Mayor Lurie names new S.F. planning director, after a contentious approval process
Sarah Dennis Phillips, a veteran San Francisco real estate executive who has had top roles in both the private and public sectors, has been named the city's planning director, replacing Rich Hillis, who announced in May that he would be stepping down.
The appointment took place after a contentious closed-door planning commission meeting on Wednesday, during which three of the seven commissioners walked out because they objected to the process by which the decision was made, according to department sources familiar with the hearing. The walkout was first reported by Mission Local.
The three planning commissioners who walked out objected that they were not given a more prominent role in reviewing applicants. In the past, planning director appointments involved a nationwide search and commissioners reviewed a pool of applicants, eventually providing the mayor with a list of at least three qualified candidates. The process took several months.
In this case, the mayor's staffers submitted Phillips' resume less than a day before the vote, which prompted commissioners Kathrin Moore, Gilbert Williams and Theresa Imperial to walk out in protest, refusing to participate in the interview or vote on the appointment. All three were appointed by the Board of Supervisors, whereas the four who voted in favor of Dennis-Phillips were appointed by former Mayor London Breed.
The San Francisco Charter dictates that the planning director serves 'at the pleasure' of the commission and that the mayor and the commission 'agree about who will be the planning director.'
The pick, which Mayor Daniel Lurie announced Wednesday, is part of a shuffling of San Francisco's top land-use brass. Phillips, who is currently the executive director of the San Francisco Office of Economic and Workforce Development, will be replaced by Anne Taupier, who currently heads up development for the mayor.
In addition, Liz Watty, who heads up current planning for the planning department, will oversee the multiagency PermitSF initiative, which is focused on reforming San Francisco's famously cumbersome and time-consuming building permitting process.
In a press release, Lurie said the new economic development team would help implement his efforts to bolster San Francisco's post-pandemic economic recovery by 'cutting red tape, supporting small businesses, adding housing, and revitalizing downtown.'
Lurie said Phillips, Taupier and Watty 'have the leadership, experience, and track record to drive our city's economic recovery.' He said the three have 'helped generate billions of dollars in economic activity, create thousands of new homes across the city, open small businesses in every neighborhood and support major initiatives downtown.'
Phillips in particular will be in the spotlight over the next seven months as the city is finalizing a rezoning that will allow more height and density in big swaths of the city in order to accommodate 46,000 units of new housing. The rezoning, which Lurie calls the 'Family Zoning' plan, is due to be adopted by the Board of Supervisors by Jan. 31, 2026, or the city risks losing state funding for transportation and housing projects.
Phillips spent time as a city planner and deputy director of the Office of Economic and Workforce Development before taking a job in the private sector with real estate giant Tishman Speyer.
While the planning director search didn't follow the established process of allowing commissioners to vet candidates, it was similar to the shortened process Lurie used to pick Julie Kirschbaum as the director of SFMTA and Dan Tsai as the city's public health director.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
a day ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Daniel Lurie didn't get everything he wanted in his first S.F. budget. Neither did his critics
Mayor Daniel Lurie 's first San Francisco budget negotiations were not as dramatic as they could have been, despite vigorous opposition from labor unions and nonprofits over his plan to close the city's huge deficit. When Lurie introduced his proposal to eliminate a roughly $800 million two-year shortfall, he sought to cut 1,300 vacant jobs and about 100 filled positions. But city lawmakers on Thursday reached a deal with Lurie to prevent 56 layoffs, blunting the impact on San Francisco's vast municipal workforce that is already one of the largest in the country. The mayor allocated funding for about 33,000 city employees next fiscal year. Unions sounded the alarm about the budget even before it was proposed by Lurie, unsuccessfully urging him to avoid deep cuts by calling on tech companies to drop lawsuits seeking tax refunds. As the Board of Supervisors vetted the budget plan, labor groups escalated their resistance, disrupting a meeting until police removed protesting workers in handcuffs. Nonprofits also vehemently objected to Lurie's proposal to cut about $185 million in grant and contract spending. Ultimately, the deal that the supervisors' budget committee brokered with Lurie scaled back some of his most aggressive plans. By tweaking the mayor's two-year spending proposal, supervisors freed up $15 million to reduce layoffs, and they reallocated $26 million to invest in a variety of services that Lurie originally intended to cut. The money is a drop in the bucket of San Francisco's $7 billion general fund, but it will help avoid some of the most painful belt-tightening originally envisioned by Lurie. The budget deal, which must still be approved by the full board of supervisors next month, illustrates how Lurie is trying to balance the demands of lawmakers and organized labor while making good on promises to reduce San Francisco's persistent deficits. He didn't give the unions or supervisors everything they wanted. But he also didn't seek a massive overhaul of the city bureaucracy or press for layoffs on the scale the city saw during the Great Recession. Lurie said in a statement that the budget deal would help the city avoid spending 'money we don't have, while focusing our resources on providing safe and clean streets, addressing the fentanyl crisis, and advancing our economic recovery.' 'Passing this budget also required painful decisions that were, unfortunately, necessary to set up our entire city for success,' Lurie said. 'Leadership means making those tough decisions, and this group of city leaders did that.' Supervisor Connie Chan, who chairs the board's budget committee, said Lurie was put in a difficult position partly because recent city budgets under his predecessor, London Breed, were balanced with a heavy reliance on temporary funding sources. Lurie used far less one-time money in his first budget proposal than Breed did last year, according to the city controller's office. The mayor and supervisors also set aside $400 million to help shield the city from federal funding cuts under the Trump administration. 