Here’s what happened around the city for the week of August 9, 2026:
- Bilal Mahmood Fixed It: New Homes to Rise at Old Car Wash
- November’s Local Ballot Measures
- Mayor Lurie Opposes DSA Housing Tax
- Car Break-Ins Fall 88% From 2017 Peak
- YIMBY Law Sues San Francisco

Bilal Mahmood Fixed It: New Homes to Rise at Old Car Wash

Published August 13, 2026

The Facts

The old car wash at Divisadero and Oak is finally becoming housing, thanks to Supervisor Bilal Mahmood. Greystar, the largest developer of apartments in the US, is scheduled to break ground on October 19 to build an eight-story building with 203 apartments and ground-floor retail, in a scoop reported by J.K. Dineen at the San Francisco Chronicle.

Mahmood’s permit-expiration reform and other bureaucratic fixess finally made the building pencil out, saving about $4 million in construction costs, according to the builder.

It will be the first significant market-rate apartment building to begin construction in San Francisco this year.

The Context

Housing was first proposed here a decade ago, and the developer went through over 1,000 community meetings before giving up. Dean Preston, the former Supervisor, tried hard to kill this building by insisting the city fund fully taxpayer subsidized apartments on the land, even though no funding was available.

In February last year, we reported that this new plan finally won streamlined approval under Assembly Bill 2011, a state law allowing qualifying apartments on commercial land to bypass discretionary review. But the approved plans still couldn’t be built without some more local fixes.

The GrowSF Take

We put up a billboard promising Bilal Mahmood would fix this stalled project. He did.

Mahmood found a specific cost blocking construction, changed the law, and helped turn approved plans into financed homes. His success shows that all we need to do to fix San Francisco is to keep electing sensible people instead of ideologues.

November’s Local Ballot Measures

Prop A merges overlapping city commissions and shuts down ones that no longer meet, saving $365,000 to $450,000 per year.

Prop B authorizes San Francisco to create a city-owned “municipal finance corporation” now and a public bank later, without providing any money for either.

Prop C raises the City’s yearly payment into the Housing Trust Fund from $50.8M to $125M by the 2030s, and indexes future contributions to rising property taxes.

Prop D raises the signature threshold for citizen ballot initiatives from 2% to 8% of registered voters, ends the Mayor’s power to unilaterally put a measure on the ballot, and ends the Board of Supervisors’ power to put a measure on the ballot with a minority vote.

Prop E puts city purchasing rules under the City Administrator and raises the dollar limits at which contracts need Board of Supervisors approval.

Prop F lets the Mayor reorganize departments and hire and fire most department heads directly, with the Board able to block a reorganization.

Prop G reopens the Great Highway to cars on weekdays.

Prop H creates a 15-year parcel tax based on building square footage to fund Muni, raising about $177M per year.

Prop I redirects about $120M per year out of the general fund into a fund restricted to affordable housing.

Prop J ends the transfer tax break for foreclosures on everything except small residential buildings, raising an estimated $100M to $150M per year.

Mayor Lurie Opposes DSA Housing Tax

Published August 13, 2026

The Facts

The DSA’s housing tax attracted its first major opposition this week. Mayor Lurie has come out to oppose the November ballot measure which would redirect taxes on certain from the General Fund into restricted housing programs.

The Controller’s analysis says the measure would shift $120 million per year out of the General Fund, increasing the projected deficit.

Lurie instead backs Proposition C, which would grow the Housing Trust Fund toward $125 million using future property-tax growth.

The Context

The San Francisco Democratic Socialists of America gathered signatures for the measure, which is also backed by former Supervisor Dean Preston.

The GrowSF Take

We have not yet taken a position on any of the local ballot measures, but we did publish our analysis of the ballot language this week. The measure somewhat confusingly worded to sound like a tax reduction, but in short it would redirects about half of a real estate transfer tax away from the general fund and toward subsidized housing.

Proposition C is quite interesting because it indexes the housing subsidy on broader economic growth, effectively aligning incentives to grow the economy while providing a possible path to bonding recurring revenues to build infrastructure faster.

Car Break-Ins Fall 88% From 2017 Peak

Published August 13, 2026

The Facts

Car break-ins are at record lows. We’re down to just 10 per day across the whole city, down almost 90% from the peak in 2017. That’s about 1,800 break-ins through June, compared to 30,000 in 2017 according to SFPD data.

“I feel like it’s a wrap,” [SF rapper] Berner said, citing the cops’ increasing use of drones and cameras. “Everything’s being recorded and documented. If you’re doing crime these days, I don’t know, man. It’s kind of crazy.”

The Context

While car break-ins also fell elsewhere, San Francisco still substantially outperformed that baseline. California Department of Justice data show theft from vehicles dropped 37% statewide from 2022 to 2025, compared with 78% in San Francisco.

Our analysis of monthly SFPD data found the sharp decline in September 2023 aligned with when Mayor London Breed, Police Chief Bill Scott, and District Attorney Brooke Jenkins launched a targeted enforcement operation against organized crews and stolen-goods networks.

The GrowSF Take

Car break-ins collapsing is a huge win.

The statewide and national decline explains only part of San Francisco’s improvement. The city’s much larger drop, and its abrupt timing in September 2023, strongly suggest that disrupting repeat offenders and the market for stolen goods made a major local difference. Breed, Chief Scott, and DA Jenkins deserve credit for focusing limited police resources where they mattered.

Voters were also right to approve Proposition E. While good policework is an important part of San Francisco’s success, cameras and drones help police identify suspects, build cases, and provide meaningful ongoing deterrence.

YIMBY Law Sues San Francisco

Published August 14, 2026

The Facts

San Francisco may be on the wrong side of the law after it banned new construction in huge swathes of Soma and Bayview last May.

In response, YIMBY Law and two other pro-housing organizations have sued San Francisco to overturn the ban. State law allows industrial land to be exempted from upzoning, but only if that land doesn’t already have housing. The suit alleges that roughly 1,900 parcels were thus illegaly exempted.

You can read their full argument at yimbylaw.org.

The Context

State Senator Scott Wiener’s SB 79 allows denser housing near major transit, but included provisions for Cities to enact alternative plans if they were roughly equivalent. San Francisco took the alternate plan route via Family Zoning.

But the Planning department and the Board of Supervisors added a permanent carve-out for land with warehouses that the state did not require, and, according to the lawsuit, doesn’t allow. GrowSF warned in May that this was foolish.

The GrowSF Take

We think the plaintiffs are right. Preserving genuinely productive industrial land can make sense, but permanently blocking homes on transit-accessible land where housing is already legal does not. The Board should repeal Planning’s carve-out rather than spend years defending it in court only to lose.

Paid for by GrowSF Voter Guide. Not authorized by any candidate, candidate’s committee, or committee controlled by a candidate. Financial disclosures are available at sfethics.org.

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of August 2, 2026:
- Fake Outrage Season Is Here
- 72% of Voters Back Police Drones and Cameras
- Jackie Fielder Requests 24/7 Mission Ambassadors
- Manny Yekutiel Raises $769,000 in District 8 Race
- Outside Lands Expands Muni and Bay Wheels Service

TAKE ACTION
- Enter Boundless San Francisco: A $150 Million Competition by Crankstart

Fake Outrage Season Is Here

Published August 7, 2026

The Facts

Scott Wiener’s congressional campaign launched ConnieChan.ai, a parody chatbot portraying Supervisor Connie Chan as reflexively opposed to housing, transit, education reform, public safety, parks, and economic recovery.

Chan’s campaign repeatedly prompted the bot about her identity until it managed to produce a line about her “San Francisco accent” in order to manufacture a scandal. Nancy Pelosi and six other elected officials—all Chan endorsers—then denounced the bot as racist and sexist. Wiener’s campaign points out that a couple users rapidly submitted 109 questions about Chan’s accent, race, gender, appearance, or citizenship to provoke the desired response.

The Context

Wiener beat Chan 40.7% to 29.7% in the June primary, but two later polls showed a dead heat.

The GrowSF Take

Pelosi and Chan’s camp should be embarrassed for manufacturing a racism-and-sexism scandal out of a response their own side worked relentlessly to provoke. The media should be embarrassed for playing along. Wiener’s campaign deserves some criticism for handing them an opening with a campaign gimmick, but these offenses are not equivalent.

The chatbot is silly, but its core satire is fair: Chan opposes more homes and better transit. Her allies deliberately baited an offensive response, then presented it as proof that the parody itself is racist and sexist. That is dishonest left-wing slopulism, not a serious defense of Chan’s record.

Pelosi made it worse. A former Speaker of the House used her stature to validate an accusation built on intentionally provocative prompts, then Chan’s other endorsers eagerly joined the fake outrage. Instead of explaining why voters should want Chan’s obstructionist politics in Congress, Pelosi turned an obvious campaign stunt into a moral emergency. San Francisco deserves better from one of its most powerful political figures.

