The case against former San Francisco Human Rights Commission director Sheryl Davis is unfolding with a level of detail that reads less like bureaucratic mismanagement and more like a sustained breakdown in oversight.
Davis, alongside her longtime partner James Spingola, is now facing 17 felony charges tied to allegations that public funds—earmarked for programs supporting the city’s Black community—were diverted for personal use. Prosecutors describe a pattern of self-dealing, with $4.5 million in city money routed to a nonprofit connected to Spingola.
The spending outlined in audits and charging documents is extensive. Among the cited expenses: more than $2 million tied to a large-scale event in Philadelphia, including venue costs, entertainment, and catering; hundreds of thousands of dollars for gala sponsorships; and tens of thousands spent on events at major sports venues. Additional expenditures included promotional efforts tied to Davis’ personal projects, including her children’s book.
The issue wasn’t confined to a single transaction or event. Investigators point to repeated instances where expenses were structured to avoid internal scrutiny, including breaking invoices into smaller amounts that fell below review thresholds.
There are also allegations of funds being used for travel, lodging, and accommodations that lacked a clear connection to the agency’s stated mission.
The broader program Davis helped oversee—the Dream Keeper Initiative—was launched as a major investment in San Francisco’s Black community. While some funding supported legitimate efforts, audits and reporting suggest oversight gaps allowed questionable spending to persist across multiple organizations receiving grants.
Examples cited include nonprofits attempting to bill the city for luxury expenses such as high-end meals, travel, and unrelated purchases. In one case, a group was barred from further business with the city after submitting improper charges. In another, publicized events featured large cash giveaways, raising additional questions about how funds were being distributed.
City officials have acknowledged the failure in controls. District Attorney Brooke Jenkins emphasized the need for stronger safeguards, while the city controller described the spending as inconsistent with the responsibilities of the office and damaging to public trust.
Davis’ legal team has pushed back, arguing she was brought in for her experience and connections and was not given sufficient guidance on navigating government systems while being tasked with building out large-scale programs.
