Michael Barba

San Francisco trash-hauling giant Recology spent nearly $500,000 trying to influence City Hall officials last year after a corruption scandal forced the firm to admit it had massively overcharged customers, putting its decades-old monopoly on local garbage collection at risk.

core/paragraph

<p>San Francisco trash-hauling giant Recology spent nearly $500,000 trying to influence City Hall officials last year after a corruption scandal forced the firm to admit it had massively overcharged customers, putting its decades-old monopoly on local garbage collection at risk.</p>

City ethics records reviewed by The Standard reveal that Recology went into damage control  mode shortly after it agreed last March to pay $95 million for over-billing customers. The company ramped up its lobbyist spending from $15,000 to $50,000 a month beginning in May, and paid a total of $460,000 last year—more than any other company spent on lobbying in San Francisco in 2021 and far more than it had spent on lobbyists in the previous five years combined.

<p>City ethics records reviewed by The Standard reveal that Recology went into damage control  mode shortly after it agreed last March to pay $95 million for over-billing customers. The company ramped up its lobbyist spending from $15,000 to $50,000 a month beginning in May, and paid a total of $460,000 last year—more than any other company spent on lobbying in San Francisco in 2021 and far more than it had spent on lobbyists in the previous five years combined.</p>

“It makes me mad, because those are bills we are paying for,” Supervisor Hillary Ronen told The Standard. “Instead of wasting their time trying to convince the public that they aren’t crooks, why don’t they just stop being crooks?”

<p>“It makes me mad, because those are bills we are paying for,” Supervisor Hillary Ronen told The Standard. “Instead of wasting their time trying to convince the public that they aren’t crooks, why don’t they just stop being crooks?”</p>

Hiring lobbyists to call and arrange meetings with City Hall officials wasn&#8217;t the only way Recology tried to buy itself out of trouble.

<p>Hiring lobbyists to call and arrange meetings with City Hall officials wasn't the only way Recology tried to buy itself out of trouble.</p>

<p>Hiring lobbyists to call and arrange meetings with City Hall officials wasn&#8217;t the only way Recology tried to buy itself out of trouble.</p>

In just one week this January,<strong> </strong>campaign finance records show, the firm dropped more than $225,000 on an ill-fated ballot measure designed to shield Recology from facing outside competition. It wasn’t until Supervisor Aaron Peskin threatened to break up the firm’s trash monopoly with a more aggressive ballot measure that <a href="https://sfstandard.com/city-hall/recology-trash-monopoly-ballot-measure-sam-francisco/">Recology dropped its own proposal</a>.

<p>In just one week this January,<strong> </strong>campaign finance records show, the firm dropped more than $225,000 on an ill-fated ballot measure designed to shield Recology from facing outside competition. It wasn’t until Supervisor Aaron Peskin threatened to break up the firm’s trash monopoly with a more aggressive ballot measure that <a href="https://sfstandard.com/city-hall/recology-trash-monopoly-ballot-measure-sam-francisco/">Recology dropped its own proposal</a>. </p>

Peskin and Mayor London Breed are now moving forward with an initiative that will reform the process for setting garbage rates but allow Recology to keep its monopoly—for now.

<p>Peskin and Mayor London Breed are now moving forward with an initiative that will reform the process for setting garbage rates but allow Recology to keep its monopoly—for now.</p>

Altogether, city records show Recology spent nearly $687,000 on lobbying and campaign-related expenses from the beginning of 2021 through mid-January of this year. That figure is just a fraction of the money Recology brings in from San Francisco ratepayers, who are essentially required to pay the firm for trash pick-up.

<p>Altogether, city records show Recology spent nearly $687,000 on lobbying and campaign-related expenses from the beginning of 2021 through mid-January of this year. That figure is just a fraction of the money Recology brings in from San Francisco ratepayers, who are essentially required to pay the firm for trash pick-up. </p>

Recology reported $336 million in revenue from residential and commercial properties in San Francisco during a one-year period ending in June 2020. Trash collection <a href="https://www.datawrapper.de/_/IsTqJ/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">rates are at the higher end</a> compared with neighboring cities.

<p>Recology reported $336 million in revenue from residential and commercial properties in San Francisco during a one-year period ending in June 2020. Trash collection <a href="https://www.datawrapper.de/_/IsTqJ/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">rates are at the higher end</a> compared with neighboring cities.</p>

Recology lobbyists’ top target was Supervisor Peskin, who called for changes to the garbage rate-setting process in response to the company being implicated in a pay-to-play scheme involving former Public Works head Mohammed Nuru. Records show the firm wanted to influence discussions between Peskin and the mayor’s office over any potential reforms.

<p>Recology lobbyists’ top target was Supervisor Peskin, who called for changes to the garbage rate-setting process in response to the company being implicated in a pay-to-play scheme involving former Public Works head Mohammed Nuru. Records show the firm wanted to influence discussions between Peskin and the mayor’s office over any potential reforms.</p>

“They have every legal right to do what they are doing,” Peskin said. “But given that they are under deep, hot running water, you would think that they would stop taking the political route and come in through the front door. But instead they chose to go down the same old path they have gone down for many years. And it’s mind-boggling.”

<p>“They have every legal right to do what they are doing,” Peskin said. “But given that they are under deep, hot running water, you would think that they would stop taking the political route and come in through the front door. But instead they chose to go down the same old path they have gone down for many years. And it’s mind-boggling.”</p>

core/html

The nearly half-million dollars Recology dropped on influence-peddling is part of a longer pattern of spending by the company. The politically powerful firm, which built its monopoly on garbage collection in San Francisco over the last century, has protected its position by deploying lobbyists to maintain relationships at City Hall and funding campaigns to crush opponents. In 2012, Recology defeated an anti-monopoly ballot measure by dropping $1.7 million, which was 55 times more money than the initiative&#8217;s backers spent.

<p>The nearly half-million dollars Recology dropped on influence-peddling is part of a longer pattern of spending by the company. The politically powerful firm, which built its monopoly on garbage collection in San Francisco over the last century, has protected its position by deploying lobbyists to maintain relationships at City Hall and funding campaigns to crush opponents. In 2012, Recology defeated an anti-monopoly ballot measure by dropping $1.7 million, which was 55 times more money than the initiative's backers spent.</p>

<p>The nearly half-million dollars Recology dropped on influence-peddling is part of a longer pattern of spending by the company. The politically powerful firm, which built its monopoly on garbage collection in San Francisco over the last century, has protected its position by deploying lobbyists to maintain relationships at City Hall and funding campaigns to crush opponents. In 2012, Recology defeated an anti-monopoly ballot measure by dropping $1.7 million, which was 55 times more money than the initiative&#8217;s backers spent.</p>

The company has also been a go-to source for politicians looking to boost their favorite causes and events.