'We are looking to the future about how we protect San Francisco and make sure that San Francisco is solvent,' Chan said. 'That really is the common goal that got us through this budget process… I recognize that and I think the mayor recognizes that.' Chan said she and her colleagues have tried to do 'whatever we can to reverse the layoffs for our front-line workers and to protect as many direct services to the most vulnerable as possible.' 'Under the circumstances, I think that we have delivered that,' she said. SEIU 1021, the city's largest public-sector union, had a mixed reaction to the budget deal. Union president Theresa Rutherford said in a statement that her group was relieved that the agreement between supervisors and the mayor 'reverses layoffs of frontline workers.' But she was 'disappointed and concerned' about cuts to nonprofits and city services that remain in the spending plan. The budget would still cut about $171 million from grants and contracts, a $14 million reduction from what the mayor first proposed. 'We've been fighting hard, but our work is not done,' Rutherford said. 'We will continue to fight to protect public services, especially for those in our community who need them the most, and the rights of all the workers who provide those services, public and nonprofit alike. And we will hold the mayor accountable for reversing these layoffs.' One of the biggest sticking points in this year's budget negotiations involved changes that Lurie proposed in how the city spends revenue from a 2018 business tax that funds homeless services. The tax measure, Proposition C, earmarked specific percentages of the proceeds for permanent housing, mental health services, homelessness prevention and shelter and hygiene services. Lurie wanted to redirect about $90 million in unspent revenue from the tax to fund his priorities, namely homeless shelters, which he thinks are in dire need of expansion to get more unhoused people off the streets. The mayor also sought more flexibility in how his administration spends future revenue from the tax. After an extended debate and negotiations with the mayor's office, the budget committee reduced Lurie's $90 million reallocation request down to about $30 million. The committee also agreed to let Lurie more freely spend up to $19 million in extra revenue from the tax if approved by a simple majority of the board. That prompted some intense pushback from Supervisor Jackie Fielder, who questioned why supervisors were 'going to do away with a key provision' of Prop C, which originally required a supermajority board vote to alter the funding categories. 'Should we even have a Board of Supervisors at this point?' Fielder asked at a budget committee hearing. The Coalition on Homelessness advocacy group also lamented the decision, calling it a 'mayoral power grab' in a news release. 'San Francisco is not a kingdom, and it is not a corporation, it is a democracy,' Jennifer Friedenbach, the coalition's executive director, said in a statement. 'Prop C … was carefully constructed to ensure that data-driven, voter-approved mandates existed to build a responsive and efficient homeless system that was protected from wrongheaded political winds.' Chan, the budget chair, defended the committee's decision as a fair compromise. 'We negotiated with the mayor the best outcome (possible) in a very balanced spending plan that supports homeless families and homeless transitional-age youth,' Chan said in an interview. 'I also understand that at this moment and this time, there is also an urgent need to solve the crisis that we see on our streets.' Aldo Toledo contributed reporting.
Axios
3 days ago
- Axios
San Francisco bets on new pro soccer team to boost Kezar Stadium
Mayor Daniel Lurie has struck a deal designating San Francisco's historic Kezar Stadium as the home field for a new men's professional soccer team: Golden City Football Club. State of play: As part of the agreement finalized Wednesday, Golden City FC— backed by private investors — will invest $10 million in stadium upgrades for pro and public use, the venue's largest cash infusion in decades. What they're saying:"This investment is truly an investment in the people of San Francisco," Lurie said in a statement. "San Francisco's vibrant culture, rich sports history and enthusiastic fan base make it an ideal home for an independent club," added Charles Altchek, president of MLS Next Pro and executive vice president of Major League Soccer. Zoom in: The renovations include new bleachers, a sound system, natural grass field, irrigation system and high-definition scoreboard. The venue will also undergo various ADA accessibility, press box and concessions upgrades. Friction point: The deal has sparked concern from supporters of the community-run San Francisco City FC — which has played at Kezar for decades — that it could sideline the team. The big picture: Golden City FC is the second pro team introduced under Lurie, following this year's debut of the Golden State Valkyries. His administration is betting on sports and entertainment to help revive local neighborhoods. Between the lines: Golden City FC will be permitted to use the stadium for home games and practices for 15 years — with three optional five-year extensions — and granted use of other city-owned fields for training.
CBS News
4 days ago
- CBS News
LA County Board of Supervisors votes to extend rent protections for wildfire victims
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted Tuesday to extend rent protections for wildfire victims, as the temporary measure was about to expire on July 1. Price gouging protections went into place when Gov. Gavin Newsom declared the Jan. 7 state of emergency. This meant that prices on goods, services, and housing could not increase by more than 10% of pre-disaster prices. The board found that rental protections are still necessary. The approved motion cited a recent Los Angeles Times article, where it was reported that rent prices in the areas adjacent to the wildfires are climbing faster than other areas of the county. "Families that signed six-month short-term leases in the immediate wake of the fires, could now face drastic price increases of 50% or more without further price gouging protection, as they will continue to need alternate accommodations as they rebuild their homes and their lives," the motion stated. State law allows price-gouging prohibitions to be extended every 30 days. "With these critical price gouging protections about to expire, it is necessary that the Board of Supervisors act to continue to protect residents from unscrupulous and excessive housing price increases during this ongoing emergency," the motion stated. The board also voted to limit price-gouging in hotels and motels and to continue protections against eviction. "The Board finds that this extension is necessary because complaints of price gouging are continuing, and have been increasing, and such an extension will protect the lives, property, and/or welfare of the residents of the county," the motion stated.
