Ernest Jones
- Office: Board of Supervisors, District 11
- Election Date: November 5, 2024
- Candidate: Ernest Jones
- 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.
Table of Contents
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?
San Francisco has been my home my entire life. I was raised in the Lakeview OMI community of District 11 and I have had the privilege to serve this community for years. The city and this neighborhood needs a person who cares for it and is willing to work for it with conviction. District 11 has often been an afterthought and in many ways has gone without many of the resources that have been provided to the District.
What is your #1 policy goal?
Safe/Clean Neighborhoods
How will you build the coalition and political capital to enact your #1 goal?
I will leverage my existing relationships with community partners and invite additional partners to the table. I will utilize the asset mapping done on previous projects to identify opportunities for collaboration and ultimately we will create a District wide plan that can modified to be used in any District throughout San Francisco.
Will the power of the office of Board of Supervisors, District 11 be enough to achieve this goal?
I believe that the power of the Board of Supervisors in combination with the will power and commitment of the community and the hard work of our City departments is enough to achieve this goal.
What are your #2 and #3 policy goals?
Affordable Workforce Housing Development
Revival of the economic corridors
Will the power of the office of Board of Supervisors, District 11 be enough to achieve these goals?
The Board of Supervisors can support these processes with legislation and vision, however housing requires capital investment and projects that are shovel ready. Economic factors play a role in the development of housing but I think there are things that the SF Board of Supervisors can do to support the process.
Like housing, the revitalization of economic corridors isn't just a legislative fix. It will take time to recreate the energy that once pumped through our city. I'm looking forward to voting on things that may ease the transition but ultimately there will be a need for citizens, the board, the mayor and city departments to work collaboratively to achieve this goal.
What is an existing policy you would like to reform?
I would reform the language access policy to allow for simultaneous translation of meetings so that we can have wider participation from all members of the community. As it stands, certain items are available with much advance notice but it still is not inclusive of all residents of our city.
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.)
All Supervisors should run in the 4th year to ensure high voter turnout. As it stands, Odd number districts always align with Presidential elections and even number Districts are always voted on in between years.
Tell us one thing you think needs to change in SF that the average voter wouldn't know about.
The amount of time it takes to hire employees into the City and County of San Francisco. It takes so long that many people skip employment for other cities. It's been highlighted with our nurses, but it is a problem across the board.
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?
Open Air Fentanyl Sales.
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?
I believe the city needs a fully staffed police force. I believe that the best way to achieve this is through prioritizing the retention of current officers while investing in additional recruiting/academies. A personal thought around funding this effort would be through a reserve similar to what we do with the library system here in San Francisco. It has proven effective in revitalizing our library program and could prove effective in the same manner here.
What solutions might exist to improve public safety that don't involve expanding the size of SFPD?
Safety must be holistic to truly be effective. Outside of a fully staffed police department we should focus on corridor activations also. Studies have shown more eyes and ears on the street help to curb offenses.
There should be increased presence of community ambassadors in all commercial areas until staffing levels allow for foot and bike patrol officers.
Increased opportunities for neighbors to meet each other. As neighbors create bonds they will begin to work together to keep their communities safe. This is especially important to have between different cultural and intergenerational spaces.
Discreet and easy reporting applications or text lines (similar to 311) would be an excellent way to share in the moment info when a crime or unsafe situation is happening. This would be especially helpful in the Muni App where situations may be contained to a moving bus or on the street where a person may be able to snap photos but may not be in the position to act immediately.
What three things would you change about how SFPD operates?
-
Increased Foot Patrol
-
Transparent Conversations about technology usage with the community before implementation.
-
Increased Participation in community activities. This visibility would help change the narrative around the actual hard work that SFPD is completing on a day to day.
Do you support policies commonly referred to as "defund the police"? Why or why not?
No. Police have a role in our communities. There are simply jobs that they perform that cannot be replaced. If someone is in a life threatening situation they want to know that there are people who are sworn to protect them.
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.
I disagree with recalls and I did not support. I do support our current District Attorney and her work.
| 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? | x | |
| Arrest and prosecute street-level fentanyl dealers? | x | |
| Prioritize diversion instead of incarceration for street-level fentanyl dealers? | x | |
| Investigate, arrest, and prosecute fentanyl distribution ringleaders (like organized crime and cartel members)? | x | |
| Arrest and prosecute street-level vendors of suspected stolen goods? | x | |
| 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:
Drugs
In general, how should the City handle people who are abusing drugs on City sidewalks?
