Rules Committee forwards three Planning Commission nominees to full Board

The Rules Committee of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors on Wednesday moved three mayoral nominations for the Planning Commission to the full Board, following brief remarks from each nominee, a period of questions from supervisors and extended public comment.

Chair Jane Kim opened the session by calling Item 1, the nomination of Cindy Wu. Wu, who has served the remainder of a prior term, told supervisors that her priorities are preserving neighborhood character while advancing affordable housing, improving public outreach and making planning code understandable "to everyday people." Wu said she "continues to care a lot about public participation and outreach" and praised a planning‑department effort meant to boost public education.

Supervisor David Campos moved to forward Wu's nomination to the full Board; the committee seconded and the motion carried without opposition. Multiple neighborhood and housing advocates, including representatives of the Council of Community Housing Organizations and the Housing Action Coalition, spoke in support of Wu during public comment, citing her experience in low‑income housing and community outreach.

The committee then considered two additional mayoral nominees. Michael Antonini, a longtime Planning Commissioner, described his decade of service and said he brings institutional knowledge, careful analysis and accessibility to the commission. Supervisors pressed Antonini on whether the Planning Commission has done enough to track how approvals affect the city's ability to meet Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) goals, and on several high‑profile projects including 8 Washington, Park Merced and the California Pacific Medical Center (CPMC) proposal tied to St. Luke's hospital. Antonini said decisions often involve trade‑offs — for example, waterfront projects may not be realistic sites for deeply affordable units, but can provide funds and public improvements that support affordable housing elsewhere — and he defended the use of development agreements to secure long‑term protections while acknowledging legal questions about enforceability.

Public testimony on Antonini's nomination was mixed: labor, business and many neighborhood speakers praised his preparedness and accessibility; the San Francisco Neighborhood Network and others said they could not support his reappointment because they differ with him on certain housing priorities. The committee voted to forward Antonini's nomination to the full Board so the full body can resolve the matter within the statutory 60‑day review period.

Finally, the committee advanced Richard Hillis' nomination. Hillis outlined his 15 years of city experience in economic and waterfront development and described work on Treasure Island and Octavia Boulevard. Supporters from neighborhood groups and homelessness‑service providers told the committee that Hillis' background and outreach skills would be assets on the Planning Commission. Supervisor Campos moved to forward Hillis' nomination with approval, a motion the committee approved without opposition.

What happens next: Each nomination will be scheduled for consideration by the full Board of Supervisors, which must act within the 60‑day statutory window or the nominations become effective by operation of law.