Mayor Lurie enjoying high approval ratings
More than six months into his term, nearly three in four voters like the job Mayor Lurie is doing.
Polling from the San Francisco Chronicle finds 73% of San Francisco voters approve of the job Mayor Daniel Lurie is doing so far.
"I am just focused on delivering results for the people of San Francisco. That's why they elected me," said Mayor Lurie. "Our administration is working relentlessly every single day to deliver and I think these numbers show that people want us to continue to do that work and that's what I'm gonna be focused on."
More than half of the poll respondents said they want the mayor to focus on local issues like safety and keeping the city clean.
Voters said they're seeing a difference in how people view the city. "It's just cool to see you feel like he has us. He has this personal relationship to the city, and he's enthusiastic, and you want everyone else to be," said Fred Ward.
San Francisco State University political science Professor Jason McDaniel said voters seem positive about the direction of the city, and that's benefiting the mayor. "I think we've seen a little bit of people feeling better the city," said McDaniel. "Not dramatic, people aren't super optimistic about the future, but I think better than they were a year ago."
The poll found most San Franciscans gave the mayor high marks for revitalizing the downtown, and focusing on safety and clean neighborhoods. McDaniel said so far Mayor Lurie has been able to maintain his popularity even as the city faces budget cuts, and he creates more of a record. "So I think that is the number one sort of iceberg in the future is the decision now we have a negative echoing effect going into the future."
While most voters say they approve of the job the mayor is doing, half or more of the respondents said they wanted to see more done to handle the city's long-standing epidemic of deadly drug overdoses and homelessness. "But I don't see Mayor Lurie doing all that much better at the moment," said Vance Johnson. "Personally I think that he's pretty much only accountable to the major corporations within downtown."
While the mayor has seen high approval ratings, the approval rating for the board of supervisors is up as well. This time last year, 20% of voters approved of the job the supervisors were doing. That number is now up to a 38% approval rating.Solve the daily Crossword
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
19 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Mayor Daniel Lurie's $15.9 billion budget approved amid criticism
After months of difficult negotiations at City Hall, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors on Tuesday gave final approval to Mayor Daniel Lurie's $15.9 billion budget, which closes an $800 million budget deficit by slashing spending. The board, which has a moderate majority since the last election, voted 10 to 1 to approve the budget, with Supervisor Jackie Fielder dissenting. Now the bill goes to Lurie's desk, and per law, he must sign it by Aug. 1. The journey to creating a two-year budget that addresses the city's structural deficit was turbulent, as Lurie faced opposition from unions and community groups that tried to block funding cuts. Ultimately, Lurie, who had campaigned on cutting wasteful spending, reduced funds to nonprofits and departments, made about 40 layoffs and eliminated over a thousand vacant positions. Supervisor Connie Chan, who is the board's budget chair, said she wouldn't celebrate the mayor's budget and warned that the future remains grim as San Francisco continues to deal with threats from the Trump administration of withholding federal funds. Lurie and the board agreed to start a $400 million reserve fund to deal with any potential loss of federal dollars, but even that could be insufficient as San Francisco gets billions from the federal government every year, including in the form of Medicaid reimbursements and FEMA disaster funds. Still, Chan acknowledged that the board 'came together despite our differences to meet this moment,' which she said was key to getting the budget deal done. Lurie's team declined to comment on Tuesday. Last week after the board passed the budget on first reading, the mayor called it the latest in 'a series of major legislative wins.' 'They voted unanimously to cut red tape for small businesses through our PermitSF legislation, and approved a real plan to support families living in RVs,' Lurie said. 'Thank you to the Board, and I look forward to building on what we've accomplished so far.' But not everyone is happy about the budget. Fielder took a page from former Supervisor Dean Preston and voted no on the budget because it included cuts to programs that serve the city's most vulnerable people. Preston, a fellow democratic socialist, voted no on every budget while he was supervisor because they included more money for the San Francisco police department. 'I cannot in good conscience vote in support of this budget,' Fielder said. 'I will be voting no with disappointment, with frustration but also with clarity about the kind of city we are fighting to become. We owe our residents more than austerity.' Throughout the budget negotiations, Fielder criticized the mayor's spending plan, including a last-minute compromise between Lurie and the board that stripped some of its ability to allocate specific funds to fight homelessness. As part of the budget deal, Lurie sought and received more power in determining how to spend revenue from Proposition C, a 2018 tax increase to fund homelessness initiatives. The board agreed to give up its power to oppose mayoral spending under $19 million with a supermajority vote. On the final day of voting, angry homelessness advocates, many from the Coalition on Homelessness, staged a silent protest. They wore black veils and paraded around City Hall with a casket labeled 'democracy.' The group also opposed a recent change to city policy that they say will put RV dwellers at risk of homelessness.