The media then breathlessly elevated obvious campaign theater into news.

Voters care about housing costs, safe streets, reliable transit, good schools, and whether San Francisco can function. Both campaigns should retire the chatbot drama and argue about those things, instead.

If you work in AI and would like to help us elect Scott Wiener instead of anti-datacenter, anti-AI Connie Chan, email us!

72% of Voters Back Police Drones and Cameras

Published August 6, 2026

The Facts

San Franciscans overwhelmingly support modern police technology. Our new GrowSF poll found:

• 72% support police using drones and cameras after a 911 call to assist an active investigatio

• 64% support continuous live camera monitoring in open-air drug markets is (rising to 69% with added civil-liberties protections)

• 67% support using drones to prevent illegal dumping and support enforcement

FM3 Research surveyed 662 voters from July 8–19 in English and Chinese; the margin of error was 4.9 percentage points. GrowSF always uses a professional polling firm to ensure our questions are without bias and the sample is representative of all San Franciscans.

The Context

Voters approved Proposition E in March 2024 by 54.09% to 45.91% to allow police to use drones for active investigations. It also changed rules for cameras, vehicle pursuits, police paperwork, and oversight of new surveillance tools.

The tools are helping police make arrests. In June, police said a drone tracked a suspected auto-burglary crew into Chinatown; officers arrested three suspects and recovered stolen property.

The GrowSF Take

Activists on social media are all a-tizzy railing against these technologies, but they are very popular with normal people.

The warnings that modern police tools would create an intolerable surveillance state have not survived contact with reality: drones and cameras help officers follow suspects, recover stolen property, and make arrests.

Jackie Fielder Requests 24/7 Mission Ambassadors

Published August 7, 2026

The Facts

Supervisor Jackie Fielder asked Mayor Daniel Lurie to provide 24/7 ambassador coverage around the 16th and 24th Street BART plazas. The current $3.2 million contract provides at least 12 ambassadors and two supervisors daily from 11 a.m. to 8 p.m.

The Context

The request comes during a 90-day Mission initiative involving extra police and behavioral-health outreach. The city has repeatedly intensified staffing there, including after nearly 900 police calls around 16th and Mission in March 2025.

The GrowSF Take

Fielder is right, for once. Transit plazas do not stop being public spaces at 8 p.m. Mayor Lurie should approve round-the-clock ambassadors during the 90-day operation, backed by police who can arrest fentanyl dealers and people selling stolen goods.

Manny Yekutiel Raises $769,000 in District 8 Race

Published August 6, 2026

The Facts

New campaign filings show Manny Yekutiel has raised more than $769,000 since entering the District 8 supervisor race and had $540,801 in cash on June 30; Gary McCoy had brought in $262,348 by July 18, Michael Nguyen reported $148,754, and Darshini Patel raised $20,354 during the first half of 2026.

The Context

District 8, which includes the Castro, Noe Valley and Cole Valley, is an open seat this November because Supervisor Rafael Mandelman is termed out. Yekutiel, the owner of Manny’s café and co-founder of the Civic Joy Fund, is running as a pro-growth civic entrepreneur.

Official records show Yekutiel’s campaign received the maximum $255,000 in public financing.

The GrowSF Take

Yekutiel is plainly the front-runner. His enormous network shows real enthusiasm for a message of more housing, thriving businesses and competent government.

Outside Lands Expands Muni and Bay Wheels Service

Published August 7, 2026

The Facts

Outside Lands will bring about 75,000 people per day to Golden Gate Park from August 7–9. SFMTA’s festival service plan adds N Judah trains, 5R Fulton Rapid buses, and post-concert 5X express buses to Civic Center BART; wristbands provide all-day Muni rides except cable cars.

The city will also restrict pickups near packed exits, close roads, and operate two special Bay Wheels stations with valets tasked with keeping docks and bikes available.

The Context

The plan follows a July 4 breakdown in which more than 100,000 fireworks spectators overwhelmed the northern waterfront, trapping Muni buses and leaving some people stuck for hours.

Bay Wheels has already shown it can handle festival crowds. Its operator recorded 5,500 Outside Lands rides in 2025, using a temporary valet station; e-bikes made up 83% of its 11,000 rides during that August concert series.

The GrowSF Take

Major festivals are good for San Francisco. The city learned the right lesson from July 4: add transit capacity and keep pickup traffic away from transit routes and crowded exits.

But the simplest way home is on two wheels. Bike to Outside Lands. You can park your own bike for free, and if past events are a guide, Bay Wheels should have a ton of e-bikes waiting when the music ends.

Enter Boundless San Francisco: A $150 Million Competition by Crankstart

Crankstart and Lever for Change have just announced Boundless San Francisco, a competition that will award up to $150 million to organizations anywhere in the world with ideas for making San Francisco a better place to live. Up to three winners will receive up to $50 million each to bring their proposal to life.

Successful proposals will pair an ambitious vision for San Francisco’s future with a clear, credible plan to build it and make it last. In addition to grant funding, applicants may request flexible, below-market capital (such as a low-interest loan). Projects must primarily benefit San Francisco.

Applicants must register to apply by September 11, at 5 p.m.

Learn more and apply!

Paid for by GrowSF Voter Guide. Not authorized by any candidate, candidate’s committee, or committee controlled by a candidate. Financial disclosures are available at sfethics.org.

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of July 26, 2026:
- Only 405 Homes Built in First Half of 2026
- Kevin Mullin Proposes Federal Robotaxi Rules
- Jollibee Finally Opens After Six Years
- Market Gets Temporary 24/7 Patrols
- Family Zoning Delivers

Only 405 Homes Built in First Half of 2026

Published July 31, 2026

The Facts

San Francisco completed just 405 new homes in the first half of 2026, reports Adam Brinklow at The Frisc.

The city’s April pipeline counted 74,888 proposed homes, but 37,577 were in long-term, multiphase developments and only 3,301 had reached the construction stage.

The Context

State housing regulators say San Francisco must build more than 82,000 homes by 2031, or over 10,000 per year, while facing some of California’s longest approval timelines.

Permits are not the only obstacle. The Controller found nearly every home type financially infeasible given current city rules under current market conditions. Mayor Lurie and the Board have since cut housing fees, including most development impact fees by 67%.

The GrowSF Take

Mayor Lurie and Supervisors Stephen Sherrill and Danny Sauter are right to attack the costs and delays that keep approved homes on paper. The recent fee cuts are a major start, but the housing math remains brutal.

After a decade whittling away at the bureaucratic barriers to housing, few remain truly insurmountable. But as uncertainty has declined, costs have risen, leaving even approved projects unable to break ground.

Kevin Mullin Proposes Federal Robotaxi Rules

Published July 30, 2026

The Facts

Congressman Kevin Mullin proposed federal emergency-response rules for robotaxis that largely mirror California’s rules, including a live 24-hour hotline and compliance with first-responder geofence requests within two minutes.

The Context

California rules that took effect July 1 require a dedicated hotline answered within 30 seconds, two-way communication inside each vehicle, and emergency geofencing. Mullin’s proposal would create a federal baseline as robotaxis expand nationally.

In May, seven Waymos entered active Bay Area freeway construction lanes by driving between cones, prompting Waymo to temporarily restrict their vehicles from operating on freeways. San Francisco firefighters have also filed at least 31 reports since April 2025 of robotaxis obstructing emergency operations, according to Jessica Blough at The Standard.

The GrowSF Take

We’re huge fans of Waymo because its vehicles are much safer than human drivers, and we think federal rules are better than a patchwork of local rules so that every company and every community can be treated fairly.

Despite a few high-profile incidents, an independent study found Waymos had 35% fewer crashes per mile than human drivers in San Francisco and 81% fewer injury crashes overall.

No person has ever been killed by a Waymo. The only Waymo-related death we know of is KitKat, a well-loved bodega cat that darted beneath it as the vehicle pulled away. Meanwhile human drivers have killed 12 pedestrians so far this year, and at least three pedestrians are hit in San Francisco every day, according to Walk SF.

Jollibee Finally Opens After Six Years

Published July 31, 2026

The Facts

Jollibee finally opened July 31 at 934 Market Street, nearly six years after its first permit application.

The restaurant needed historic-preservation approval for minor exterior changes, permission for an underground utility line, coordination with BART over crane operations, and noise compliance for rooftop equipment, according to The Standard.

The Context

Qualifying storefront businesses are supposed to get permit decisions within 30 days under Proposition H, which voters passed in 2020. But the law only requires departments try to meet that deadline.

Mayor Lurie’s PermitSF reforms aim to coordinate departments and move permits online, but the city still has no migration schedule for complex commercial developments requiring several agencies.