<p>The company has also been a go-to source for politicians looking to boost their favorite causes and events.</p>

<strong>&#8216;Legal Bribery&#8217;</strong>


<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-legal-bribery"><strong>&#8216;Legal Bribery&#8217;</strong></h2>


core/heading

<h2 id="h-legal-bribery"><strong>'Legal Bribery'</strong></h2>

<h2 id="h-legal-bribery"><strong>&#8216;Legal Bribery&#8217;</strong></h2>

Many officials have spoken out against Recology over the last year. But aside from a brief public statement last spring in which the mayor called the case against Recology &#8220;appalling,&#8221;  Breed has remained silent.

<p>Many officials have spoken out against Recology over the last year. But aside from a brief public statement last spring in which the mayor called the case against Recology "appalling,"  Breed has remained silent.</p>

<p>Many officials have spoken out against Recology over the last year. But aside from a brief public statement last spring in which the mayor called the case against Recology &#8220;appalling,&#8221;  Breed has remained silent.</p>

A review of ethics filings shows the trash company regularly made large payments on her behalf.

<p>A review of ethics filings shows the trash company regularly made large payments on her behalf.</p>

The so-called behested payments are donations that officials can solicit from individuals and companies to fund charitable causes or for governmental purposes. They’re often directed to nonprofits and can be used for noble causes, like Covid relief. But behested payments are also regularly criticized as being a legal method for donors to curry favor with officials at the local and state level.

<p>The so-called behested payments are donations that officials can solicit from individuals and companies to fund charitable causes or for governmental purposes. They’re often directed to nonprofits and can be used for noble causes, like Covid relief. But behested payments are also regularly criticized as being a legal method for donors to curry favor with officials at the local and state level.</p>

“It’s legal bribery,” said Larry Bush, a member of San Francisco’s Ethics Commission. “A payment made at the request of a city official, it’s not a payment made because of a relationship between the donor and the recipient, but because there is a city official who is in between.”

<p>“It’s legal bribery,” said Larry Bush, a member of San Francisco’s Ethics Commission. “A payment made at the request of a city official, it’s not a payment made because of a relationship between the donor and the recipient, but because there is a city official who is in between.”</p>

During her first two years in office, records show, Recology made $51,000 worth of payments on behalf of the mayor, beginning with a $10,000 check for her 2018 mayoral inauguration. The firm was among 39 different contributors who gave the $10,000 maximum payment for the event. The money rolled in with help from Breed’s mentor and the chair of her inaugural committee, former Mayor Willie Brown, who <a href="https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Not-everyone-gets-to-help-pay-for-new-SF-Mayor-13064648.php">called on donors</a> to contribute $500,000 total for the bash.

<p>During her first two years in office, records show, Recology made $51,000 worth of payments on behalf of the mayor, beginning with a $10,000 check for her 2018 mayoral inauguration. The firm was among 39 different contributors who gave the $10,000 maximum payment for the event. The money rolled in with help from Breed’s mentor and the chair of her inaugural committee, former Mayor Willie Brown, who <a href="https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Not-everyone-gets-to-help-pay-for-new-SF-Mayor-13064648.php">called on donors</a> to contribute $500,000 total for the bash.</p>

Recology also made donations on behalf of Breed for backpack and turkey giveaways, as well as a Black History Month ceremony in 2019. The last time the firm made a contribution on Breed’s behalf was a $5,000 check for her second inauguration ceremony in January 2020. Records show that payment came in on Feb. 20—a week after the City Attorney’s Office publicly subpoenaed Recology in connection with the Nuru scandal.

<p>Recology also made donations on behalf of Breed for backpack and turkey giveaways, as well as a Black History Month ceremony in 2019. The last time the firm made a contribution on Breed’s behalf was a $5,000 check for her second inauguration ceremony in January 2020. Records show that payment came in on Feb. 20—a week after the City Attorney’s Office publicly subpoenaed Recology in connection with the Nuru scandal.</p>

Nuru, who solicited payments from Recology for Public Works parties and admitted to using his official influence to benefit the firm’s business, <a href="https://sfstandard.com/city-hall/mohammed-nuru-key-figure-in-sf-corruption-scandal-formally-pleads-guilty/">pleaded guilty to fraud</a> in federal court last month. Breed has not been accused of any crimes. She was, however, fined after admitting to accepting about $5,600 in car repairs from Nuru, and she had close relationships with many of the figures charged by the U.S. Attorney&#8217;s Office.

<p>Nuru, who solicited payments from Recology for Public Works parties and admitted to using his official influence to benefit the firm’s business, <a href="https://sfstandard.com/city-hall/mohammed-nuru-key-figure-in-sf-corruption-scandal-formally-pleads-guilty/">pleaded guilty to fraud</a> in federal court last month. Breed has not been accused of any crimes. She was, however, fined after admitting to accepting about $5,600 in car repairs from Nuru, and she had close relationships with many of the figures charged by the U.S. Attorney's Office.</p>

<p>Nuru, who solicited payments from Recology for Public Works parties and admitted to using his official influence to benefit the firm’s business, <a href="https://sfstandard.com/city-hall/mohammed-nuru-key-figure-in-sf-corruption-scandal-formally-pleads-guilty/">pleaded guilty to fraud</a> in federal court last month. Breed has not been accused of any crimes. She was, however, fined after admitting to accepting about $5,600 in car repairs from Nuru, and she had close relationships with many of the figures charged by the U.S. Attorney&#8217;s Office.</p>

core/embed

<figure class="wp-block-embed is-type-wp-embed is-provider-datawrapper wp-block-embed-datawrapper"><div class="wp-block-embed__wrapper">
https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/oZjgR/2/
</div></figure>

Jeff Cretan, a spokesperson for Breed, said in an email that any behested payments Recology made on behalf of the mayor have not influenced her decisions. Cretan also noted that the payment request for Breed’s 2020 inauguration “occurred prior to the City Attorney’s announcement” that Recology was being subpoenaed.

<p>Jeff Cretan, a spokesperson for Breed, said in an email that any behested payments Recology made on behalf of the mayor have not influenced her decisions. Cretan also noted that the payment request for Breed’s 2020 inauguration “occurred prior to the City Attorney’s announcement” that Recology was being subpoenaed.</p>

The Standard could not find any record of Breed speaking publicly about the trash company since last March, when she issued a six-sentence <a href="https://sfmayor.org/article/statement-mayor-london-breed-city-attorneys-settlement-recology">statement</a> about the $95 million settlement and never mentioned Recology by name. Cretan said the mayor has been concerned with fixing the rate-setting process and pointed to the reform measure she is bringing to voters this summer in collaboration with Supervisor Peskin.

