In a blistering review of how government dollars are being spent, a team of city officials is recommending culling five homelessness oversight commissions that collectively cost taxpayers $2 million annually to operate.
The report Friday from five senior staffers at the city administrator and controller’s offices suggested eliminating some of the oversight bodies or condensing them into one, alleging they perform duplicative duties that have slowed efforts to curb the homelessness crisis.
Their recommendations were sent for consideration to the Commission Streamlining Task Force, a five-member panel that was created via Proposition E (opens in new tab). The November 2024 ballot measure was crafted to study the city’s roughly 130 boards, commissions, and advisory bodies and make recommendations on which should be changed, eliminated, or consolidated in efforts to reduce government bloat. The task force will consider the report’s recommendations at an Oct. 15 meeting.
The report describes a “patchwork of bodies” that it claims have failed to catch corruption while creating unnecessary bureaucracy around one of the city’s most visible emergencies. The report notes that the commissions, which are collectively overseen by 52 politically appointed commissioners, failed to catch “several recent high-profile cases” in which homelessness nonprofits “either misused funds or mismanaged service delivery.”
“It’s not clear that having multiple public bodies overseeing homelessness is making the city’s homelessness work more effective,” the report says.
Keeping tabs on SF’s movers and shakers.
Get the inside scoop on City Hall and local politics in our weekly Power Play newsletter.
The report suggests either eliminating some of the commissions or combining their responsibilities into the Homelessness Oversight Commission, which oversees the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing. The department’s 2026 budget is $786 million, with which it funds nearly 4,000 shelter beds and more than 19,500 housing beds through an array of nonprofit contracts.
The recommended changes target the Local Homeless Coordinating Board; the Our City, Our Home Oversight Committee; the Shelter Grievance Advisory Committee; and the Shelter Monitoring Committee. Those bodies are tasked with touring city-run facilities, processing allegations of abuse at shelters, and keeping tabs on hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars.
The Homelessness Oversight Commission, which has seven members and oversees contracts while acting as a liaison between the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing and the public, has an annual operating budget of $1.1 million, making it the most expensive of the five bodies.
Some members of the Homelessness Oversight Commission questioned its ability to handle more responsibilities — and whether the additional workload would come at the expense of homeless people, taxpayers, and government accountability.
“The amount of grievances that come to those bodies, it wouldn’t be realistic for one commission to take those on,” said Whit Guerrero, a member of the commission. “That’s way too much for one body.”
San Francisco’s numerous commissions and task forces have generated criticism of bureaucratic bloat and inefficiency. But supporters contend that they increase oversight of government functions.
The task force’s report suggests that because homelessness is a top priority for Mayor Daniel Lurie, there is no need for so many commissions.
“One of the key purposes of having a governance body overseeing a department is to provide additional oversight at a level of detail that the mayor cannot provide to all departments,” the report says. “In this case however, the mayor and his staff are deeply involved in focusing on and directing homelessness policy.”
Del Seymour, a member of the Local Homeless Coordinating Board, said he would embrace the task force’s recommendations. He argued that a single commission would prove more effective and receive more input from the public.
“It would be taking my position away, but I’m willing to sacrifice that for efficiency,” Seymour said. “One board is more powerful than five boards. There’s too many cooks in the kitchen.”