Nelson Mei

• Office: Mayor
• Election Date: November 5, 2024
• Candidate: Nelson Mei
• Due Date: July 1, 2024
• Printable Version

Your Goals

Executive experience

The Issues

• Public Safety
• Drugs
• Mental Health
• Education
• Housing
• Small Business
• Transit Infrastructure
• Budget

Personal

Thank you

Your Goals

Why are you running for Mayor?

The reason I decided to run for mayor this year is because we can't afford to waste another four years – San Francisco deserves better. Over the past few years, I've seen our city decline, and I can no longer stand by and watch. I am proud to step up and fight for the chance to make a positive impact on our city. I truly believe I have the best vision for San Francisco among the 13 mayoral candidates. I am certain that I will lead the city to make all the necessary changes and put an end to the current inefficiencies and issues we face.

What is your #1 policy goal?

My #1 policy goal is to solve the current public safety and homelessness challenges. I believe that addressing these issues is crucial for the well-being of our residents and the overall health of our city. By improving public safety and providing comprehensive support for the homeless, we can create a safer and more supportive environment for all San Franciscans.

How will you build the coalition and political capital to enact your #1 goal?

I will build a coalition by engaging with local business leaders, community organizations, and residents to gather their support and input. I will work closely with the Board of Supervisors and other elected officials to find common ground and develop policies that benefit the entire city. By demonstrating my commitment to concrete results and listening to the concerns of all involved, I will build the political capital necessary to effectively address public safety and homelessness. Additionally, I will leverage the expertise of non-profit organizations and advocacy groups that specialize in these areas to ensure a comprehensive and effective approach.

Will the power of the office of Mayor be enough to achieve this goal?

While the power of the office of Mayor is significant, achieving this goal will require collaboration with the Board of Supervisors, state and federal representatives, and community organizations. The Mayor's office can provide the leadership and direction needed, but building strong partnerships and engaging the community are essential for creating sustainable solutions. By leveraging the influence of the Mayor's office and fostering a cooperative environment, we can effectively address public safety, reform ineffective policies, and revitalize the economy in San Francisco.

What are your #2 and #3 policy goals?

My #2 policy goal is to overcome the current ineffective policies that benefit criminals who commit crimes like shoplifting. This is the kind of nonsense I want to end. It is essential to create a justice system that protects our residents and businesses, ensuring that criminal activities are addressed swiftly and effectively. This will help restore a sense of safety and security throughout San Francisco.

My #3 policy goal is to revitalize the economy. This involves attracting more companies to the city, reenergizing the downtown area, rejuvenating the Westfield shopping mall, and supporting businesses throughout San Francisco. A strong economy is vital for the overall health of our city and provides the resources needed to address other critical issues.

Will the power of the office of Mayor be enough to achieve these goals?

The power of the office of Mayor will be instrumental in achieving these goals, but it will also require collaboration with the Board of Supervisors, state and federal representatives, and community organizations. The Mayor's office can provide the leadership and direction needed, but building strong partnerships and engaging the community is essential for creating sustainable solutions. By leveraging the influence of the Mayor's office and fostering a cooperative environment, we can effectively address public safety, reform ineffective policies, and revitalize the economy in San Francisco.

What is the top single policy you would like to reform in 2025?

The top single policy I would like to reform in 2025 is Proposition 47, which was passed in 2014. While the intention behind this proposition was to reduce penalties for certain non-violent offenses, it has led to unintended consequences, including increased crime rates like shoplifting. Reforming Proposition 47 is essential to ensure that our justice system effectively protects residents and businesses while still addressing the root causes of crime. This change will help restore public safety and confidence in our legal system.

Is there an "out there" change 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.)

Not at the moment, but I will think about it. My focus right now is on solving the critical challenges we are currently facing. While I don't have a specific comment on potential "out there" changes at this time, it doesn't mean I won't address other important issues in the future.

Tell us one thing you think needs to change in SF that the average voter wouldn't know about.

The permitting process in San Francisco for new businesses and housing developments is currently inefficient, creating significant delays and obstacles for entrepreneurs and developers. This inefficiency often involves excessive paperwork, long waiting times for approvals and complex regulations that can be difficult to navigate. Addressing the inefficiency in the permitting process is essential for encouraging investment, promoting economic growth, and increasing housing availability in San Francisco.

Executive experience

Please describe your experience running large organizations, managing executive teams (including hiring, firing, and performance management), driving cultural change and clear communication throughout all levels, effective financial management (budgets, reporting, audit, etc.), and any other experience relevant to running a city with a $14B+ budget and tens of thousands of employees.

I believe the most important thing for a leader, such as the Mayor of San Francisco, is having a clear vision for the future of the city. A leader's primary role is to provide direction and set the strategic course, allowing subordinates to implement this vision effectively.

Please describe a time when you had an underperforming subordinate and how you handled the situation, including (and especially) how you were able to increase their performance.

Note: Please remember that this questionnaire will be public, so do not include any personally identifiable information.

Please describe a time when your organization faced an extreme challenge and how you got the organization through it.

The Board of Supervisors may not be aligned with your goals. In that case, how will you be able to execute with an adversarial Board?

Navigating an adversarial Board of Supervisors requires strategic collaboration, effective communication, and a focus on common ground. Here's how I would approach this challenge:

1. Building Relationships: I would prioritize building strong, respectful relationships with each member of the Board of Supervisors. Understanding their perspectives, priorities, and concerns is crucial. By finding common ground and showing a willingness to collaborate, I can create an environment of mutual respect and cooperation.

2. Open Communication: Maintaining open and transparent communication is key. I would ensure regular meetings with the Board members to discuss my plans, listen to their feedback, and address any concerns they may have. By fostering an environment where dialogue is encouraged, I can better understand their viewpoints and work towards finding solutions that benefit the city as a whole.

3. Compromise and Flexibility: In situations where there is disagreement, I would be prepared to compromise and show flexibility. It's important to focus on the bigger picture and the overall good of San Francisco. Finding a middle ground on contentious issues can help move initiatives forward, even if it means making some concessions.