<p>The Standard could not find any record of Breed speaking publicly about the trash company since last March, when she issued a six-sentence <a href="https://sfmayor.org/article/statement-mayor-london-breed-city-attorneys-settlement-recology">statement</a> about the $95 million settlement and never mentioned Recology by name. Cretan said the mayor has been concerned with fixing the rate-setting process and pointed to the reform measure she is bringing to voters this summer in collaboration with Supervisor Peskin.</p>

“The Mayor has been focused on reforming our waste management ordinance to protect ratepayers and better serve San Francisco,” Cretan said. “These reforms are the result of investigations by the City Attorney and Controller’s Office, which the Mayor has called for and supported every step of the way, and she has strongly supported efforts to hold Recology accountable for their actions.”

<p>“The Mayor has been focused on reforming our waste management ordinance to protect ratepayers and better serve San Francisco,” Cretan said. “These reforms are the result of investigations by the City Attorney and Controller’s Office, which the Mayor has called for and supported every step of the way, and she has strongly supported efforts to hold Recology accountable for their actions.”</p>

<p>Recology spokesperson Robert Reed declined to answer questions by email, but he issued a statement noting that “Recology has worked tirelessly and diligently to uphold its responsibilities” outlined in the $95 million settlement.</p>

<p>Recology is now barred from making behested payments to city officials until June 2025 as a provision of the settlement, which also prohibits the firm from giving them gifts. </p>


<h2 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>Talking Trash</strong></h2>


<p>Recology’s monopoly on garbage in San Francisco dates back to an ordinance passed in 1932. The company used its foothold in the city to build a trash-hauling empire across the West Coast, with operations in Washington and Oregon. In order to protect its position in San Francisco, Recology deploys the powerful lobbying firm Noyola Piccini Group.</p>

<p>David Noyola is one of the city’s highest paid lobbyists. A former aide to Supervisor Aaron Peskin, one City Hall insider referred to Noyola as the “Aaron whisperer.” He has a roster of high-paying clients including Uber and Airbnb, and he works in tandem with longtime lobbyist Jacqueline Piccini.</p>

<p>Records show Recology’s monthly payments to Noyola tripled in December 2020 from $5,000 a month to $15,000. This came shortly after federal prosecutors charged former Recology executive Paul Giusti with fraud and money laundering.</p>

<p>Three months later, in March 2021, Piccini began reaching out to officials about Recology’s over-billing. Supervisor Ronen was among the four officials Piccini contacted, and Ronen recalled the interaction as a brief, informational phone call. By May, Recology’s lobbying payments surged to $50,000 a month.</p>

<p>“(Recology) wanted to participate in the task force, and I said, ‘No, you cannot,’” Peskin said.</p>

<p>In September, Piccini reached out to several supervisors and other city officials about a deferred prosecution agreement that three local Recology companies had reached with the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Charged with fraud, the companies agreed to admit wrongdoing and pay <a href="https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/press-release/file/1431571/download">$36 million in criminal penalties</a> as part of a deal that allowed the firms to avoid a conviction.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-embed is-type-wp-embed is-provider-datawrapper wp-block-embed-datawrapper"><div class="wp-block-embed__wrapper">
https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/EG4t8/5/
</div></figure>

<p>Supervisor Rafael Mandelman was one official Piccini reported contacting, but he told The Standard he had no recollection of their interaction. Other supervisors, including Board President Shamann Walton, also had a hard time remembering details beyond informational phone calls from Recology lobbyists.</p>

<p>Mandelman called Recology’s political spending “unseemly” but didn’t take issue with the lobbying. He said it makes sense for the firm, given what’s at stake.</p>

<p>“They are a corporation trying to look after their interests,” Mandelman said. “They are clearly under intense scrutiny and at risk of losing their monopoly.”</p>

core/column

<div class="wp-block-column" style="flex-basis:50%"><p>Recology spokesperson Robert Reed declined to answer questions by email, but he issued a statement noting that “Recology has worked tirelessly and diligently to uphold its responsibilities” outlined in the $95 million settlement.</p><p>Recology is now barred from making behested payments to city officials until June 2025 as a provision of the settlement, which also prohibits the firm from giving them gifts. </p><h2><strong>Talking Trash</strong></h2><p>Recology’s monopoly on garbage in San Francisco dates back to an ordinance passed in 1932. The company used its foothold in the city to build a trash-hauling empire across the West Coast, with operations in Washington and Oregon. In order to protect its position in San Francisco, Recology deploys the powerful lobbying firm Noyola Piccini Group.</p><p>David Noyola is one of the city’s highest paid lobbyists. A former aide to Supervisor Aaron Peskin, one City Hall insider referred to Noyola as the “Aaron whisperer.” He has a roster of high-paying clients including Uber and Airbnb, and he works in tandem with longtime lobbyist Jacqueline Piccini.</p><p>Records show Recology’s monthly payments to Noyola tripled in December 2020 from $5,000 a month to $15,000. This came shortly after federal prosecutors charged former Recology executive Paul Giusti with fraud and money laundering.</p><iframe title="Recology's Monthly Lobbying Expenditures" aria-label="Column Chart" id="datawrapper-chart-a2lh6" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/a2lh6/1/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="width: 0; min-width: 100% !important; border: none;" height="420"></iframe><script type="text/javascript">!function(){"use strict";window.addEventListener("message",(function(e){if(void 0!==e.data["datawrapper-height"]){var t=document.querySelectorAll("iframe");for(var a in e.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var r=0;r<t.length;r++){if(t[r].contentWindow===e.source)t[r].style.height=e.data["datawrapper-height"][a]+"px"}}}))}();
</script><p>Three months later, in March 2021, Piccini began reaching out to officials about Recology’s over-billing. Supervisor Ronen was among the four officials Piccini contacted, and Ronen recalled the interaction as a brief, informational phone call. By May, Recology’s lobbying payments surged to $50,000 a month.</p><p>“(Recology) wanted to participate in the task force, and I said, ‘No, you cannot,’” Peskin said.</p><p>And so the lobbying continued.</p><p>In September, Piccini reached out to several supervisors and other city officials about a deferred prosecution agreement that three local Recology companies had reached with the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Charged with fraud, the companies agreed to admit wrongdoing and pay <a href="https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/press-release/file/1431571/download">$36 million in criminal penalties</a> as part of a deal that allowed the firms to avoid a conviction.</p><figure class="wp-block-embed is-type-wp-embed is-provider-datawrapper wp-block-embed-datawrapper"><div class="wp-block-embed__wrapper">
https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/EG4t8/5/
</div></figure><p>Supervisor Rafael Mandelman was one official Piccini reported contacting, but he told The Standard he had no recollection of their interaction. Other supervisors, including Board President Shamann Walton, also had a hard time remembering details beyond informational phone calls from Recology lobbyists.</p><p>Mandelman called Recology’s political spending “unseemly” but didn’t take issue with the lobbying. He said it makes sense for the firm, given what’s at stake.</p><p>“They are a corporation trying to look after their interests,” Mandelman said. “They are clearly under intense scrutiny and at risk of losing their monopoly.”</p></div>


