ELECTION 2020
The Frisc asked all the candidates for District 7 supervisor to answer five questions about the city’s critical issues. Five responded.
Answers have been edited for length and clarity, and we have fact-checked as much as possible, providing links to sources where appropriate as well as a list of extra resources after each question. An asterisk* in a candidate’s answer indicates that you’ll find more information and context in our resources.
Here are the five respondents, with links to their campaign sites: Joel Engardio, Stephen Martin-Pinto, Myrna Melgar, Vilaska Nguyen, and Ken Piper.
What should San Francisco do to protect the unsheltered from COVID-19? What’s your long-term strategy for helping the homeless?
Joel Engardio: We spend hundreds of millions of dollars a year* on homelessness services, and things get worse. We must audit all contracts and programs. If a program doesn’t work, we should stop paying for it. Putting an expensive Navigation Center* in every neighborhood is not cost-effective or efficient. Tents on the sidewalk* are unsafe and unsanitary. We should centralize wrap-around services at a large site like an unused pier to allow for social distancing.
We must deal with the mental health crisis. If a mentally ill person attacks someone, the SF Behavioral Health Court gives them treatment, but not until there are criminal charges. Our jails should not be de facto mental institutions. That’s why I support expanding conservatorship laws* and opening a new generation of mental health facilities where people can get the treatment they need.
We should also look at what other cities are doing, [like] the tiny homes community in Austin, Texas. Residents get mental health and substance abuse treatment and work on maintenance and cleaning of the community spaces. There is an 87 percent retention rate. We should see if something like this could work at a pier.
Stephen Martin-Pinto: The city can only do so much to protect the homeless from COVID 19. We can give them hotels*, but that has been a disaster. Drug labs were found in one hotel. Fires were started in hotel rooms, according to my own experience as a first responder and what I have heard from other firefighters. If a homeless person wants to protect himself from COVID, he needs to seek help from the services that exist and be responsible for himself.
Long term, it is a drug and mental illness issue*. We need to aggressively prosecute drug dealers who trap homeless individuals in a cycle of addiction, poverty, and misery. As a veteran who has deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, I know the stresses of combat and the long-term psychological effects if left untreated. About 7% of the homeless SF population were veterans in the 2019 count*. The VA hospital can be of great assistance in this matter.
We need stronger conservatorship laws*. Homeless persons with mental and drug issues cannot be responsible for themselves. We conflate being “nice” to homeless people with being “good” to them. They are not the same.
Myrna Melgar: We must make every effort to get folks off the streets. I support efforts to temporarily shelter folks in hotels* and organized tent villages*. The pandemic has shown that our collective health depends on a level of equality we do not have, and how precarious and unsustainable our housing crisis is.
Long term, we know that permanent, affordable housing with social services and support is the most effective solution* to keep people housed. I support increasing our investment in those solutions, and increasing the services people who struggle the most staying housed need: mental health supports and drug treatment on demand. The homeless are not monolithic, and we need more affordable housing for everyone, including those who are just lacking a roof they can afford and don’t have other issues.
The SFUSD estimated in 2017 that 2,100 young people, one in every 25 students, were homeless. In District 7, over 100 residents live in their RVs or cars; a survey by San Francisco State found nearly all were workers with low wage jobs in the city.
Vilaska Nguyen: I’ve seen where the criminal justice system is broken and how it leads to a cycle of homelessness. People who have mental illness that makes them unable to take care of themselves should be conserved*. As an SF public defender, I’ve had clients that I’ve fought to get conserved who were just abandoned back on the streets. I’ve worked to get people off the street and change their lives.
I will work with anybody willing to examine our broken homelessness system and make the big changes that we need with a long-term focus on permanent supportive housing*. I publicly support a Navigation Center in District 7*.
Ken Piper: Shelter, food, and education on how to stay healthy, not just with COVID, but consistent with what should be in place.
For far too long, this city has had a scattershot approach to homelessness, talking in grand words and throwing massive amounts of money into it, with little change and anecdotal wins. I believe there are three areas of concentration that all need a distinct approach: mental health, drug dependencies, and (for lack of a better word) general homelessness. Also, centralize the assistance* to be able to triage quickly and efficiently.
