In a dramatic turn of events that has sent shockwaves through San Francisco’s political landscape, newly appointed District 4 Supervisor Beya Alcaraz resigned just hours after explosive revelations about potential tax fraud at her former pet shop, Animal Connection.

The controversy erupted when Mission Local published text messages revealing Alcaraz’s admission to potentially illegal financial practices. In her own words, she described paying employees “under the table” and manipulating business expenses for personal gain, writing, “I spend expense a bit of money on my personal life so I can use it as a tax deduction”.

Alcaraz’s brief tenure was already marred by controversy surrounding the condition of her pet shop, which the new owner described as being in a state of extreme disrepair, with reports of dead animals, mouse infestations, and unsanitary conditions.

Mayor Daniel Lurie, who had personally appointed Alcaraz, quickly distanced himself from the unfolding scandal. In a statement, he acknowledged that the new information would be a “significant distraction” from serving the community.

The abrupt resignation highlights deeper tensions in the Sunset District, an area already experiencing political volatility due to ongoing debates about highway closures, rezoning plans, and recent political recalls.

Alcaraz’s swift downfall raises critical questions about the vetting process for political appointments and the importance of transparency in local government. Mission Local noted that she was potentially the least experienced supervisor appointed in San Francisco in at least 25 years.

Lurie has committed to finding a new supervisor who can “be fully dedicated to representing” the Sunset community, but the damage to his political capital might already be significant. The incident could potentially alienate key voting blocs, particularly the Chinese-American community that played a crucial role in his election.

As San Francisco continues to navigate complex political dynamics, the Alcaraz saga serves as a stark reminder of the scrutiny public officials must withstand and the consequences of ethical lapses in local governance.