<h2 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>‘Huge Mistake’</strong></h2>


<h2><strong>‘Huge Mistake’</strong></h2>

<p>In early December, the relationship between Recology and City Hall began to disintegrate.</p>

<p>Supervisor Peskin and Andres Power, Breed’s policy advisor, met with Recology CEO Sal Coniglio to discuss a ballot measure the city's Refuse Working Group helped draft. The document proposed amending the 1932 ordinance to reform the process for setting garbage rates, rather than creating a municipal garbage collector or allowing other companies to bid to provide service.</p>

<p>Supervisor Peskin and Andres Power, Breed’s policy advisor, met with Recology CEO Sal Coniglio to discuss a ballot measure the city&#8217;s Refuse Working Group helped draft. The document proposed amending the 1932 ordinance to reform the process for setting garbage rates, rather than creating a municipal garbage collector or allowing other companies to bid to provide service.</p>

<p>The reforms included making San Francisco’s city controller the key figure overseeing trash-hauling prices instead of the Public Works director—a position previously held by Nuru. The reforms would also add a ratepayer advocate to the board that oversees proposed increases. Most significantly, the measure would give City Hall the power to amend the ordinance in the future should Recology find itself in trouble again.</p>

<p>The trash company and its CEO had concerns.</p>

<p>The 1932 ordinance is a holy grail of sorts for Recology, as it enshrines the company’s monopoly. The ordinance split San Francisco into 97 different garbage routes and created permits for each one. Recology acquired these permits over the years through a series of mergers and acquisitions, making the firm the only licensed refuse provider in the city.</p>

<p>If City Hall had the power to change the ordinance without returning to voters, Recology’s monopoly might come under threat should officials decide to let other firms bid on permits.</p>

<p>Peskin left the Dec. 9 meeting with Coniglio expecting to resume negotiations in the New Year, but on Dec. 20—while on vacation in Oaxaca, Mexico—he woke up to an early morning voicemail from Recology’s CEO.</p>

<p>Coniglio reached out to tell Peskin that Recology would instead submit its own ballot measure—one that included some of the reforms but would not allow City Hall to make further changes to the ordinance without voter approval. The CEO shared the watered-down proposal with Peskin in an email later that day.</p>

<p>“In almost every other way it is identical to what has been proposed,” Coniglio wrote.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Peskin took the move as an act of bad faith. “I then called him and let him have it,” he said.</p>

<p>But Recology—which did not disclose this contact with Peskin as required <a href="https://41k4p01v6nzq13r4y42jb9xv-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Contacts-Disclosure-report-2021-12-amended-2022-01-28.docx.pdf">until contacted by The Standard</a>—still moved forward with its own plan.</p>

<p>On Jan. 6, the firm spent $157,000 to begin printing and circulating its petition,&nbsp; according to campaign finance records. Within five days, Recology had already dropped another $70,000 on consulting and polling.</p>

<p>An infuriated Peskin rallied support from the mayor’s office and his supervisor colleagues to place the original reform measure on the June ballot. For additional leverage, Peskin got four supervisors to express support for a nuclear option—a potential third ballot measure that would allow other companies to apply for Recology’s refuse permits.</p>

<p>On Jan. 20, less than a week later, Recology pulled the plug on its initiative and Peskin said he would scrap the nuclear option.</p>

<p>“As a sign of good faith and our desire to reach consensus, we have pulled our ballot measure and are focusing on discussions with the City,” Recology’s spokesperson said in a Jan. 21 statement.</p>

<p>John Bouchard, the secretary-treasurer for Teamsters Local 350, which represents Recology’s drivers and other refuse workers, said the company’s ballot initiative “was a huge mistake.”&nbsp;</p>

<p>He added that the union would prefer to see the money Recology spent on lobbying go back toward community projects and supporting the company’s 1,000-plus local workers.</p>

<p>“I think this is indicative of Recology not doing a good job of reading the room,” he said.</p>

<div class="wp-block-column" style="flex-basis:40%"><h2><strong>‘Huge Mistake’</strong></h2><p>In early December, the relationship between Recology and City Hall began to disintegrate.</p><p>Supervisor Peskin and Andres Power, Breed’s policy advisor, met with Recology CEO Sal Coniglio to discuss a ballot measure the city&#8217;s Refuse Working Group helped draft. The document proposed amending the 1932 ordinance to reform the process for setting garbage rates, rather than creating a municipal garbage collector or allowing other companies to bid to provide service.</p><p>The reforms included making San Francisco’s city controller the key figure overseeing trash-hauling prices instead of the Public Works director—a position previously held by Nuru. The reforms would also add a ratepayer advocate to the board that oversees proposed increases. Most significantly, the measure would give City Hall the power to amend the ordinance in the future should Recology find itself in trouble again.</p><p>The trash company and its CEO had concerns.</p><p>The 1932 ordinance is a holy grail of sorts for Recology, as it enshrines the company’s monopoly. The ordinance split San Francisco into 97 different garbage routes and created permits for each one. Recology acquired these permits over the years through a series of mergers and acquisitions, making the firm the only licensed refuse provider in the city.</p><p>If City Hall had the power to change the ordinance without returning to voters, Recology’s monopoly might come under threat should officials decide to let other firms bid on permits.</p><p>Peskin left the Dec. 9 meeting with Coniglio expecting to resume negotiations in the New Year, but on Dec. 20—while on vacation in Oaxaca, Mexico—he woke up to an early morning voicemail from Recology’s CEO.</p><p>Coniglio reached out to tell Peskin that Recology would instead submit its own ballot measure—one that included some of the reforms but would not allow City Hall to make further changes to the ordinance without voter approval. The CEO shared the watered-down proposal with Peskin in an email later that day.</p><p>“In almost every other way it is identical to what has been proposed,” Coniglio wrote.&nbsp;</p><p>Peskin took the move as an act of bad faith. “I then called him and let him have it,” he said.</p><p>But Recology—which did not disclose this contact with Peskin as required <a href="https://41k4p01v6nzq13r4y42jb9xv-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Contacts-Disclosure-report-2021-12-amended-2022-01-28.docx.pdf">until contacted by The Standard</a>—still moved forward with its own plan.</p><p>On Jan. 6, the firm spent $157,000 to begin printing and circulating its petition,&nbsp; according to campaign finance records. Within five days, Recology had already dropped another $70,000 on consulting and polling.</p><p>An infuriated Peskin rallied support from the mayor’s office and his supervisor colleagues to place the original reform measure on the June ballot. For additional leverage, Peskin got four supervisors to express support for a nuclear option—a potential third ballot measure that would allow other companies to apply for Recology’s refuse permits.</p><p>On Jan. 20, less than a week later, Recology pulled the plug on its initiative and Peskin said he would scrap the nuclear option.</p><p>“As a sign of good faith and our desire to reach consensus, we have pulled our ballot measure and are focusing on discussions with the City,” Recology’s spokesperson said in a Jan. 21 statement.</p><p>John Bouchard, the secretary-treasurer for Teamsters Local 350, which represents Recology’s drivers and other refuse workers, said the company’s ballot initiative “was a huge mistake.”&nbsp;</p><p>He added that the union would prefer to see the money Recology spent on lobbying go back toward community projects and supporting the company’s 1,000-plus local workers.</p><p>“I think this is indicative of Recology not doing a good job of reading the room,” he said.</p></div>