The GrowSF Take

Six years to replace a shoe store with a restaurant is ridiculous. Site-specific complications explain some delay; they do not excuse a system that sends one business among commissions, departments, utilities, and transit agencies without one accountable decision-maker.

Also, what exactly about this building would you consider historic? The historic preservation rules in this city are out of control. This is utilitarian brutalism unworthy of historic preservation—it isn’t the Barbican!

The Board should now eliminate Historic Preservation Commission hearings for minor alterations to unrated buildings. Fried chicken does not threaten San Francisco’s heritage.

Market Gets Temporary 24/7 Patrols

Published July 30, 2026

The Facts

Market Street is temporarily getting 24/7 foot patrols after three shootings over three days left five people wounded. The deployment runs only through August 3.

The Context

The shootings punctuate broader safety gains. Total crime fell 22% through June 14 compared with 2025, though homicides showed a sharp rise from 10 to 17.

The GrowSF Take

People are right to demand a visible response when bullets fly on Market Street. But a patrol surge that expires August 3 is reassurance, not a safety strategy.

Hire enough police officers and ambassadors to walk regular beats. Use cameras and gunshot detectors to identify and arrest shooters. Market Street needs persistent enforcement, not a temporary show of force.

Family Zoning Delivers

Published July 30, 2026

The Facts

The first new homes proposed under Family Zoning won unanimous Planning Commission approval Thursday, according to Kevin Nguyen at The Standard. The Planning Commission vote was largely ceremonial; changes to state and local law now all but guarantee approval for new homes that comply with the rules.

The building will turn a two-unit building that’s been vacant since 2019 into an eight-story building with eight condos, six of which would have three or four bedrooms. Two homes would be subsidized for households earning up to 80% of area median income.

The Context

Mayor Lurie’s Family Zoning Plan allows six- to eight-story housing along many transit and commercial corridors in northern and western neighborhoods. It was necessary to comply with state homebuilding mandates.

The GrowSF Take

Family Zoning is working as intended. More families living in the Richmond will strengthen its neighborhood character, not diminish it.

Now San Francisco needs to make sure these homes get built by continuing to ease permitting rules and pulling every lever it can to make projects financially feasible.

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of July 19, 2026:
- City Budget Hits $16.9 Billion
- Great Highway Vote Returns
- School zone speed limit drops to 20mph
- Mahmood Pivots to Grocery Incentives
- Dolores Huerta Backs Scott Wiener

City Budget Hits $16.9 Billion

Published July 25, 2026

The Facts

San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors unanimously approved a $16.9 billion budget on July 21, according to Alyce McFadden at the Chronicle.

The budget relies on two main elements:

• About $300 million in recurring changes: Roughly half comes from higher future tax and public-health revenue. The rest comes from lower staffing, contract, grant, and operating costs, according to the Controller’s analysis.

• $696.1 million in one-time money: This includes $505 million in unused money carried forward from prior years and $191.1 million from reserves. Most will be used in the second year, according to the revenue plan.

The $300 million and $696.1 million figures measure different things. The first reduces the annual mismatch between revenue and spending. The second is temporary funding used across the two-year budget.

About $80 million of the recurring savings is supposed to come from future staffing reductions, but the affected positions have not been identified, according to an S&P credit review.

The Board also restored $28.6 million for Free City College for residents, youth jobs, health care, senior services, and other programs.

The Context

Federal funding changes represented $306.3 million of the original $642.8 million two-year deficit. Revenue was expected to grow slowly because remote work continued to weaken downtown activity and commercial property values, while tourism remained below its pre-pandemic strength. Salaries, benefits, and voter-mandated spending continued to rise.

The GrowSF Take

A stronger economy and real spending reductions helped, but one-time money only buys time. City Hall must complete the promised staffing reductions and control recurring costs while ensuring departments are delivering what residents are paying for.

Great Highway Vote Returns

Published July 23, 2026

The Facts

A measure to reopen the Upper Great Highway to private cars on weekdays has qualified for November’s ballot. It would allow cars most weekdays while keeping the road car-free from Friday at 6 p.m. until Monday at 4 a.m. and on holidays; implementation may require Coastal Commission approval.

The Context

Voters approved Proposition K in November 2024 with 54.73% support, permanently closing the two-mile road between Lincoln Way and Sloat Boulevard to private cars. Sunset Dunes opened in April 2025.

Reopening would require at least $10.75 million in roadway and signal work, although some signals were already due for replacement, according to Samantha Kennedy at KQED.

The GrowSF Take

Just like California’s repeated dialysis initiatives, voters are yet again being asked to decide the fate of a two-mile stretch of coastal road.

Ballot fights like this drive home the need for Mayor Lurie’s reform to raise the signature threshold for citizen ordinances from 2% to 8% of registered voters. It should take more than roughly 10,000 signatures in a city of more than 800,000 people to put something to a vote.

School zone speed limit drops to 20mph

Published July 23, 2026

The Facts

The SFMTA Board approved citywide school zones of 15 or 20 mph on July 21, replacing remaining 25 mph zones with a 20 mph default while retaining 15 mph limits on qualifying two-lane residential streets.

SFMTA will replace speed-limit signs around six school campuses before the new school year, then install the new signs citywide over two years, according to Rachel Swan at the San Francisco Chronicle.

The Context

California’s AB 382, signed October 10, 2025, lets cities establish 20 mph limits within 500-foot school zones before a statewide framework takes effect in 2031. It also allows 15 mph limits on qualifying residential roads with no more than two traffic lanes.

Lower limits work best with enforcement. After one year, San Francisco’s 33-camera network recorded a 79% reduction in vehicles traveling at least 10 mph over the limit, from 11% of drivers to 2%, or roughly 40,000 fewer speeding incidents daily.

The GrowSF Take

We’re glad to see it! But taking two years to swap out speed-limit signs is unacceptably slow. SFMTA should finish this straightforward safety upgrade in weeks, not years. And it’d be great to throw in some automated speeding cameras to punish drivers putting kids at risk.

Mahmood Pivots to Grocery Incentives

Published July 23, 2026

The Facts

Supervisor Bilal Mahmood is taking a new approach to getting more grocery stores open in San Francisco.

Mahmood is introducing legislation that would waive some city fees in underserved neighborhoods, make it easier to divide large, empty supermarkets into smaller spaces, and encourage housing projects that include a grocery store.

The plan will go through the Board of Supervisors instead of appearing on the November ballot.

The Context

San Francisco has struggled to keep grocery stores open — and to replace the ones it loses. When the Fillmore Safeway closed in February 2025, it left the neighborhood without a full-service grocery store, and three grocers have since walked away from plans to reopen the site.

The GrowSF Take

The best way to get more grocery stores is to make them easier and less expensive to open.

Mahmood’s plan addresses the reasons stores struggle to open and survive: high costs, rigid zoning, large retail spaces, and too few nearby customers.

Dolores Huerta Backs Scott Wiener

Published July 23, 2026

The Facts

Labor and civil-rights icon Dolores Huerta has endorsed Scott Wiener for Congress. “I know the difference between a politician who talks about justice and one who fights for it,” Huerta said in her endorsement statement.

The Context

Huerta co-founded United Farm Workers, but she and the union make endorsements independently. Her support gives Wiener a powerful labor movement validator.

The GrowSF Take

Congrats to Senator Wiener for earning Huerta’s endorsement. We support Wiener because he builds coalitions and turns pro-housing and civil-rights goals into state law. Huerta knows his record and agrees.

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of July 12, 2026:
- SF Cuts Housing Tax to 5%, Except in the Mission
- Supervisors Back More Speed Cameras
- SF Will Finally Fund Drug-Free Housing
- Wiener Fundraising Surges After Attack
- Pelosi Can’t Lift Chan
- Campaign Donation Reform Uncertain

SF Cuts Housing Tax to 5%, Except in the Mission

Published July 16, 2026

The Facts

The Board of Supervisors voted 9-2 on July 14 to cut San Francisco’s inclusionary housing requirement from 15% to 5%, and exempted buildings with fewer than 24 homes entirely, reports Aaliyah Español-Rivas at Mission Local. The inclusionary requirement is the rule that homebuilders must sell or rent a share of new homes at below-market prices. Because the builder absorbs the loss on those homes, it works like a tax on new housing.

But the new rate will not apply everywhere. District 9 Supervisor Jackie Fielder won a 6-5 amendment keeping the Mission at 8%, the highest rate in the city, over the opposition of Supervisors Dorsey, Wong, Sherrill, Sauter, and Mandelman.

The Context

Nobody builds at a loss: a project only gets financed when expected rents cover the cost of construction (land, labor, and materials), and every required below-market home is an extra cost the building must absorb. When costs are too high, builders don’t just build less, they don’t build at all, and that’s exactly how San Francisco got here.

