If you can’t get through to the mayor, try sending him a postcard.
This was the strategy of the People’s Budget Coalition — made up of various nonprofits and other city-funded groups impacted by budget cuts — which delivered more than 1,500 postcards today to Mayor Daniel Lurie’s office.
Each card was inscribed with an individual’s plea to keep the mayor’s budget cuts at bay. Those cuts have gutted many social programs, advocates say, including immigrant services and public-health initiatives.
“People will die if these budget cuts move forward,” said Anya Worley-Ziegmann, coalition coordinator.
The postcards were tied together with string, and activists lined up to deliver them to Lurie’s office.
Representatives from different community groups — among them seniors and people with disabilities, neighborhood residents, and others from the HIV Advocacy Network — spoke to a representative from the mayor’s office, who stood outside, listened to each person, and took notes.
Lurie’s office directed members of the press to the mayor’s remarks at a press conference earlier Tuesday morning. San Francisco is facing a $643 million deficit, and Lurie earlier this year instructed departments to cut programs, stop hiring, and review all contracts for potential savings.
“We have to make painful decisions,” Lurie said during that Q&A. “I want to set our city up on firm financial footing, I want to think long term about the city.”
Lurie has largely spared law enforcement from the cuts, however, and the city recently approved new police and firefighter contracts that would cost $100 million extra over two years.
The mayor only has “discretionary” control over some $3 billion — about 19 percent — of the city’s $16 billion budget. The rest is set in stone on account of “enterprise departments” like the airport and the port that operate mostly independently, and funds that have been pre-allocated for certain programs.
Still, the People’s Budget Coalition would like to put an end to the mayor’s recent cuts. Activists are calling on Lurie to find another way to address the deficit without cutting funds to programs such as those.
The coalition is not alone in this appeal. Budget chair and District 1 supervisor Connie Chan said Monday that the mayor’s cuts last year were “enough,” and that she would “find it very difficult” to support more. But Chan’s plan depends on finding money from a ballot measure that is not guaranteed to pass, and one-time reserves.
Nonetheless, members of the coalition echoed those same alternatives Tuesday.
“We have money that is set aside within our reserves that we could actually be using in order to fund the gap that is currently here,” said Jason Wyman, a member of the coalition. Around Wyman in the hall, members of the coalition were chanting, “si se puede.”
Wyman said that the city should focus on revenue, pointing to ballot measures which he said could “help” or “hurt” the city’s revenue.
Wyman was talking about Proposition D, which is known as the “Overpaid CEO Act,” which could increase the city’s revenue by $250 to $300 million per year and Proposition C, its counter measure, which could decrease revenue by $30 to $40 million.
“So maybe now is not the time to be hurting our revenue,” Wyman said.
Worley-Ziegmann agreed.
“Every time that [Lurie] says that tough choices have to be made, he’s ignoring the fact that he has already made the choice to make cuts and not raise revenue,” Worley-Ziegmann said. “We call on City Hall to make a tougher choice: raise revenue.”
Outside Lurie’s office, each round of testimonials saw another string of postcards delivered to Lurie’s staffers and brought inside.
Gabriel Medina, executive director of La Raza Community Resource Center, spoke on behalf of District 9 families.
“What happens to these families when they come here for sanctuary, but the people that give them sanctuary are cut? Who do they come to?” he said.
Maddie, a resident of a Chinatown single-room occupancy hotel, implored the mayor’s office to support SRO subsidies.
“It seems like the world has forgotten about us,” a translator said in English after Maddie spoke. She described the conditions living with her son, and the “extremely small and tiny space” they share.
“I’m not sure if you understand what kind of challenges we are going through, but I really hope that you can give us the help and support that we need to get through the day,” she said through the translator.
“We really need your help.”
SF debt was the result of years of poor city governance, politics, finances, audits, policing, and policies. This caused more businesses to leave the city. Also, some small businesses closed up shop. Also, some of the NGOs were ripping off the tax payers according to law enforcement. Some cease to exist as a result of this, and some people went to jail. Now, some people want to tax the CEOs of some companies, which is a band aid solution to the problem. If enough CEOs and some companies leave California and other cities and setup shop in other states, this will result in more lost jobs and revenue. Small other small businesses that depend on big businesses will cease to exist as well. However, other states that welcome them will gain more economic development, jobs, and revenue. If SF wants more revenue, it has to attract more businesses into the city, it has to reform its system of managing the city, which includes enforced audits of NGOs that receive taxpayer $. Enforced laws to arrest people who scam government provided services. As for taxing companies, a better solution would be deleting loop holes such as borrowing $ against stocks at the federal and state levels tax free. This cause will CEOs, rich people, special interest groups, and members of government to automatically pay taxes on the capital gains of their stocks to the IRS and some state tax collectors for these sold assets. If you kill enough golden gooses you depend on, you end up hurting not only yourselves but others around you. Are you really sticking it to the CEOs or causing losses to everybody around you? Look at some other cities and states that voted on something like prop D and their end results. They lost and other welcoming states and cities won. Therefore, think big before you vote.
With MEDA’s CEO making over $450k – and have a look at the rest of its staff salaries- I find myself not really understanding how the designation “non-profit” matters in this town. They’re bloated money-makers, either way – the money’s just being absorbed by insiders instead of shareholders. That’s fine if informed *donors* want their money to go to administrative salaries, but taxpayers don’t have a meaningful say.
We absolutely need to stop ALL the cuts. What is CRIMINAL about Mission Local’s reporting is their ABSOLUTE BLIND SPOT When it comes to ” non profits” like tdc, mercy, thc, john stewart, to name just a few.Aaron Peskin planned on sitting them all down were he elected and ask ” What have you done for us lately?” Dan Lurie won and those of us in Human Rights work were hopeful early on when in the early days of of 2025 the Mayor called on Dean Chrispen to DO SOMETHING about the deplorable conditions in SF County.I am the Clinical Director of Streets 2 Sheets Case Management. We do not take government funds Acting in a voluntary capacity for TUTU Tenants Union Internationál I contacted the Mayor early on , told him I’d campaigned for Peskin said ” we’re saving lives so let’s work together” A fire inspector came to see me about a chronically broken elevator at 811 Geary and it was clear this guy had no interest in holding scum lord randy shaw accountable but he promised next time the elevator broke I should call him and he’d be there in an hour . 47 hours later it broke I called him 7 times! Same thing the next day, s Sunday Monday same thing. On Tuesday a note appeared on my door ” The elevator was fixed” no fine Chrispen pi**ed on his benefactor who’d given him the job some 6 weeks before. I believe Dan Lurie acted to make SF safer but was now face to face with the BIGGEST PROBLEM that Mission Local REFUSES to report on.It’s called CORRUPTION I don’t expect a response which is why I REFUSE to send ML any money Start acting like Propublica , The Nation, Mother Jones, The Progressive- any news org that does investigative reporting then I will send u cash
These are not activists, they are advocates, employees of city funded private nonprofit corporations, service providers.
1500 people? That’s .18% of San Franciscans. This only highlights the limited reach of these “essential” programs.
And The People’s Budget is not really about people, it is about keeping the tax money spigot open for city funded private nonprofit corporations with limited reach.
“People will die if these budget cuts move forward”. Hyberole much? Give it a rest. The city sqanders far too much money on ideologically driven spending priorities like “immigrant services”, “harm reduction”, gazillions of highly questionable nonprofits and who knows what else. Taking more and more from the taxpayers is not the answer.