Endorsement: Stephen Sherrill #1

Supervisor Sherrill has put in the work for his constituents. His top priorities remain public safety and  clean, safe streets, which are top priorities for ConnectedSF and our D2Unite Members. He continues to be an advocate for small businesses, cutting red tape and reducing fees. He’s creative in his approaches to meeting goals for District 2, from minor fixes (a cracked sidewalk) to major achievements, like identifying financial solutions and reform to help jumpstart stalled development.

Note: We disagree with his endorsement of Proposition H; he needs to demand more accountability of SFMTA. And we are highly concerned with his strong support of Scott Wiener. We agree with his opposition to Propositions B and I.

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#district2)

Nod to Rank Choice Voting: Endorsement: Nick Berg #2

While Sherrill is the obvious choice in this race, rank choice voting allows for some whacky outcomes, so we are providing a second option here: Nick Berg is a real estate executive for a property management firm. His values align with those of ConnectedSF and D2Unite, as he was a volunteer on the SaferSF campaign to recall District Attorney Chesa Boudin and his top priorities include:

• Treatment-First, Shelter-First initiatives to solve the drug and homelessness crisis

-Better schools through choice

• Responsible spending. By focusing on accountability, demanding independent audits and sunsetting programs that don't demonstrate results.

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#district2)

Endorsement: Stephen Sherrill #1

Supervisor Sherrill has put in the work for his constituents. His top priorities remain public safety and  clean, safe streets, which are top priorities for ConnectedSF and our D2Unite Members. He continues to be an advocate for small businesses, cutting red tape and reducing fees. He’s creative in his approaches to meeting goals for District 2, from minor fixes (a cracked sidewalk) to major achievements, like identifying financial solutions and reform to help jumpstart stalled development.

Note: We disagree with his endorsement of Proposition H; he needs to demand more accountability of SFMTA. And we are highly concerned with his strong support of Scott Wiener. We agree with his opposition to Propositions B and I.

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#district2)

Nod to Rank Choice Voting: Endorsement: Nick Berg #2

While Sherrill is the obvious choice in this race, rank choice voting allows for some whacky outcomes, so we are providing a second option here: Nick Berg is a real estate executive for a property management firm. His values align with those of ConnectedSF and D2Unite, as he was a volunteer on the SaferSF campaign to recall District Attorney Chesa Boudin and his top priorities include:

• Treatment-First, Shelter-First initiatives to solve the drug and homelessness crisis

-Better schools through choice

• Responsible spending. By focusing on accountability, demanding independent audits and sunsetting programs that don't demonstrate results.

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#district2)

Endorsement: Alan Wong #1

Supervisor Wong has been focused on the basics, and he plans to keep it that way. He’s worked hard to reform outdated and “dumb” laws and keep his district’s streets clean and safe.

Note: Our D4 and D1 members are especially appreciative that he endorsed Proposition G, supports a compromise, and that he is opposed to Proposition B. We hope to see him be more vocal in the coming weeks in his support of Prop G.

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#district4)

Nod to Rank Choice Voting: Endorsement: Albert Chow #2

While Alan is our top choice here, Albert is a relentless advocate and supporter of District 4. He has lived in the district for 40 plus years and is a small business owner. He was an integral part of the Engardio recall and getting Proposition G on the ballot this November. Albert is a solid #2 choice.

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#district4)

Endorsement: Alan Wong #1

Supervisor Wong has been focused on the basics, and he plans to keep it that way. He’s worked hard to reform outdated and “dumb” laws and keep his district’s streets clean and safe.

Note: Our D4 and D1 members are especially appreciative that he endorsed Proposition G, supports a compromise, and that he is opposed to Proposition B. We hope to see him be more vocal in the coming weeks in his support of Prop G.

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#district4)

Nod to Rank Choice Voting: Endorsement: Albert Chow #2

While Alan is our top choice here, Albert is a relentless advocate and supporter of District 4. He has lived in the district for 40 plus years and is a small business owner. He was an integral part of the Engardio recall and getting Proposition G on the ballot this November. Albert is a solid #2 choice.

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#district4)

District 6 Supervisor - Matt Dorsey

We have a long history of engaging with and supporting Supervisor Dorsey on public safety and recovery matters. He has been the leader on the Board of Supervisors in combatting San Francisco’s drug and homelessness crises. Having once suffered from drug addiction himself, Supervisor Dorsey’s lived experience has helped reshape San Francisco's approach to homelessness and drug policy towards recovery-first model. ConnectedSF has collaborated on many topics with Supervisor Dorsey - he is a solid public safety advocate, and a strong ally on most common sense issues.

Note: We must note that we are disappointed by his endorsement of Propositions B and G.

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#district6)

District 10 Supervisor - Theo Ellington

In District 10 there is a clear choice.

Theo Ellington stands far out front from the rest of the pack. Theo has a vision for District 10 that includes a vibrant 3rd Street commercial corridor, new housing of all income levels, and propelling major development projects, like Pier 70, Candlestick Point, and the Shipyard, over the finish line.

Theo most aligns with our stance and emphasis on public safety. He supports and is a leader in the drug-free housing movement.

He strongly supports  growth in District 10, including expanded housing production and creating  new jobs, while still being cautious and mindful about displacing existing residents.