core/columns

<div class="wp-block-columns"><div class="wp-block-column" style="flex-basis:50%"><p>Recology spokesperson Robert Reed declined to answer questions by email, but he issued a statement noting that “Recology has worked tirelessly and diligently to uphold its responsibilities” outlined in the $95 million settlement.</p><p>Recology is now barred from making behested payments to city officials until June 2025 as a provision of the settlement, which also prohibits the firm from giving them gifts. </p><h2><strong>Talking Trash</strong></h2><p>Recology’s monopoly on garbage in San Francisco dates back to an ordinance passed in 1932. The company used its foothold in the city to build a trash-hauling empire across the West Coast, with operations in Washington and Oregon. In order to protect its position in San Francisco, Recology deploys the powerful lobbying firm Noyola Piccini Group.</p><p>David Noyola is one of the city’s highest paid lobbyists. A former aide to Supervisor Aaron Peskin, one City Hall insider referred to Noyola as the “Aaron whisperer.” He has a roster of high-paying clients including Uber and Airbnb, and he works in tandem with longtime lobbyist Jacqueline Piccini.</p><p>Records show Recology’s monthly payments to Noyola tripled in December 2020 from $5,000 a month to $15,000. This came shortly after federal prosecutors charged former Recology executive Paul Giusti with fraud and money laundering.</p><iframe title="Recology's Monthly Lobbying Expenditures" aria-label="Column Chart" id="datawrapper-chart-a2lh6" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/a2lh6/1/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="width: 0; min-width: 100% !important; border: none;" height="420"></iframe><script type="text/javascript">!function(){"use strict";window.addEventListener("message",(function(e){if(void 0!==e.data["datawrapper-height"]){var t=document.querySelectorAll("iframe");for(var a in e.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var r=0;r<t.length;r++){if(t[r].contentWindow===e.source)t[r].style.height=e.data["datawrapper-height"][a]+"px"}}}))}();
</script><p>Three months later, in March 2021, Piccini began reaching out to officials about Recology’s over-billing. Supervisor Ronen was among the four officials Piccini contacted, and Ronen recalled the interaction as a brief, informational phone call. By May, Recology’s lobbying payments surged to $50,000 a month.</p><p>“(Recology) wanted to participate in the task force, and I said, ‘No, you cannot,’” Peskin said.</p><p>And so the lobbying continued.</p><p>In September, Piccini reached out to several supervisors and other city officials about a deferred prosecution agreement that three local Recology companies had reached with the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Charged with fraud, the companies agreed to admit wrongdoing and pay <a href="https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/press-release/file/1431571/download">$36 million in criminal penalties</a> as part of a deal that allowed the firms to avoid a conviction.</p><figure class="wp-block-embed is-type-wp-embed is-provider-datawrapper wp-block-embed-datawrapper"><div class="wp-block-embed__wrapper">
https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/EG4t8/5/
</div></figure><p>Supervisor Rafael Mandelman was one official Piccini reported contacting, but he told The Standard he had no recollection of their interaction. Other supervisors, including Board President Shamann Walton, also had a hard time remembering details beyond informational phone calls from Recology lobbyists.</p><p>Mandelman called Recology’s political spending “unseemly” but didn’t take issue with the lobbying. He said it makes sense for the firm, given what’s at stake.</p><p>“They are a corporation trying to look after their interests,” Mandelman said. “They are clearly under intense scrutiny and at risk of losing their monopoly.”</p></div><div class="wp-block-column" style="flex-basis:40%"><h2><strong>‘Huge Mistake’</strong></h2><p>In early December, the relationship between Recology and City Hall began to disintegrate.</p><p>Supervisor Peskin and Andres Power, Breed’s policy advisor, met with Recology CEO Sal Coniglio to discuss a ballot measure the city's Refuse Working Group helped draft. The document proposed amending the 1932 ordinance to reform the process for setting garbage rates, rather than creating a municipal garbage collector or allowing other companies to bid to provide service.</p><p>The reforms included making San Francisco’s city controller the key figure overseeing trash-hauling prices instead of the Public Works director—a position previously held by Nuru. The reforms would also add a ratepayer advocate to the board that oversees proposed increases. Most significantly, the measure would give City Hall the power to amend the ordinance in the future should Recology find itself in trouble again.</p><p>The trash company and its CEO had concerns.</p><p>The 1932 ordinance is a holy grail of sorts for Recology, as it enshrines the company’s monopoly. The ordinance split San Francisco into 97 different garbage routes and created permits for each one. Recology acquired these permits over the years through a series of mergers and acquisitions, making the firm the only licensed refuse provider in the city.</p><p>If City Hall had the power to change the ordinance without returning to voters, Recology’s monopoly might come under threat should officials decide to let other firms bid on permits.</p><p>Peskin left the Dec. 9 meeting with Coniglio expecting to resume negotiations in the New Year, but on Dec. 20—while on vacation in Oaxaca, Mexico—he woke up to an early morning voicemail from Recology’s CEO.</p><p>Coniglio reached out to tell Peskin that Recology would instead submit its own ballot measure—one that included some of the reforms but would not allow City Hall to make further changes to the ordinance without voter approval. The CEO shared the watered-down proposal with Peskin in an email later that day.</p><p>“In almost every other way it is identical to what has been proposed,” Coniglio wrote.&nbsp;</p><p>Peskin took the move as an act of bad faith. “I then called him and let him have it,” he said.</p><p>But Recology—which did not disclose this contact with Peskin as required <a href="https://41k4p01v6nzq13r4y42jb9xv-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Contacts-Disclosure-report-2021-12-amended-2022-01-28.docx.pdf">until contacted by The Standard</a>—still moved forward with its own plan.</p><p>On Jan. 6, the firm spent $157,000 to begin printing and circulating its petition,&nbsp; according to campaign finance records. Within five days, Recology had already dropped another $70,000 on consulting and polling.</p><p>An infuriated Peskin rallied support from the mayor’s office and his supervisor colleagues to place the original reform measure on the June ballot. For additional leverage, Peskin got four supervisors to express support for a nuclear option—a potential third ballot measure that would allow other companies to apply for Recology’s refuse permits.</p><p>On Jan. 20, less than a week later, Recology pulled the plug on its initiative and Peskin said he would scrap the nuclear option.</p><p>“As a sign of good faith and our desire to reach consensus, we have pulled our ballot measure and are focusing on discussions with the City,” Recology’s spokesperson said in a Jan. 21 statement.</p><p>John Bouchard, the secretary-treasurer for Teamsters Local 350, which represents Recology’s drivers and other refuse workers, said the company’s ballot initiative “was a huge mistake.”&nbsp;</p><p>He added that the union would prefer to see the money Recology spent on lobbying go back toward community projects and supporting the company’s 1,000-plus local workers.</p><p>“I think this is indicative of Recology not doing a good job of reading the room,” he said.</p></div></div>


