California voters want their leaders to be as diverse as they are. But San Francisco, like many municipalities statewide, still has work to do to achieve that standard.
UC Berkeley published a study last month finding that eight in 10 Californians consider it "important" for their political leaders to "represent the diversity of their community." More than half of respondents described it as "very important," while another 25% characterized it as "somewhat important."
However, several studies have revealed the state's shortcomings in recent years: namely, and unsurprisingly, that California electeds are disproportionately white and lack minority representation. Almost half of UC Berkeley survey respondents called it a "major concern."
How does San Francisco City Hall fare when it comes to diversity? The results are a mixed bag.
The City shared data with The Examiner showing how every prominent San Francisco elected official since 2019 identified themselves in terms of race and ethnicity.
The dataset was limited to politicians who have held office as a supervisor , mayor, assessor-recorder, treasurer, public defender, city attorney, district attorney, and sheriff. It excludes school board members, city college officials, and judges, who are also voted into office. A city spokesperson said they only have some, not all, racial and ethnic data for that group of electeds.
On the whole, San Francisco elected officials, while not perfectly proportional with the general population, cover a broad range of ethnic and racial backgrounds. Half of the 18 officials identified themselves as nonwhite, while another two identified themselves as biracial.
But when the data is narrowed to only include The City's top leaders, there is a clear overrepresentation of the white population. More than half of the top electeds are white, and they don't come close to reflecting San Francisco's dense Asian American population. District 1 Supervisor Connie Chan is the only one of the 11 supervisors who identifies as Asian American, the community that's currently, and historically, The City's largest racial minority.
The tally of Asian American San Francisco legislators has dropped in recent years, too. Since 2019, four supervisors who have left office identified as Asian, while seven of the eight supervisors who left since then are people of color.
That includes former Supervisor Gordon Mar, who was the last of six straight Asian American officials to represent San Francisco's District 4, a majority Asian American electorate encompassing the Sunset and Parkside neighborhoods. However, Joel Engardio broke that streak when he unseated Mar, making him the first non-Asian supervisor for the district in more than two decades.
But it's also notable that minority groups are more represented when you look beyond the most front-facing San Francisco electeds. The public defender, city attorney, and sheriff all identify as Asian, while the assessor-recorder and treasurer both identify as Hispanic.
Ex // Top Stories
Union says UC withholding key employment data, which school system says shouldn’t prevent bargaining
Program seeks to organize student-led discussions encouraging healthy boundaries with online platforms
Pete Hegseth’s writings often read more like that of a Fox News analyst than a military expert
In addition, San Francisco's highest ranking public official — Mayor London Breed — and top prosecutor — District Attorney Brooke Jenkins — each identify as Black.
It should be noted that this is an imprecise analysis, since personnel changes among even just one or two elected officials could dramatically shift the percentages due to the small size of the dataset. For instance, if a person who identifies as Asian replaces a supervisor who identifies as white, the share of Asian people among top officials will nearly double to 15%.
The City's data largely tracks with statistics compiled by the Bay Area Equity Atlas, a subsidiary of the national research institute Policy Link. The organization tabulates racial and ethnic statistics for city and county leaders after each Bay Area election cycle and releases their findings to the public.
The Examiner had to request The City's data, which isn't publicly available otherwise. The Atlas limits their data to only the mayor, the board of supervisors and the district attorney.
The site started tracking such statistics in 2017 to provide their advocacy partners with empirical evidence to back up the importance of investing in people of color, low income families and others historically excluded from positions of power.
"As is the case for all localities across the region, there is more to be done (in San Francisco) for there to be better political representation of communities historically excluded from power," Michelle Huang, associate with the Bay Area Equity Atlas, told The Examiner.
Huang said San Francisco's disproportionate white representation follows a similar trend seen throughout all Bay Area counties, except for Alameda and Santa Clara County, where the majority of their top electeds are people of color.
She said that the lack of Asian representation among The City's top officials is due to "myriad" factors, including the small number of political mentors for those hoping to be involved, lack of resources to run for office, language barriers, and a history of political exile that disincentivizes many Asians from engaging in civic life.
"As refugees coming from political persecution, there is inherent fear and doubt for many in the community," she explained.
While Black and Hispanic officials account for six of 18 electeds compared to 16% of The City's population, Huang cautioned "the goal is not to have an equilibrium of elected officials to the population."
She said in order to undo centuries of racial harm, minority groups should be overrepresented in political office, so their voices are amplified.
"It's really important when there are people from historically disadvantaged groups coming to political power, to bring that community voice and community experience," Huang said. "At the same time, just because you have more people of color on board doesn't always mean more equitable or progressive policies that will champion racial equity."