4. Leveraging Public Support: Gaining public support for my goals is another effective strategy. By engaging with the community and rallying public backing, I can put pressure on the Board of Supervisors to consider the desires and needs of their constituents. Demonstrating widespread public approval for my initiatives can encourage the Board to align with my vision.

5. Data-Driven Decision Making: Presenting well-researched, data-driven arguments for my proposals can help build credibility and make a compelling case. By showing the potential benefits and positive impacts of my plans through concrete evidence, I can persuade Board members to support my initiatives.

6. Incremental Progress: In some cases, it might be necessary to pursue incremental progress rather than sweeping changes. By breaking down larger goals into smaller, more manageable steps, I can achieve gradual improvements that build momentum and demonstrate the effectiveness of my approach.

7. Engaging Stakeholders: Involving key stakeholders, including community leaders, business owners, and advocacy groups, can help build a coalition of support. These stakeholders can amplify the call for change and help bridge the gap between my goals and the Board's priorities.

By employing these strategies, I believe it is possible to execute my goals and drive meaningful change, even with an adversarial Board of Supervisors. The focus will always be on what's best for San Francisco and its residents, working collaboratively to achieve shared objectives.

The Issues

Public Safety

What is your plan to increase SFPD staffing?

One of my commitments is to reinforce the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) by hiring 300 - 500 officers to fully staff the department. Here's how I plan to achieve this.

1. Recruitment Campaign:

   • Targeted Outreach: Launch a comprehensive recruitment campaign aimed at attracting a diverse pool of candidates from within San Francisco and nearby areas. Highlight the benefits of joining the SFPD, such as career advancement opportunities, competitive salaries, and the impact of serving the community.
   • Community Engagement: Partner with community organizations, local colleges, and universities to reach potential recruits. Host job fairs, informational sessions, and workshops to provide insights into the requirements and rewards of a career with the SFPD.

2. Competitive Compensation and Benefits:

   • Salary Reviews: Regularly review salaries to ensure that SFPD officers are competitively compensated compared to other law enforcement agencies in the region.
   • Comprehensive Benefits: Offer comprehensive benefits packages, including health insurance, retirement plans, and career advancement opportunities, to attract and retain high-quality officers.

3. Streamlined Hiring Process:

   • Efficient Background Checks: Improve the efficiency of the background check process to reduce hiring delays while maintaining high standards for candidate evaluation.
   • Accelerated Training: Implement accelerated training programs for candidates with prior law enforcement or military experience, allowing them to join the force more quickly.

4. Fostering a Positive Work Environment:

   • Supportive Culture: Create a supportive and inclusive work environment that prioritizes officer well-being, professional development, and work-life balance.
   • Mental Health Support: Provide robust mental health support services for officers, including counseling and stress management resources.

5. Policy Reforms:

   • Effective Policing Policies: Reform policies that currently prevent police officers from doing their jobs effectively. This includes removing unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles and enabling officers to take proactive measures against crime.

6. Upgrading Tools and Technologies:

   • Cutting-Edge Technologies: Upgrade the tools and technologies used by the police, equipping them with the newest and best cutting-edge technologies to better protect officers and help them perform their duties efficiently. This includes integrating advanced communication systems, body cameras, and data analytics tools.
   • Tesla Cybertrucks: As part of this initiative, I plan to bring Tesla Cybertrucks to the SFPD fleet, providing robust, state-of-the-art vehicles that enhance the department's capabilities and presence.

By implementing these strategies, I am confident that we can successfully hire 300 - 500 officers, fully staff the SFPD, improve public safety, and create a police department well-equipped to serve and protect the residents of San Francisco.

Traffic enforcement has been declining since 2014, and fell off a cliff in 2020. It is now near zero. Why do you think this crash in enforcement happened and what is your plan to ensure SFPD actually performs their jobs?

The decline in traffic enforcement in San Francisco since 2014, and its significant drop in 2020, can be attributed to several factors:

1. Resource Allocation: With increasing demands on police resources to address rising crime rates and other pressing issues, traffic enforcement may have been deprioritized.
2. Pandemic Impact: The COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 led to a significant reduction in traffic volume due to lockdowns, remote work, and other restrictions, which may have contributed to the sharp decline in enforcement.
3. Policy Shifts: Changes in policing priorities and policies over the years, focusing more on serious crimes and less on traffic violations, may have also played a role.
4. Staffing Shortages: Chronic understaffing in the SFPD has likely impacted the department's ability to maintain consistent traffic enforcement.

Plan to Ensure SFPD Performs Their Jobs:

1. Increase Staffing:

   • Recruitment Campaign: Launch a targeted recruitment campaign to hire 300 - 500 officers, ensuring that the SFPD is fully staffed and capable of addressing all areas of public safety, including traffic enforcement.
   • Streamlined Hiring Process: Improve the efficiency of the hiring process to quickly bring new recruits on board.

2. Reprioritize Traffic Enforcement:

   • Dedicated Traffic Units: Reestablish and expand dedicated traffic enforcement units within the SFPD to focus specifically on monitoring and addressing traffic violations.
   • Clear Directives: Issue clear directives to prioritize traffic enforcement alongside other critical public safety duties, emphasizing the importance of traffic safety.

3. Upgrade Tools and Technologies:

   • Advanced Traffic Monitoring: Implement cutting-edge technologies such as automated traffic monitoring systems, speed cameras, and license plate recognition systems to aid officers in enforcing traffic laws more effectively.
   • Modern Equipment: Equip traffic units with modern tools and vehicles, including Tesla Cybertrucks, to enhance their efficiency and presence on the roads.

4. Policy Reforms:

   • Effective Policing Policies: Reform policies that hinder effective traffic enforcement, ensuring that officers have the authority and tools they need to perform their jobs efficiently.
   • Supportive Environment: Foster a supportive environment where officers feel empowered to enforce traffic laws without unnecessary bureaucratic obstacles.

What is the #1 public safety issue today?

The #1 public safety issue today is the rise in violent crime and the perception of lawlessness in San Francisco. This includes incidents of assault, robbery, and other serious offenses that threaten the safety and well-being of residents and visitors. Additionally, drug addiction is a very serious public safety issue. The widespread use of substances like fentanyl has contributed to an increase in both nonfatal and fatal overdoses. The increasing sense of insecurity and the visible impact of crime on communities are eroding trust in public safety institutions and making it harder for people to feel safe in their neighborhoods.