<h2 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>Voters Up</strong></h2>


In four months, San Francisco voters will be asked to weigh in on the reform measure to ensure Recology never overcharges ratepayers again. At the same time, the city Controller’s Office has launched <a href="https://sfstandard.com/city-hall/sf-investigates-recology-for-more-overbilling-after-95-million-payout-tied-to-corruption-scandal/">another investigation</a> into whether customers are currently being overcharged by Recology.

<p>In four months, San Francisco voters will be asked to weigh in on the reform measure to ensure Recology never overcharges ratepayers again. At the same time, the city Controller’s Office has launched <a href="https://sfstandard.com/city-hall/sf-investigates-recology-for-more-overbilling-after-95-million-payout-tied-to-corruption-scandal/">another investigation</a> into whether customers are currently being overcharged by Recology.</p>

In an unexpected twist, all sides seem to be coming out of a chaotic year mostly getting what they wanted.

<p>In an unexpected twist, all sides seem to be coming out of a chaotic year mostly getting what they wanted.</p>

Recology agreed to pay a $95 million settlement to ratepayers and $36 million in criminal fines. It spent nearly half a million dollars on lobbying and dropped almost a quarter-million on a short-lived ballot measure campaign. But it still has its monopoly.

<p>Recology agreed to pay a $95 million settlement to ratepayers and $36 million in criminal fines. It spent nearly half a million dollars on lobbying and dropped almost a quarter-million on a short-lived ballot measure campaign. But it still has its monopoly.</p>

Supervisor Peskin played the role of reformer and took Recology to task in what became a deeply personal power struggle.

<p>Supervisor Peskin played the role of reformer and took Recology to task in what became a deeply personal power struggle.</p>

And Mayor Breed, having aligned herself with Peskin, continued to distance herself from a corruption scandal that netted some of her closest allies at City Hall.

<p>And Mayor Breed, having aligned herself with Peskin, continued to distance herself from a corruption scandal that netted some of her closest allies at City Hall.</p>

The only group that has yet to have its voice heard in the process are San Francisco ratepayers, who still have just one garbage choice.

<p>The only group that has yet to have its voice heard in the process are San Francisco ratepayers, who still have just one garbage choice.</p>

Money in politics: Recology spent big on lobbying to beat back threat to garbage monopoly

The Standard Staff

<strong>12:02 a.m. | Last Update on Election Totals Is Lackluster</strong>


<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>12:02 a.m. | Last Update on Election Totals Is Lackluster</strong></h3>


<h3><strong>12:02 a.m. | Last Update on Election Totals Is Lackluster</strong></h3>

Officials with the Department of Elections were expected to release one last round of vote totals around 11:45 p.m. Tuesday, and when the results went live, the big reveal turned out to be just 204 more votes. An update on ballots received will occur at 9 a.m. Wednesday, but new vote totals won&#8217;t be released until 4 p.m. Thursday.

<p>Officials with the Department of Elections were expected to release one last round of vote totals around 11:45 p.m. Tuesday, and when the results went live, the big reveal turned out to be just 204 more votes. An update on ballots received will occur at 9 a.m. Wednesday, but new vote totals won't be released until 4 p.m. Thursday.</p>

<p>Officials with the Department of Elections were expected to release one last round of vote totals around 11:45 p.m. Tuesday, and when the results went live, the big reveal turned out to be just 204 more votes. An update on ballots received will occur at 9 a.m. Wednesday, but new vote totals won&#8217;t be released until 4 p.m. Thursday.</p>

Thanks for following along as we tracked the fourth and final election in San Francisco this year. Please stay tuned for The Standard&#8217;s ongoing election coverage in the days to come.

<p>Thanks for following along as we tracked the fourth and final election in San Francisco this year. Please stay tuned for The Standard's ongoing election coverage in the days to come.</p>

<p>Thanks for following along as we tracked the fourth and final election in San Francisco this year. Please stay tuned for The Standard&#8217;s ongoing election coverage in the days to come.</p>

<strong>11:01 p.m. | No Final Call on District 6 Race Tonight</strong>


<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>11:01 p.m. | No Final Call on District 6 Race Tonight</strong></h3>


<h3><strong>11:01 p.m. | No Final Call on District 6 Race Tonight</strong></h3>

Supervisor Matt Dorsey leads the District 6 race with 8,369 votes counted so far—that’s 530 more votes as of the third tally of the night—but he said he will not be making another speech or declaring victory tonight. Below are vote totals:

<p>Supervisor Matt Dorsey leads the District 6 race with 8,369 votes counted so far—that’s 530 more votes as of the third tally of the night—but he said he will not be making another speech or declaring victory tonight. Below are vote totals:</p>