In June 2016, voters passed Proposition C, which raised the inclusionary zoning requirement for large projects to 25%. The city’s own advisory committee warned in 2017 that anything above 18% would sink projects, but the rate stayed too-high-to-build under the previous Progressive majority. This April, the City Controller recommended going all the way to zero, warning that “requirements significantly above 0% would further threaten feasibility and would not create additional housing”.

The Mission’s carve-out rests on a repeatedly disproven fear that building new homes causes displacement. If that were true, then demolishing homes would make a neighborhood more affordable. The evidence points the other way: Austin built, and rents fell.

The GrowSF Take

Credit where it’s due: cutting the housing tax from 15% to 5%, with a full exemption for smaller buildings, is the biggest step any Board has taken to restart homebuilding in San Francisco. It completes a drop from 25% at the 2016 peak to 5% today, and it passed 9-2. Thank you to the nine supervisors who voted yes.

Still, let’s be clear about what 5% is: a political number, not an economic one. The City’s own economists said even zero doesn’t pencil out, and no analysis has surfaced to justify 5% instead. The Board picked a number small enough to signal seriousness but big enough to avoid the headline that San Francisco eliminated its inclusionary requirement. If the economists are right, that compromise has a cost: projects that don’t pencil at 5% produce neither market-rate homes nor below-market ones, and 5% of nothing is nothing.

There is no such defense for Supervisor Fielder’s Mission carve-out. The Controller said any rate above 0% “would not create additional housing.” Fielder heard that and demanded 8% for her own district anyway, the highest rate in the city. That 8% will not produce a single below-market home, because the projects that would contain them won’t break ground. It will simply make the Mission the one neighborhood the recovery skips: as building restarts everywhere else, the Mission’s frozen supply will push prices up faster, causing exactly the displacement Fielder says she is fighting.

Now the Board should watch permit applications, and if 5% still doesn’t pencil, follow its economists to zero. Either way, the Mission’s 8% should be the first thing repealed.

Supervisors Back More Speed Cameras

Published July 17, 2026

The Facts

More speed cameras may be coming to San Francisco, if the state agrees. The Board of Supervisors on Tuesday formally asked the state to lift San Francisco’s 33-camera cap and allow the city to install up to 80 more, with Supervisor Shamann Walton casting the sole no vote.

The Context

California’s AB 645 pilot caps San Francisco at 33 systems through 2031. Citations are civil penalties starting at $50, and cameras photograph rear license plates rather than drivers’ faces.

SFMTA’s one-year report found that the share of drivers going at least 10 mph over the limit fell 79% at camera locations, from 11% to 2%, equal to roughly 40,000 fewer speeding incidents each day.

Citywide traffic deaths fell from 43 to 25 between 2024 and 2025, alongside speed cameras and other safety measures.

The GrowSF Take

The evidence is undeniable: speed cameras save lives. Sacramento should let San Francisco place them on more streets where crash data shows the greatest danger.

Automated enforcement should complement safer street design and police enforcement, not replace either.

SF Will Finally Fund Drug-Free Housing

Published July 16, 2026

The Facts

New city-funded supportive housing must be drug free after the Board of Supervisors voted 7-4 to pass Supervisor Dorsey’s “Drug Free Housing” ordinance, reports Delilah Brumer at the Chronicle. Until now, the city followed the state’s Housing First rules, under which illicit drug use could not be grounds for eviction.

Of the city’s roughly 8,500 supportive housing units, only 42 are drug-free today. The ordinance allows for relapse and requires that anyone facing eviction be offered shelter.

The Context

The old rule meant someone could leave treatment determined to stay sober, and the city would house them in a building where drug use was protected. Amber Richmond, a formerly homeless housing coordinator, told the Chronicle her clients ask for housing insulated from drug use and she has nothing to offer them: “By forcing them into drug-tolerant buildings, we’re just setting them up to fail.”

The Civil Grand Jury found that 26% of San Francisco’s accidental overdose deaths in 2024 happened inside permanent supportive housing, while the city’s first fully sober shelter, Hope House, filled up almost immediately.

The GrowSF Take

Drug-free housing for people trying to escape drug addiction should have been the default decades ago, and Supervisor Dorsey, in recovery himself, deserves enormous credit for getting it done.

Connie Chan voted against this, attempting to force everyone receiving housing assistance into a one-size-fits-all solution that put children and people in drug recovery into housing with easy access to drugs. We think people should be able to choose a drug-free or a drug-tolerant environment.

This November Chan faces Scott Wiener for Nancy Pelosi’s seat in Congress, author of the state’s Recovery Incentives Act. We endorsed him in June, and votes like this are exactly why.

Wiener Fundraising Surges After Attack

Published July 17, 2026

The Facts

State Sen. Scott Wiener raised $127,600 from about 1,090 grassroots contributions in the four days after a video of protesters harassing him at the Trans March went viral, according to Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez at The Standard.

The footage showed protesters following and berating Wiener over his positions on Gaza, which barely differ from his opponent’s: Chan wants a full embargo on aid to Israel and to fully cut ties with the nation, while Wiener wants to halt offensive weapons sales while continuing a strong US-Israel relationship. Both have described the ongoing war as “genocide.”

The Context

Chan barely acknowledged the attacks. After the Chronicle asked for comment, she issued a general statement that did not name Wiener or the incident, according to Joe Garofoli at the Chronicle. She also declined to sign a letter specifically condemning the harassment, threats, and physical intimidation.

Wiener’s grassroots surge of 1,090 contributions also easily surpassed the $100,000 raised by Pelosi for Chan.

The GrowSF Take

Political disagreement is legitimate. Following, screaming at, and harassing someone at a Pride event is not persuasion, and this pile-on plainly backfired.

GrowSF endorsed Wiener because he has the strongest record of turning pro-housing, pro-transit ideas into law. This fundraising surge shows that many voters reject political intimidation and want effective leadership instead.

Pelosi Can’t Lift Chan

Published July 16, 2026

The Facts

Nancy Pelosi raised a paltry $100,000 for Connie Chan at a July 7 fundraiser in Jackson Square, according to Gabriel Lorenzo Greschler at The San Francisco Standard.

Chan has raised about $1.08 million and had $362,000 on hand through June 30. State Sen. Scott Wiener reported nearly $1.3 million available.

The Context

Pelosi is among the most successful political fundraisers in American history, helping Democrats raise an estimated $1.28 billion after entering House leadership in 2002. Yet her handpicked successor trails Wiener financially and electorally: Wiener won 40.7% of the primary vote, compared with Chan’s 29.7%.

The candidates also represent different traditions. Wiener has built a record of passing ambitious housing and transit laws. Chan is an SF progressive: she opposes change, only supports government-funded housing, and wants to slow everything down in layers of process.

The GrowSF Take

For Pelosi, $100,000 is a surprisingly modest haul. She is literally the Democratic Party’s best fundraiser, working for the candidate she chose to inherit her seat. The result suggests Chan remains a weak pick even with Pelosi’s network behind her.

Chan is also poorly aligned with Pelosi’s pragmatic, institution-building legacy. Pelosi’s endorsement increasingly looks less like affirmative support for Chan and more like a spiteful effort to stop Wiener.

Campaign Donation Reform Uncertain

Published July 17, 2026

The Facts

The $500 campaign contribution limit was set in 1973, and the Ethics Commission is trying to raise it. However, Supervisor Rafael Mandelman is not sure it has the votes.

The Ethics Commission proposal would raise candidate contribution limits from $500 to $1,000, index them to inflation, simplify spending limits, and increase the public-financing match from $6 to $8 per qualified dollar without raising each candidate’s maximum subsidy.

The Context

Before the Ethics Commission approved it 5-0 in September 2025, GrowSF explained the imbalance: candidate committees face frozen caps while Super PACs and other independent committees can accept unlimited donations.

San Francisco first set the limit at $500 in 1973. It reached $1,000 in 1983, but pushed back down to $500 in 1986 via Prop F. Keeping pace with inflation would put the limit around $3,500 today.

The GrowSF Take

Low donation limits do not remove big money from politics. They push it into Super PACs that candidates cannot control.

We support raising the limit to $3,500. Let candidates raise money transparently, communicate directly with voters, and take responsibility for their own campaigns. That would reduce the relative power of outside spending and bring a half-century-old limit in line with today’s costs.

The astute reader may ask: “But isn’t GrowSF a Super Pac?” Indeed, but that doesn’t mean we don’t support reforms that reduce the influence of outside money! We want good civic outcomes, not good-for-our-bottom-line outcomes.

We highly recommend checking out the interactive charts on growsf.org so you can adjust the dates, election types, and check the sources. If you spot an error, please email us at contact@growsf.org.

