The San Francisco Board of Supervisors held its regular meeting on March 24, 2026, commencing at 10:15 AM. The meeting included a roll call, excusal of Supervisor Fielder, passage of multiple ordinances and resolutions, a lengthy discussion on surveillance technology, a series of commendations for Women's History Month, a debate on the Petrero Yard Modernization Project, and several new business introductions. Key votes included approval of an electronic location tracking device policy (9–1) and adoption of a resolution for the Petrero Yard project with amendments urging funding for affordable housing (10–0).
Supervisor Chan requested a continuance to obtain answers from SFPD regarding use of tracking devices (Star Chase) and automated license plate readers (Flock ALPR) in light of a 2012 Supreme Court ruling. An SFPD representative explained that GPS tracking is a search requiring a warrant unless an exception (e.g., exigent circumstances) applies; Flock captures images in public view where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. The department’s policy includes safeguards, audit logs, and oversight. Supervisor Walton spoke against the technology, citing privacy concerns, disproportionate impact on people of color, and erosion of trust. He argued for a pause. Supervisor Wong spoke in support, emphasizing the tool’s value in reducing dangerous vehicle pursuits and noting the policy’s strict guardrails. The vote was 9–1, with Supervisor Walton casting the only no vote.
Supervisor Chan introduced non‑binding amendments to urge the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD) to identify funding sources for future affordable housing and to urge SFMTA to deliver the originally intended 465 affordable housing units at other sites. The original project had been scaled back from 465 affordable units (part of an entitlement approved in March 2024) to 100 units after a $70 million podium cost increase made the larger housing component infeasible. Judson True (SFMTA) explained the history, noting that the podium would cost about $70 million and that building housing above a bus yard would be extremely expensive (roughly $191,000 per unit in land‑acquisition cost) and unfunded. Supervisor Melgar supported the amendments as they did not delay the project. Supervisor Sherrill expressed concern about urging the city to spend money on something that might reduce overall affordable housing production. Supervisor Mandelman voted no on the amendment. The amendment passed 9–1, and the item as amended passed 10–0.
Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to the March 24th, 2026 regular meeting of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll? Thank you, Mr. President. Supervisor Chan. Chan present, Supervisor Chen. Chen present, Supervisor Dorsey. Dorsey present, Supervisor Fielder, Fielder not present, Supervisor Mahmoud. Mahmoud present, Supervisor Mandelman. Present. Mandelman present, Supervisor Melgar. Present. Melgar present, Supervisor Sauter. Solder present, Supervisor Cheryl. Cheryl present, Supervisor Walton. Walton present, and Supervisor Wong. Wong present. Mr. President, you have a quorum. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The San Francisco Board of Supervisors acknowledges that we are on the unceded ancestral homeland of the Ramitu Shaloni, who are the original inhabitants of the San Francisco Peninsula. As the indigenous stewards of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the Ramatushaloni have never ceded, lost, nor forgotten their responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. As guests, we recognize that we benefit from living and working on their traditional homeland. We wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors, elders, and relatives of the Ramatushalone community and by affirming their sovereign rights as First Peoples. Colleagues, will you join me in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance? Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, but indivisible with liberty and justice for all behalf of this board. They record each of our meetings each of our meetings and make the transcripts available to the public online. Madam Clerk, do you have any communications? Yes, Mr. President. The clerk's office is in receipt of a memo requesting excusal today from today's board meeting from Supervisor Jackie Fielder, number one. And to those of you who have joined us in the public gallery, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors welcomes you to attend this meeting in person in the board's legislative chamber, room 250 on the second floor in City Hall. And when you're not able to be here, you can catch the live stream at WWW.sfgovtv.org or watch the proceeding on SFGOVTV's Channel 26. If you have public comment you'd like to provide in writing, you can send an email to to BOS at sfgov.org or use the postal service if you just address the envelope to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, the number one, Dr. Carlton B. Goodlitt Place, City Hall, Room 244, San Francisco, California 94102. If you need to make a reasonable accommodation for a future meeting under the Americans with Disability Act, or to request language assistance, contact the clerk's office at least two business days in advance by calling 415-554-5184. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Uh Madam Clerk. Can I have a motion to excuse Supervisor Fielder, made by Chen, seconded by Dorsey? Madam Clerk, I think we can take that without objection. Without objection, Supervisor Fielder is excused. And then let's go, Madam Clerk, to unfinished business. Please call item one. Item one, this is an ordinance to amend the police code to require that individuals who notarize or assist people in completing immigration documents. Offer a document prepared by the city that identifies free or low-cost immigration legal services providers and consulates, and to authorize the human rights commission to provide assistance to members of the public who wish to file a complaint with a state licensing or enforcement entity against a notary or immigration consultant who allegedly violated legal requirements applicable to those activities. Can you please call the roll?