What will you change about how SFPD operates?

To address the rise in violent crime and improve the overall effectiveness of the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD), I propose several key changes to how the department operates:

1. Reevaluate Staffing Levels:

   • Hire 300-500 Officers: Increase the number of officers to ensure adequate coverage and faster response times. This will allow the SFPD to effectively manage and respond to the increasing crime rates and improve public safety.

2. Reform Policing Policies:

   • Effective Policing Policies: Reform policies that currently prevent police officers from doing their jobs effectively. This includes removing unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles and enabling officers to take proactive measures against crime.

3. Enhance Training and Development:

   • Specialized Training: Provide specialized training for officers to handle violent situations effectively and safely, focusing on de-escalation techniques and mental health crisis intervention.
   • Continuous Education: Ensure ongoing training on the latest crime-fighting techniques and technologies to keep officers updated and well-prepared.

4. Improve Accountability and Transparency:

   • Performance Metrics: Implement clear performance metrics and accountability measures for all involved departments. Regularly review progress and adjust strategies based on outcomes and feedback.
   • Transparent Reporting: Increase transparency in reporting crime statistics and police activities to build public trust and confidence in the department.

5. Strengthen Legal Frameworks:

   • Criminal Justice Reforms: Advocate for criminal justice reforms that ensure laws and policies effectively deter crime and hold offenders accountable.
   • Collaboration with the Judicial System: Work closely with the judicial system to ensure swift and fair prosecution of violent crimes, providing justice for victims and deterring future offenses.

6. Support Officer Well-being:

   • Mental Health Resources: Provide robust mental health support services for officers, including counseling and stress management resources, to ensure their well-being and effectiveness on the job.
   • Positive Work Environment: Foster a supportive and inclusive work environment that prioritizes officer well-being, professional development, and work-life balance.

My goal is to let all the police officers know that the work they are doing really makes the city better, and I will make sure that all the hard work they have done is not wasted.

What will you change about how the Police Commission operates?

The Police Commission is very important for our city. I propose conducting regular audits of the Commission's activities to ensure compliance with policies and procedures and to identify areas for improvement. Additionally, I will enhance transparency by ensuring all Commission meetings are open to the public, with agendas and minutes readily accessible online, and by publishing regular reports on the Commission's work. This will help build public trust and ensure the Commission operates effectively and transparently.

Some have argued that Police Chief Scott should be fired and replaced. Regardless of your position on Chief Scott, how will you ensure the Chief of Police is effective? If that position includes firing the Chief, please explain why you will fire him, and how you will hire a good replacement given the fact that the Police Commission picks the set of candidates.

It would be irresponsible to draw a conclusion about Chief Scott solely based on news and social media without thoroughly analyzing his performance. However, based on the current public safety situation in the city, SFPD's performance does not meet my expectations, particularly in terms of hiring new officers and addressing crime. That said, I will need to obtain and analyze actual data to make an informed decision on whether the city should retain or replace him. Regardless of my position on Chief Scott, my priority is to ensure that the Chief of Police is effective in leading the San Francisco Police Department.

Do you support the policies referred to as "defund the police"? Why or why not?

I do not support the policies referred to as "defund the police." In fact, I will do the opposite. I will redirect more funds to the police department because public safety is my top priority, and the police department is essential to achieving it. Ensuring that our police force is well-funded, well-trained, and well-equipped is crucial for maintaining law and order, protecting our residents, and effectively responding to emergencies. By investing more resources into the police department, we can enhance their capabilities, improve community policing efforts, and ensure a safer San Francisco for everyone.

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 fully support the recall of DA Chesa Boudin. His removal from office is necessary for the safety and well-being of our city. People like him are one of the reasons I decided to run for mayor; we can't allow individuals with misguided policies to govern San Francisco. There are many ways to solve our problems, but he chose the worst approach, exacerbating the issues. His tenure significantly contributed to the rise in crime in our city.

Should San Francisco...	Yes	No
Try to achieve "full staffing" for SFPD? (Defined as about 2,100 officers, according to the City)?	X
Retain the cite-and-release policy for misdemeanors like shoplifting and car break-ins?		X
Arrest and prosecute street-level fentanyl dealers?	X
Prioritize diversion instead of incarceration for 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:

• One of my commitments is to hire more police officers because they keep our city safe and are the ones we rely on in times of trouble and danger.
• Shoplifting and car break-ins are two of the main problems I want to eliminate from our city. The cite-and-release policy for these misdemeanors is another nonsensical policy that I am determined to change. This policy has destroyed all kinds of businesses, forcing many to leave the city. Additionally, car break-ins play a crucial role in damaging the insurance industry, leading to higher premiums and financial strain for residents.
• Selling food on the street is fine to me, but the city must ensure that these vendors understand and follow food safety guidelines. Requiring a permit is a good way to ensure that vendors learn how to prepare food safely. This is all about the safety of the people who buy from these vendors. Ensuring food safety through proper training and permitting helps protect public health and supports a thriving street food culture in our city.

Drugs

Today, people are openly dealing drugs, including fentanyl, with little or no consequences. Why is this happening and what will you do to change this?

Based on my research, fentanyl can cause severe and life-threatening consequences. According to the CDC, it is 50 to 100 times more potent than morphine, and synthetic opioids like fentanyl contribute to nearly 70% of overdose deaths. Even in small doses, fentanyl can be deadly. Over the past few years, nonfatal and fatal overdoses involving fentanyl have continued to rise. Due to its high potency, fentanyl can quickly lead to physical dependence and addiction. Users may develop a tolerance, requiring higher doses to achieve the same effects, which increases the risk of overdose.

Given these severe risks, I am committed to completely eliminating fentanyl from our city, unless it is for legitimate medical purposes. This includes cracking down on illegal distribution and ensuring that those who misuse fentanyl receive the help they need to overcome addiction. My approach will focus on both law enforcement and public health strategies to address this critical issue.

In general, how should the City handle people who are abusing drugs on City sidewalks?

