Committee advances municipal ID ordinance after broad public support; staff outline costs and security measures

The Budget and Finance Committee advanced Supervisor Tom Ammiano’s ordinance to create a San Francisco municipal identification card and continued the item for further amendment and review, following technical briefings and more than an hour of public comment.

Ammiano told the committee the ordinance would "create a city-issued ID card for San Francisco residents regardless of immigration status," and said he expects the card to improve public safety by making it easier for people to report crimes, open bank accounts and access local services. He said the proposal draws on New Haven’s program, which issued about 4,000 cards after launching in July.

City Attorney Francesca Gessner summarized the ordinance’s key provisions, including new proof-of-identity and proof-of-residency rules, an expiration date requirement for cards, confidentiality protections for applicant data and a $15 fee for adults and $5 for minors (subject to exceptions). Gessner said applicants would file under penalty of perjury and that the county clerk would be required to accept specified forms of identity and residency. The ordinance would become operative nine months after its effective date, she said. Gessner also explained that the office recommended the ordinance not be severable so that striking particular provisions would suspend the program rather than create unpredictable partial implementations.

The committee heard a detailed budget analyst report raising caution about cost estimates. Using materials prepared by the county clerk and by New Haven, the analyst presented a high-range net-cost estimate of roughly $1.11 million for the first year, including one-time implementation costs in the low hundreds of thousands (the analyst cited implementation ranges such as $324,000–$882,000 in various lines). The analyst emphasized that New Haven’s experience "may not apply to San Francisco" and that demand and staffing needs are uncertain; the report recommended the Board treat the item as a policy decision and consider periodic renewal or other controls on ongoing costs.

County Clerk Karen Hong described operational plans to meet initial demand: temporary staff and trained volunteers, a three-day training regimen adapted from New Haven, partnership with police anti-counterfeit units, and a card design incorporating security features (photo, city seal, laminated holograph). Hong confirmed the office would not accept employee or school IDs alone to meet the two‑document identity test and said the clerk’s office would not retain applicants’ residential addresses and would allow applicants to state privacy preferences when applying.

Nani Coloretti of the Mayor’s Budget Office said the administration believes actual costs will likely be below the high-range numbers cited in one report and offered to work with the clerk’s office and partners to find cost‑effective implementation approaches. Lee Phillips of the Treasurer’s Office said the treasurer supports using the municipal ID to expand access to mainstream financial services and will pursue bank and credit‑union partnerships to ensure the card meets "know your customer" requirements; the Treasurer’s Office has secured pro bono advertising and outreach support to lower outreach costs.

Representatives from Recreation and Park and the Public Library described administrative changes to accept the municipal ID for resident rates and library cards, and said they will work with the clerk’s office on practical implementation details.

Public comment was overwhelmingly in favor. Labor, immigrant‑rights, faith and neighborhood groups, as well as individual residents, described how immigrants, seniors, transgender people, homeless residents and day laborers currently struggle to access banking, report crimes or obtain recreational and library services. Tim Paulson of the San Francisco Labor Council said he expects the council to be heavily involved in outreach and said, "I will probably be the first in line to get an ID." Several speakers urged more flexible proof‑of‑identity rules for people who have lost documents while fleeing violence.

Supervisor Ammiano said substantive amendments were proposed during the hearing; the committee agreed to take those amendments and continue the item as amended to the committee’s next meeting on November 7 for additional technical work and final recommendation to the full Board. No formal vote on final passage occurred at this meeting.

Next steps: the committee will reconvene on Nov. 7 to consider the amended ordinance and additional implementation details, including final cost estimates, privacy safeguards and any renewal or sunset provisions.