Extra resources: Homelessness
THE BASICS: Every two years the city conducts the “point in time” count. The previous one tallied more than 8,000 unhoused people; the next one is in January. In 2019, 39 percent said a lost job or eviction was the primary cause of their homelessness. Twenty-six percent cited substance abuse or mental illness. These problems are visible and notable, but experts like UCSF’s Margot Kushel note that they can be brought on or compounded by living in the streets. Permanent supportive housing is the current consensus for the best solution for homelessness: getting people into homes surrounded by services.
A few years ago, the city’s new Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing, or HSH, began overhauling a tangled web of servicesand building a tracking system to help homeless people more efficiently. Last year The Frisc reported that the system had been slow to take hold.
The Frisc’s running timeline of the city’s COVID-era response to homelessness is here.
FUNDING: In 2018, voters approved the Prop C business tax to boost services and housing (estimated to bring in more than $300 million a year). It won, but Mayor London Breed and some allies opposed it, and the margin wasn’t large enough to stave off a lawsuit. The state Supreme Court just struck down the suit — a big help for the city’s next budget cycle.
The new two-year, $26 billion budget has $1.4 billion for HSH (page 143), but with caveats. Some sources aren’t guaranteed, like federal reimbursement for hotel rooms. City officials say the federal government will reimburse perhaps 75 percent of hotel costs. In addition, the nearly $500 million Prop A bond on the ballot in November sets $207 million for facilities related to mental health and homelessness.
HOTELS: City data on hotels and other shelter sites during COVID are updated here. There are about 1,900 occupied hotel rooms and about 600 more under lease. When COVID struck, advocates called for the city to close shelters and lease thousands of suddenly empty hotel rooms. Supervisors demanded more than 8,000 rooms by end of April. Breed refused, citing logistics and costs. HSH said in August it would stop leasing rooms and move everyone into shelters, tent sites, and permanent housing by June 2021.
NAVIGATION CENTERS: These are invite-only shelters, now closed during the pandemic, where residents have more privacy, can keep belongings and pets, and get transitional help to housing and services. Many proponents want at least one in every district. Some opponents fear the centers will boost crime. The Frisc’s special report earlier this year showed there is no pattern of rising crime around new centers.
The centers are meant to last a few years. Reports on construction costs have ranged from $2 million up to $12.5 million, which doesn’t include operating costs.
SAFE SLEEPING SITES: The first sanctioned tent site went up in Civic Center to ease the crisis in the Tenderloin. (Updates on the neighborhood are here.) In the Haight, neighbors including Amoeba Records sued to stop the city’s second site but backed away when it became public that the suit was filed by a local Trump-loving Republican. Neighborhood opposition remains. A third site was recently slated to open in the Mission.
CONGREGATE SHELTERS: Before COVID, the overnight shelter system had about 1,200 beds for adults and 1,000 people on the wait list. The system is now mostly shut down. The mayor’s office plans to “reactivate” up to 1,000 beds as part of a larger homelessness plan.
CONSERVATORSHIP: When a person is a risk to themselves or others due to mental illness or substance abuse, a 2018 state law lets officials compel them into treatment, with many caveats. After a well-known mentally ill homeless man killed a Glen Park resident in May, Sup. Rafael Mandelman, a conservatorship proponent, told the SF Chronicle that the city had not used the law once.
Is there a housing shortage in San Francisco? If so, how do we fix it?
Engardio: There is a housing shortage, and we must allow construction of housing at all price points. I support market-rate housing because it generates funding to build affordable housing*. If we want families, seniors, and vulnerable populations to remain in San Francisco, it’s impossible on public dollars alone — especially now that we’re facing massive budget deficits.
In District 7, I want to focus on housing along Muni lines. Just four years ago, housing on a transit corridor was a nonstarter. From meetings I’ve had with neighborhood leaders, I know there is more support now for housing on the actual train corridor but not beyond the street.
I have long advocated for a concept called Domicity, created by retired architect Eugene Lew. Domicity has two- and three-bedroom units above retail or community space like a senior center or child care. It’s perfect for senior housing and for middle-income families leaving San Francisco. Domicity is designed to fit on transit corridors like West Portal Avenue. It won’t hurt neighborhood character or single-family homes. My goal would be to build one Domicity pilot. If people like it, we can talk about more.
Martin-Pinto: Last year, I would have said yes. This year, I’m not sure. I think there is a Bay Area-wide shortage, but more than that, I think there’s a public transportation shortage. A rapid, efficient, high-speed public transportation system would make locations virtually closer. San Francisco is the densest major city in California and the second densest city in the U.S. with a population over 150,000.