The City should adopt a balanced approach to handling people who are abusing drugs on city sidewalks. This includes deploying outreach teams to provide immediate support and connect individuals to addiction treatment services, while also enforcing laws against drug use in public spaces. It would be inhumane to let individuals continue using drugs without intervention, as those struggling with addiction often cannot help themselves. It is the government's responsibility to help them overcome their addiction and ensure the safety and well-being of all residents.

Do you support the creation of safe consumption sites in San Francisco? If so, please detail how they should be run, including how the City should handle people abusing drugs in public, outside of those sites. If not, please explain a viable alternative to reducing overdoses and drug addiction.

I do not support the creation of safe consumption sites in San Francisco. While the intention behind these sites is to reduce harm and prevent overdoses, I believe there are more effective alternatives to addressing drug addiction and its associated risks. Providing a place for individuals to consume drugs could potentially attract more users and is not a sustainable solution. The best approach is to help individuals overcome their addiction. One significant difference between me and some other candidates is that I focus on solving problems at the root and providing lasting solutions.

Everyone knows that drugs are detrimental to health and can ruin lives, but some people are so addicted that they lack the determination to quit. Just as we do not allow children to smoke or drink alcohol because they cannot always make the right decisions, the government should step in to help those struggling with addiction make better choices.

Instead of safe consumption sites, we should focus on:

• Deploying social workers, counselors, and healthcare professionals to engage with individuals abusing drugs, providing support and connecting them to services.
• Enforcing laws against drug use in public spaces to maintain public safety and eliminate drug dealers from the city, while helping every person addicted to drugs overcome their addiction.
• Increasing access to addiction treatment services, including detoxification, medication-assisted treatment, and long-term rehabilitation programs.
• Launching campaigns to raise awareness about the dangers of drug abuse and implementing school programs to educate young people on the risks and promote healthy, drug-free lifestyles.

Should fentanyl dealing be penalized differently from dealing other drugs?

Fentanyl dealing should indeed be penalized differently from dealing other drugs. Given fentanyl's extreme potency and the significant risk it poses to public health, stricter penalties can help reduce the availability of this dangerous substance, save lives, and protect public health and safety while also addressing the underlying factors contributing to drug trafficking and substance abuse. Generally, drugs that cause more harm should be regarded with more severity.

As Mayor, what directives will you give SFPD and other departments to end fentanyl dealing and clean up drug-dealing hotspots? How will you ensure they do their jobs effectively?

As Mayor, I will implement a comprehensive strategy to end fentanyl dealing and clean up drug-dealing hotspots in San Francisco. This strategy will involve coordinated efforts across various city departments, particularly the San Francisco Police Department, and will include the following directives:

1. Advocate for harsher penalties for fentanyl trafficking. Making sure there will be serious consequences for fentanyl trafficking.
2. Direct the SFPD to conduct targeted operations in known drug-dealing hotspots. These operations will focus on identifying and arresting major dealers and suppliers, rather than low-level users.
3. Increase the presence of law enforcement in high-risk areas to deter drug dealing and ensure rapid response to any illegal activities.
4. Establish specialized units within the SFPD dedicated to combating fentanyl trafficking, equipped with the necessary resources and training to effectively tackle this issue.
5. Foster collaboration between the SFPD, federal agencies (such as the DEA), and neighboring jurisdictions to share intelligence and coordinate efforts against drug trafficking networks.
6. Implement surveillance technologies, such as cameras and sensors, in high-risk areas to monitor activities and gather evidence against traffickers.

To ensure the effectiveness:

1. Establish clear performance metrics and accountability measures for all involved departments. Regularly review progress and adjust strategies based on outcomes and feedback.
2. Provide transparent public reporting on the progress of these initiatives to maintain accountability and public trust.
3. Ensure that law enforcement officers and outreach workers receive comprehensive training on the latest strategies for combating drug trafficking and supporting individuals with addictions.
4. Allocate sufficient resources to ensure that all departments have the tools and support needed to execute their responsibilities effectively.

By implementing these directives and ensuring their effective execution, we can make significant strides in ending fentanyl dealing and cleaning up drug-dealing hotspots in San Francisco, ultimately enhancing public safety and health for all residents.

Mental Health

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 believe that placing people experiencing mental health crises on the streets into involuntary mental health holds at psychiatric facilities can be necessary under certain circumstances, but it must be approached with caution and comprehensive support.

Reasons for Support:

1. Immediate Safety:

   • Protection: Involuntary holds can protect individuals who are a danger to themselves or others. Immediate intervention can prevent harm and stabilize the person in crisis.
   • Public Safety: Removing individuals experiencing severe mental health crises from the streets can enhance public safety by preventing potential incidents that may arise from unpredictable behavior.

2. Access to Treatment:

   • Stabilization: Psychiatric facilities can provide the immediate care and stabilization needed for individuals in crisis, including medication management and therapeutic interventions.
   • Continuum of Care: Involuntary holds can be a gateway to longer-term treatment plans, helping individuals receive the comprehensive care they need.

Concerns and Conditions:

1. Ethical Considerations:

   • Autonomy and Rights: Involuntary holds must be balanced with respecting individuals' autonomy and rights. Any such intervention should be closely monitored to ensure it is used appropriately and only when absolutely necessary.
   • Due Process: There must be clear guidelines and due process to ensure that individuals are not unjustly deprived of their liberty. Legal safeguards and oversight are crucial.

2. Quality of Care:

   • Adequate Resources: Psychiatric facilities must be adequately funded and staffed to provide high-quality care. Overburdened systems can lead to inadequate treatment and further harm.
   • Holistic Approach: Care should include not only stabilization but also comprehensive treatment plans that address the root causes of mental health crises, including therapy, social support, and housing solutions.

3. Community-Based Alternatives:

   • Preventive Measures: Emphasize preventive care and early intervention to reduce the incidence of crises requiring involuntary holds. Community-based mental health services, outreach programs, and crisis intervention teams can provide support before situations escalate.
   • Voluntary Treatment Options: Promote voluntary treatment options and support systems to encourage individuals to seek help willingly.

Conclusion:

While involuntary mental health holds can be a necessary tool for ensuring the safety and well-being of individuals in severe crises, they must be used judiciously and ethically. The focus should be on creating a robust mental health care system that prioritizes prevention, voluntary treatment, and comprehensive care, ensuring that involuntary holds are a last resort.

