Advocates Call on City to Protect San Francisco’s Disability and Aging Commissions Report
RE: October 15, 2025, Commission Streamlining Task Force Meeting
San Francisco, CA — Community advocates are urging city leaders to protect the integrity of San Francisco’s disability and aging governance structure amid proposed reforms that could merge or eliminate several long-standing oversight bodies. They warn that consolidating commissions and committees may weaken accountability, reduce community participation, and threaten essential funding for programs that support older adults and people with disabilities.
At the center of the debate is a proposal to streamline city commissions by folding the Disability and Aging Commission into the Human Services Commission, while also restructuring related advisory bodies. Supporters of the current system say such changes would silence diverse community voices and dismantle hard-won representation that ensures policies reflect lived experience.
Call to Maintain Independence
Advocates are calling on city officials to maintain the Disability and Aging Commission as an independent governing body. They argue that the commission was established to focus specifically on the intersecting needs of seniors and people with disabilities, which differ sharply from those addressed by the broader Human Services Commission.
“Combining the two commissions risks losing the visibility and focus that aging and disability issues deserve,” said one local advocate. “An independent commission keeps these priorities front and center.”
Supporters note that the Disability and Aging Commission plays a vital role in shaping city policy on home care, community living, and accessibility. It also oversees programs that help residents age safely and independently in their own homes—goals that align with San Francisco’s voter-approved Dignity Fund.
Preserving Oversight of the Dignity Fund
The Dignity Fund Oversight and Advisory Committee (OAC), established through the city charter, is another focal point of concern. The committee monitors the use of the Dignity Fund, which provides a dedicated funding stream for community-based programs serving older adults and people with disabilities.
Advocates say the committee’s independence and oversight authority must be preserved to ensure transparency and public accountability.
“The OAC exists to make sure every Dignity Fund dollar is spent as voters intended on direct services that enhance dignity, health, and inclusion,” said a coalition statement from community leaders. “Weakening its charter protections would undermine public trust and put vital services at risk.”
The Dignity Fund supports services such as home-delivered meals, case management, transportation assistance, caregiver support, and social engagement programs. According to city data, demand for these services continues to rise as San Francisco’s older adult population grows and the cost-of-living increases.
Marie Jobling and Brenda Billings
Representation Across All Districts
Advocates are also pressing the city to preserve the Disability and Aging Advisory Committee (DAAC), ensuring representation from all 11 Supervisorial districts. The DAAC provides a platform for residents to voice concerns, share local perspectives, and inform city priorities.
“Every neighborhood has different needs,” said a member of a local senior advocacy group. “District representation ensures that the voices of residents in the Bayview, the Sunset, and the Tenderloin are all heard equally.”
The committee has been instrumental in identifying service gaps and advising on funding priorities across communities, particularly in areas where linguistic diversity, cultural barriers, and accessibility challenges intersect.
Updating an Outdated Council—While Keeping Provider Input
While advocates agree that some streamlining is appropriate, they recommend a targeted approach. Specifically, they support eliminating the outdated Long-Term Care Coordinating Council (LTCCC), which has largely completed its original policy objectives.
However, they urge the city to retain the Service Provider Working Group (SPWG), a coalition of community-based organizations that provide direct services to older adults and people with disabilities.
“Frontline providers know what’s working and what’s not,” said one nonprofit director. “Their input is critical for crafting policies that actually serve people rather than just look good on paper.”
The SPWG has historically served as a communication bridge between city departments and the nonprofit sector, identifying emerging needs and offering feedback on program implementation.
Concerns About Reduced Participation
Community leaders caution that merging commissions or reducing advisory roles could unintentionally shrink public participation and overburden volunteers.
“Fewer seats mean fewer voices,” said one advocate. “Instead of silencing participation, the city should be focusing on filling long-standing vacancies and removing barriers that prevent people—especially those with disabilities—from serving.”
Advocates suggest reforms should prioritize accessibility, timely appointments, and transparent recruitment rather than consolidation. Many note that committees have struggled for years with unfilled positions, limiting their ability to achieve a quorum or represent all communities effectively.
Opposition to “Trigger” Clause in Charter Reform
Another major concern is the inclusion of what advocates call a “discriminatory trigger” in proposed Charter language that would block the Dignity Fund’s annual $3 million increase under certain fiscal conditions.
The trigger would suspend the fund’s inflationary growth during budget downturns, even though the cost of providing services continues to rise. Advocates say this mechanism unfairly targets older adults and people with disabilities by treating their funding differently from other protected city allocations.
“The Dignity Fund is not a luxury, it’s a necessity,” said a spokesperson from a coalition of aging and disability organizations. “It provides meals, in-home care, and support that literally keeps people alive and independent. Cutting or freezing those funds during hard times is the opposite of what San Francisco stands for.”
A Broader Fight for Equity
The debate over restructuring commissions and protecting the Dignity Fund comes at a time when San Francisco’s aging and disability populations are growing rapidly. According to the Department of Disability and Aging Services, nearly one in three city residents will be over the age of 60 by 2030.
Advocates argue that now is not the time to weaken oversight or reduce representation. Instead, they see this as an opportunity to modernize the city’s engagement practices, fill vacancies, and strengthen collaboration between policymakers and the communities they serve.
“San Francisco has long been a national leader in disability rights and senior services,” said one policy expert. “These reforms must build on that legacy, not dismantle it.”
Looking Ahead
As city officials continue to review potential Charter amendments and governance reforms, aging and disability advocates say they will remain vigilant. They plan to submit formal recommendations, mobilize public comment, and educate voters about the implications of any proposed changes.
For now, their message is clear: preserve independence, protect oversight, and prioritize participation.
“Efficiency is important,” one advocate concluded, “but not at the cost of equity. These commissions and committees exist for a reason—to ensure that San Francisco remains a city where people can age and live with dignity, no matter their abilities or income.”