Fast Company
a day ago
- Fast Company
San Francisco weighs ban on homeless people living in RVs
San Francisco is set to ban homeless people from living in RVs by adopting strict new parking limits the mayor says are necessary to keep sidewalks clear and prevent trash buildup. The policy, up for final approval by San Francisco supervisors Tuesday, targets at least 400 recreational vehicles in the city of 800,000 people. The RVs serve as shelter for people who can't afford housing, including immigrant families with kids. Those who live in them say they're a necessary option in an expensive city where affordable apartments are impossible to find. But Mayor Daniel Lurie and other supporters of the policy say motor homes are not suitable for long-term living and the city has a duty to both provide shelter to those in need and clean up the streets. 'We absolutely want to serve those families, those who are in crisis across San Francisco,' said Kunal Modi, who advises the mayor on health, homelessness and family services. 'We feel the responsibility to help them get to a stable solution. And at the same time, we want to make sure that that stability is somewhere indoors and not exposed in the public roadway.' Subscribe to the Daily newsletter. Fast Company's trending stories delivered to you every day Privacy Policy | Fast Company Newsletters Critics of the plan, however, say that it's cruel to force people to give up their only home in exchange for a shot at traditional housing when there is not nearly enough units for all the people who need help; the mayor is only offering additional money to help 65 households. Jennifer Friedenbach, executive director of the Coalition on Homelessness, says city officials are woefully behind on establishing details of an accompanying permit program, which will exempt RV residents from parking limits so long as they are working with homeless outreach staff to find housing. 'I think that there's going to be people who lose their RVs. I think there's going to be people who are able to get into shelter, but at the expense' of people with higher needs, like those sleeping on a sidewalk, she said. San Francisco, like other U.S. cities, has seen an explosion in recent years of people living out of vehicles and RVs as the cost of living has risen. Banning oversized vehicles is part of Lurie's pledge to clean up San Francisco streets, and part of a growing trend to require homeless people to accept offers of shelter or risk arrest or tows. Strict new rules The proposal sets a two-hour parking limit citywide for all RVs and oversized vehicles longer than 22 feet (7 meters) or higher than 7 feet (2 meters), regardless of whether they are being used as housing. Under the accompanying permit program, RV residents registered with the city as of May are exempt from the parking limits. In exchange, they must accept the city's offer of temporary or longer-term housing, and get rid of their RV when it's time to move. The city has budgeted more than half a million dollars to buy RVs from residents at $175 per foot. The permits will last for six months. People in RVs who arrive after May will not be eligible for the permit program and must abide by the two-hour rule, which makes it impossible for a family in an RV to live within city limits. It first cleared the Board of Supervisors last week with two of 11 supervisors voting 'no.' RV dwellers can't afford rent Carlos Perez, 55, was among RV residents who told supervisors at a hearing this month that they could not afford the city's high rents. Perez works full-time as a produce deliveryman and supports his brother, who lives with him and is unable to work due to a disability. 'We don't do nothing wrong. We try to keep this street clean,' he said, as he showed his RV recently to an Associated Press journalist. 