If you agree with this view, please outline some guardrails and oversight the City must provide to prevent abuse.

If the City agrees to implement involuntary mental health holds for individuals experiencing mental health crises on the streets, it must establish stringent guardrails and oversight mechanisms to prevent abuse and protect individuals' rights. Here are some key measures:

1. Clear Criteria for Involuntary Holds:

   • Defined Guidelines: Establish clear, objective criteria for when involuntary holds can be implemented. These guidelines should be based on whether the individual poses a danger to themselves or others or is unable to care for themselves due to their mental state.
   • Qualified Assessments: Ensure that only qualified mental health professionals can make the decision to place someone under an involuntary hold. This assessment should include a thorough evaluation of the individual's mental health status and immediate risks.

2. Legal Safeguards and Due Process:

   • Right to Legal Representation: Guarantee that individuals subject to involuntary holds have access to legal representation. They should be informed of their rights and have the opportunity to contest the hold in a timely manner.
   • Independent Oversight Body: Create an independent oversight body to monitor the implementation of involuntary holds. This body should have the authority to review cases, investigate complaints, and make recommendations for policy changes.
   • Transparency and Reporting: Mandate regular public reporting on the use of involuntary holds, including statistics on the number of holds, the reasons for them, and their outcomes. Transparency will help build public trust and ensure accountability.

3. Oversight and Accountability:

   • Adequate Funding and Staffing: Ensure that psychiatric facilities are adequately funded and staffed to provide high-quality care. Overburdened facilities can lead to inadequate treatment and further harm.
   • Regular Evaluations: Conduct regular evaluations of individuals under involuntary holds to assess their progress and determine the need for continued detention. The goal should be to release individuals as soon as they are stable and no longer pose a danger.

4. Quality of Care:

   • Humane Treatment: Guarantee that all individuals under involuntary holds are treated with dignity and respect. Facilities should follow strict protocols to prevent mistreatment or neglect.
   • Comprehensive Treatment Plans: Develop comprehensive treatment plans for individuals placed under involuntary holds. These plans should address the root causes of mental health crises, including therapy, social support, and housing solutions.

5. Rights and Dignity:

   • Preventive Care and Early Intervention: Invest in preventive care and early intervention to reduce the incidence of crises requiring involuntary holds. Community-based mental health services, outreach programs, and crisis intervention teams can provide support before situations escalate.
   • Voluntary Treatment Options: Promote voluntary treatment options and support systems to encourage individuals to seek help willingly.

By implementing these guardrails and oversight mechanisms, the City can ensure that involuntary mental health holds are used appropriately and ethically, protecting the rights of individuals while addressing public safety concerns.

If you disagree with this view, please outline your preferred alternative solution, possible drawbacks, and the oversight it might need.

Education

What reforms should be made to the way the Board of Education is elected or conducts business?

I don't have comments on how the Board of Education is elected, but I do have some suggestions on how it should conduct its business:

1. Transparency and Accessibility:

   • Structured Opportunities for Public Comment: Implement structured opportunities for public comment and feedback during meetings, allowing for meaningful community input. This could include designated times for public comments and mechanisms for submitting feedback online.
   • Open Meetings: Ensure all Board of Education meetings are open to the public and provide accessible online streaming options. Meeting minutes and recordings should be promptly posted online for public access.
   • Public Documentation: Make all documents and reports discussed in meetings readily available to the public beforehand to enable informed participation.

2. Public Engagement:

   • Consideration of Community Input: After making decisions, the Board should provide feedback on how community input was considered and the rationale behind their decisions. This helps build trust and transparency.
   • Regular Updates: Provide regular updates on the implementation of decisions and policies, ensuring that the community is kept informed about progress and outcomes.

3. Accountability and Follow-Up:

   • Feedback on Decisions: After making decisions, the Board should provide feedback on how community input was considered and the rationale behind their decisions. This helps build trust and transparency.
   • Regular Updates: Provide regular updates on the implementation of decisions and policies, ensuring that the community is kept informed about progress and outcomes.

4. Recall Process:

   • Easy Recall Process: Implement an easy and transparent process to recall board members. This ensures accountability and allows the community to remove those ineffective board members promptly.

By focusing on these areas, the Board of Education can enhance transparency, encourage meaningful community participation, and ensure that all voices are heard and considered in the decision-making process.

Some parents prefer their children attend private religious schools, others prefer public magnet schools for specific skills (like the Ruth Asawa School for the Arts or Lowell), others prefer public or private charter schools with nontraditional curricula, and others prefer homeschooling. Should all of these educational options be available to students in San Francisco? Why or why not?

I believe the purpose of public education is to provide students with the opportunity to learn all the fundamental knowledge they need, rather than focusing on personal interests.

Public education should ensure that every student acquires essential skills in areas such as literacy, mathematics, science, and social studies. This foundational knowledge is crucial for students to succeed in higher education, their careers, and as informed citizens. While exploring personal interests is valuable, the primary goal of public education should be to equip students with a well-rounded and comprehensive academic foundation.

As Mayor, how will you support SFUSD in its efforts to achieve financial stability and sustainability, especially in regards to school closures?

As Mayor, I will support SFUSD in its efforts to achieve financial stability and sustainability by fostering strong collaboration between the city and the school district. This includes establishing a joint task force for regular communication, conducting independent audits to identify budget efficiencies, and pursuing state and federal grants to bolster funding. Additionally, I will promote equitable resource allocation across schools, support robust transition programs for students affected by school closures, and engage with communities to address their concerns. By investing in our teachers' growth and development, we can enhance their teaching effectiveness and ultimately improve student outcomes. If, after these efforts, a teacher still consistently underperforms, I believe that termination should not be the first course of action. Instead, we should provide support to help teachers improve their performance. This can include professional development opportunities, mentorship programs, and regular feedback. By investing in our teachers' growth and development, we can enhance their teaching effectiveness and ultimately improve student outcomes.

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 fully support the recall of all Board of Education members: Alison Collins, Gabriela Lopez, and Faauuga Moliga due to their controversial actions and perceived failures in leadership.

