2026 California Primary
San Francisco County Board of Supervisors - District 2
The San Francisco League of Conservation Voters (SFLCV) endorses Stephen Sherrill for supervisor in District 2.
His demonstrated work to bring housing, accessible transit, and environmental priorities to city governance— the topics in focus for this endorsement process— make him an excellent candidate for his district.
Sherrill supports transit-first improvements, such as increased frequency of high-ridership bus lines, bus-only lanes, signal priority and timing adjustments, and safer pedestrian infrastructure around transit. He also supports the November 2026 Stronger Muni for All and Connect Bay Area transit funding measures and has identified the need for additional long-term transit funding sources.
The SFLCV considers dense urban housing an urgent climate priority for San Francisco. Sherrill has demonstrated alignment with our position on this topic via his support of the Family Zoning Plan and his co-sponsorship of an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD) to facilitate 1,200 new housing units in development at 3333 and 3700 California Street. He has also expressed support for additional housing projects across the city, including sites at 1035 Van Ness, 3400 Laguna, and 750 Golden Gate Avenue.
However, Sherrill opposes a 25-story apartment complex proposed at the Marina Safeway site, citing that the project doesn’t fit the scale of the neighborhood. SFLCV does not align with this stance because large, dense housing projects are necessary to meet San Francisco’s pressing housing needs. We urge Sherrill to reconsider his position and work to support this project to generate substantial new housing for District 2.
On the issue of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission’s (SFPUC) misguided approach to water consumption of the Tuolumne River, Sherrill stated his concern that the agency’s projections have "consistently overestimated future need, and the gap has real consequences for ratepayer affordability and river health. I support greater investment in water recycling, conservation, and alternative supply, and I believe the SFPUC should update its demand modeling to reflect actual trends. We should not be planning infrastructure around inflated projections when smarter, more sustainable alternatives may exist.” The Board of Supervisors needs more members who are willing to hold SFPUC to account, and SFLCV appreciates Sherrill’s position on this topic.
By contrast, Sherrill’s opponent, Lori Brooke, claims that she opposes cutbacks in Muni service, but has declined to support the ballot measure to provide more funding to Muni. She has also not outlined a clear alternative plan to address Muni’s budget deficit without cutting service. Brooke opposed the Family Zoning Plan and has more broadly resisted zoning changes that would allow multifamily housing along major transit corridors.These positions are far from what our city and our environment need.
SFLCV encourages voters to support Stephen Sherrill for District 2 Supervisor.
San Francisco Board of Education - At Large
The San Francisco League of Conservation Voters supports Phil Kim for Board of Education based on a comparative assessment of candidates’ responses on environmental priorities, fiscal constraints, and district governance.
Across the field of candidates, there is broad agreement on core issues. Brandee Marckmann, Virginia Cheung, and Kim all support expanding outdoor and experiential learning, improving environmental health conditions in schools, and utilizing district property for teacher housing. Each candidate also acknowledges the connection between safe, sustainable school environments, and student outcomes.
Differences emerge in how these priorities would be implemented. Kim’s proposals more consistently focus on integrating environmental goals into existing district systems, particularly for facilities planning, budgeting, and accountability structures. He identifies specific gaps, such as the absence of an environmental safety workforce, and proposes aligning capital investments and audits to address health hazards and infrastructure needs.
By comparison, Marckmann emphasizes a broader “Sustainable Community Schools” and a Green New Deal framework, with a focus on community-driven programming and structural reforms, while Cheung prioritizes partnerships, capital improvements, and a whole-child model tied to environmental health. These approaches share similar goals but rely more heavily on future program development or external funding.
On fiscal issues, Kim places greater emphasis on multi-year planning, transparency, and aligning new investments with existing constraints. Other candidates focus more on revenue generation, governance restructuring, or program expansion, with less specificity on how environmental initiatives would be prioritized within the current budget context.
Regarding school closures/consolidation and facilities use, Kim does not take a categorical position but instead frames environmental health, access to green space, and community impact as key decision-making criteria. Marckmann opposes closures outright, and Cheung supports a moratorium, reflecting differing approaches to managing enrollment decline and infrastructure.
Kim’s integrated approach, which embeds environmental priorities within core district functions and maintains a focus on implementation, distinguishes his candidacy in this evaluation.
SFLCV encourages voters to support Phil Kim for Board of Education.
Source (https://www.sflcv.org/blog/2026/4/28/june-2026-sflcv-endorses-phil-kim-for-board-of-education)
Upcoming race
June 2026: The San Francisco League of Conservation Voters (SFLCV) supports Proposition A, which funds critical investments in earthquake safety and emergency response infrastructure.
San Francisco is in one of the most seismically active areas in the world. The earthquake in 1906 and the fires that followed it destroyed much of the city. Although improvements have been made, key infrastructure vulnerabilities still exist and pose threat to San Franciscans.The Earthquake Safety and Emergency Response Bond is a chance to fill that gap. SFLCV urges a YES vote. From an environmental perspective, the bond supports climate resilience through investments in infrastructure.
Climate change increases the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, including conditions that exacerbate urban fires. Climate resilience requires more than emissions reductions. It requires that cities be structurally prepared for the emergencies that a warming world will deliver. Investments in fire suppression infrastructure, efficient emergency facilities, resilient transportation facilities, and reliable water access are climate investments that protect the homes, neighborhoods, and ecosystems San Franciscans depend on.
The bond accomplishes this without raising property tax rates, and it creates more than 2,000 construction-related jobs in the process. These are the kinds of public investments that demonstrate fiscal discipline and environmental seriousness.
San Francisco cannot build a sustainable future on a fragile foundation. Vote YES on Prop A.