Rules Committee forwards Shruti Gandhi's retirement-board nomination after hearing on divestment plans

The Rules Committee on May 10 referred Mayor London Breed's nomination of Shruti Gandhi to the San Francisco retirement board to the full Board of Supervisors as a committee report without recommendation, after a hearing that focused on fossil-fuel divestment and transparency.

Gandhi, introduced by Chair Aaron Peskin, described her background as a venture capital investor and founder of Array Ventures and said she would "be a strong advocate for aggressive divestment" and would push for public goals, transparency, and metrics to track progress. She told the committee she would prioritize creating a clear plan and work to ensure accountability for both staff and board members.

Committee members sought specifics about what "neutrality" versus divestment would mean in practice. Chair Peskin noted that the retirement board's most recent environmental, social and governance (ESG) report set a net-carbon neutrality goal for 2050 but that neutrality is not the same as divestment. Peskin cited "approximately 120 instruments" in the fossil-fuel portfolio totaling "a little more than a half a billion dollars," roughly "2% or less" of the overall fund, and pressed Gandhi on realistic timelines. Gandhi said she would prioritize more-liquid equity and similar positions and suggested a one- to two-year horizon to begin materially addressing those holdings while distinguishing long-term, illiquid investments that require additional planning.

Public comment included supportive endorsements from entrepreneurs and colleagues who cited Gandhi's investment and governance experience; at least one business leader and several advocates from Sunrise Bay Area and SEIU urged a nominee with direct divestment experience and insisted the Board adopt concrete, time-bound plans. Commenters described a long history of advocacy beginning with a 2013 board resolution and urged urgency given climate and public-health concerns.

Following public testimony, Chair Peskin recommended sending the nomination to the full Board as a committee report so the entire Board could deliberate; the committee recorded unanimous committee "Aye" votes and the item will proceed to the full Board. The committee briefly rescinded and then reprocessed the vote to correct technical wording ("appointment" versus "reappointment") after clerks and the deputy city attorney explained notice and amendment procedures; the corrected referral was sent to the full Board as a committee report.

The matter will be on the full Board agenda for the next meeting; the committee emphasized that the Board's February 23 resolution urging divestment will be a central reference in that broader discussion.