Alison Collins: Collins faced significant backlash for past tweets that were widely viewed as racist towards Asian Americans. After being stripped of her leadership role due to her tweets, she escalated the situation by suing the school district for $87 million, a move seen as a misuse of resources and a distraction from the Board's responsibilities. Collins also supported the controversial effort to rename 44 schools during the pandemic, which was criticized for diverting focus from reopening schools and addressing educational disparities.

Gabriela López: As the Board President, López led the renaming initiative, including schools named after historical figures like Abraham Lincoln and George Washington. This effort was criticized for its timing during the pandemic, when reopening schools and addressing learning gaps should have been the priority. López was also criticized for the Board's slow handling of school reopenings, which lagged behind other districts and increased frustrations among parents and students.

Faauuga Moliga: Moliga supported the renaming initiative and, like López, faced criticism for the Board's delayed reopening of schools, impacting students' learning and well-being. Additionally, Moliga was associated with broader financial mismanagement issues within the Board, including a significant budget deficit that remained unaddressed.

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
Require schools to improve student performance, and fire teachers who consistently underperform?	X

If you want to explain any positions above, please feel free:

Offering Algebra in 8th and 7th Grades:

• Offering Algebra in both 7th and 8th grades provides advanced students the opportunity to challenge themselves and excel in mathematics at an earlier age. This early exposure can better prepare them for higher-level math courses in high school and improve their overall academic performance. Schools should ensure that students who are ready and interested in taking Algebra at these levels have access to the necessary resources and support. Personally, I studied algebra at a very young age, and it worked out very well for me. We should not underestimate our children; instead, we should support and encourage their educational pursuits, especially in subjects as foundational as mathematics.

Improving Student Performance and Addressing Underperforming Teachers:

• Improving student performance is always welcome, but we need to set clear guidelines for schools to ensure genuine progress. It's important to avoid methods like making exams easier to artificially boost grades. Instead, we should focus on enhancing students' actual knowledge and skills. This can be achieved through a robust curriculum, effective teaching methods, and regular assessments that accurately measure student understanding and growth. By setting high standards and providing the necessary resources and support, we can ensure that students are truly benefiting from their education and are well-prepared for future academic and career challenges.

• For firing teachers who consistently underperform, I believe that termination should not be the first course of action. Instead, we should provide support to help teachers improve their performance. This can include professional development opportunities, mentorship programs, and regular feedback. By investing in our teachers' growth and development, we can enhance their teaching effectiveness and ultimately improve student outcomes. If, after these efforts, a teacher still consistently underperforms, then termination may be considered as a last resort. This approach ensures that we prioritize support and improvement while maintaining high educational standards.

Housing

Do you believe that San Francisco has a shortage of market-rate homes? Why or why not?

Yes, San Francisco has a shortage of market-rate homes, which has been a significant issue for several years. This shortage is driven by several factors: high demand and limited supply, limited land availability, and long construction durations coupled with high construction costs. The high desirability of living in San Francisco has led to increased demand, but the supply has not kept pace.

Do you believe that housing prices are set by supply and demand constraints? Why or why not?

Yes, housing prices are largely set by supply and demand constraints. This basic economic principle dictates that when demand for housing exceeds supply, prices rise, and when supply exceeds demand, prices fall.

Under State law, San Francisco must build over 82,000 new homes by 2031. Do you think this is a good goal?

While I am not sure if 82,000 is the perfect number, we might need even more. I 100% agree that we need to build more housing in San Francisco. The city's current housing shortage is a significant issue, driven by high demand, limited supply, and various regulatory and financial barriers. Building more housing is crucial to making homes more accessible and affordable for a broader range of residents.

Follow-up: Do you believe we're on track to achieve this goal?

No, I don't believe we are on track to achieve this goal. The California Department of Housing and Community Development recently announced that San Francisco is behind schedule.

Follow-up: What will you do to meet the goal?

To meet the goal of building 82,000 new homes by 2031 in San Francisco, I will implement a comprehensive strategy focused on streamlining regulatory processes, collaborating with homebuilders, working closely with suppliers, and engaging with communities. I will negotiate the best deals with homebuilders and suppliers to ensure cost-effective construction. Working with communities, I will ensure that the homes built suit the diverse needs of San Francisco's residents.

Should homeless shelters be exempt from CEQA, Discretionary Review, and Conditional Use permits?

Exempting homeless shelters from CEQA, Discretionary Review, and Conditional Use permits could significantly expedite the development of much-needed housing for the homeless, addressing the crisis more rapidly and at a lower cost. However, this approach must balance the need for speed with the importance of environmental protection and community involvement. Careful consideration and potentially limited exemptions with specific safeguards could offer a balanced solution.

As Mayor, will you order the construction of thousands of new homeless shelters across the City, even if neighbors object?

As Mayor, addressing the homelessness crisis in San Francisco will be one of my top priorities. However, the approach to constructing new homeless shelters needs to be balanced, strategic, and inclusive of community input. Work with residents to address legitimate concerns about safety, property values, and neighborhood impact. This might include increasing police presence, enforcing local amenities, or providing additional community services. Ensure that shelters are designed to be safe, clean, and conducive to rehabilitation. This includes adequate facilities for healthcare, counseling, and job training. Incorporate sustainable building practices to minimize environmental impact and ensure long-term sustainability. By taking a balanced, strategic approach and working closely with communities, I aim to address the homelessness crisis effectively while maintaining the support and trust of San Francisco residents.

Should subsidized affordable housing be exempt from CEQA, Discretionary Review, and Conditional Use permits?

My answer is probably no. While the urgency of the housing crisis necessitates faster development, exempting subsidized affordable housing from CEQA, Discretionary Review, and Conditional Use permits may lead to poor planning, environmental degradation, and community pushback. Instead, efforts should focus on streamlining these processes without eliminating them, ensuring that affordable housing projects are both expedited and thoroughly vetted. This balanced approach promotes sustainable, high-quality, and community-supported development.

Should market-rate housing be exempt from CEQA, Discretionary Review, and Conditional Use permits?

