Editor:

In a local election, access matters.

Voters rely on candidate forums to hear directly from the people asking for their vote. These events should be open, community-driven spaces where neighbors can listen, compare ideas and make informed decisions about the future of their district.

But what happens when those spaces aren’t as open as they appear?

On March 18, a District 4 candidate forum was held at Holy Name School and promoted as a public community event. Five candidates are running in this race. Four were invited to participate. I was not.

When we reached out to ask why, organizer Rob Aiavao told us that candidates needed to have raised $30,000 to participate and that my campaign had not yet reached $10,000.

However, all of the five candidates have only filed one campaign finance report so far. Based on that filing, just one candidate met the $30,000 threshold. Four of us – including the three candidates who were allowed to participate – did not. In fact, one participating candidate had raised just $6,151.

If most candidates did not meet the stated requirement, why were some included and others excluded? 

I’ve participated in other forums and have several more scheduled. I’m actively engaging with voters across the district. But this particular forum highlights a broader issue: how money shapes who gets heard in San Francisco politics.

I am currently the only candidate in the race who supports keeping Sunset Dunes a full-time park. Excluding one candidate doesn’t just affect that individual. It affects the voters who deserve to hear the full range of perspectives on issues, not just for District 4, but for the city of San Francisco.

District 4 voters deserve to hear from all legitimate candidates, and not just the ones who have raised the most money. An honest forum is one that lets voters decide for themselves.

Jeremy Greco, candidate for District 4 supervisor.