The Long Count

It wasn’t always like this

Between 1926 and 2002, San Franciscans would learn the outcome of an election before they went to bed. But in 2002, it started to take longer to learn who won, and today in 2026 it can take days or weeks. 100 years after the adoption of voting machines led to immediate counts, why have our elections gotten slower?

The big change is that almost everyone votes by mail now, and counting mail-in ballots takes longer than counting in-person votes. The signature on each mail-in ballot is manually verified, and the Department of Elections stops counting ballots a day before Election Day in order to print paper voter rolls instead of using electronic voter rolls. In other words, the Department is using outdated technology and processes that haven’t kept up with changing voter behavior.

But the good news is that we can speed up the count without limiting vote-by-mail. Other California counties have already adopted proven fixes, and San Francisco can too.

To create this research report, GrowSF created the first publicly available dataset containing registration counts, in-person voting turnout, and absentee voting data going back to 1849. We searched historic records from the Chronicle archives and the Department of Elections to understand what we knew, and when we knew it, about the outcome of our elections. This significant effort would not have been possible without Anthropic Fable 5, Claude Code, the dutiful reporters at the San Francisco Chronicle, the San Francisco Examiner, the Daily Alta California, and the San Francisco Call, archivists at the San Francisco Public Library, the visionaries behind the Internet Archive and the Wayback Machine, the San Francisco Department of Elections, the registrars who compiled the city’s historical Municipal Reports, the California Secretary of State’s Reports of Registration and Statements of Vote, the U.S. Census Bureau by way of IPUMS NHGIS, the California Voter Foundation’s county counting-speed research, and the county election offices around the state whose practices we compared.

Why the count slowed

There are two main reasons that counting votes in San Francisco has slowed down over the last two decades:

1. More voters are voting by mail, and they’re voting later than ever

2. The SF Department of Elections verifies signatures manually instead of using automatic signature verification systems, and they pause the count for two days to print paper voter rolls instead of using electronic voter rolls

Our county-by-county analysis lets us apportion the blame between the two: of the roughly 15 points of election-night share San Francisco lost between 2012 and 2024, the shift to mail voting mechanically explains only about 4. The other 11 come from how the city counts.

Voting by mail

The count’s slowdown is directly tied to the rise of vote by mail, and specifically to VBM ballots arriving on or near election day. In 1978, the state legislature made it much easier to vote by mail (AB 1699), and late-arriving absentee ballots slowly began to erode the election-night count. But the real break came in 2002, when California allowed voters to be “permanent absentee,” meaning they would always get their ballot via mail. By 2020, only about 35% of voters were still voting in person.

2020’s universal vote-by-mail law (AB 860), prompted by COVID, slowed things down further. The November 2020 election was actually a high-water mark for the speed of the count, because voters mailed in their ballots early. But after that, voters returned to their old habits of voting late. Now the final two days of voting are marked by about half of all ballots coming back, by mail, in drop boxes, or handed in at polling places, and those won’t be counted for many days.

In the June 2026 primary, the final two days looked like this:

And for the election as a whole, in-person voting has become a small minority:

Outdated policy

For 28 days leading up to the election, San Francisco counts mail-in ballots as soon as they arrive. But they stop counting the day before Election Day and don’t resume until the day after. Even if you mail your ballot early, if it arrives on Monday or Tuesday it misses the election-night count. Same story for ballot drop boxes and ballots handed in at polling places. None of these ballots will be counted until Wednesday, and their results won’t be published until Thursday, at the earliest.

The Department stops counting so they can print paper voter rolls and distribute them to the voting precincts across the city. The department flags which voters have already voted so If they show up at their polling place, they’ll be turned away. This guarantees that the 11% of voters who show up at their polling place will be able to vote on a regular (non-provisional) ballot, but it also means that 50% of the count is paused for two days.

In the June 2026 primary, just 46% of ballots were counted on election night.

The policy problem is that the list of voters exists only on paper. Other cities in California have fixed this by using electronic voter rolls so the count never stops and voters are verified in real time.

Why mail ballots are counted so slowly

Every mail ballot must have the signature on its envelope checked against the signature on file, with a human worker comparing the two by eye. That is slow work, and with a sudden deluge of more than a hundred thousand ballots, it’s a real bottleneck in the counting process.

San Francisco has not adopted technology like automatic signature verification to keep pace with the rise of vote-by-mail voting, unlike many other jurisdictions.

Do more people vote? No.

Is a slow count worth it if it means we’ve expanded the franchise and more people can vote? Absolutely. But is that what happened? Our analysis says no.

The franchise did not grow in 2020 when we switched to permanent vote-by-mail. It didn’t grow when we allowed permanent absentee registration in 2002. It didn’t grow in 1978, when we made it easier to do vote by mail.

In fact, the share of eligible San Franciscans who are actually registered has held around three-quarters for over a century. And no vote by mail reform has shifted what percent of registered voters actually cast their ballot.

So what would actually speed it up?

Speeding up the count requires a combination of fixes. Better software is part of it, but we also need some policy changes. We can do a lot better, but we still won’t hit 100% election-night counts.

Fix #1: Don’t stop the count

Net election-night increase: 15 points

On election day in June 2026, the Department of Elections was holding 42,107 vote-by-mail ballots it simply wasn’t allowed to process (3,181 handed in at the City Hall counter, 9,211 in Monday’s drop boxes, and 29,715 that arrived by mail on Monday and Tuesday), all because the count pauses to print rosters.

See the data: every June 2026 mail ballot, by date received and return method

Instead of pausing the vote-by-mail count for two days to print a paper list of who has and who hasn’t voted, the Department of Elections should use electronic pollbooks that sync in real time. Each polling place will get a tablet where voters can check in electronically, and verify in real time that they haven’t already voted. This is the single biggest lever to speed up the count, and it is already legal and proven in other counties.

This change would increase election-night counts by as much as 15 points, moving the June 2026 election-night report from 46% toward the low 60s. It would also eliminate the two-day pause, so that ballots returned on Monday and Tuesday would be counted immediately instead of waiting until Wednesday.

Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, Santa Clara, and San Luis Obispo counties all use e-pollbooks. This is the highest-confidence, highest-payoff fix for the election-night count, and it’s already proven to work.

Fix #2: Sign, scan, and go

Net election-night increase: 10 points

On election day, 60,637 ballots were handed in at polling places. Placer County’s “Sign, Scan & Go” lets a voter cast their mail ballot like an in-person ballot by feeding it straight into the precinct scanner. It cut Placer’s post-election processing by three to four days.

As of the June 2026 primary, 31 of California’s 58 counties offered it, but San Francisco isn’t one of them. A pending bill in the State Senate (SB 1420) would support wider adoption. It won’t catch everyone, since plenty of voters will still drop and go, but it is the only tool that touches that 60,000-ballot polling-place pile.

Say half of polling-place-drop-off voters used sign, scan, and go. That would be 30,000 ballots counted on election night instead of waiting for the post-election canvass, moving the June 2026 election-night report from the low 60s toward the low 70s.

Fix #3: Modernize signature verification

Net election-night increase: 5-30 points

Automated signature verification (ASV) should be used to check every signature, with the high-confidence matches automatically approved. Human workers should only manually review mismatches.

Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego use it, among others. ASV is worth doing, but it is not an election-night silver bullet. Signature verification is only as good as the reference set of signatures on file, so if the voter only has a 10 year out-of-date signature from the DMV on file, their ballot will still end up in manual review. But this can be fixed over time: each accepted signature can be folded back into the reference set, so the more ballots that are processed, the better the system gets. ASV is a lever that pays off over time. The Department of Elections could also run signature-update drives, request higher-resolution signatures at the DMV, and proactively reach out to voters with outdated signatures.

Of note, almost no ballots are flagged for review due to mismatched signatures today. In the June 2026 election, just 694 vote-by-mail ballots were flagged for a signature that didn’t match, and the city cured half of them (331). Just 363 out of 241,414 ballots went uncounted due to a signature mismatch. 221 ballots were rejected because the envelope had no signature at all.

Fix #4: Count drop boxes on election night

Net election-night increase: 14 points

The Department of Elections should count ballots in drop boxes on election night, instead of waiting until the post-election canvass. In the June 2026 primary, 38,263 ballots went into drop boxes on Election Day itself (Monday’s 9,211 drop-box ballots are already counted by Fix #1), and none of them were counted until Wednesday. Counting them on election night would move the June 2026 election-night report from the low 70s toward the mid 80s.

Fix #5: Tell voters to vote earlier

Net election-night increase: 5-15 points

The Department of Elections should run a public-education campaign to encourage voters to return their ballots earlier. The June 2026 election saw 52% of ballots returned in the final two days, and that is a big part of why the count is so slow. If voters mailed or dropped off their ballots earlier, more of them would be counted on election night.

