing construction through fees paid by market rate developers. The legal justification for this is that new market rate development has a quantifiable impact that can be mitigated through a fee. If so then we will never produce enough housing to solve the problem, we will only be barely catching up while the problem gets worse. We need state funding to help with affordable housing.
I also support:
-
Mayor Breed's housing for all legislation.
-
Supervisor Melgar's and the Mayor's legislation for increasing corridor density and
-
Removing procedural constraints to eliminate unnecessary processes and hearings, eliminate certain code requirements and geographic restrictions, and expand housing incentive programs for new housing that fits within the City's existing zoning laws.
We should incentivize flexible financing programs than what is available now to permit homeowners to add units to their homes to age in place and provide housing to others without losing or selling their home.
Our market right now is designed so that developers upgrade homes without adding density. This is because the costs associated with navigating the SF regulatory process and the premium on land can make it more profitable to upgrade an existing house and sell at a higher price rather than build more units.
Should homeless shelters be exempt from CEQA, Discretionary Review, and Conditional Use permits?
Exempt from CEQA - Yes
Exempt from Discretionary Review - Yes
Exempt from Conditional Use - Yes
To my understanding emergency projects are generally exempt from CEQA and CEQA was created to ensure environmental justice practices.
Emergency shelters are important for families with children and if we have a shortage we need to move on this quickly. For instance an example of this is the Horce Mann and Buena Vista Stay over program families with children. These families are waitlisted to be moved into permanent housing. Waitlisted families need a transparent process. They need to know where they are in the line and how long the wait will be. Housing is a human right and we need housing for our most vulnerable communities with families and children first with respect to environmental justice and environmentalism, under the essence of CEQA. Right now it is riddled with zoning laws and policies that need to be updated.
Should subsidized Affordable housing be exempt from CEQA, Discretionary Review, and Conditional Use permits?
Exempt from CEQA - Depends. To my understanding projects must comply with the City's objective planning and building code standards and applicable state laws regarding affordable housing. Projects must also comply with prevailing wage and other labor requirements. Because CEQA applies only to projects that require some form of discretionary governmental approval, projects eligible for streamlining should generally not be subject to CEQA review.
Exempt from Discretionary Review - Yes
Exempt from Conditional Use - Yes
Nevertheless we must ensure public review and environmental justice practices for affordable housing. As a former environmental planner for Caltrans I am familiar with CEQA. Prioritizing affordable workforce housing especially in District 11 for our teachers, nurses, veterans, and firefighters, and prioritizing housing opportunities for our seniors, children and families is a must. Increased housing at all levels fosters a vibrant community with clean and safe streets for our families, children and seniors. Housing increases foot traffic, supports transit frequency and revitalizes business as well. For District 11 this makes density, height, and affordability appropriate housing on the corridor even more vital to meet the needs of our diverse demographics.
Should market rate housing be exempt from CEQA, Discretionary Review, and Conditional Use permits?
Exempt from CEQA - No. CEQA is a state law issue. CEQA was created to ensure environmental justice practices and for this reason I would have to review any proposals of exemption before lending my support.
Exempt from Discretionary Review - Yes. So long as their community input and a fair public review process of new housing units. Community input on this is vital since they are the ones who will be living in or near these developments. We need to look at how other cities have built housing and quickly with community input.
Exempt from Conditional Use - Yes. By eliminating most CUs for code-compliant projects, this legislation would allow new housing to be approved faster.
The current funding scheme doesn't allow us to build enough housing based on how much market rate housing is being built. Right now the lack of housing is our number one issue. We need housing at all levels. We need a common sense housing plan that considers the reality of our economy and society.
The current legislation by the Mayor to remove constraints on new housing would amend many existing code provisions that require the approval of a Conditional Use Authorization (CU) by the Planning Commission. A CU approval can add six to nine months to the housing approval process by requiring hearings and discretionary approvals for projects that already comply with zoning laws. By eliminating most CUs for code-compliant projects, this legislation would allow new housing to be approved faster.
Should San Francisco retain, loosen, or even abolish the existing limits on height, density, and bulk for residential buildings? (ie taller, denser, and fewer/reduced setbacks)
I support the Mayor's Housing for All legislation, removing constraints on corridors for density. I also support her legislation to streamline permits.
San Francisco Planning requires that new street-facing windows comply with City-imposed design requirements that both raise the price of windows while lowering their thermal and noise insulation. Should the City abolish these requirements?
I would have to review any proposals to planning requirements before lending my support.
| In general, is it too hard, just right, or too easy to… | Too hard | Just right | Too easy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expand your home (adding new stories, rooms, decks, etc) | x | ||
| Renovate your home (update bathroom, kitchen, etc) | x | ||
| Demolish your home and redevelop it into multifamily housing | x | ||
| Redevelop things like parking lots and single-story commercial into multifamily housing | x | ||
| Build subsidized housing | x | ||
| Build market-rate housing | x | ||
| Build homeless shelters (including navigation centers and "tiny homes") | x |
If you want to explain any positions above, please feel free:
Transit Infrastructure
Should Muni be free for everyone? If so, what other programs would you take money from in order to fund this change, or what new tax would you propose to fund it?
MUNI should be free for everyone. Access to affordable or even free public transportation is important, especially for working class families.