'It's not easy to be in a place like this.' Yet, Perez also loves where he lives. The green-colored RV is decorated with a homey houseplant and has a sink and a tiny stove on which Carlos simmered a bean soup on a recent afternoon. He's lived in San Francisco for more than 30 years, roughly a decade of which has been in the RV in the working-class Bayview neighborhood. He can walk to work and it is close to the hospital where his brother receives dialysis multiple times a week. advertisement Zach, another RV resident who requested being identified by his first name to not jeopardize his ability to get work, started living in the vehicle a dozen years ago after realizing that no matter how hard he worked, he still struggled to pay rent. Now he works as a ride-hail driver and pursues his love of photography. He parks near Lake Merced in the city near the Pacific Ocean and pays $35 every two to four weeks to properly dispose of waste and fill the vehicle with fresh water. He says Lurie's plan is shortsighted. There is not enough housing available and many prefer to live in an RV over staying at a shelter, which may have restrictive rules. For Zach, who is able-bodied, maintains a clean space and has no dependents, moving to a shelter would be a step down, he says. Still, he expects to receive a permit. 'If housing were affordable, there is a very good chance I wouldn't be out here,' he said. City recently closed its only RV lot RV dwellers say San Francisco should open a safe parking lot where residents could empty trash and access electricity. But city officials shuttered an RV lot in April, saying it cost about $4 million a year to service three dozen large vehicles and it failed to transition people to more stable housing. The mayor's new proposal comes with more money for beefed-up RV parking enforcement — but also an additional $11 million, largely for a small number of households to move to subsidized housing for a few years. Officials acknowledge that may not be sufficient to house all RV dwellers, but notes that the city also has hotel vouchers and other housing subsidies. Erica Kisch, CEO of nonprofit Compass Family Services, which assists homeless families, says they do not support the punitive nature of the proposal but are grateful for the extra resources. 'It's recognition that households should not be living in vehicles, that we need to do better for families, and for seniors and for anyone else who's living in a vehicle,' she said. 'San Francisco can do better, certainly.' —Janie Har and Terry Chea, Associated Press
Fox News
a day ago
- Fox News
San Francisco close to taking new step to fight homelessness
San Francisco is set to crack down on homeless people living in RVs with its Board of Supervisors preparing to vote on strict new parking limits. A proposal that would enact a two-hour parking limit citywide for all RVs and oversized vehicles longer than 22 feet or higher than 7 feet -- regardless of whether they are being used as housing -- is up for final approval Tuesday. Mayor Daniel Lurie and supporters of the policy say motor homes are not suitable for long-term living and the city has a duty to both provide shelter to those in need and clean up the streets. Under an accompanying permit program, RV residents registered with the city as of May are exempt from the parking limits. In exchange, they must accept San Francisco's offer of temporary or longer-term housing and get rid of their RV when it's time to move. The city has budgeted more than half a million dollars to buy RVs from residents at $175 per foot. "We absolutely want to serve those families, those who are in crisis across San Francisco," Chief of Health & Human Services Kunal Modi told The Associated Press. "We feel the responsibility to help them get to a stable solution. And at the same time, we want to make sure that that stability is somewhere indoors and not exposed in the public roadway." The permits would last for six months. People in RVs who arrive after May will not be eligible for the permit program and must abide by the two-hour rule. The proposal, which targets at least 400 RVs, first cleared the Board of Supervisors last week with two of 11 supervisors voting "no." RV dwellers say San Francisco should open a safe parking lot where residents could empty trash and access electricity. However, city officials shuttered an RV lot in April, saying it cost about $4 million a year to service three dozen large vehicles and it failed to transition people to more stable housing, the AP reported. The mayor's new proposal comes with more money for beefed-up RV parking enforcement — but also an additional $11 million, largely for a small number of households to move to subsidized housing for a few years. Officials acknowledge that may not be sufficient to house all RV dwellers, but note that the city also has hotel vouchers and other housing subsidies.
