Board approves Bloomberg-funded innovation office despite concerns over long-term costs and timing

SAN FRANCISCO — The San Francisco Board of Supervisors on Nov. 16 approved an ordinance to accept an approximately $3.4 million grant from Bloomberg Philanthropies and to add five grant-funded positions across the mayor’s office and city administrator’s offices, voting 8–2 on first reading.

The ordinance authorizes the mayor’s office to accept the competitive Bloomberg grant and amends the annual salary ordinance to create one mayoral staff position and four digital-services positions funded through the grant for the period Oct. 1, 2021, through Aug. 31, 2024. Nick Menard of the Budget and Legislative Analyst told the board the grant requires matching funds of $1,100,000 and that the BLA’s report notes the four technical positions are permanent and “will ultimately be a general fund cost.”

Why it matters: Supervisors said the grant could help coordinate cross-departmental digital and permitting projects that have stalled in siloed systems, but several supervisors warned the city could be left funding the positions permanently if philanthropic matching funds are not secured.

Supervisor Ahsha Safaï and others argued the city routinely accepts philanthropic grants and that the funding could accelerate needed work. Supervisor Dean Preston repeatedly pressed the mayor’s office for details on the match and on safeguards against political influence; Preston said the proposal was “a pretty unusual proposal here” and expressed concern that the grant could create ongoing general‑fund obligations without sufficient detail on the office’s work.

Tom Paulino of the mayor’s office and Sophia Kittler, representing the mayor’s office later in the meeting, described the proposal as a competitive award from Bloomberg Philanthropies that will fund a team in the mayor’s office to coordinate cross‑departmental digital projects. Kittler said, “we're not really creating a new department, we're creating a new office in the mayor's office,” and described the intent as a cross‑departmental team to reduce siloed work orders and to pursue strategic priority projects.

Nick Menard (Budget and Legislative Analyst) told the board: “the matching funds required by the grant are $1,100,000.” Kittler said the mayor’s office plans philanthropic fundraising for the match and that the general fund would be a backstop subject to future budget appropriations if fundraising falls short.

Supervisors Peskin and Preston both said they would vote no. Peskin argued it was fiscally risky to create positions that would become ongoing general‑fund costs: “these are gifts that keep on costing,” he said. Preston raised questions about the timing of the award relative to political endorsements and requested a clear, on‑the‑record statement that grant discussions and any endorsement process were separate.

Supervisor Chan and others emphasized the potential benefits for permitting and other city systems, and Supervisor Chan said the grant process was competitive and that other cities had been selected as well.

Vote and next steps: On a roll call the board recorded an 8–2 vote in favor. Votes recorded in the transcript were: Mandelmann (aye), Mar (aye), Melgar (aye), Peskin (no), Preston (no), Safaï (aye), Supervisor Stephanie (aye), Walton (aye), Chan (aye), Haney (aye). The ordinance passed on first reading; the mayor’s office and the BLA indicated the board will see follow-up on fundraising, program description and accountability during the budget and reporting process.

The BLA report and mayor’s office statements that positions are permanent and that the city must identify $1.1 million in matching funds — with fundraising planned but not fully committed — were placed on the record.