Fix #6: Report on Wednesday

Even with those fixes in place, the Department still doesn’t release updated vote counts until Thursday, two days after the election. Simply posting a Wednesday update, using numbers it already has in hand, would show the public a large share of the remaining vote a full day sooner, with no new equipment and no change in law.

It is the cheapest item on this list: a reporting-cadence choice, not a technology. Los Angeles already reports this way: its first canvass update of November 2024 landed the day after Election Day, adding 80,941 ballots to the count, with daily updates after that. And, really, are we going to let LA beat us to the punch on election-night reporting?

Conclusion

Taken together, these six fixes could move San Francisco’s election-night count from 46% in June 2026 to the low-to-mid 90s, and the one-week count from 90% to nearly 100%.

We performed a difference-in-differences study across California’s counties to quantify the effect of adopting these reforms, and the results are encouraging: counties that adopted e-pollbooks, automatic signature verification, and Voter Choice Act vote centers almost all saw meaningful improvements in their election-night counts versus the control. The two counties that adopted vote centers most recently, San Diego in 2022 and Placer in 2024, both beat their own past performance immediately. But Sacramento, which adopted vote centers in 2018 and still saw its night count collapse, showing that the technology only pays off when the operations behind it work.

None of these changes are on San Francisco’s roadmap. We reviewed the Department of Elections’ budget memos, the city’s procurement portal, and the Elections Commission’s 2026 meeting minutes, and none of them turn up a plan to adopt electronic pollbooks, automatic signature verification, or sign-and-scan. When asked directly about automated signature verification, the Department told us it had “previously considered” the technology but “ultimately opted for human review of signatures.”

We will never get a final count on election night, since California lets ballots arrive for a week after election day. But we can do a lot better than 46%. The long count is a choice, and San Francisco can make a different one.

California Voter Foundation study

We developed these recommendations independently. So it really means something that the California Voter Foundation, a nonpartisan group that has tracked the state’s count speed since 2022 through its Close Count Transparency Project, arrived at the same ones. GrowSF’s research report began on June 9th, but on June 25, 2026, CVF published California’s Long Count, an in-depth study built on case studies of Orange, Placer, and San Joaquin counties.

Its list of recommendations matches ours: sign-and-scan, faster signature curing, and voter education that moves ballot returns earlier, plus the things only Sacramento can provide, like funding for ballot-processing equipment, space, and staff ($55.5M in CVF’s budget ask) and a $35M early-voting education campaign. We were surprised that their study even shared a name with ours (The Long Count vs California’s Long Count) - a coincidence.

Addendum: History of SF Voting

Eras

San Francisco has gone through five distinct eras of vote counting.

Hand-count era. (before 1926)

Although voting machines were first tried in 1904, irregularities were found in the election results and the machines were destroyed in the 1906 earthquake & fire. Rather than replace the machines, election officials returned to hand-counting every ballot, often by lamplight. Results were erratic rather than uniformly slow: in light-ballot years the city had most of the result by morning (85% in the 1912 general; 92% in the 1908 primary), but long ballots and heavy turnout could slow the count considerably, like in 1914, with 40-plus state measures on the ballot, and in 1916, the closest presidential race in state history, where barely 3% was counted by the next morning.

Fast-count era (1926 - 1978)

Fast counting arrived with mechanization, led by Joshua H. (Harry) Zemansky, the longtime Registrar of Voters in the early 1900s. Zemansky is unknown now, but was well known and well respected at the time, and is responsible for bringing San Francisco’s elections into the modern era.

At the 1922 convention of county clerks in Los Angeles, Zemansky advocated to “substitute the voting machine in place of the present methods of casting ballots“. By 1923, Zemansky had ordered 52 machines (though the Chronicle reported it was actually 100 machines for 52 precincts), deployed 500 machines by November 1925, and rolled them out to every one of the 600+ precincts by 1926.

The difference was immediate, and the contrast was visible the same year the rollout was half-finished. Because a lever machine tallies each vote as it’s cast, “the counting of the ballots was done in each polling place rather than at a central point,” and officials in the machine precincts “were done with their tasks immediately after the close of the polls” — while the precincts still using paper ballots “required considerable time” (San Francisco Chronicle, November 4, 1925). As soon as machines replaced hand-counted paper across the city, San Franciscans started learning the outcome on election night: “The machines were a great success, giving the result at 8 o’clock on election night, while in the paper ballot booths officials worked until the early morning hours” (San Francisco Chronicle, November 13, 1925)

Absentee early voting era (1978 - 2002)

In 1978, the state legislature made it much easier to vote by mail. Until then, a voter had to specify a qualifying reason (illness, absence from the precinct on Election Day, physical handicap, a conflicting religious commitment, or living more than 10 miles from their polling place) to get an absentee ballot at all. But AB 1699 (Chapter 77, Statutes of 1978 [Lehman]) “delete[d] the requirement that a registered voter specify a reason for the request for an absentee ballot” and guaranteed that an absentee ballot would be “made available to any registered voter.”

At the beginning of the era, these absentee voters typically voted early and their ballots were already counted by election night. But by the 1990s they were voting later and later, and the election-night count slowly began to erode, though San Franciscans still went to bed knowing the outcome.

Permanent vote-by-mail era (2002 - 2020)

In 2002, California opened its first permanent absentee voter roll: register once and you’d automatically receive a mail ballot in every election. By 2020, only about 35% of voters were still voting in person.

This was a major change in voter behavior, and it immediately caused a noticeable and persistent slowdown in the count. People started to get accustomed to receiving their ballot early, waiting to fill it out, and mailing it in later and later. Election nights below 75% counted, a rarity in the previous three-quarters of a century, became the norm: since 2006, only the all-mail November 2020 election has cleared that bar, and the slide continued for two decades.

Slow-count era (2020 - present)

Nearly one hundred years after San Francisco entered its fast count era with mechanical voting machines, in 2020 the slow count era began.

Two things define this era:

1. Almost everyone votes by mail, and counting mail ballots takes a long time due to manual signature verification.

2. About half of all voters return their ballot in the final two days of voting.

The COVID pandemic in 2020 forced a change to universal vote-by-mail, which slowed the count dramatically. Not only is counting a mail ballot slow due to manual signature verification, but anyone who casts their ballot in the final four days of the election wouldn’t have their ballot counted until the day after Election Day, at the earliest. And because about half of all voters return their ballot in those final two days, the end of every election is now marked by a deluge of ballots that won’t be counted for many days.

As of the June 2026 primary election, just 46% of ballots were counted on election night.

How votes were counted, by era

Until 1926: Hand-counted paper ballots, tallied by clerks precinct by precinct, late into the night.

1926–1960s: Mechanical lever voting machines — adopted in 1923 (upheld in Ashe v. Zemansky), citywide by 1926. Each machine tallied votes at the precinct, so totals were read off the counters at the close of polls.

1960s–1990s: Punch-card ballots, machine-tabulated — the system behind 1995’s “chad-jam” count.

2000s: Punch cards were decertified after the 2000 Florida recount; the city moved to optical-scan paper ballots, and to ranked-choice tabulation in 2004.

Today: Optical-scan paper everywhere: precinct scanners on Election Day, and high-speed central scanners for the mail ballots — each read only after its signature is verified, at the central office.

Registration and turnout

Slightly more people are registered, and slightly more are voting, but it hasn’t changed much since 1948. And no vote by mail reform has shifted what percent of registered voters actually cast their ballot.

The share of eligible San Franciscans who are actually registered has held around three-quarters for over a century. One thing to note, though: in the 1990s the share of registered voters briefly exceeds the eligible electorate. That’s the “deadwood” era of bloated rolls, before the 1995 federal “motor-voter” law forced a cleanup to remove people who were no longer correctly registered after they moved out of the jurisdiction.

Turnout is a slightly different story. You can see in the chart above that post-2002’s permanent absentee voter roll, turnout in the general election does go up, but it’s confounded by a new political environment with always-on news, social media, and never-ending political campaigns. So it may be more attributable to the media environment, or even who’s on the ballot, rather than how people are voting.

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of June 28, 2026:
- Today’s 4th of July Celebrations
- 14 State Ballot Measures
- Wiener Driven From Trans March
- California Funds Faster Counts

Today’s 4th of July Celebrations

Main fireworks and waterfront events

Golden Gate Bridge + waterfront fireworks — 9:30 p.m., free

San Francisco’s official Fourth of July fireworks show is planned for about 9:30 p.m., with fireworks from the Golden Gate Bridge and barges on the bay. Best viewing areas are Crissy Field, Marina Green, Pier 39, Fisherman’s Wharf, and the northern Embarcadero.

Fisherman’s Wharf / Pier 39 waterfront celebration — afternoon through fireworks, free to attend

Fisherman’s Wharf businesses, restaurants, shops, and attractions will be open, and there will be free musical entertainment from 2:00–9:15 p.m. at Crab Wheel Plaza near Jefferson and Taylor.