Before we start making major increases to density, we need to talk transportation. We’re not far behind New York City in terms of density, but our subway and light rail is light years behind. We have a trunked subway system. NYC is criss-crossed by subways. We need to expand Muni Metro aggressively to support increased density. We need to expand BART and Caltrain to accommodate a greater Bay Area population. We need to simultaneously increase housing where appropriate while incentivizing telecommuting and reducing demand, both of which will use natural market forces to stabilize housing cost.
Melgar: We have created eight jobs for every one unit of housing we have created in the past 15 years. The cumulative effect has been a shortage of housing.
While those with means have a lot of housing choices, those in the middle or low end of the financial spectrum have few. The housing market is inelastic (it takes a long time to produce new units) and it is not fluid, meaning that just because you create more, it does not necessarily bring down the price. The past few years, we have produced a lot of small one-bedroom condo units to accommodate single workers. But many of those workers at some point will have families and need a different type of housing.
The cost of construction, not the cost of land, remains the highest cost in building. We must plan and produce housing for all income levels and population at different stages in life, in particular in low- and middle-income housing, where the need is greatest. We need to invest in housing production the same as roads or sewers. It is an essential component of our economy and our health.
Nguyen: There is an affordable housing* shortage in San Francisco. My housing policy is going to be focused on the needs of District 7 families. We have a responsibility to house students attending City College, SF State, and UCSF. According to data we’ve obtained from the Department of Elections, our district’s registered voters are 18 percent Chinese-American. We have a responsibility to have supportive housing and elderly care for the aging Chinese population.
We need to build housing that is affordable to the people who live here. I will support the development of affordable housing and municipally owned housing. We can’t just build housing that is affordable to the people who are left in the city after a decade of gentrification and displacement. We also need housing that is affordable to people who have been driven out and who we need to return.
We need to take this opportunity to reimagine how this city plans for the future and not return to a “normal” that wasn’t serving the people of San Francisco. I want to be part of changing what development is prioritized in our city. That includes revisiting our levels of affordability.
Piper: If housing shortage is defined by more demand than supply, then yes. But platitudes do not solve the problem. San Francisco is surrounded by water on three sides. There are some pockets to develop, i.e. Balboa Reservoir. I believe we need to do two things:
1) Update zoning on transit corridors to allow for more housing, but limit the distance, and 2) strengthen current zoning rules* to protect single-family homes.
Extra resources: Housing
THE BASICS: In most of SF, the residential height limit is 40 feet and most properties can only house one or two units (not including “in-law” ADUs), a legacy of 20th-century racist “redlining” practices. Attempts by former city supervisor and now state senator Scott Weiner to allow more density in California cities (along transit lines, for example), have drawn vehement opposition from SF progressives along with suburban legislators statewide, and have repeatedly failed. A less ambitious local program, HOME-SF, has had limited effect in the face of resident complaints and other factors. (Lots of zoning information and maps are here.)
PRICES: Rents were once arguably the most expensive in the U.S. (This story explains the “arguably” part.) As demand drops during COVID, rental prices have plummeted. Before the pandemic, home prices were soaring. The median cost of a two-bedroom: $1.35 million. These days, condo sales have fallen, but SF’s median home price is up 3.8 percent from 12 months ago. For a deeper dive into the debate over supply and demand and housing prices, start here.
EVICTIONS: The city tracks evictions filed with its rent board. Pre-pandemic, SF had one of the lowest rates in the country, with the caveat that California law keeps them undercounted. (By how much is a matter of debate; this 2018 report counted an average of 3,275 a year from 2014 to 2016, 52 percent more than the rent board’s count.) With COVID’s financial crisis, local and state officials have enacted eviction moratoriums, but the latest state action has sown confusion.
VACANCIES: How many SF houses sit empty in the midst of a shortage? This pre-COVID story said that as of 2018, there might have been some 30,000, depending what you call a vacancy. (Thousands of those units were up for rent, according to the urban think tank SPUR. Housing is complicated around here.) SF’s 2015 regulation of short-term rentals led to a sharp drop of vacant homes, according to this 2019 study (page 24). Suspicions about so-called speculators buying up properties haven’t been verified. It’s unclear how a tax on vacant units, proposed by some candidates, would affect vacancies.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: It can range from supportive housing for the formerly homeless to housing for teachers and other middle-income workers. It’s no less expensive to build than market-rate housing, and especially expensive in SF. (See page 7 of this report.)