Public use of drugs is a misdemeanor crime which can technically be punished by jail time. However, we cannot prosecute our way out of a drug problem. People need treatment and they need treatment that is attached to abstinence. I believe we should use the consequence of jail time to incentivize treatment while methodically cracking down on the dealers of drugs.
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 are not a solution to the problem. They are a less risky alternative to consuming drugs on the street. They do help to preserve the lives of many people who use drugs (fewer overdoses, fewer ambulance calls). Without a strategy to get people from these safe injection sites and into treatment they are simply a place for people to do drugs. There must be a more focused pathway to get people away from the use and into treatment programs that incentivize rehabilitation.
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?
As mentioned above, we should not allow public use of illicit drugs. We should do everything in our power to get those using off of the street and into treatment programs.
Should fentanyl dealing be penalized differently from dealing other drugs?
Fentanyl is deadly. Those who sell fentanyl should be prosecuted in line with the letter of the law. However, if the drug sale leads to death, the dealers should be held responsible for that life that was lost.
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.
What is the role of government in providing care for those who cannot care for themselves?
It is essential that the government care for those who cannot care for themselves. Government should be designed in a way that supports all its people. There should be safeguards in place that protect each citizen - including the most vulnerable populations who are experiencing mental health crises. If a person cannot care for themselves they become a danger not only to themselves but also to others. As community members we have seen unattended fires destroy businesses and homes. We have seen violent outbursts happen injuring seniors and we've seen situations where someone experiencing a crisis has harmed themselves. We need deep investments in mental health treatment facilities, emergency mental health outreach teams and the option to begin conservation once proper assessments have been performed.
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.
Yes.
If you agree with this view, please outline some guardrails and oversight the City must provide to prevent abuse.
To prevent abuse the City should implement independent evaluations by doctors outside of the City network and next of kin should always be notified once a hold is in place.
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?
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. Part of being a great city is offering strong education options for families. There is not a one size fits all solution when it comes to education. We should have well run, supported public schools, with options for private and magnet schools as well. Parents/families should have the option to choose as opposed to being forced to choose because of poor performance.
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.
I disagree with recalls and did not support. However, I do feel that the new makeup of the board has been positive.
| 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:
Small Business
What would you change about the process of new retail business formation in San Francisco?
I would remove many of the conditional use restrictions to allow businesses to open faster. All businesses should be given clearly defined requirements for their business and its buildout as they apply for their initial license to operate. There shouldn't be design surprises or unnecessary feedback that happens months after starting the process. Business owners spend months paying rent while they wait for various approvals and ultimately begin their business fighting to survive.
Should all businesses be permitted by-right? If not, which business categories do you think should require special government approval?
No. Alcoholic beverage sales, Cannabis sales/consumption, medical / cosmetic / surgical treatments are among some of the options that should still require government approval. Restaurants should be cleared by the health department to ensure proper refrigeration/sanitation/warming are in place.
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?
The city should issue additional licenses. The city should continue to issue type 87 licenses to restaurants along neighborhood commercial corridors and prioritize the release of typical licenses in the areas of San Francisco that have seen major decline in retail footprint and off peak hour activation. This is a good strategy to reimagine our downtown area by getting more people into those areas during night and weekend times when traditional office/retail services may not be open. Businesses with existing permits may receive some sort of abatement of business fees to offset the influx of new licenses to the market. This could potentially be paired with a restriction on the timeframe of acquisition (of the licenses) to carve out older businesses who purchased licenses at a lower cost.
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?
In my conversation with many cannabis retailers, they were thankful for the moratorium that was put in place. Many were seeing dwindling profit margins even in their partnerships with larger brands such as STIIZY. The operators that are currently open are either equity applicants or applicants who were grandfathered in. I do not believe we have reached our capacity for dispensaries, but I do think it is time to take a look at a variety of offerings outside of retail storefront (Ie. Cafe's with food options).
| 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:
Housing
Do you believe that San Francisco has a shortage of homes? Why or why not?
Yes. In 2022 there were roughly 415,000 units with the population being over 800,000 people. This accounts for people who live here and not necessarily work here and would want to live near their jobs. Many of our first responders do not live in San Francisco due to pricing, and supply. Many people in San Francisco's workforce would love to live here but are priced out due to supply and demand.
Do you believe that housing prices are set by supply and demand constraints? Why or why not?
Various factors play into the housing prices. Supply and demand is definitely a factor, but alongside that principle there is also the issue of cost to build. When the underwriting happens for many of the buildings there are defined rents needed to make the project pencil.
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?
Continue to work toward the necessary goals. Ultimately the state wants to see that we are capable of building housing and meeting the goals set forth. We must continue to build and plan for all types of housing while prioritizing the opportunities for construction of workforce and affordable projects.