Free public events during the day

Sunset Dunes Community Parade — 11:30 a.m.–2:00 p.m.

A neighborhood Fourth of July parade and community event on the Great Highway/Sunset Dunes corridor. The parade starts at Noriega and ends at Judah, with live music and children’s activities until 2:00 p.m.

Golden Gate Park Band: “Happy 250th America!” — 1:00–2:00 p.m.

The Golden Gate Park Band will play a patriotic Fourth of July program at the Golden Gate Bandshell in the Music Concourse area.

Fillmore Jazz Festival — 10:00 a.m.–6:00 p.m.

The Fillmore Jazz Festival runs July 4–5 on Fillmore Street, with live music, art, food, and beverages. It is free to attend and is a strong daytime option for people who want a street-festival atmosphere rather than a fireworks-only plan.

“7X7” light installation at Civic Center Plaza — dusk to dawn

The 7X7 public light-art installation runs through July 4 at Civic Center Plaza, with 49 beams representing San Francisco’s 49 square miles.

Just walk around the Mission

The Mission will pop off after dark with many intersections taken over by unsanctioned fireworks shows. It’s always a lively time!

14 State Ballot Measures

Published July 2, 2026

The Facts

You’ll be voting on 14 state ballot measures this November, and here’s a quick overview of what each will do. GrowSF will publish detailed analyses of each one in the coming months.

• Prop 1: $11.25 billion in bonds: $10 billion for affordable housing construction, preservation, and homeownership programs, plus $1.25 billion for CalVet home loans that veteran borrowers repay themselves. The $10 billion refills existing programs whose 2018 bond money is spent, costs roughly $17.39 billion to repay over 30 years per a legislative analysis, and February PPIC polling found likely voters split at 49% yes.

• Prop 2: Doubles the state rainy day fund maximum from 10% to 20% of General Fund, forces bigger deposits in capital-gains boom years, extends mandatory debt paydown through 2039-40, and exempts reserve deposits from the Gann spending limit until withdrawn. Legislative Democrats put it on the ballot as part of the 2026 budget deal after years of surplus-then-deficit whiplash, and the nonpartisan LAO says it would cover about half of future shortfalls versus one-third under current rules, short of the 50% cap the LAO recommended.

• Prop 3: Makes the existing 10.3–12.3% top income tax rates permanent by deleting their 2030 expiration date; doesn’t raise rates or create new taxes. The rates were created by Prop 30 (2012) and extended by Prop 55 (2016), bring in $5–15 billion a year, and while the money is branded for schools and children’s healthcare, only about 40% typically reaches K-14 education, with the rest flowing to reserves and the general fund.

• Prop 4: Un-bans public financing for political campaigns by repealing California’s 1988 ban. Charter cities like SF and LA already run such programs, since Charter cities are special.

• Prop 5: Ends the two-question recall ballot for state officers. Rather than a recall vote and a replacement vote, voters would decide only yes-or-no on removal, and a recalled Governor would be succeeded by the Lieutenant Governor. It would also newly allow a recalled officer to run in that later special election, and it passes with a simple majority.

• Prop 37: $25 billion in bonds to fund fixed-rate second mortgages covering up to 17% of the price of a newly built home, for buyers earning up to 200% of area median income who put at least 3% down. The bonds are repaid by borrowers rather than taxpayers (the LAO estimates no direct state or local costs), the program applies only to new construction to push supply rather than bid up existing homes, and the measure also bundles in an opt-in builder track trading stronger labor enforcement for friendlier construction-defect rules.

• Prop 38: $8.4 billion in general obligation bonds for immunology and immunotherapy research, splitting the proceeds evenly between one UC-affiliated institute and competitive grants, with $4.2 billion earmarked for cancer, heart disease, and Alzheimer’s. It follows the Prop 71/Prop 14 stem cell bond model, would cost the General Fund roughly $500 million a year for about 25 years per the LAO, and is bankrolled by billionaire Dr. Gary Michelson, with the institute criteria closely matching UCLA’s existing immunology institute.

• Prop 39: Requires photo ID for in-person voting, an ID number on mail ballots, and citizenship verification for registration. Nearly all Californians vote by mail, so for most voters the practical change is writing a driver’s license or last-four digits of their Social Security number on the return envelope; the LAO pegs costs in the tens of millions annually, and the citizenship-check provision faces likely federal preemption litigation under the National Voter Registration Act.

• Prop 40: Imposes a one-time 5% tax on the wealth of Californians worth over $1 billion, sending 90% of the money to health care and 10% to schools and food assistance. It was put on the ballot by the SEIU healthcare workers union to offset federal Medicaid cuts, and it shares the ballot with two billionaire-funded countermeasures (Props 41 and 42) that can nullify it if they get more yes votes, so the margins matter as much as passage.

• Prop 41: Requires audits of programs funded by new special taxes proposed in an upcoming election, every four years after it passes, and blocks new taxes from Gann spending limit exemption. This is one of two anti-Prop-40 measures; with the Gann spending limit change being the operative provision that would block the “billionaire tax.”

• Prop 42: Constitutional amendment to prevent future asset and wealth taxes, and most retroactive taxes. Another anti-Prop-40 measure, both main provisions are designed to block the billionaire wealth tax.

• Prop 43: Requires two-thirds voter approval for all local special taxes, including those placed on the ballot by citizen initiative. It was placed on the ballot by a near-unanimous Legislature as a deal to get the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association to withdraw a broader initiative that would have also capped transfer taxes and repealed existing ones like LA’s Measure ULA; Prop 43 leaves existing taxes untouched and only applies going forward. It closes a court-created loophole that allowed local special taxes to pass with only a simple majority if they were put on the ballot via signatures rather than via legislation.

• Prop 44: Requires nonprofit community health clinics to spend at least 90% of annual revenue on direct patient care and mission-related expenses, with Attorney General enforcement, penalties, and refunds for money spent elsewhere. It was placed on the November 2026 ballot by SEIU-UHW after a similar bill (AB 1113) died in the Legislature, clinics are challenging it in federal court as preempted by federal health-center law, and much depends on how “mission-related expenses” gets defined in rulemaking.

• Prop 45: Fast-tracks “essential projects” (housing, water, clean energy, medical, public safety, broadband, education, and transportation) through CEQA reviews, with shorter agency deadlines and narrower judicial review. It builds on the Legislature’s 2025 CEQA reforms (AB 130/SB 131) but goes further by locking streamlining into voter-approved law, and it drew over $13.7 million in supporter funding with no organized opposition committee reported as of the March 31, 2026 filings.

The Context

Hey, at least there’s no dialysis measure.

The GrowSF Take

We’ve got our work cut out for us!

Wiener Driven From Trans March

Published July 2, 2026

The Facts

Scott Wiener was surrounded by a mob and chased out of Dolores Park during last Friday’s Trans March. The hecklers filmed themselves shouting insults, getting in his face, and antagonizing him over his positions on Israel and Gaza.

Wiener said protesters made physical contact and that it became unsafe for him to stay.

The Context

This was a repeat confrontation. After this year’s incident, Mayor Daniel Lurie called the abuse targeted and antisemitic.

The GrowSF Take

The harassment was vile, aggressive, and, frankly, scary. You can disagree with Senator Wiener without dehumanizing him, using antisemitic slurs, or even raising your voice. Pen a scathing op-ed if you really have something to say. Surrounding an elected official, making physical contact, and driving him out of a public event crosses the line from protest into intimidation. This behavior is dangerous, and we oppose it when used against anyone, whether we agree with them or not.

We have also privately reached out to Scott to give him our support and are heartened to know that hundreds of others did the same.

California Funds Faster Counts

Published July 2, 2026

The Facts

California’s 2026-27 budget sets aside $29 million for county staffing, equipment, and technology to speed ballot counting, plus $10 million for voter education and $750,000 to fight election misinformation. The funding surfaced as lawmakers finalized the deal, in a Chronicle report by Sara DiNatale.

The Context

California’s count is slow for structural reasons, but it’s been heading in the right direction. Counties have up to 30 days to canvass votes, and they must keep processing provisional ballots, and count mail ballots postmarked by Election Day that arrive up to 7 days after the election. They also have to deal with matching ballot envelope signatures to voters’ signature on file - a lengthy and mostly manual process.

A recent California Voter Foundation report argued that better equipment, staffing, voter education, and faster in-person ballot processing could shorten the count without making voting harder.

The GrowSF Take

Faster results are good government. California should protect broad ballot access and still expect a speedy count. This budget is a step forward, but it only partly funds the fixes counties and advocates say they need.