Market-rate projects of 10 units or more must include a percentage of affordable housing on site, or pay for it offsite. The linkage is problematic. Some supervisors and candidates want to eliminate it because they want as little market-rate housing built as possible. (This recent Frisc story is a good place to start for an explanation.)
Where else could funding come from? There’s bond money, like last year’s successful $600 million Prop A, which at current costs would create about 2,800 units. Also there are taxes, like the one proposed by this November’s Prop I that might pay for up to 10,000 city-owned rental units.
We aren’t building enough units to make SF affordable for more people or to meet California’s RHNA mandates (page 24). From 2015 to 2020, the city completed nearly 1,000 units per year; more than 70 percent were in only two districts. City planners have set a target of 50,000 new affordable units (among 150,000 total units) by 2050.
Cost isn’t the only barrier. Many San Franciscans don’t want development for reasons of congestion, noise, and aesthetics, among other issues. Our planning process often lets them block or delay projects, and their representatives on the board often don’t push back. The YIMBY movement rose in part to counter these forces.
Merchants are in deep trouble. With employees working from home, downtown offices are empty. What can the city do to revitalize business?
Engardio: Even when the economy was booming, small businesses were in trouble. Last year, more than 500 restaurants closed* in SF because City Hall was killing them with fees, regulations, and permits*. We can’t go back to the way things were.
The Chronicle cited San Francisco as one of the most difficult cities in the country to open a food truck. We need to rank as the easiest. Of course, some regulation is necessary to keep people safe. Beyond that, SF should let an entrepreneur try anything — there are new ideas we don’t know about yet. Every idea has a chance to be the one that saves our local economy.
Even after a vaccine, the pandemic will have forever changed how we live. To help workers affected, we must look to our state and congressional representatives to provide enhanced unemployment benefits. This is also a good time to talk about a basic universal income.
Martin-Pinto: We can do much if we make downtown an attractive place again. We must demand a safe, clean Market Street with no open drug markets. This didn’t exist when I was young, and that was not long ago. We can do it again. Waive all fees for new restaurants, bars, and other small businesses. Encourage diversity in the economy. But before we pursue any of these solutions, the absolute first thing we must do is eliminate the open drug-market problem and crime problem*.
We must restore faith in public transportation. People don’t feel safe using BART or Muni downtown and don’t feel safe once they are downtown. If we don’t fix these problems we are quite frankly wasting our time.
Melgar: The planning code needs to adapt to a fast-changing landscape. Large areas once used for manufacturing have been rezoned, as automation has replaced many manufacturing jobs. The pace of change accelerated before the pandemic, and our regulations have not kept pace.
For example, 20 years ago, the business plan of a Union Square retailer was very different than today in the age of Amazon. Restaurants have seen Grubhub and Uber Eats flip their profit margins.
With the loss of customers and traffic downtown and in the neighborhoods, many businesses have gone under*. Those who have managed to reopen are adapting to new rules. The city must invest in small business recovery with financial assistance (through grants and loans); flexibility in permitting for uses that will allow for income generation (such as Prop H*); redirecting departments like the Arts Commission to invest in activities that will draw people to our merchant corridors; incentivizing through direct tax cuts or other incentives the renegotiation of leases that are favorable to small businesses; and supporting child-care businesses because so many businesses and their workers depend on those to operate.
Nguyen: The combination of xenophobia and shelter-in-place caused many Chinese storefronts, unique to our neighborhoods, to close down. To bring back these businesses, we need to fast-track their reopening. We can streamline the bureaucratic process* and prioritize businesses that were negatively affected by COVID in the application process.
Traditional gathering places need to be reimagined for business to remain operational while limiting the spread of COVID. To ensure that businesses are able to adapt and flourish, we can reduce or eliminate the requirements for outdoor seating permits*.
Data shows that open-air circulation and UV light reduces the spread of COVID. To encourage more outdoor seating, we can shut down certain streets*, create more pedestrian plazas and allow businesses to expand their seating to the sidewalks and streets*.
For businesses suffering during the transition period to fully reopen, we can relax certain regulations* to allow businesses to diversify their revenue stream. Along with prepared food, we can allow businesses to sell excess produce and goods that are safe for consumption.
Piper: I agree [that merchants are in trouble]. Even if many can come back, don’t expect a 100 percent return of revenue. Can they succeed at 70 percent for a period of time? Local taxes and fees* need to be lowered or eliminated. Keep what pays for health and safety and eliminate the rest. Assist in lease renegotiation. Create a level playing field where both landlord and tenant find a long-term equitable solution.
Finally, assess if big businesses are coming back to the same percentage. Downtown was filled with employees of large companies that have been able to run effectively with remote work, not just tech, but finance, consulting, and other high paying white-collar jobs. This is the engine that drove many of the small businesses in San Francisco. Will they come back to their offices? If so, at what level?
The current supes are scared out of their mind. They’ve made too many promises and have competing needs. The current budget is a joke. It only works if new revenue passes and the tax base stays consistent.
Extra resources: Small business
There’s a city moratorium on commercial evictions, but it’s set to expire Sept. 30.
BUSINESS TAXES: With Prop F, supported by the mayor and supervisors, SF voters must decide in November whether to shift the city’s tax structure to gross receipts. Smaller and more beleaguered sectors would get a break. Prop F would add nearly $100 million to city revenue, the controller estimated. Also on the ballot: Prop L, the “overpaid CEO” tax, docking companies where the top executive earns at least 100 times more compensation than the median employee.
VACANCY TAX: Authored by District 3 Sup. Aaron Peskin and approved in March, the tax on owners of vacant storefronts has been delayed for a year until 2022 because of the pandemic.
CLOSURES: Of about 4,000 SF restaurants, as many as half may close this year, the SF Chamber of Commerce told The Frisc. The local restaurant trade group says 87 percent of eateries it surveyed are not breaking even from takeout and delivery. In response, more than 1,300 restaurants have the green light to build emergency “Shared Spaces” parklets for outdoor dining; hundreds more applications are pending. Owners still need to pay for materials and hope customers return. (Some can tap into grants or free PPE.) Those depending on delivery now pay lower fees to delivery app companies.
RED TAPE RELIEF: COVID didn’t start the fire. Hundreds of SF restaurantsclosed in 2019. Small businesses, dealing with neighbors forcing delays and other red tape, have fought for relief for years. In 2018, Sups. Ahsha Safai (running for reelection) and Katy Tang pushed through flexible-retail rules for some districts. It failed to gain citywide traction. Small-business regulations will get an overhaul if Prop H passes in November, but many merchants will likely give up before then.
WORK FROM HOME: Twitter, Square, and many other white-collar giants are not going to use their offices for quite some time — perhaps never, and it’s not just tech letting folks work from home. It’s a near-term disaster for the delis, cafes, and happy-hour hangouts around those offices. Longer term, we don’t know what will happen. Many of those at-home workers may buy more coffee and lunches in their neighborhoods, keyword being “may.” (The Frisc reported on SF’s post-pandemic economic quandary in August in two parts, here and here.)
The city will shift $120 million from law enforcement to the Black community. Is this too little, too much? It will also shift responsibility for mental health and other calls away from the police. What will you do to ensure public safety?
Engardio: I agree with Governor Gavin Newsom and Senator Kamala Harris about “reimagining” the police and making them better. Like Joe Biden, I do not believe in a literal defunding* or disbanding. We still need police to protect the public. When crime happens, we can’t forget about the victims.
Every year, officers go on tens of thousands of calls for things like noise complaints and wellness checks on homeless and mentally ill people. There are better people for the job, like social workers*. This will let officers focus on the most serious and dangerous crimes. Right now, rape is only solved 20 percent of the time, and assault and human trafficking less than 40 percent*. We could also create a small, dedicated corps of officers who wouldn’t carry firearms to handle things like collecting reports from victims, building community trust, and solving nonviolent crime.
San Francisco’s police officers are stretched thin while crimes like burglary and homicide are up*. We need to continue to recruit new officers from diverse communities. We should only employ officers who work at the highest standard.
Martin-Pinto: I really would like to know what the city hopes to achieve by having it go to other services like mental health. It’s not a clearly articulated concept. If we cut one dime from the SFPD budget, that is one dime too much. We need more funding for the SFPD, not less. Crime has risen dramatically.* If we want a more effective police force, we need more training, better equipment, and more manpower. By pulling SFPD funding, you are working against the very aims you purport to want to achieve.
As for having mental health workers respond to persons having mental crises: A person, especially one who has severe mental or drug addiction issues, can become very violent and very dangerous very quickly. A mental health worker is not trained to deal with this danger. A police officer trained in de-escalation of force procedures and techniques to deal with persons having a mental health crisis is even better trained to deal with this.
Melgar: I support police reform*. What San Franciscans are asking for — and which I support — is a police department that relies on knowledge of the community, cultural competence, anti-racism and de-escalation strategies, and decreasingly on lethal force. I support using these principles to guide our reforms:
The primary goal of our public safety system is to keep everyone safe. To keep us safe, our city must provide law enforcement, peacekeeping and social services. These are different functions that require different staffing and specific training. Cross-training our police officers, firefighters, first responders, and social service providers will ensure the best response for each situation.
Nonviolent activities should not be handled by police officers, but instead by civilians without weapons who are trained in de-escalation. We must rely less on force and more on strategy, and on relationships with and knowledge of the community. At this historic moment, San Franciscans are calling for a thoughtful, measured effort to ensure that all communities, especially low-income communities, receive the crime protection they desperately need and have historically been denied.
Nguyen: I’ve worked in the criminal justice system for the majority of my career, I know that crime hurts our entire community. In some ways, families here are expected to just accept that crime happens in our city. Families deserve to feel safe and protected. One of my top priorities will be effective responses to crime so we can keep our communities safe.
I have worked directly with SFPD and I think it’s time that we reform* the system. I support defunding* the police. More importantly, we have a unique opportunity to see reform in action. The over-policing and disproportionate prosecution and sentencing of our communities of color has eroded stability and destroyed any hope of moving forward with our current police system.
To address predatory and unjust policing practices, we need to dismantle the blatant and systemic racism that our police system was built on, and we need to get serious about demilitarizing our police force. This needs to be done in collaboration with reinvesting in the programs and services that benefit our communities.
Piper: I agree with [SFPD] Chief [Bill] Scott* that a portion of the SFPD budget can be allocated to other services, but it needs to be tracked and accountability needs to be in place. I want to see the impact before deciding if it should continue.
To ensure safety, back the police, keep businesses open, attract big business back to downtown, and stop the transient open door policies.
Extra resources: Policing
THE BASICS: SF is not going to defund the police. But it is cutting and redirecting part of the budget, with the blessing of the chief. The budget 10 years ago was $455.5 million. The final pre-pandemic budget was $692 million. In that decade, full-time headcount rose 20 percent to 3,285. Current plans are to cut $37 million over the next two years, to $656 million. Cuts are also planned for the Sheriff’s Office. All told, $120 million will be redirected to academics, social services, and other resources for the Black community.
REFORM: In 2016, SF voters passed two measures to overhaul civilian oversight of the police. The same year, the Justice Department recommended 272 reforms in a report on the SFPD’s biases and excessive force against people of color. The cops say they’re committed to “responding” to the recommendations. The state took the reins of the oversight after the Trump administration ended federal involvement. In early 2020 the city passed a law to make the police report victim demographics in response to fears that Chinese seniors were being targeted for crime. The president’s blame of China for the pandemic seems to have exacerbated the situation in SF.
CRIME RATES: With 27 homicides through July 2020, SF is on pace for its highest murder count since 2017 (56). But the overall trend on crime is lower, not higher. From 2013 to 2019, violent crimes dropped 13 percent to 6,080. In 2020, there were 2,800 violent crimes through the end of July, which might suggest another decline.
Among property crimes, burglaries are an outlier: 4,109 burglaries were reported through July, which is approaching the full 2019 tally of 4,800. But overall, property crime (23,167 reports through July) could drop below the 48,551 incidents tallied in 2013.
Crime data from 2015 to 2020 are posted here. (This document has data for 2013 and 2014.) The SFPD case clearance dashboard is here.
Folks are leaving San Francisco for several reasons. What do you say to them?
Engardio: I am running for supervisor to help keep residents and families in San Francisco. The pandemic has created new problems to go with what we already had. It’s time to focus on the basics that residents care about: clean streets, less crime, and more effective services.
City Hall must change the decades-long practice of ignoring the needs of families when it comes to housing, schools, and quality of life. Kids should be able to attend their neighborhood school. An entrepreneur should be able to open a business without roadblocks. People should feel safe living here.
City Hall must change its ways to save small businesses by promoting, not stifling, good ideas. We must radically rethink a $13 billion budget* that was out of control for a long time. We need new and independent leadership at City Hall to clean up the corruption* and mismanagement scandals that continue to unfold.
I believe our best days are ahead — if we’re willing to tackle today’s problems with equal doses of innovation and common sense.
Martin-Pinto: I know our city government is a mess. I know homelessness is out of control. I know crime is out of control. I know corruption is out of control*. I’m working on it. It takes time to fix the problems that have been decades in the making. Don’t give up hope. Stay positive, always look forward, and do whatever you can to make your block, your neighborhood, and your city better. It is worth it.
Melgar: Please stay! Reinvention, innovation, gritty survival skills are in our DNA. There is a story about how after the 1906 earthquake and fire, AP Giannini saved the vault from his destroyed bank on Montgomery Street. With what he had in the vault he set up planks across wine barrels on the street and started lending to small businesses on a handshake. He would later say that all loans were repaid. Our city will rebuild after this pandemic and the spirit, beauty, craziness, and drive that has attracted so many smart, creative, dreamer people from so many places around the world will help us collectively push forward in making progress on our challenges. We have recovered from earthquakes, fires, social unrest, epidemics, mass suicides, racism before, and we will again.
[Correction: Due to an editing error, someone else’s response was previously misattributed to Myrna Melgar in this section. We apologize.]
Nguyen: I love San Francisco. I’ve also seen how hostile the city has become to families just trying to get by. I understand the frustration. Between affordability, homelessness, and now smoke from wildfires, it’s become a tough place for many folks to live. But this city is a special one, where bold new ideas are tested, and artists, engineers, entrepreneurs and activists push the boundaries of what was thought possible. It’s worth fighting for.
I will work with my constituents, the board, and the city at large to create housing that’s affordable for families, make investments into social services that have been proven to work, like mental health services and supportive housing, and reimagine our public safety system such that all of our residents feel safe, regardless of the color of their skin.
San Francisco has always been a city that leads the way on trying big things. If we listen to and work alongside the residents that live here, we can find better ways to address the toughest issues we face, and reinvigorate hope and pride in our great city.
Piper: This is what worries me. I’ve heard from numerous folks in D7 that they are considering leaving. What really sunk in is that some are longtime residents who own their home and don’t have financial insecurity. Instead, they fear that their city is, has, and will continue to change for the worse. They no longer think it’s a city to have a family, raise kids, or build a community. It’s a decision based on fear.
For that, shame on our leaders. Focus back on families, make San Francisco a full lifetime city again, from cradle to grave. Support single-family home ownership. Support seniors. Support local.
Extra resources: Leaving SF
THE BASICS: Last year, SF had more than 881,000 residents — its highest total ever and a nearly 10 percent jump from 2010. There have been many stories about people fleeing cities for the suburbs, but the data don’t bear that out, and some ex-residents may even return.
SATISFACTION: While COVID has spurred some San Franciscans to relocate, how many remains to be seen; wait for findings from the 2020 census. Last year, the city controller released its biennial satisfaction survey: Libraries, really good. Muni, not so much. In an early 2020 pre-COVID survey by the Chamber of Commerce, SF respondents said that life in the city was getting worse.
BUDGET MANAGEMENT: San Francisco has a two-year budget cycle. The latest iteration, available here, is $13.6 billion for 2020–2021, a city record, before dropping to $12.4 billion in 2021–2022. For now, it avoids a $1.5 billion deficit without layoffs, by dipping into the city’s reserves, raising some taxes, and freezing some positions. Some assumed sources of revenue, like federal COVID reimbursement or tax hikes on November’s ballot, might not arrive as planned. Why is SF’s budget so big? Here’s a good explainer.
CORRUPTION: Department of Public Works chief Mohammed Nuru was arrested in early 2020 on federal corruption charges. Former Mayor Ed Lee appointed Nuru in 2011 over the protests of city attorney Dennis Herrera who had pursued Nuru for ethics violations. (Then a mayoral candidate, Herrera’s objections were dismissed as political.) The growing investigation has spurred Prop B, which would reorganize DPW and create more oversight. The seventh and eighth defendants in the current probe were named earlier this month.
Kristi Coale (@unazurda) is a San Francisco-based freelance writer and radio producer for various outlets, including KALW’s Crosscurrents and the National Radio Project’s Making Contact. Alex Lash contributed to this report.
