View of a city street lined with parked cars and trees, with a domed government building visible in the distance under a clear sky.
San Francisco City Hall shot at Fulton and Pierce, near Alamo Square. Photo by Genesia Ting

San Francisco voters have approved the city’s first-ever public-bank measure, Proposition B, with 52.3% of the vote as of 4 p.m. on Sunday. 

With only 6,200 votes in total left to be counted, the campaign for the measure declared victory Monday morning. 

“Together we made history, and in 100 years, San Franciscans will assume the Public Bank has always been here to provide for us, like our airport, our roads, like the very water from the Hetch Hetchy,” wrote Misha Steier, spokesperson for the San Francisco Public Bank Coalition, an organization created in 2017 that has been spearheading the issue, in a statement. 

The organization was co-founded by Supervisor Jackie Fielder, a progressive who has been one of the most vocal champions of Prop. B. 

“As working San Franciscans struggle with the rising cost of living and the growing threat of climate crisis, we need public institutions that aspire to reimagine how we can invest in our communities and in solutions that address climate change,” Fielder wrote in a statement. 

The measure marks the first step to establishing a municipal public bank in San Francisco, a city-owned and independently operated financial institution that could give out loans to issues of public interest, such as housing, environmental protection and various forms of community infrastructure. 

Prop. B would help create a “municipal finance corporation” and start out with the help of banking professionals and a board of directors and commissions to oversee it. 

The measure does not fund that body, however. Potential funding sources for the corporation would include federal funding, state grants and philanthropic giving. 

To become a full-fledged public bank, the corporation would need to have a record of success in its first three years.

Then it can transition into a public bank once it successfully applies for a state banking charter, obtains approval and licensing from the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation along with Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) deposit insurance.

City progressives, including the Democratic Socialists of America, have long floated the idea of a public bank, which would reinvest public money back into the community.

Critics of Prop. B said that creating a public bank would be costly for the city, and that running such a complicated financial institution poses too many risks. Mayor Daniel Lurie was opposed to the measure but did not actively campaign against it; the group GrowSF and the think tank SPUR were behind a modicum of opposition spending.

Supervisor Chyanne Chen, who led the legislative effort to put the measure on the ballot, sees hope, especially after the “blue tsunami” on election night in which Democrats took back majority control of both House and Senate in Congress.

“I’m especially excited because with Democrats in control of the House and Senate, there may be new avenues available to fund the bank, so that we can get work financing the things we need,” Chen wrote in a statement.

On election night, the measure was trailing behind at 49.8% to 50.2% with a thin margin of 630 votes. It gained ground as more results came in and reversed course two days later on Nov. 5. With later ballot returns leaning progressive, Prop. B continued to pick up steam. 

“This victory shows that nothing is beyond grassroots power,” Steier said. “On we march.”

Xueer works on data and covers the Excelsior. She joined Mission Local as part the inaugural cohort of the California Local News Fellowship in 2023.

Xueer is a bilingual journalist fluent in Mandarin. She graduated from UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism with a Master's Degree. In her downtime, she enjoys cooking and scuba diving.

You can reach her securely on Signal @xueerlu.77.

Join the Conversation

10 Comments

  1. Where exactly is the money from this bank going to go to? Is it going to go to prospective home buyers in good standing who can make a strong case for their affordable housing projects?

    Or is it going to go to more MEDA, TODCO, and criminal enterprises stealing our taxpayer dollars and funding politicians who protect the graft train? Because knowing the track record of D9, I fear this bank will result in our neighborhood getting Jon Jacobo’d at the speed of light.

    +6
    -4
    votes. Sign in to vote
  2. This is great! Everyone in the city should have access to banking. Time to transition from the predatory money lenders and paycheck cashing places. I don’t see any downside to this as long as it is backed by the proper financial regulators.

    +6
    -4
    votes. Sign in to vote
    1. “Everyone in the city should have access to banking”. This is not how this has been framed. There is no expectation that this would support the unbanked. Which would the one beneficial thing, so we can allow businesses to drop having to handle cash, including Muni.
      “as long as it is backed by the proper financial regulators.”, a.k.a. the crux.

      +3
      0
      votes. Sign in to vote
  3. I have a really hard time with the idea of a public bank that’s controlled by SF politicians or administration. City government has been full of corruption and while I don’t think this particular administration is so bad, there is no telling what the next will bring. A public bank will just be turned into a slush fund to pay out favors for the well connected.

    +6
    -4
    votes. Sign in to vote
  4. Hoping someone can post a link to the best case scenario for this new bank? I’m inclined to cynicism wherever our city and county government is concerned but I want to hear public bank advocates state their case at least…

    +3
    -1
    votes. Sign in to vote
  5. This is awesome. I own 2 businesses in SF and I’ll be moving everything there. Invest in SF and not sending money off to invest in corporations who are all based in Delaware and wash their money through Iceland and spend millions on politics. Buy local, invest locally, and stop being a bunch of whiny b$tches saying SF politicians are corrupt. Go work in a corporate bank (as I have) and you’ll see mismanagement that would make the entire city have a seizure in horror, but one politician in SF gives their cousins nephew’s neighbors brother a $100 contract and everyone screams corruption. Get over yourselves. This is a great opportunity and it will be good for the dirty, even it it is run terribly, it is STILL keeping money in SF. Step up and grow a spine people. This is an opportunity.

    +3
    -1
    votes. Sign in to vote
  6. “airport, our roads, like the very water from the Hetch Hetchy”, “invest in our communities and in solutions that address climate change”
    We already have all the instruments and institutions in place to support such efforts. We already have, we will in the future.
    Naturally, such a bank would provide a cushy landing pad for our local political class to lord over loans handed out to favored projects. This will become a whole new level griftfest.

    +6
    -5
    votes. Sign in to vote
    1. I’m so tired of this corruption trope. It just doesn’t play out. If you don’t like what you’re elected leaders choose as priorities, organize, vote, communicate to them. San Francisco has one of the lowest rates of corruption of any municipal government in the country. So if you want to see different properties do something about it, don’t just cry corruption as if you have no power. Take some responsibility for your political situation, or understand that the people who live in your city actually want something different than you.

      0
      0
      votes. Sign in to vote
Leave a comment
Please keep your comments short and civil. Do not leave multiple comments under multiple names on one article. We will zap comments that fail to adhere to these short and easy-to-follow rules.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *