For seven weeks, I spent my Tuesday nights in a classroom in the Mission taking an independent civics class called "How SF Government Works," taught by Michael Adams.
I originally found out about the class from a random tweet on my feed. The curriculum sounded like something I would benefit from, but the question was whether to spend $650 on an unaccredited course I found on social media. I decided to take a shot on it, and I'm happy to report it was a solid investment.
One of many whiteboard drawings from the class lecture
My Motivation for Taking the Class
I enrolled in this course for a few reasons.
To get more context on SF politics: At the end of March, I attended the CA-11 debate at the Sydney Goldstein Theater and realized I needed to get more educated on local issues. Like most SF residents, I vote and read about Board of Supervisors decisions all the time. However, prior to this class I had never attended a BoS meeting and couldn’t name the various commissions that shape SF’s policies.
Local data journalism: I had been exploring civic datasets on the SF data portal and realized I could use that data much more effectively if I actually understood the government entities producing this data. The Fogline’s early posts were primarily about things like restaurant openings and local events, but we found there is demand for data-driven analysis of local issues like housing and transit.
In-person community: I felt the social experience of an informal, cohort-based class would be a great way to organically meet motivated people over the course of a couple of months.
Some people only take courses from formal institutions, but I’ve found my best learning often happens in informal settings alongside self-motivated people who aren't just there for a piece of paper. After reading through Michael’s Substack and his ideas, I felt he’d be a great instructor.
Class Curriculum and Structure
The class meets in person once a week for seven weeks. It's cohort-based, meaning you learn alongside the same group of people in the same room every week rather than watching videos solo online. Each class lasts two hours.
The curriculum covers the structure and hierarchy of city government. While you are probably familiar with the Mayor and some members of the Board of Supervisors, the class does a deeper dive into the numerous commissions, their departments, who appoints them, and the relationships between them.
You learn to distinguish between different types of law and trace how an ordinance moves through the legislative process. You also dig into legislative tools like Legistar and analyze how measures get on the ballot.
There is significant work outside of class. I spent a few hours each week reading and writing, and completing homework and quizzes. The capstone project requires you to do significant research and publish it on your own Substack or blog, and there is a final exam with a high bar for success.
What Works Well
Mechanics Instead of Ideology
The class doesn't push a political agenda. Michael isn't trying to recruit you into a cause, he just gives you the tools and the map. What you do with them is up to you. This means the class can stay focused and works for a wide range of people. I personally wanted to write more intelligently about the city. Some students were housing/transit advocates while others were looking to pivot careers into city government or civic tech. I enjoyed that the class avoided identity politics and name-calling that is often present in online political discussion. The class focuses purely on the mechanics. Who is in charge of what and how is SF’s government organized? Where do you show up to speak your mind? How do you conduct independent research using SF datasets?
Cohort Learning
Seeing the same faces every week creates a social bond. Reading through dry municipal codes or sitting through a two hour commission hearing with someone you met in class is surprisingly motivating. I met a variety of people of different ages and backgrounds. Our conversations naturally centered on city issues rather than the typical "what do you do?" stuff, which was refreshing.
There were also group activities. For example, we did a legislative roleplay where each student represented a different officeholder to simulate a piece of legislation moving through the process.
Writing Projects and the Capstone
The course involved a significant writing component and Adams encourages students to publish their work on a Substack or blog. For example, one of the first assignments is to research your district supervisor and write about them. After researching my supervisor a bit more, I ended up writing a fairly popular post on Connie Chan’s record that used snapshots from the Internet Archive. I also researched and wrote about what was happening with the patio smoking ban. The knowledge of various primary sources and how to use them made it easy to make an argument for why the ban didn’t make sense.
The class also motivated me to do a deep dive into the history of some of the city’s public transit projects. For my capstone, I wrote about the recent Geary Subway study. While the class is optimistic about one’s ability to impact the city and its policies, I came away a bit pessimistic when researching the Geary Subway, and wrote about how many studies we’ve already funded with nothing to show for it.
“Make Contact with Reality”
Michael frequently uses the phrase, "Make Contact with Reality." A few weeks into the class, we were required to leave our comfort zones and attend both a Board of Supervisors meeting and a commission hearing. I attended several hearings, including multiple SFCTA board meetings, a preservation commission hearing on the Latin Rock House, and a Planning Commission hearing where the Balboa Reservoir Project was discussed.
Historic Preservation Commission hearing, Missions residents speak out about Latin Rock House Landmark status, Photo: FoglineSF
When you show up in real life, you quickly notice how many important decisions get made in rooms that are mostly empty. Often the only people in attendance are retirees with free time and individuals with direct financial stakes in the items on the agenda. The people who live with the consequences of these decisions are usually absent, only to be surprised by the outcomes later.
It is not enough to simply leave an angry comment on Instagram or repost something on your feed. It is important to “make contact with reality.” Learn how the process works in real life and be physically present in the place where you can actually impact the decision.
Class Weaknesses
While I highly recommend the course, there are a few areas for improvement:
Lack of Feedback: Oddly, the instructor didn't ask for any feedback on the course itself. Typically an independent course creator would be interested in how to make the course better. But also, there was no feedback provided on our capstone projects. After spending multiple weeks researching and writing it, I had no idea if it fit with the course objectives or successfully demonstrated what I had learned at all.
Rote Memorization: The course spends a bit too much time on learning a few diagrams (eg. the political map, hierarchy of law) just to draw it on the final exam exactly the same way.
End of the course: I would say the last 2 weeks of the course were a bit weaker than how it starts. One of the last weeks you informally discuss your capstone with your classmates and practice for the final. Then the last week of the class is the final exam, in which there is no talking. You take the test and leave, so after 7 weeks, it’s a bit of an abrupt end.
The Final Exam and the Alumni Network
The last week of the course is the final exam. You need a 90% to “pass” the course. Obviously grades don’t matter much since it is an informal class and we are all working adults. However, there is a reward for passing the course in that you get to be part of the alumni network. This seems like a great social perk for being part of an ongoing in-person community in San Francisco.
Unfortunately, I didn't make a 90% on the exam, so I don’t get to be part of the alumni network despite paying for the course, showing up to every class, and doing all of the assignments. I did, however, meet some great people who I expect I will run into again in the future.
Is it worth it?
Ultimately, I think this is a great class that fills a void. There are many working professionals in San Francisco who spend so much time grinding (this was me in the 2010’s) that they haven’t stopped to learn more about local government. For this group, the time and cost is definitely worth it. If you want to learn more about the mechanics of SF government, “How SF Government Works” is a solid choice. Sure you can read all of this stuff online and attend city meetings on your own, but I find there is value to showing up in person, meeting a group of like minded people, and motivating each other to learn.
Michael’s claim is that you are in the 1% of informed citizens in San Francisco if you complete the course, and I think that statement is probably accurate. Most people arguing about local politics all day probably have no idea how the system functions. So going through the process of engaging with all of this, becoming familiar with the primary sources, and attending the public meetings with other residents probably does make you part of a small club. It gets you from the stage of simply having feelings about the city to being equipped to take action.
If you're interested in future cohorts, I recommend checking out Michael's Substack, Civilization Lab. He has created some great free resources, including the SF Government Graph, for anyone who wants to start learning before committing to the class.