The applicants for District 4 supervisor have been quizzed about everything from taxes to potentially incriminating social media posts, according to a five-page questionnaire Mission Local obtained.
The application, 13 sections in all, was prepared by the mayor’s office for would-be District 4 supervisors. Applicants were asked to turn in the “District 4 Candidate Questionnaire” to Adam Thongsavat, the mayor’s liaison to the Board of Supervisors, by the end of the day Monday, Nov. 17.
“Mayor Lurie committed to a stronger, more thorough process so we can appoint a supervisor as quickly as possible to represent the Sunset—and that’s exactly what we’re doing,” said Charles Lutvak, Mayor Daniel Lurie’s press secretary.
The more thorough scrutiny of applicants came after Lurie’s appointment of pet store owner Beya Alcaraz quickly unraveled, forcing the supervisor to resign after only seven days in office.
The revelations that she paid her former pet-shop workers “under the table” and allegations of squalid conditions at her former business could easily have been discovered if the mayor’s office had spoken with the new owner of the pet store.
This time around, the mayor promised, the vetting would be stronger.
Alcaraz was the least experienced San Francisco supervisor appointee in 30 years, according to a Mission Local analysis. She had no political or community-service experience, and no college degree.
The new survey includes questions on education and employment records.
Several sections inquired about applicants’ taxes: property taxes, business ventures, and taxes on personal wealth — including “offshore bank accounts.” In an only-in-San Francisco touch, applicants were asked whether they had hired a permit expediter on their properties.
“To the best of your knowledge, are [your] companies and non-profit organizations current on their taxes?” the questionnaire asked. “To the best of your knowledge, are they registered with the San Francisco Treasurer & Tax Collector?”
Had Alcaraz been mandated to fill out this questionnaire, the tax section would have been a stumbling block. She resigned only hours after Mission Local published a story documenting texts in which the supervisor talked about writing off dinners and drinks with friends as business expenses and paying workers “under the table” to lower her tax burden.
In the new questionnaire, applicants were asked to list all their social media accounts, and told to be prepared to share even private profiles: “Do you have a “finsta” (‘fake’ Instagram account, typically only used to post ‘bad’ photos) account, or do any of your friends have finstas with potentially compromising content about you?”
There were follow-up questions about arguments the applicant may have been “entangled” in online: “Have you ever said anything that could be perceived as offensive on social media platforms such as X?”
Applicants were also asked if they’d attended city meetings or listening sessions, which Alcaraz had not. A space was given to provide 10 references who live in San Francisco.
In the questionnaire’s final section, applicants were asked to describe “perspectives or positions” they may have on four local issues. Listed first: The mayor’s upzoning plan, which would allow developers to build higher and denser on the west side of the city.
“What do you believe is the right approach to the Family Zoning plan, and how would you vote if appointed?”
That plan will go before the board in early December, but it appears the mayor has enough support to pass the legislation with or without support from the new supervisor.
Applicants were also queried about their experience overseeing a large budget, their thoughts on police drones, and, of course, if they’d voted to close the Great Highway, an issue that propelled the recall of Engardio from this very position.
Albert Chow is a hardware store owner in the Sunset who was considered for the job after sitting through three interviews and filling out a survey — but was passed over in favor of Alcaraz. He said he got the questionnaire from the mayor’s staff in a group chat with them toward the end of the past weekend.
While Chow didn’t want to identify who else was in the group chat, he said he was told that “they are considering me again.”
Chow decided to fill out the questionnaire, which took him a couple of hours. He noted some differences between this questionnaire and the previous survey he had to fill out when he was considered as a candidate before Alcaraz’s appointment.
The previous survey, he said, was more focused on the “what-if” type of questions. Chow said he was asked what he would do about the city’s homelessness issue and the staffing level at the police department.
But that survey, Chow said, “never really dug into” more details around his personal background. “This questionnaire dug a little deeper.”
Even though Chow told Mission Local that he will run for the seat in 2026, he said he still filled out the questionnaire.
“We don’t have representation in the Sunset,” Chow said. “We’ve lost a lot of time already. … If you [the mayor] are gonna appoint, I might as well get in there and start doing the work right now.”
According to the mayor’s office, names continue to roll in and they are still sending out the questionnaire to potential candidates. While the questionnaire is listed as “confidential,” it is unclear why this would be. Mission Local has filed a public records request to disclose who was sent the questionnaire and who returned it.
“This time around, the mayor promised, the vetting would be stronger.”
Stronger than zero IS stronger… good work I hope?
Albert Chow! ACTUAL SUNSET REPRESENTATION!
Lurie’s upzoning is the less important issue of the two – his credibility is at stake and he’s still focused on getting a rubber-stamp in there. Big fails.
This is the epitome of good journalism. Thorough, relevant and accurate… with just a touch of nuanced sarcasm. Much love to Mission Local.
Hardware store man strikes again. Remind me what’s his level of experience in government and community service?
Question 1: How many times have you been convicted of a felony?
Question 2: Have you evaded any taxes during the last ten years?
Question 1: How many pets do you have?
Just appoint a Mar twin !
They were screwed out of the job by Breed’s Redistricting scam.
go Niners !!
h.
I like Mayor Lurie. I think he’s doing a good job on policy. Here’s the problem with electing someone who’s a non-politician, like Lurie: They have no understanding of the broader landscape. They are unfamiliar with the communities they represent, and they don’t know the local leadership within those communities. So when the time comes to choose a commissioner or replace a recalled supervisor, they faceplant. It is a skill to both represent the will of the community and understand the forces that move through the landscape. Policy aside, we need skilled professionals who know their constituents. Hate on them all you like, but Gavin Newsom and Willie Brown were masters at this.
For transparency’s sake the mayor should make public the questionnaire and the responses from all of the applicants. District 4 voters deserve all of that before we vote in the June 2026 special election.
You guys really are not letting BeyaGate go, are you?
This is our city. This is important. Lurie needs to understand how bad this was — and how lucky he is — so that it does not happen again.
You don’t have a problem with tax fraud and mismanagement?
No of course you don’t.