Streamlining the approval process for market-rate housing can help expedite construction and increase housing supply. Government should get out of the way of the market on projects that are compliant, do not impact the safety of the community and do not remove protected resources in historic districts. I would not support blanket exemptions.

Market-rate housing is currently infeasible to build in San Francisco even though it's being built elsewhere, such as Seattle and Minneapolis. San Francisco's fees and requirements make building housing much more expensive here, including the requirement that 12-16% of homes must be sold to income-restricted households at below market rates. Do you support lowering this requirement to an economically viable percentage, even if that percentage is 0%?

While it is crucial to maintain affordable housing options in San Francisco, it is also important to ensure that market-rate housing remains financially feasible to build. Reducing the inclusionary housing requirement to a more economically viable percentage, even if temporarily, can help stimulate the construction of new housing. The city should adjust this rate based on market conditions. A fixed rate is not ideal in a dynamic market where conditions can change rapidly. Instead, the city should monitor the market carefully and adjust the rate accordingly.

The mayor must be able to adapt to any situation and make the necessary changes to address it. I am committed to being a leader who continuously reviews and adjusts policies to ensure they are effective and responsive to the needs of our city.

Should San Francisco retain, loosen, or even abolish existing limits on height, density, and bulk for residential buildings? If so, where and how?

Given the severe housing crisis in San Francisco, it is crucial to consider adjustments to the existing limits on height, density, and bulk for residential buildings. Loosening these restrictions can significantly increase the housing supply, helping to meet the growing demand and alleviate the housing shortage. This is essential for building over 82,000 new homes by 2031.

Higher density and taller buildings can reduce the per-unit cost of housing by spreading land and construction costs over more units, making both market-rate and affordable housing more feasible. Additionally, taller and denser buildings make better use of limited urban land. Focusing on areas near transit hubs and underutilized neighborhoods, community engagement and careful planning will be essential to ensure these changes benefit all residents and maintain the city's unique character.

San Francisco Planning requires that new street-facing windows comply with City-imposed design requirements. Supporters argue that this policy enhances 'neighborhood character' while critics argue that these policies raise the price of window replacements while lowering their thermal and noise insulation. As Mayor, you can direct the Planning Department to maintain or discard these requirements. What will you do?

As Mayor, I would direct the Planning Department to discard the existing City-imposed design requirements for street-facing windows because these requirements impose significant limitations and higher expenses on our property owners. By removing these design requirements, we can reduce costs, enhance flexibility for homeowners, and promote the use of modern, energy-efficient window technologies. This approach respects homeowners' preferences and supports more sustainable and practical home improvements across San Francisco.

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:

Overall, the permitting process in San Francisco is excessively lengthy and complex for all types of construction and renovation projects. This creates substantial barriers to development, impacting the ability to address housing shortages, improve infrastructure, and meet community needs efficiently.

Small Business

Should all businesses be permitted by-right? If not, which business categories should require special government approval?

No, not all businesses should be permitted by-right. While permitting businesses by-right can streamline the process and encourage economic growth, certain categories of businesses should require special government approval to ensure public safety, health, and community well-being.

There are many categories of business that should require special government approval. I can't list all of them, but here are some examples:

• Businesses with Significant Environmental Impact
• Health and Safety-Related Businesses
• Businesses Involving Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms
• Large-Scale Commercial Developments
• Adult Entertainment and Gambling Establishments
• Businesses in Residential Areas

While permitting businesses by-right can simplify the process and encourage economic growth, it is essential to have special government approval for certain categories of businesses to protect public health, safety, and community well-being. By striking a balance between streamlined processes and necessary regulations, cities can foster a healthy business environment while safeguarding their residents and resources.

For businesses that require government approval or permits, what will you change about the process of new retail business formation in San Francisco?

As Mayor, I will streamline and enhance the process for new retail business formation in San Francisco by creating a centralized online portal for all permit applications, introducing expedited review processes, and providing clear guidelines and progress updates. Additionally, I will improve coordination between city departments, review zoning regulations for flexibility, and expand business assistance programs and financial incentives to support entrepreneurs. These changes will make it easier for new retail businesses to thrive in our city, particularly given the significant amount of vacant retail and office space that needs revitalization. This will not only support new businesses but also help reinvigorate underutilized areas and contribute to the city's economic recovery.

Some in the small business community have argued that San Francisco should increase the number of available ABC permits (also known as liquor licenses). Currently, some bars and restaurants buy licenses from each other because there aren't enough licenses available, which increases those establishments' operating costs and deprives others who don't participate in trading licenses of revenue opportunities. 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?

A balanced approach to increasing the number of ABC permits in San Francisco can help reduce operating costs, encourage economic growth, and revitalize vacant spaces, while also addressing the concerns of existing businesses. By implementing gradual changes and providing support, the city can create a more equitable and thriving business environment.

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:

Attracting businesses to the city is a key component of my city revitalization plan.

Transit Infrastructure

Some have argued that the cost of fare enforcement exceeds the benefit. Others say not enforcing fare payment starves Muni and BART of revenue, lowers the quality of service, and makes the systems less safe. What is your position?

Fare enforcement is crucial for the sustainability of Muni and BART, and I fully support it. While it's true that fare enforcement incurs costs, the alternative – having no fare enforcement – would lead to a situation where no one would pay for their rides. This would ultimately shift the financial burden onto taxpayers, who would be responsible for covering the entire operational cost of Muni and BART through their taxes. Effective fare enforcement ensures that everyone contributes their fair share, maintaining the financial health of our public transit systems and keeping them safe and reliable for all users.

As Mayor, will you direct SFMTA to build a citywide protected bike lane network? Why or why not? Please also explain how you will hold MTA accountable for this task.

To hold SFMTA accountable for this task, I will set specific goals and timelines for the development of the bike lane network, with regular progress updates to ensure accountability. I will also conduct independent audits to ensure that resources are used efficiently and objectives are met. Additionally, I will regularly solicit feedback from the community to ensure the network meets public needs and make adjustments based on this input.

As Mayor, will you direct SFMTA to install more automated red light cameras and automated speed enforcement cameras?