Funding is just as important to acknowledge for this programming. MUNI also receives funding from its riders, but ideally we should find other sources of revenue within the city budget to fund a free MUNI. Enforcement of fares also is another mechanism that we utilize and spend our budget allocations on. And I would need to review the funding of MUNI and how revenue is generated before lending my support.
Some have argued that the cost of fare enforcement exceeds the benefit. Others have argued that not enforcing fare payment starves the Muni and BART systems of revenue, lowers quality of service, and makes the systems less safe. What is your position?
I support measures to ensure safety and improved quality of MUNI, BART and all public transportation. Oversight of tracking and spending funds is important for the City. We need a set of clear metrics to measure success, ridership and fare payments among other metrics for an equitable transportation system. We also need to have transparency and accountability in our City.
Recent State funding requires Muni and BART to enforce fare payments in order to receive that funding; do you agree with this requirement?
Bart is a regional bay area transit and we have elected officials to the Bart Board to make those decisions. Bart fare enforcement is to the benefit of the region.
MUNI is for the City and we should have funding from both state and local sources to keep our transportation functioning.
Should it be the policy of San Francisco to build a citywide protected bike lane network? Why or why not?
There is a visual impact associated with protected bike lanes for drivers and this would decrease driving safety. If we had a comprehensive network of bike paths and comprehensive traffic calming measures for all of SF then we would not have to resort to such measures as fully protected bike paths. Having protected bike paths in the short term is important for families that use them to take their kids to schools but we have to come up with a better approach to ensure both driving safety measures and bike safety measures for our families, children and seniors. .
| Yes | No | |
|---|---|---|
| Do you support banning cars from central downtown areas and certain retail or residential corridors? | x | |
| Do you support congestion pricing? | x | |
| Should San Francisco prioritize buses over car traffic by creating more bus-only lanes and directing traffic enforcement officers to ticket drivers who ignore the restrictions? | x | |
| Should Uber, Lyft, Waymo, and other ride-share services be permitted to operate in San Francisco? | x | |
| Should San Francisco allow more bike share and scooter share companies? | x | |
| Should San Francisco allow bike and scooter share companies to operate with fewer restrictions on the number of vehicles they offer for rent, and in more places (including inside Golden Gate Park)? | x |
If you want to explain any positions above, please feel free:
I have planning experience and we need traffic impact studies that have alternating findings with public commenting and review to have a deeper dive in the health of our streets and transit. What we do want to look at is the impact of increased or decreased congestion along economic corridors. Working class families rely on their vehicles for their children and aging parents. Seniors also need to do groceries, lift heavy groceries and go to doctor appointments and pick up medicines. Bus stops are too far apart for those in walkers and those who can't walk far or lift heavy groceries.
Post pandemic cars now speed through corridors where children cross to go to school. We need preventative measures and a holistic approach to driving safety and bike lanes that is comprehensive and is made for our children, families and seniors that are especially from the working class.
We can also increase transit and other alternative modes of transportation to battle climate change. San Francisco is also trying to minimize cars. Also if Uber, Lyft, Waymo, and other ride-share services are permitted to operate in San Francisco they should pay a trip tax.
We need to ensure we are taxing bike, scooter and car ride share services and autonomous car services adequately and proportionately for using City streets. Ensure they are paying their fair share to maintain city streets is important for the City Budget revenue.
Budget
San Francisco is facing a large budget deficit due to declining tax revenues from our struggling downtown. What will your approach be to fix this?
| Do you think San Francisco spends too little, too much, or just enough on… | Too little | Just enough | Enough, but badly | Too much |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Police and public safety | x | |||
| Street cleanliness | x | |||
| Homeless services | x | |||
| Affordable housing | x | |||
| Parks | x | |||
| Roads | x | |||
| Bus, bike, train, and other public transit infrastructure | x | |||
| Schools | x | |||
| Medical facilities | x | |||
| Drug prevention and treatment | x | |||
| Arts | x |
If you want to explain any positions above, please feel free:
As a candidate for Supervisor, I would support measures such as Supervisor Catherine Stefani's legislation to enhance oversight of nonprofit spending of city funds towards mental health, drug addiction and homelessness.
Personal
Tell us a bit about yourself!
How long have you lived in San Francisco? What brought you here and what keeps you here?
I was born and raised in District 11. I went to Sunnyside Elementary, Aptos Middle School and Lick-Wilmerding High School. I have a 2 year old daughter and I am the caregiver for my aging parents and I am a proud member of SEIU 2015 for in-home support services workers. I used to work as a teacher at James Lick Middle School and Environmental Planner for Caltrans. I also taught park access to city youth and worked in the Headlands.
Most recently I was a policy analyst for early childhood education and 21st Century Learning skills for comprehensive learning to include social emotional learning and I did that for 5 or 6 plus years before I entered politics.
What do you love most about San Francisco?
I love Beep's Burgers on Ocean Avenue. It's been there forever.
What do you dislike the most about San Francisco?
The cold wind that comes in from the ocean.
Tell us about your current involvement in the community (e.g., volunteer groups, neighborhood associations, civic and professional organizations, etc.)
I am part of all the neighborhood groups
Oceanview Merced Ingleside Neighborhood improvement
New Mission Terrace Improvement
Excelsior Development Improvement Group
Alice B Toklas Dem Club
United Dem Club
YIMBY
Friends Of Balboa Park
If you see any errors on this page, please let us know at contact@growsf.org.