SF Mayor Lurie Seeks to Reset Tense Ties With Board of Supervisors

This column was reported for Political Breakdown, a bi-monthly newsletter offering analysis and context on Bay Area and California political news. Click here to subscribe.

Mayor Daniel Lurie pledged on the campaign trail that, as an outsider with no government experience, he could help San Francisco finally break free from the city’s notorious political infighting.

With fewer than two months in office, supervisors from different sides of the political spectrum say Lurie has so far shown good faith in working across ideological lines.

That has included passing his first major piece of legislation, a law giving Lurie expanded authority to cut through red tape on programs and services related to the city’s drug and homelessness challenges. Supervisor Connie Chan expressed hesitation about the extended powers and requested amendments, after which the ordinance passed easily. However, the ordinance lacks specific plans for how Lurie will leverage it.

It’s also taken the form of smaller gestures, like stopping by supervisors’ offices regularly to check in and discuss policy. That’s a shift from Lurie’s predecessor, former Mayor London Breed, current and former supervisors said.

“Breed made the decision that it was in her political interest to disagree and fight with the board, while Lurie wants to produce and solve problems with the city and sees it in his interest to work together and find areas where they can compromise and solve problems,” political consultant Jim Ross said.

Supervisor Jackie Fielder, a Democratic socialist who oversees the Mission District, said she and Lurie, a moderate Democrat, have gone on several walks together since they both started their positions in January.

“I have a pretty good relationship with the mayor and his office. They’re very responsive to my calls,” Fielder said. “I would say we’re off to a good start, and that’s the kind of cooperation I think San Francisco’s have been wanting and certainly what they deserve.”

Other supervisors said they’ve noticed a shift in alignment on public safety issues. But Breed and the board did come to agreement on a number of issues, such as on an affordable housing bond and other business and tax legislation.

“It’s good for people to remember that politics is cyclical, and the tables can turn pretty quickly. I’ve seen that happen in the time that I’ve been on the board,” Board President Rafael Mandelman said. “And I do think that the external threat from the Trump administration is also a factor that keeps people trying to work together internally as effectively as we can.”

Another notable difference, former Supervisor Aaron Peskin said, is Lurie’s distance from the billionaire-backed political organizing groups that flooded the city’s election cycle in 2024, such as GrowSF, Neighbors for a Better San Francisco and TogetherSF. The last of those groups shut down after its preferred candidates and measures were defeated in November.

“One of the things that really poisoned politics at City Hall was the very aggressive, toxic behavior of some of these tech oligarch groups and some of the billionaires like Gary Tan, who were making really horrible, violent comments,” Peskin said. “They have receded under Lurie, I think in part because Mr. Lurie has really put out a tone that is not tolerant or embracing of this behavior that they exhibited for the last four years that London Breed embraced with open arms.”

Lurie is listening closely to some of the city’s tech and business elite. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, who donated $1 million to President Donald Trump’s inaugural fund, was on Lurie’s transition team. Lurie has been quiet on Trump, raising questions from residents and supervisors concerned about the executive orders targeting immigration crackdowns, transgender identity and public funding.

This week, supervisors agreed to pass Lurie’s motion to remove police commissioner Max Carter-Oberstone, a police reform advocate appointed by Breed. The vote passed 9–2, with Supervisors Fielder and Myrna Melgar in opposition.

“Commissioner Carter-Oberstone has been a steadfast advocate for reforms and oversight. His leadership has been smart, principled and moral,” Fielder told KQED. “He represents the kind of principled, uncorrupt, independent governance San Franciscans want, and he should be rewarded for his service, not punished.”

Fielder said she and Lurie will be in opposition on more issues, such as how to fund housing initiatives.

“The mayor knows I’m going to be on this side, and he’s going to be over there on a lot of the important issues,” Fielder said. “But we’re very honest about that, and it just makes everything easier.”

Many difficult decisions around the city’s now nearly $900 million budget shortfall lie ahead.

“We are in a honeymoon, so it likely won’t go on like this forever,” Mandelman said. “But the mayor and his team are trying to keep it going as long as possible.”