Chronicle: Prop D is wrong for SF
PLUS: SF may see first city strikes in 50 years
What You Need To Know
Here’s what happened around the city for the week of May 10, 2026:
- Chronicle: No on D
- SF may see first city strikes in 50 years
- Shadows to no longer be considered toxic waste
- Congress Summons Maria Su
Election Countdown
Just 17 days until the June 2 Primary Election! So far turnout is below expectations, at just 22,000 ballots cast. Using the June 2022 election as a baseline, we’d expect over 35,000 ballots to have been cast by now.
Low turnout means your vote carries more weight! Be sure to read and share the GrowSF Voter Guide, and let’s keep making San Francisco better.
Chronicle: No on D
Published May 15, 2026
The Facts
The Chronicle says voters should reject Prop D. The editorial board says the measure is being sold as a tax on overpaid CEOs with revenues that would fund healthcare, but in reality the tax is paid by businesses, not executives, which would pass those costs on to consumers, and the funds it raises will be put in the general fund, not dedicated to healthcare.
Prop D supporters say it would protect hospitals and essential services without raising taxes on working families. The Chronicle argues that is misleading because the money is not dedicated to health care, and because the measure would likely hit low-income consumers and retailers, grocery stores, and pharmacies harder than the tech giants and wealthy CEOs voters may picture from the campaign’s rhetoric.
The Context
Prop D is the big fight on this June’s ballot. It is being run by SEIU, a large City Hall labor union, who wants the money available for potential raises in upcoming contract negotiations (see next story, below), though they are telling voters that the money will be used for healthcare. It will significantly impact low-margin businesses like grocery stores and wealthy CEOs will be completely insulated from its impacts.
The GrowSF Take
We fully agree with the SF Chronicle: Prop D is not a CEO tax. It is a big increase to San Francisco’s existing gross-receipts tax, and the costs will land on employers, workers, shoppers, or all three. If proponents want to argue for a general tax increase, they should do that honestly. Dressing it up as a strike against billionaire CEOs is not honest, and it is not good policy.
SF may see first city strikes in 50 years
Published May 15, 2026
The Facts
San Francisco may see its first City Hall worker strike in 50 years soon. Due to a California Public Employment Relations Board ruling in 2023 which struck down the city’s strike ban, first enacted in 1976, unions are gearing up for a big fight.
A $642.8 million deficit over the next two years is colliding head-on with these new rules. After Mayor Lurie sent a palty 127 pink slips in April, SEIU 1021’s Kristin Hardy told Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez at The Standard that city workers could “shut down the whole city” if deeper cuts continue.
The Context
San Francisco’s Charter still contains 1970s-era rules threatening mandatory dismissal for city workers who strike, part of a voter-driven backlash to major strikes that shut down the city for weeks. Instead of strikes, interest arbitration has been used to ensure labor contract negotiations don’t shut down the city every few years. The 2023 ruling found the strike ban unlawful and unenforceable for most non-public-safety workers.
SEIU is running Prop D, telling voters that the money will be used for healthcare. But in reality, if it passes the money will go into the general fund and SEIU will try to use it to get raises.
The GrowSF Take
San Francisco cannot budget by wishful thinking, and the unions cannot get everything they want when the city is losing money. The city needs a disciplined budget, clear priorities, and faster economic growth, and that means voting No on Prop D.
Shadows to no longer be considered toxic waste
Published May 15, 2026
The Facts
Shadows will no longer be considered toxic waste that can stop new housing if Supervisor Mahmood’s SHADE Act passes. Mahmood says shadow-based California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) appeals have stalled 2,195 homes over the past decade.
The Context
The proposal would not end shadow studies, but it would stop CEQA appeals based on “shadow impacts.” An appeal is when an outside individual or interest group attempts to stop a development by appealing their permit. This triggers a lengthy study, review, and hearing period that often makes projects financially infeasible.
The proposal would not repeal San Francisco’s sunlight law, which requires extra review when buildings over 40 feet cast new shadow on Rec and Park property. The studies, which require diagrams, calculations, and technical memos, will still be done, but vague “environmental impact harms” would not longer be considered adequate basis for appeal.
The GrowSF Take
Supervisor Mahmood is right to pick this fight. The 2,195 homes he cites getting blocked by shadow appeals doesn’t include the thousands of homes that were never attempted due to the threat of CEQA shadow appeals. In a city that’s getting hotter, shadows are not a good reason to say no to new homes.
Congress Summons Maria Su
Published May 15, 2026
The Facts
Maria Su has been summoned to testify at a June 10 Congressional hearing alongside Loudoun County superintendent Aaron Spence and Chicago Public Schools CEO Macquline King. The Standard’s Ezra Wallach reports Republicans plan to question SFUSD over ethnic studies, transgender-related lessons, and staff training materials.
The Context
A Republican-led House committee is scrutinizing several major school districts around the country over ethnic studies, transgender policies, sexuality/gender instruction, and parental-rights claims. SFUSD requires high schoolers to complete two semesters of ethnic studies, has a policy to protect students from discrimination or harassment based on sex, gender, or sexual orientation. SFUSD also gives parents advance notice of sexuality instruction with the option to opt out.
Under California Education Code 221.5(f), schools are required to let students use facilities and participate in sex-segregated school programs consistent with their gender identity, regardless of what is listed in school records.
The GrowSF Take
Congress should really be asking why San Francisco schools are failing to educate so many students in math and reading, with 53.2% of proficient in reading and 46% in math (in raw numbers, that’s about 25,000 children that the district is failing to adequately teach. San Francisco’s children need better academic outcomes and clear accountability, not a made-for-TV fight that does nothing to help them learn.
Paid for by GrowSF Voter Guide. FPPC # 1433436. Not authorized by any candidate, candidate’s committee, or committee controlled by a candidate. Financial disclosures are available at sfethics.org.