His top District 10 priorities include:

• Moving proposed waterfront developments across the finish line,
• Establishing a formal community and economic development plan for the district, and
• Launching a school-to-career pipeline, so students can have clearer pathways to jobs.

Below are a few attributes that make Theo a strong candidate.

• He was a leader in spearheading “The Way Out” program at The Salvation Army
• He will prioritize developing a vibrant 3rd Street corridor that “you can plan your life around” and would include a full-service grocery store, housing, and a team of beat officers.
• He grew up and has lived in the Bayview for 30+ years; he is deeply ingrained in the community.

Where does Theo stand on this November’s ballot measures?

• Proposition B: Yes
• Proposition C: Yes
• Proposition D: Yes
• Proposition E: Yes
• Proposition F: Yes
• Proposition H: Yes
• Proposition I: No

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#district10)

Prop 2 - Increases State’s Rainy Day Fund

Endorsement: NO on Proposition 2

Sacramento must prove to taxpayers they’re producing results for California before asking for any increases in funding. Proponents claim that Proposition 2 would stop politicians from overspending. Ironic, given that Sacramento’s budget is confirmed at $352 billion in FY 2026/27 and they’re asking for more handouts.

Yet another attempt to increase the insider slush fund.

Vote NO on Proposition 2

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#prop-2)

Prop 3 - Constitutional Amendment for Permanently Higher Taxes

Endorsement: NO on Proposition 3

This is what we call puppies and kittens governance: California spends obscene amounts of our taxpayer dollars on things we don’t want (including $40 million to non-existent healthcare providers and hundreds of millions in other fraud), wags its finger that we must fund “insert heartstring-tugging need here,” and then lectures that we’re the "bad guy" if we don’t give them what they demand. It's an extreme misuse of funds. The only way to stop the cycle of "abuse" is to pull the money and force them to deliver what WE want and need, instead of the perks they want to give themselves and their friends on OUR dime (e.g., full-time security details for former elected officials!).

Vote NO on Proposition 3

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#prop-3)

Prop 4 - Use Your Money to Fund Political Campaigns

Endorsement: NO on Proposition 4

This is one of those “do they really think they can fool us" measures. And, yes, they really do. In no way should taxpayers fund political campaigns that don’t align with their values. We’re required to in SF, and it hasn't gone well.

This measure makes California less affordable.

Vote NO on Proposition 4

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#prop-4)

Prop 5 - Makes it More Difficult for Citizens to Recall (Incompetent or Dishonest) Politicians

Endorsement: NO on Proposition 5

Stop trying to take away voters’ rights.

And stop enabling career politicians and insiders to game the system!

Vote NO on Proposition 5

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#prop-5)

Prop 37 - Loan Programs for Middle-Income Buyers

Endorsement: Vote NO on Proposition 37

While this sounds great, when you actually read the law, it is a bad idea. California should not be in the banking business! Our state government needs to focus on the basics and eliminate channels that create additional bloat and leave room for potential grift.

Vote NO on Proposition 37

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#prop-37)

Prop 40 - Asset Seizure (Billionaires Now, YOU later)

Endorsement: NO on Proposition 40

Ahhh, the “Billionaire Tax.” It’s really an asset seizure dishonestly called a tax, targeting one group today, with political provisions to expand it (to you!) tomorrow. (See legal text, pg 26 (https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/25-0024A1%20%28Billionaire%20Tax%20%29.pdf)).

The government should not be free to seize citizens’ assets. It undermines the American Dream, capitalism, and entrepreneurship. It’s also likely unconstitutional. If this passes, the measure is likely to face expensive constitutional challenges, meaning tax dollars spent in court rather than on services.

We risk driving entrepreneurs, innovators, and taxpayers out of California. California has already lost an estimated $1 trillion in assets (https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/california-billionaire-tax-proposal-hemorrhages-1-trillion-billionaires-flee) (which translates to $50B (5% of $1T) in “wealth taxes”) , since this proposition was advanced. You can thank the authors of this measure for fewer services and a higher deficit going forward.

Stop the bleeding now.

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#prop-40)

Prop 41 - Requires Audits for New State Special Taxes & Restores Spending Limits

Endorsement: YESon Proposition 41

Hey, here’s a novel idea: let’s AUDIT where our tax dollars are going!

Proposition 41 is genius — and a rare measure that actually seeks to make life better for citizens who feel the crushing burden of high prices and increased taxes.

Yes to making life more affordable for Californians!

Vote YES on Proposition 41

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#prop-41)

Prop 42 - Prohibits New State Personal Property Taxes & Certain Retroactive Taxes

Endorsement: YES on Proposition 42

California already has the highest cost of living, and some of the highest taxes, in America. Maybe let taxpayers keep a little of what they earn?

Proposition 42 stops Sacramento from running amok with your family’s financial stability.

Hey, Sacramento! Go ahead: tax our income, but not our stuff. If the government wants more money, it should first prove it can use the piles of tax dollars it currently has responsibly. (Maybe claw back some of that EDD fraud, hospice fraud, and the $25B for a non-existent high-speed rail before you double-tax us).

Stop treating Californians like an ATM.

Vote YES on Proposition 42

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#prop-42)