Mayor Daniel Lurie has convinced San Francisco voters to hand him more power. It’s a risky bet.
Like many moderates in town, Lurie has blamed bureaucratic red tape and recalcitrant City Hall insiders for holding back progress on housing construction and waste of taxpayer dollars. His billionaire-funded victory on three ballot measures this week amending the city charter means he will gain more control over how City Hall runs and face fewer potential roadblocks from his elected colleagues.
The popular mayor has described these changes as a way to combat corruption and waste at City Hall, which he’s been running for the past two years.
But they also take away any future excuses: Lurie won’t have anyone else to blame if and when citywide failures or economic downturns fall at his feet, say political analysts. That goes for his successors, too.
“These charter reform measures will make it very hard now for mayors to argue credibly that they don’t have the authority to do what voters ask of them, and voters will have few qualms about holding future mayors accountable,” said Jason McDaniel, a political science professor at San Francisco State University who supported the charter amendments.
Proposition D makes it more difficult for residents, city supervisors and the mayor to put measures on the ballot. Proposition E empowers the city administrator to reform San Francisco’s contracting procedures, and raise the threshold for board approval of contracts from $10 million to $25 million. Proposition F will give the mayor sole power to hire certain city department heads — and fire most of them — with no board of supervisors or commission involvement.
All three were winning as of Friday morning. Around $14 million was raised to gather signatures and blast a wave of ads supporting the charter changes. The measures’ biggest backers were billionaires Michael Moritz ($3.1 million), Chris Larsen and wife Lyna Lam ($2.5 million) and John Pritzker ($1 million).
He’s also sacrificing some power through these measures, such as the ability to unilaterally place his own initiatives on the ballot, though the scales ultimately tip in his favor.
Lurie, who had a steep learning curve when he took office two years ago, has benefitted from declining crime and a hot AI-driven economy, McDaniel said.
“And that could change,” he said. The affordability crisis has dramatically worsened in the last year — San Francisco’s already exorbitant rents were up 24% year over year. The mayor has put together an “emergency” package that includes displacement assistance, but the Anti-Displacement Coalition said those policies were “incomplete.”
Because Lurie’s measures could put an end to the “deflecting” and “blame games” that have dogged City Hall for the past decade, said Democratic political consultant Eric Jaye, he won’t have anyone else to point fingers at when residents complain about issues that — fairly or unfairly — fall at his feet.
“‘All right Mayor Lurie, why can’t I still afford an apartment? I gave you the power you asked for,’” said Jaye, who was vocally critical of the measures. “‘All right Mayor Lurie, why can’t my kids still buy a house? I gave you the power you asked for.’”
Plus, McDaniel said, “so far the mayor has managed to avoid missteps clinging to him,” and there have been a few.
Lurie’s appointment of an inexperienced former pet shop owner to the Board of Supervisors ended seven days later, sparking questions over his vetting abilities. His selection of government software developer OpenGov to overhaul San Francisco’s archaic permitting system — without a competitive bid — led to missed deadlines and public accusations of favoritism.
The ballot measures also mean fewer checks and balances.
“You get better outcomes when you consult with people,” said Jaye. “You make fewer mistakes.”
Jay Cheng, a moderate political strategist and former executive director of Neighbors for a Better San Francisco, supported the ballot measures and called their victory a vindication for Lurie and his image. But he agreed they’re a risk.
“When it comes time to run for reelection in 2028, he will be held accountable for everything he did and the performance will be laid at his feet, for better or for worse, but also — I do think he’ll be able to execute everything he wants in the next two years,” Cheng said. “I can’t remember anything he’s wanted to do in the past two years that was blocked.”
A campaign spokesperson for Lurie didn’t respond to requests for comment.
Lurie, for his part, gestured toward concerns about future excuses in his victory speech on Tuesday night, facing jubilant supporters crammed into the back patio of the cocktail lounge Anina in Hayes Valley.
“These victories are not a finish line, they are a starting point,” Lurie said. “San Franciscans tonight are giving us the tools to govern effectively … we are going to keep delivering — let’s go San Francisco.”
The crowd roared with applause.
“He has all the power he asked for,” said Jaye, the political consultant. “Let’s see what he does with it.”