As Mayor, I will direct the SFMTA to install more automated red light cameras and automated speed enforcement cameras to enhance public safety on our streets. These measures have proven effective in reducing traffic violations, preventing accidents, and saving lives. By leveraging technology to enforce traffic laws, we can create safer road conditions for cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers. Ensuring that these systems are implemented fairly and transparently will be crucial to gaining public trust and maximizing their positive impact on our community's safety and well-being.

Should Market Street remain off-limits to private vehicles and remain a bus/bike/taxi-only street? Why or why not?

Keeping Market Street off-limits to private vehicles offers significant benefits in terms of safety, public transit efficiency, and environmental sustainability. The policy has led to a reduction in accidents, improved public transit times, and lower greenhouse gas emissions, making the area more pedestrian and cyclist friendly.

However, it is essential to acknowledge the challenges this restriction presents, such as inconvenience for drivers, operational issues for ride-sharing and delivery services, and potential economic impacts on some businesses. Balancing these pros and cons is crucial for making an informed decision about the future of Market Street. Ensuring continued support and improvements for public transit and addressing the concerns of affected businesses will help maximize the benefits of keeping Market Street car-free.

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?

San Francisco can create a more sustainable and efficient transportation system by prioritizing buses over car traffic. But it is also crucial to address the fairness concerns of drivers. Balancing these needs through effective planning and community engagement can lead to a more integrated and harmonious transit system.

As Mayor, how will you increase the frequency and reliability of buses and trains?

As Mayor, I will secure additional funding to expand and maintain our transit fleet, invest in workforce development to ensure a skilled and reliable transit workforce and engage with the community to gather feedback and continuously improve services.

As Mayor, will you order SFMTA and DPW to install more pedestrian safety infrastructure, such as protective barriers, bollards, crosswalks, and lighting?

As Mayor, I will also direct the SFMTA and DPW to install more pedestrian safety infrastructure, including protective barriers, bollards, crosswalks, and improved lighting. Enhancing pedestrian safety is crucial for reducing accidents, promoting walking as a mode of transportation, and ensuring the well-being of our residents and visitors.

Budget

San Francisco is facing a large budget deficit due to declining tax revenues from our struggling downtown, increasing payroll costs, and inflexible budget set-asides for special programs. What will your approach be to fix this?

To address San Francisco's budget deficit, my approach will focus on revitalizing downtown to boost tax revenues, managing payroll costs efficiently, and increasing budget flexibility. By attracting new businesses and supporting local ones through incentives and grants, we can stimulate economic activity and increase tax revenues. I'll conduct audits to streamline city operations and negotiate fair contracts to manage payroll costs. Additionally, I will reevaluate budget set-asides for special programs to ensure funds are directed toward essential services.

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		X
Schools	X
Medical facilities		X
Drug prevention and treatment			X
Arts			X

If you want to explain any positions above, please feel free:

The multiple choice answers provided are based on my observations and experiences in daily life. However, I am committed to thoroughly investigating these services once I am elected. Upon gathering and analyzing all necessary data, I will make informed decisions to either increase or decrease the budget accordingly. This approach ensures that we allocate resources efficiently and effectively to meet the needs of our community.

Personal

Tell us a bit about yourself!

My website: nelsonmei.com

Feel free to check out my website and learn my vision and plan for San Francisco.

How long have you lived in San Francisco? What brought you here and what keeps you here?

I have lived in San Francisco since 2008, which makes it over 15 years now. Initially, my family came to San Francisco for its excellent educational and career opportunities. Over the years, I have built strong connections within the community and started my own family here. The supportive and inclusive nature of the city makes it a wonderful place to live and raise children.

Witnessing the challenges and changes in San Francisco over the years has inspired me to contribute positively to the city. My commitment to improving public safety, economic vitality, and overall quality of life for all residents motivates me to stay and work towards a better future for San Francisco, facing now, ensuring that it remains a thriving and vibrant place for everyone.

I am not a politician. I am a problem solver who always comes up with lasting solutions instead of temporary fixes. I am proud to step up and fight for a chance to make a positive impact on our city. I have the best vision for our city, which is what a leader needs. I value other people's opinions and feedback. I am dedicated to ensuring that every resident's voice is heard. I am data-driven and will always make the best adjustments and adaptations based on the facts.

With over 800,000 residents, I am honored to stand as a candidate committed to making positive changes and proud to fight for the future of our beloved city. I am passionate about transforming San Francisco into the best city in the world. I believe in our city's potential and, with your support, we can build a brighter, safer, and more prosperous future for everyone. Together, we can make San Francisco a city we are all proud to call home.

What do you love most about San Francisco?

What I love most about San Francisco is its amazing mix of cultures and its status as a tech and innovation hub, bringing together talented people and fresh ideas. The city's diversity, with people from around the world and different cultures, makes it an exciting and inspiring place to be. The vibrant community and dynamic environment are what truly make San Francisco special to me.

What do you dislike the most about San Francisco?

What I dislike the most about San Francisco is the increasing issues related to public safety and homelessness. Over the years, these problems have significantly affected the quality of life for residents and visitors alike. The rise in violent crime and the perception of lawlessness have made many people feel unsafe in their neighborhoods. Additionally, the growing homelessness crisis, with inadequate support and resources for those in need, has led to a visible and troubling presence on the streets. Addressing these challenges is crucial to ensuring San Francisco remains a vibrant and livable city for everyone.

Tell us about your current involvement in the community (e.g., volunteer groups, neighborhood associations, civic and professional organizations, etc.)

I am just a normal resident of San Francisco who has recently started a family in this vibrant city. I'm not a politician and I bring a fresh perspective to politics, free from the constraints of traditional political experience. I am a problem solver with a clear vision and concrete plans to transform San Francisco into the best city in the world.

Having experience in volunteer groups, neighborhood associations, and civic and professional organizations is valuable, but it doesn't necessarily make someone a great mayor. Conversely, not having political experience doesn't make someone a bad mayor. What truly matters is having a vision for the future and the ability to implement effective plans.

I believe my vision for San Francisco and my ability to execute these plans make me the best among the 13 candidates. I am committed to addressing the city's challenges with innovative solutions, ensuring a brighter and more prosperous future for all residents.

Thank you

Thank you for giving us your time and answering our questionnaire. We look forward to reading your answers and considering your candidacy!