Finance committee refuses to release $92,890 for airport international tourism post amid funding questions

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors’ Finance Committee on Tuesday declined to release $92,890 in reserve funds that would have funded the airport’s international economic and tourism development director position.

Peter Nardoza, representing the airport, asked the committee to release money reserved during last year’s budget hearings. "We are here today to request that you release the funds that you placed on reserve for the position of executive of tourism development at the airport," Nardoza said, describing the role as focused on marketing San Francisco in China, Japan and other Asian Rim countries and on attracting new carriers and flights.

Supervisors pressed the administration for quantifiable performance measures and proof the role’s benefits primarily accrue to airport operations rather than the broader regional economy. A committee member challenged the airport to provide verifiable economic benefits beyond attendance at events and asked for numbers such as meetings with airline executives or newly attracted flights. "Is there anything that's changed? Can you justify it now? Quantifiable economic benefits or cost savings?" one supervisor asked.

Public supporters provided testimony praising the incumbent, William L. Lee, while acknowledging the funding question. A speaker who identified connections with Greater China said one visit to San Francisco clients could be worth about $50,000; Margaret Burgess read a letter from the Ladies of the San Francisco Consular Corps thanking the city for Lee’s outreach. Richard Hamlin and other residents described regional competition to attract Asian trade and tourism and urged continued investment in the post.

But multiple supervisors said the airport had not supplied a substantive plan showing alternative funding sources or the administration’s vision for the role. Citing a short two‑paragraph request letter and missing documentation, one committee member moved not to release the reserve funds, a motion the committee adopted "without objection." The clerk filed the item as heard and filed.

The committee asked the administration and airport leadership to return with a clearer plan that lays out measurable goals, how the position differs from existing work at the Convention and Visitors Bureau or the city’s economic development offices, and potential cost‑sharing sources if the position is intended to serve a broader regional role.

Next steps: the item was filed; supervisors indicated the administration may return with a revised proposal or the matter could be calendared for a future hearing if alternative funding or a clearer justification is presented.