Should homeless shelters be exempt from CEQA, Discretionary Review, and Conditional Use permits?
Shelters should undergo a community information process. Similar to the process that happened with the vehicle triage in District 11. Shelters don't necessarily need to undergo CEQA unless being built from the ground up. However, we have tons of vacancies in San Francisco that could be converted. Discretionary Review is adequate.
Should subsidized Affordable housing be exempt from CEQA, Discretionary Review, and Conditional Use permits?
Affordable housing projects should be by right and fast tracked. There should be informational sessions to keep community members informed, but once financing and location are in place - there should be urgency to get these projects built. There have been basic carve outs to bypass some of these processes. Discretionary review is adequate.
Should market rate housing be exempt from CEQA, Discretionary Review, and Conditional Use permits?
Market rate housing should be built after environmental and discretionary review. Conditional use should be removed. I would add that historical districts should require a more in depth community/discretionary review.
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)
San Francisco should loosen restrictions. I am supportive of taller/denser buildings - especially along commercial corridors and access points to transportation.
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?
We should be moving to bring down the cost to develop new housing in San Francisco. Additional costs to windows raises the price to make a home livable. I would like to see the requirement moved to a window that had higher thermal efficiency and provide the best price for the effectiveness.
| 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?
No. I support free muni for youth especially since many of our students use Muni as their primary mode of transportation to and from school. Muni, like the airport, is one of the few agencies that has the ability to support itself via fares/fees. This income is critical to maintaining infrastructure, maintenance of the systems, and providing living wages to employees. Senior and disabled riders can be discounted currently with Clipper Card activation as it stands.
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 believe that fare enforcement is necessary. As mentioned in my previous answer, SFMTA is an enterprise department that generates revenue for the city. This revenue is important because it can cover costs needed to improve service. I believe the presence of enforcement helps with safety as there are additional trained eyes and ears riding our system and interacting with the public. We should create more opportunities to buy fares (pay stations at stops or ability to pay using card on train/bus) but ultimately enforcement should remain.
Recent State funding requires Muni and BART to enforce fare payments in order to receive that funding; do you agree with this requirement?
Yes. If money is being shared to provide paid transportation service there should be compliance to make sure the money is not being wasted.
Should it be the policy of San Francisco to build a citywide protected bike lane network? Why or why not?
Yes. San Francisco should be a city of bikes and cars. Many people choose to ride bikes to travel the city and we should make it not only convenient, but safe for them to do so without restrictions on where they can ride safely.
| 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 support Uber and Lyft. I think there are still some concerns about autonomous driving and its ability to allow safety workers to effectively do their jobs.
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?
First San Francisco has to get lean on its budget and spending. This means cutting programs and services that are not essential to health, safety, or business of San Francisco. A portion of this is combing through department budgets and finding unspent dollars that can be earmarked for essential projects.
| 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 |
If you want to explain any positions above, please feel free:
Medical facilities - needs investment in mental health treatment beds Homeless services need to produce more shelter beds and more options for housing those in need.
Drug prevention should be focused on rehabilitation and transitioning from drug use to a lifestyle that is incentivized and sustainable.v
Personal
Tell us a bit about yourself!
How long have you lived in San Francisco? What brought you here and what keeps you here?
My entire life. I am rooted here because of my family, lifelong friends, my commitment to neighborhood projects and my desire to see San Francisco thrive.
What do you love most about San Francisco?
The size of the city is my favorite thing. While San Francisco has the feel of a big city - its still a fairly small city geographically making it easy to see friends and family who may live in other Districts. Additionally, each neighborhood boasts its own unique style but collectively adds to the flavor of San Francisco.
What do you dislike the most about San Francisco?
The cost of living in San Francisco is higher than many cities. Due to the cost, we have lost many people who can no longer afford to live here. I find that to be a downside.
Tell us about your current involvement in the community (e.g., volunteer groups, neighborhood associations, civic and professional organizations, etc.)
Volunteer at The City Eats
Volunteer with Cayuga Neighborhood Clean Ups via Refuse Refuse OMICC
OMINIA
Volunteer SWCC Senior Food Distribution
Volunteer for SF Youth First
Volunteer Member of SF Black Wall Street
Volunteer Member of Invest Black
Saint Ignatius Alumni Host
Volunteer We Are OMI
Thank you
Thank you for giving us your time and answering our questionnaire. We look forward to reading your answers and considering your candidacy!
If you see any errors on this page, please let us know at contact@growsf.org.