By Maria Verissimo

The three leading candidates for San Francisco’s congressional seat debated at a forum hosted by local media outlets.

The San Francisco Independent Media Coalition (SFIMC) hosted a congressional forum on April 15 at the United Irish Cultural Center. The event brought together the three leading candidates seeking to replace former Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi in California’s 11th Congressional District.

SFIMC is an alliance of neighborhood and community publications that directly serve ethnic communities and local neighborhoods across the City. Some of its participants are: J Jewish News, Wind Newspaper, El Tecolote, Ingleside Light and San Francisco Bay View – in addition to the Richmond Review and Sunset Beacon.

Moderated by Ben Trefny, executive producer of KALW Public Media, candidates had one minute for opening statements, 90 seconds per answer and two minutes for closing remarks. Candidates cycled in alphabetical order, with the option for 60-second follow-up responses at the moderator’s discretion.

The top three candidates contenders for Pelosi’s seat are: Saikat Chakrabarti, a former congressional chief of staff who ran Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s first campaign and helped craft the Green New Deal; San Francisco District 1 Supervisor Connie Chan, who also chairs the Board of Supervisors’ Budget Committee and State Sen. Scott Wiener, who has also been a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors representing District 8.

A late entrant into the race, Marie Hurabiell did not participate.

As part of their opening statements, Chakrabarti highlighted the need for change.

“The problems we face right now are monumental. Authoritarianism, potential World War III – there’s a constant crisis that’s still crushing San Franciscans, and politics as usual is not going to solve this. We have to change the system,” he said. “There are people running across the country going up against the establishment, because this is the culmination of a movement that started with Bernie (Sanders) in 2016. …We have to take on not just Republicans, but corporate money, and we have to change Democratic Party leadership.”

Chan emphasized her role as budget committee chair and the city’s collective response to President Donald Trump-era cuts, citing a hearing on denied cancer treatments and noting her endorsements from teachers, nurses and firefighters.

“Just last week, as your budget committee chair, we held a budget hearing demanding answers from Blue Shield when they deny cancer treatments to our retired firefighters and retirees. When Trump cut our health care, we put $400 million on reserve. When Trump cut our education, we made sure to have affordable child care, fully funded K-12 classrooms and free city college,” Chan said. “And when Trump cuts our food security, we made sure that we support our community.”

Wiener’s opening statement highlighted his legislative record, including work on housing, A.I. safeguards and mental health coverage.

“I have done that my entire time in office, and I am the only candidate who has not just talked about challenging the establishment, but has actually gotten it done, beating some of the most powerful forces around. I helped build and lead a movement to completely change how we approach housing. We’ve gone up against big tech and beaten them on A.I. safety. I’ve challenged health insurance corporations and forced them to cover more mental health. And when establishment Democrats said back away from trans people, I said, ‘hell no.’ I will take that tenacity and that fight and that willingness to break glass to Congress,” Wiener said.

In total, 14 questions were asked from member coalition publications. The topics ranged from housing, healthcare, A.I. regulation, immigration and insider trading.

One of the sharpest exchanges came from a question by Mission Local: “Where is congressional Democratic leadership failing now, and what would you do differently?”

According to a CNN poll from last month, amongst Democrat-identifying voters, 55% don’t think Congressional Democrats have the right priorities, and approval of Democratic Congressional leaders went from +19% in 2018 to -4% this year.

Chakrabarti pointed to the $900 billion defense budget that passed with 115 Democratic votes, when only 3% of Democrats wanted a larger defense budget. He also blamed the leadership for allowing a War Powers Resolution to die without a vote before military action in the Middle East.

“They’re not fighting, and they don’t have a vision for what comes next,” he said. “It’s not enough to say we’re not the party of Trump. We have to have a vision for what we’re going to do.”

Wiener focused on procedural leverage.

“We need to exercise every ounce of leverage and power that we have,” he said. “There should be none left because we used it all.” He criticized Senate Democrats for providing the 60th vote to reopen the government, calling that “not OK.” He also pointed to his own record, including a California law forcing insurance companies to cover mental health, as a model for national policy.

“National paid family leave – it is absolutely unacceptable that in 2026 we still do not have that,” he said.

Chan emphasized process and party unity. “We are not using every tool in our toolbox,” she said, listing discharge motions (to force floor votes), pro forma sessions (to block recess appointments) and oversight hearings. Chan also argued that the Democratic Party should accept a range of strategies across its caucus rather than marginalizing its progressive wing.

“We should allow every spectrum,” she said. “East Coast and West Coast have different approaches, but we all come together to deliver.”

The Frisc asked candidates to describe one federal funding initiative they would pursue for San Francisco. Gazetteer SF asked about Mayor Daniel Lurie’s Family Zoning Plan falling short of state-mandated housing goals.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, a Controller’s Office report found the plan would not come close to producing the 82,000 units state law requires San Francisco to plan for by 2031.

Chakrabarti proposed creating a new federal agency that would lend money to build affordable housing, and if private companies will not build, the government would build it itself. He also called for lifting a federal ban on new public housing construction.

Wiener called for a $1.2 trillion investment over 10 years, paid for by reversing Trump and George Bush‑era tax cuts for wealthy individuals and corporations. The money would build mixed-income social housing and provide cities with $10,000 per home built as an incentive.

Chan emphasized rental subsidies and pointed to Senator Adam Schiff’s “BOOM” Act, which would provide federal grants for housing construction and expand rental assistance. She said San Francisco needs both low-income and middle-income housing, noting that a single adult earning $100,000 a year is still considered low-income in the City.

Asked by the Richmond Review and Sunset Beacon about the future of the Upper Great Highway, a city‑managed roadway that has been closed to cars and turned into a park after a citywide vote, the candidates offered different views.

Chan supported a compromise position. Wiener supported keeping the park created by Prop. K, the Sunset Dunes. Chakrabarti, who voted for Prop K, said he is listening to westside residents about their opinions.

The debate’s questions came from neighborhood and community media, reflecting their mission to local concerns. However, a member of Congress also votes on legislation related to war and the largest military budget in human history. No question was asked about the war with Iran, which was ongoing at the time of the debate.

The defense budget was mentioned, but as part of answers to unrelated questions. Chakrabarti criticized Democratic leaders for allowing a $900 billion defense budget to pass despite low public support, and Chan cited Trump’s defense spending in her argument for taxing billionaires.

Attendees later shared their views on the debate and the questions asked by the SFIMC.

“I thought we definitely got to see a clear view of the candidate’s stances and their differences, and I think we see that in every debate,” Aphrodite Avidon said.

Joel Puliatti said, “There’s a sentiment over the country to have a big change. I think that’s really important. This is a time to seize this moment because it’s not going to come back in a while. So if the pendulum is swinging our way, we’ve got to take advantage of it.”

Andrew Villamor added, “The debate overall went well. I think there was a good flow, it was well moderated. Funny enough the most divisive question was the Great Highway, which isn’t even a federal issue.”

The top-two vote getters in the June 2 election will move on to the general election in November. Primary ballots will be mailed out to San Franciscans this month.