These recommendations for the June 2, 2026 election reflect a political philosophy centered on property rights, economic growth, housing stability, and opposition to policies that landlords believe increase the cost and risk of operating rental housing in San Francisco.
For many landlords, especially small property owners, these endorsements are not simply partisan choices — they are viewed as practical decisions tied directly to the future viability of owning and managing housing in one of the nation’s most heavily regulated rental markets.
Below is a closer look at why many San Francisco landlords should support the candidates and ballot positions listed on the slate card.
A Political Climate Shaped by Housing Regulation
San Francisco landlords operate in an environment defined by:
- Strict rent control laws
- Extensive eviction protections
- High property taxes and operating costs
- Increasing insurance and maintenance expenses
- Growing regulatory compliance requirements
- Political hostility toward landlords in some city debates
Many housing providers believe city policy has become increasingly punitive toward rental property ownership. As a result, landlord organizations like SFAA often support candidates and measures they believe will restore balance between tenant protections and housing economics.
The slate card reflects that broader objective.
Candidate Endorsements
District 2 Supervisor: Stephen Sherrill
District 2 includes neighborhoods such as the Marina, Pacific Heights, and Cow Hollow — areas with substantial multifamily housing stock and many small property owners.
Landlords should support Stephen Sherrill because he is perceived as:
- More moderate on housing policy
- Supportive of public safety and neighborhood stability
- Less aligned with aggressive anti-landlord legislation
- More open to business-friendly governance
For property owners, supervisor races matter enormously because the Board of Supervisors directly influences:
- Rent regulations
- Eviction policies
- Transfer taxes
- Housing development rules
- Small business regulations
- Property-related fees
Landlords often favor candidates who they believe will:
- Encourage housing production
- Reduce bureaucratic barriers
- Resist expanding regulations on existing housing providers
District 4 Supervisor: Alan Wong
(Sole endorsement — “Do not rank other candidates”)
The “sole endorsement” language is especially important in San Francisco’s ranked-choice voting system.
By not ranking additional candidates, voters attempt to maximize the electoral advantage for Alan Wong and avoid helping more progressive opponents through redistributed votes.
Landlords support Wong because they see him as:
- Focused on neighborhood quality-of-life issues
- Concerned about public safety
- Supportive of economic development
- Less supportive of additional landlord restrictions
District 4 contains many homeowners and smaller-scale landlords who are often sensitive to rising operating costs and neighborhood concerns.
Board of Education: Phillip Kim
Why would landlords care about a school board race?
Because many property owners view school quality as directly tied to:
- Property values
- Neighborhood desirability
- Family retention in the city
- Long-term housing demand
Phillip Kim is widely viewed by moderate San Francisco voters and landlords as the strongest candidate for Board of Education because he brings real experience inside SFUSD, a strong focus on academic achievement, and a reputation for practical, stable leadership during a time of financial and operational challenges in the district. Supporters point to his work improving SFUSD’s financial standing, advocating for stronger STEM and algebra programs, and keeping the school board focused on student outcomes rather than political controversy. Many voters also believe strong public schools are essential to maintaining neighborhood stability, attracting families to the city, and protecting long-term property values, making Kim an appealing choice for those who want competent, results-driven governance.
Superior Court Judge: Phoebe Maffei
Judicial endorsements often reflect concerns about:
- Property law
- Contract enforcement
- Public safety
- Court efficiency
Phoebe Maffei is a strong choice for Superior Court Judge because many San Francisco landlords and property owners believe she represents fairness, professionalism, and respect for the rule of law at a time when the court system plays a major role in housing, public safety, and business stability. Supporters see Maffei as an experienced and balanced legal professional who will apply the law impartially, protect due process rights, and help maintain confidence in the judicial system. For landlords, having judges who value consistency, accountability, and efficient court administration is especially important in cases involving contracts, property disputes, and tenant-landlord matters, making Maffei an appealing candidate for voters seeking stability and legal integrity in San Francisco courts.
Ballot Measures
Proposition A — Earthquake Safety and Emergency Response Bond
No Position
The neutrality here is notable.
Earthquake safety is critically important in San Francisco, especially for owners of older multifamily buildings. However, landlord groups may avoid endorsing expensive public bonds unless:
- Funding mechanisms are clearly defined
- Costs do not disproportionately burden property owners
- The measure directly benefits housing providers
Proposition B — Lifetime Term Limits for Mayor and Supervisors
VOTE YES
Landlords often support term limits because they believe long-term incumbency can:
- Entrench ideological political machines
- Reduce accountability
- Encourage increasingly activist policymaking
Supporters of Proposition B would likely argue that:
- Fresh leadership improves governance
- Competition produces more balanced policymaking
- Long-serving politicians can become insulated from economic realities
Many property owners feel San Francisco politics has drifted steadily toward anti-business and anti-landlord policies over time. Term limits are viewed as a mechanism to reset city leadership.
Proposition C — Decreases to Business Taxes
VOTE YES
This may be the easiest position to understand from a landlord perspective.
Commercial property owners and housing providers are deeply affected by the city’s economic health. Many landlords support reducing business taxes because they believe:
- San Francisco is losing employers and jobs
- Empty office buildings hurt the entire city economy
- Reduced business activity lowers demand for housing
- Economic recovery requires making the city more competitive
Landlords frequently argue that:
- Excessive taxation discourages investment
- Businesses pass costs onto consumers and tenants
- Economic decline ultimately harms housing values and city services
Support for Proposition C reflects a broader pro-growth, pro-investment philosophy.
Proposition D — Tax Based on CEO-to-Worker Pay Ratios
VOTE NO
Landlords likely oppose this measure because they see it as:
- Punitive toward employers
- Symbolic rather than economically productive
- Likely to discourage companies from operating in San Francisco
Measures like Proposition D can contribute to:
- Corporate departures
- Job losses
- Declining commercial occupancy
- Reduced tax revenue
- Economic contraction
Property owners often view San Francisco’s recovery as dependent on retaining employers and rebuilding downtown economic activity. Policies perceived as hostile to business are therefore opposed.
The Bigger Picture: What Landlords Are Really Voting For
At its core, landlords should vote to support:
1. Economic Stability
Landlords depend on:
- Stable employment
- Strong local businesses
- Population retention
- Consumer confidence
A weak local economy ultimately affects rents, vacancies, and property values.
2. Regulatory Predictability
Many housing providers believe constant new regulations create uncertainty and financial risk.
They often support candidates who promise:
- Clearer rules
- Slower regulatory expansion
- More collaboration with property owners
3. Public Safety and Quality of Life
Concerns about:
- Retail theft
- Homelessness
- Drug activity
- Street conditions
Landlords frequently argue these issues directly impact:
- Tenant retention
- Property maintenance costs
- Neighborhood desirability
- Housing investment
4. Housing Investment Incentives
Many small landlords argue that if operating rental housing becomes financially unsustainable, owners may:
- Exit the rental market
- Convert units to other uses
- Delay maintenance or upgrades
- Avoid future housing investment
For many landlords, these endorsements are driven less by ideology than by concern over whether owning and operating rental housing in San Francisco remains economically feasible in the years ahead.
In a city defined by fierce debates over housing, inequality, and development, the slate card is ultimately a statement about what kind of city landlords believe San Francisco must become in order to remain livable, investable, and economically sustainable.