<ul class="wp-block-list"><li>Matt Dorsey: 55.3% of votes.</li><li>Honey Mahogany: 38.74% of votes.</li><li>Cherelle Jackson: 3.61% of votes.</li><li>Ms. Billie Cooper: 2.35% of votes.</li></ul>


core/list

<ul><li>Matt Dorsey: 55.3% of votes.</li><li>Honey Mahogany: 38.74% of votes.</li><li>Cherelle Jackson: 3.61% of votes.</li><li>Ms. Billie Cooper: 2.35% of votes.</li></ul>

<strong>10:56 p.m. | Prop. I Campaign Admits Defeat</strong>


<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>10:56 p.m. | Prop. I Campaign Admits Defeat</strong></h3>


<h3><strong>10:56 p.m. | Prop. I Campaign Admits Defeat</strong></h3>

Shortly before the third round of votes were counted, the Prop. I campaign issued a statement admitting defeat as early returns show 61% of voters opposing the measure to reopen JFK Drive and the Great Highway to vehicles. &#8220;Tonight’s results ensure that Golden Gate Park’s crown-jewel amenities will remain permanently closed off to people without the physical ability or financial capacity to access the park,&#8221; the statement read. The competing Prop. J, which would keep the status quo on car-free JFK Drive and the Great Highway, looks like it will pass, with 60% of votes currently in support.

<p>Shortly before the third round of votes were counted, the Prop. I campaign issued a statement admitting defeat as early returns show 61% of voters opposing the measure to reopen JFK Drive and the Great Highway to vehicles. "Tonight’s results ensure that Golden Gate Park’s crown-jewel amenities will remain permanently closed off to people without the physical ability or financial capacity to access the park," the statement read. The competing Prop. J, which would keep the status quo on car-free JFK Drive and the Great Highway, looks like it will pass, with 60% of votes currently in support.</p>

<p>Shortly before the third round of votes were counted, the Prop. I campaign issued a statement admitting defeat as early returns show 61% of voters opposing the measure to reopen JFK Drive and the Great Highway to vehicles. &#8220;Tonight’s results ensure that Golden Gate Park’s crown-jewel amenities will remain permanently closed off to people without the physical ability or financial capacity to access the park,&#8221; the statement read. The competing Prop. J, which would keep the status quo on car-free JFK Drive and the Great Highway, looks like it will pass, with 60% of votes currently in support.</p>

<strong>10:42 p.m. | CCSF Could Have Some New Leadership</strong>


<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>10:42 p.m. | CCSF Could Have Some New Leadership</strong></h3>


<h3><strong>10:42 p.m. | CCSF Could Have Some New Leadership</strong></h3>

<figure class="wp-block-embed is-type-rich is-provider-twitter wp-block-embed-twitter"><div class="wp-block-embed__wrapper">
https://twitter.com/idamoj/status/1590231198525456384?s=20&amp;t=5vaLZYK_BKU8dPRTkKT2mQ
</div></figure>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">At El Rio, 3 CCSF challengers — who ran as a slate — are currently beating the 3 incumbents. One of the challengers, Anita Martinez, hints that labor groups could organize another slate for the next election to challenge the next incumbents <a href="https://t.co/Lb4Cb6ogHn">pic.twitter.com/Lb4Cb6ogHn</a></p>&mdash; Ida Mojadad (@idamoj) <a href="https://twitter.com/idamoj/status/1590231198525456384?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 9, 2022</a></blockquote><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Incumbents for City College of San Francisco are having a rough night, as three challengers—Anita Martinez, Vick Chung and Susan Solomon—are in the lead. They ran as a slate to challenge CCSF Board of Trustee incumbents, and Chung said they were shocked to be ahead from the get go.

<p>Incumbents for City College of San Francisco are having a rough night, as three challengers—Anita Martinez, Vick Chung and Susan Solomon—are in the lead. They ran as a slate to challenge CCSF Board of Trustee incumbents, and Chung said they were shocked to be ahead from the get go.</p>

Chung was a student trustee during the pandemic, which they said was critical in their decision to challenge the incumbents. &#8220;They weren&#8217;t doing enough,” said Chung, shortly before the crowd at El Rio sang them &#8220;Happy Birthday.&#8221;

<p>Chung was a student trustee during the pandemic, which they said was critical in their decision to challenge the incumbents. "They weren't doing enough,” said Chung, shortly before the crowd at El Rio sang them "Happy Birthday."</p>

<p>Chung was a student trustee during the pandemic, which they said was critical in their decision to challenge the incumbents. &#8220;They weren&#8217;t doing enough,” said Chung, shortly before the crowd at El Rio sang them &#8220;Happy Birthday.&#8221;</p>

Susan Solomon also spoke to the importance of running as a slate. &#8220;I never would have run by myself,&#8221; said Solomon, who retired as president of the United Educators of San Francisco in summer 2021. “We need to get to the bottom about how this went down.”

<p>Susan Solomon also spoke to the importance of running as a slate. "I never would have run by myself," said Solomon, who retired as president of the United Educators of San Francisco in summer 2021. “We need to get to the bottom about how this went down.”</p>

<p>Susan Solomon also spoke to the importance of running as a slate. &#8220;I never would have run by myself,&#8221; said Solomon, who retired as president of the United Educators of San Francisco in summer 2021. “We need to get to the bottom about how this went down.”</p>

<strong>10:31 p.m. | SF&#8217;s Transit Boss Feeling Good about Prop. L</strong>


<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>10:31 p.m. | SF&#8217;s Transit Boss Feeling Good about Prop. L</strong></h3>


<h3><strong>10:31 p.m. | SF's Transit Boss Feeling Good about Prop. L</strong></h3>

<h3><strong>10:31 p.m. | SF&#8217;s Transit Boss Feeling Good about Prop. L</strong></h3>

Jeff Tumlin, head of the SFMTA, felt encouraged by Prop. L’s early returns—it had 69% of voters casting &#8220;yes&#8221; ballots as of second returns—but he isn&#8217;t about to throw a hootenanny. &#8220;I&#8217;m cautiously optimistic,&#8221; Tumlin said, adding that Prop. L requires a two-thirds majority to pass and that could be a difficult barrier for the measure. The measure would allow Muni to modernize its fleet among other boosts in funding.

