Skip to main content
News

The 10 most controversial people on The Standard’s inaugural SF100 power list

These are the most divisive names on the SF100, according to the people who assembled it.

When the staff of The Standard started compiling the names that would make up the SF100, our inaugural list of San Francisco’s most powerful and influential people, the debates were fierce. Is this a list of people we admire? (Not necessarily.) Should we include only people using their power for good? (By whose criteria?) Do we have to include Elon Musk? (Yes.)

After whittling the list down from 500 names, we settled on 100 people (if you count the Waymo Driver and urban coyotes as “people”), yet our own internal debates are still firing. The final list is by no means a mark of consensus among The Standard’s journalists: We’re still arguing about some of them.

So, who are the most controversial names on the SF100, according to the very people who assembled it?

Elon Musk

The image is a stylized, halftone portrait of a man in a suit, featuring intricate dot patterns on a turquoise background, giving it a retro feel.

Why the controversy? Because of his “extremely hardcore” ethos at X, his political extremism, his dismantling of federal agencies, and his general Elon Musk-iness. 
Why he made it anyway: Because among all the business leaders who have built companies in the Bay Area, he’s undeniably the most impactful.

Curtis Yarvin 

The image is a pixelated portrait of a person with glasses, wearing a leather jacket and a collared shirt, set against a dotted background on a light purple canvas.

Why the controversy? Because his views on monarchy (pro), democracy (anti), and slavery (just look it up) give us the willies. 
Why he made it anyway: Because while we may cringe at his ideas, he has the ears of some of the nation’s most powerful people, including the vice president of the United States and more than a few self-elected thought leaders in tech.

Harmeet Dhillon

The image features a woman with curly hair, smiling. It's stylized in green and black dots, resembling a pop art or halftone effect.

Why the controversy? Because she’s cozy with the president and with San Francisco native son Tucker Carlson. 
Why she made it anyway: She’s a formidable presence on the legal landscape and someone worth keeping an eye on as the second Trump administration barrels toward what the president says (jokes?) will be a third.

FriscoLive415

The image features black text saying "FRISCO LIVE 415" in a bold font on a green background. The letters "L" and "I" in "LIVE" form the shape of a tower.

Why the controversy? Because this anonymous social media account is helping to perpetuate the city’s reputation as hell on earth. 
Why he made it anyway: The lawlessness portrayed in FriscoLive’s posts is terrifying, but it’s also a reality and reminds us that the most beautiful city in America still has a ways to go to clean up its ugly side.

Nancy Pelosi

The image is a stylized, teal-toned portrait of a middle-aged individual with short hair, wearing a suit jacket. The background features a dotted pattern.

Why the controversy? Because, at 85, she persists in blocking the next generation of local progressive political leaders from rising through the ranks. 
Why she made it anyway: Pelosi is as San Francisco as … well, pretty much anything San Francisco. She’s definitely a hometown hero, but she’s also held a place of such national prominence that you could argue she still sets the political agenda for the Democratic Party.

Mark Zuckerberg

The image features a digitally stylized portrait of a person, with a dot pattern effect on a green background, creating a modern, artistic look.

Why the controversy? Aside from commanding the attention of everyone on the planet for untold hours of the day, Zuckerberg is controversial for his loud, weirdly proud pivot to the right over the last year. 
Why he made it anyway: Should we really be celebrating his midlife crisis (the martial arts, the chains, the hair), or should we politely look away? Answer: We can’t look away.

Michael Moritz

The image is a stylized portrait of a person with a serious expression. It uses a dot pattern effect and is framed by a diamond shape on a blue background.

Why the controversy? Well, aside from the queasy feeling of writing about the chairman of your own news organization (hello, Sir Michael — you’re looking fit!), there was the business of his backing losing candidates (Mark Farrell) and campaigns (Prop. D) in the last election, and the crash-landing of California Forever, his moonshot plan for a new city. 
Why he made it anyway: It’s the philanthropy, stupid. And the commitment to independent local media, for which, admittedly, we have a strong bias.

Brooke Jenkins

The image is a halftone-style portrait of a person in a suit, facing slightly right. The background and the person are in contrasting shades of green and black.

Why the controversy? Because, sure, crime is down, but tell that to San Franciscans who still feel angsty — and antsy — about it. 
Why she made it anyway: It’s not clear if the drop is due to the DA,  but she’s a visible symbol of the city cleaning up its act, and for that, she belongs on the list.

David Sacks

The image is a stylized dot-pattern portrait of a man in a suit on a yellow background with a triangular design.

Why the controversy? Because as a VC and podcaster, he has shown smarts and foresight, but lately his energy seems to be devoted to celebrating and emboldening President Donald Trump, who is not exactly the biggest supporter of our fair city (note his gutting of the Presidio Trust). 
Why he made it anyway: Because he’s a true gatekeeper, picking the winners and losers in AI and crypto. Also, we thought he might talk about us on his podcast and got really excited.

Patti Poppe

A halftone-style image shows a woman smiling, with long hair and wearing a buttoned jacket, set against a patterned background.

Why the controversy? I mean, who’s really a fan of PG&E? It’s as if we’d put the weather on the list: We have zero influence over that, too.
Why she made it anyway: Controlling the power is very powerful, and we do really enjoy our lights and fully charged phones, so … Also, we’ll give her credit for the fascinating new ad campaign in which PG&E execs grovel before their angry customers.