<p>Jeff Tumlin, head of the SFMTA, felt encouraged by Prop. L’s early returns—it had 69% of voters casting "yes" ballots as of second returns—but he isn't about to throw a hootenanny. "I'm cautiously optimistic," Tumlin said, adding that Prop. L requires a two-thirds majority to pass and that could be a difficult barrier for the measure. The measure would allow Muni to modernize its fleet among other boosts in funding.</p>

<p>Jeff Tumlin, head of the SFMTA, felt encouraged by Prop. L’s early returns—it had 69% of voters casting &#8220;yes&#8221; ballots as of second returns—but he isn&#8217;t about to throw a hootenanny. &#8220;I&#8217;m cautiously optimistic,&#8221; Tumlin said, adding that Prop. L requires a two-thirds majority to pass and that could be a difficult barrier for the measure. The measure would allow Muni to modernize its fleet among other boosts in funding.</p>

<strong>10:10 | The Standard Talks Election Results With ABC7</strong>


<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>10:10 | The Standard Talks Election Results With ABC7</strong></h3>


<h3><strong>10:10 | The Standard Talks Election Results With ABC7</strong></h3>

<figure class="wp-block-embed is-type-video is-provider-youtube wp-block-embed-youtube wp-embed-aspect-16-9 wp-has-aspect-ratio"><div class="wp-block-embed__wrapper">
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLF2NEhUPFA
</div></figure>

Josh Koehn, a senior reporter for The Standard, talks with ABC7 about some key early takeaways from the election and what message San Francisco voters are sending to elected officials.

<p>Josh Koehn, a senior reporter for The Standard, talks with ABC7 about some key early takeaways from the election and what message San Francisco voters are sending to elected officials.</p>

<strong>10:04 p.m. | Supervisor Gordon Mar Acknowledges Vote Deficit</strong>


<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>10:04 p.m. | Supervisor Gordon Mar Acknowledges Vote Deficit</strong></h3>


<h3><strong>10:04 p.m. | Supervisor Gordon Mar Acknowledges Vote Deficit</strong></h3>

core/video

At about 10 p.m., Supervisor Gordon Mar addressed reporters on being 350 votes behind challenger Joel Engardio. Mar said he’s not surprised about the early result, and it’s still early, as approximately more than half of the ballots are yet to be counted. He said the early votes “tend to be most conservative.”

<p>At about 10 p.m., Supervisor Gordon Mar addressed reporters on being 350 votes behind challenger Joel Engardio. Mar said he’s not surprised about the early result, and it’s still early, as approximately more than half of the ballots are yet to be counted. He said the early votes “tend to be most conservative.”</p>

<strong>10:01 p.m. | Madame Mayor Drops by DA&#8217;s Election Party</strong>


<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>10:01 p.m. | Madame Mayor Drops by DA&#8217;s Election Party</strong></h3>


<h3><strong>10:01 p.m. | Madame Mayor Drops by DA's Election Party</strong></h3>

<h3><strong>10:01 p.m. | Madame Mayor Drops by DA&#8217;s Election Party</strong></h3>

Mayor London Breed stops by District Attorney Brooke Jenkins’ Election Night party at Harborview Restaurant & Bar on Nov. 8, 2022. | Camille Cohen/The Standard


<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/ElectionNight-Jenkins15.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-91597"/><figcaption>Mayor London Breed stops by District Attorney Brooke Jenkins’ election night party at Harborview Restaurant &amp; Bar on Nov. 8, 2022. | Camille Cohen/The Standard</figcaption></figure>


core/image

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/ElectionNight-Jenkins15.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-91597"/><figcaption>Mayor London Breed stops by District Attorney Brooke Jenkins’ election night party at Harborview Restaurant &amp; Bar on Nov. 8, 2022. | Camille Cohen/The Standard</figcaption></figure>

Mayor London Breed is having herself a night, with many of her preferred candidates and propositions looking strong in the early returns—aside from Proposition D, which is way too close to call. Breed stopped by District Attorney Brooke Jenkins party to share in the good times.

<p>Mayor London Breed is having herself a night, with many of her preferred candidates and propositions looking strong in the early returns—aside from Proposition D, which is way too close to call. Breed stopped by District Attorney Brooke Jenkins party to share in the good times. </p>

Mayor London Breed speaks with Assessor-Recorder Joaquín Torres at District Attorney Brooke Jenkins’ Election Night party at Harborview Restaurant & Bar on Nov. 8, 2022. | Camille Cohen/The Standard


<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/ElectionNight-Jenkins16.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-91594"/><figcaption>Mayor London Breed speaks with Assessor-Recorder Joaquín Torres at District Attorney Brooke Jenkins’ election night party at Harborview Restaurant &amp; Bar on Nov. 8, 2022. | Camille Cohen/The Standard</figcaption></figure>


A dance floor broke out, and Jenkins joined the party in showing off some moves.

<p>A dance floor broke out, and Jenkins joined the party in showing off some moves.</p>

Meanwhile, nervous energy abounded at the Prop. D party after second-round results showed the measure losing by 110 votes. Supporters are taking a “wait-and-see” attitude and don’t expect to know whether the measure to streamline housing will pass until later in the week.

<p>Meanwhile, nervous energy abounded at the Prop. D party after second-round results showed the measure losing by 110 votes. Supporters are taking a “wait-and-see” attitude and don’t expect to know whether the measure to streamline housing will pass until later in the week. </p>

City Attorney David Chiu and District 7 Supervisor Myrna Melgar stopped by to show their support for the ballot proposition and for Matt Dorsey, who looks close to cinching victory.

<p>City Attorney David Chiu and District 7 Supervisor Myrna Melgar stopped by to show their support for the ballot proposition and for Matt Dorsey, who looks close to cinching victory.</p>

<p><em>— Josh Koehn and Sarah Wright</em></p>

<strong>9:54 p.m. | DA Brooke Jenkins Sounds Like She Thinks She Won</strong>


<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><strong>9:54 p.m. | DA Brooke Jenkins Sounds Like She Thinks She Won</strong></h3>


<h3><strong>9:54 p.m. | DA Brooke Jenkins Sounds Like She Thinks She Won</strong></h3>

District Attorney Brooke Jenkins stopped short of declaring victory at her election night party, but she was clearly celebrating. “I feel very thrilled about where these results are at at this point,” Jenkins told the crowd.

<p>District Attorney Brooke Jenkins stopped short of declaring victory at her election night party, but she was clearly celebrating. “I feel very thrilled about where these results are at at this point,” Jenkins told the crowd.</p>

Money in politics: Recology spent big on lobbying to beat back threat to garbage monopoly

Election live blog: DA Jenkins ‘thrilled’ with early results; Dorsey, Engardio lead supervisor races

3 Black-led organizations making real change in San Francisco

City Hall is reopening: What happens to remote public comment?

Here’s how San Francisco’s cultural districts work

Search Results for: shamann walton

Money in politics: Recology spent big on lobbying to beat back threat to garbage monopoly

Election live blog: DA Jenkins ‘thrilled’ with early results; Dorsey, Engardio lead supervisor races

3 Black-led organizations making real change in San Francisco

City Hall is reopening: What happens to remote public comment?

Here’s how San Francisco’s cultural districts work