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of June 21, 2026:
- Voters to Decide Two-Thirds Tax Rule
- Dorsey pushes lobbying transparency
- Fielder Returns, Questions Remain
- SFUSD Budget Splits Board
- Sheriff Wants More RESET Centers
- Audit Finds Contract Steering
- SFPUC Head to Retire in December

Voters to Decide Two-Thirds Tax Rule

Published June 26, 2026

The Facts

Passing local taxes may get a bit harder this November, with a return to pre-2020 rules. California voters will decide ACA 22, which would re-instate a two-thirds vote requirement on any local tax earmarked for a specific use and placed on the ballot by citizen initiative, after the California Supreme Court ruled in 2020 that voter-initiative taxes only needed a simple majority. The text does not appear to retroactively cancel taxes voters already passed.

The Context

The measure is the result of legislative dealmaking with the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer’s Association’s (HJTA) ballot measure that would have forced local real-estate transfer taxes down to the state rate of 0.11%, automatically repealed any local taxes that didn’t meet the 2/3 vote requirement, and threatened San Francisco’s Muni parcel tax.

The GrowSF Take

Voters may or may not like this deal (we’ll find out in November!), but its definitely better than the measure the HJTA had qualified for the ballot. Their measure, had it passed, would have wiped out a bunch of important funding for SF government services and pushed the city and state to replace that lost funding with new (likely even more distortionary) taxes.

Dorsey pushes lobbying transparency.

Published June 25, 2026

The Facts

City-funded nonprofits may soon have to disclose lobbying at City Hall. Supervisor Matt Dorsey is drafting an ordinance that would also require nonprofit speakers to identify their affiliations during public comment, closing a local exemption.

San Francisco’s 2014 lobbyist amendments exempted officers and employees of many 501(c)(3) nonprofits, and some 501(c)(4)s, from registration and reporting when speaking for their organizations.

The Context

City Hall paid nonprofits $1.63 billion in 2025, up from $809 million in 2019, according to J.D. Morris and Hanna Zakharenko at the Chronicle. The Ethics Commission already oversees lobbyist registration and disclosure for other interests, so Dorsey’s proposal is about extending transparency rules to a much larger slice of City Hall influence.

The GrowSF Take

This is a sensible transparency reform. If an organization takes public money and then organizes pressure campaigns at City Hall, the public should know who is speaking, whom they represent, and how much advocacy is being funded.

San Francisco has a non-profit accountability problem. Many nonprofits do valuable work, but taxpayers still deserve clear disclosure when publicly funded groups lobby the officials who oversee their contracts.

Fielder Returns, Questions Remain

Published June 26, 2026

The Facts

Supervisor Jackie Fielder plans to return Monday after a three-month leave following a mental health crisis. The Board approved her request to be excused from meetings from April 7 through June 30.

The Context

Her return comes while a City Attorney investigation into her office remains unresolved.

That investigation began after a confidential legal memo was leaked to Mission Local. The memo warned that Mayor Lurie’s proposed sobering center carried “very high legal risk” if the city detained people there without meeting detention-facility standards.

The Chronicle later reported that the investigation had focused on Fielder’s office. Fielder’s office denied leaking the memo.

The GrowSF Take

Mental health crises are serious, and elected officials are human beings. We wish Supervisor Fielder well as she returns.

At the same time, District 9 went months without its elected Supervisor during an important budgeting process. San Franciscans still don’t have answers about how a confidential legal memo ended up in the press.

If confidential legal memos can be leaked without consequence, it becomes harder for city leaders to ask hard questions, get honest answers, and make responsible decisions.

Fielder is often in the Board minority, so her return likely won’t change any outcomes. Still, District 9 deserves to have its supervisor present and voting.

SFUSD Budget Splits Board

Published June 26, 2026

The Facts

SFUSD passed a $1.36 billion budget in a 4-3 vote and updated its Local Control and Accountability Plan ahead of the July 1 deadline. Superintendent Maria Su says the district can now self-certify a positive budget after cutting spending and tightening operations. One major unresolved issue is attendance: SFUSD has said student absences cost it over $60 million in state funding last school year.

The Context

The split was more interesting than a simple yes-or-no headline. As Ezra Wallach at The Standard reported, Parag Gupta, Jaime Huling, and Matt Alexander voted no because they still did not see a strategic enough link between spending and student outcomes. Huling wanted more general-fund money aimed at chronic absenteeism. On the other side, Supriya Ray and Phil Kim joined Alida Fisher and Lisa Weissman-Ward voting in favor. Kim said he would “like to vote no,” but voted yes despite being “very frustrated” that clearer alignment documents showed up only once passage of the budget was at risk. Kim and Ray also want the budget better aligned with outcomes, but risking decertification from the state was too big a risk.

The GrowSF Take

We’re glad to see the district continue to move forward balancing its budget, but we share the frustration that the money is not better tied to outcomes.

The uncomfortable truth is that both sides were right: SFUSD needed to pass this budget, and SFUSD still needs to show, in plain language, how the money will improve reading, math, and attendance.

Sheriff Wants More RESET Centers

Published June 26, 2026

The Facts

Sheriff Paul Miyamoto wants more sobering sites, known as RESET centers, after the Sixth Street facility admitted about 600 people over the past month. The facility opened May 4 at 444 Sixth St. as an involuntary 24-hour sobering facility for certain public-intoxication arrests.

The Context

The city’s RESET contract funds a 25-chair site and pays ConnectionsCA up to $14.5 million through March 2028. The Sheriff’s latest budget request asks for $6.7 million to operate the current center. The site is designed to move people arrested for public intoxication indoors instead of leaving them on sidewalks.

The GrowSF Take

Getting intoxicated people indoors is better than leaving them on the street. If the Sixth Street site is handling this many referrals this quickly, San Francisco should be open to expanding the model. The city needs more places that move people off sidewalks and into supervised care.

Audit Finds Contract Steering

Published June 25, 2026

The Facts

A city audit found former chief assistant treasurer Tajel Shah steered a tax-software procurement toward Mechanical Orchard through an undisclosed friendship with one of the firm’s executives. Auditors said staff handling both the discovery project and later bid process made repeated decisions that unfairly benefited the company.

The deal involved a contract worth up to $10 million.

The Context

The procurement was tied to replacing the city’s business-tax system, which the Treasurer-Tax Collector had already said was reaching end of life. That system helps administer billions in city revenue, so the stakes were high.

The GrowSF Take

The scandal is real, but this is not a case where nobody noticed.

An earlier bid-rigging probe put the issue on the radar, then auditors confirmed serious procurement misconduct. That shows that San Francisco’s watchdogs work.

SFPUC Head to Retire in December

Published June 25, 2026

The Facts

Dennis Herrera will retire at the end of the year, ending his tenure as SFPUC general manager, according to The San Francisco Standard and the San Francisco Chronicle.

The Context

Herrera is one of the most consequential San Francisco officials of the last 25 years. He served nearly 20 years as City Attorney before moving to SFPUC in 2021. As City Attorney, he helped defend San Francisco’s same-sex marriage licenses, sued the Trump administration over its sanctuary-city funding threats, and built one of the country’s most respected municipal law offices.

The SFPUC manages some of San Francisco’s most important infrastructure: drinking water, wastewater, and power. Herrera took over after former SFPUC general manager Harlan Kelly was caught up in the City Hall corruption scandal. Kelly was later sentenced to four years in prison for bribery, bank fraud, and conspiracy.

Herrera leaves behind a mostly positive legacy: a serious City Attorney’s office, a stabilizing tenure at SFPUC after scandal, and a public-power effort that is further along than when he arrived.

The GrowSF Take

Mayor Lurie now gets one of the most important appointments in city government.

The next SFPUC chief should be boring in the best possible way: ethical, competent, and focused on the basics. San Francisco needs reliable water and power, clean contracting, and faster delivery of major infrastructure.

They will also inherit the city’s long-running effort to take over PG&E’s local power infrastructure. Whatever one thinks of public power, its implementation requires serious management, clear numbers, and honest communication with the public.

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of June 14, 2026:
- Overdose Deaths Fall
- GrowSF launches our new transparency portal
- Billionaire Tax Negotiations
- Recalled, Still in Office
- Golden Gate Bridge Tolls Rise July 1

Overdose Deaths Fall

Published June 18, 2026

The Facts

Overdose deaths fell sharply this spring. San Francisco recorded 34 deaths in April, 35 in May, and 219 through across the first five months. The 2021-2025 monthly totals were higher in every prior year: 286 deaths in the first five months of 2021, 246 in 2022, 348 in 2023, 329 in 2024, and 316 in 2025. City officials also warned, in reporting by Natalia Gurevich at The Examiner, that cychlorphine, a synthetic opioid tied to a first local death, is showing up in counterfeit pills.

The Context

The city is improving from a still-awful baseline. San Francisco logged 625 overdose deaths in 2025. DPH says Neighborhood Street Teams expanded citywide in May 2025, and the city funded a 16-bed crisis stabilization unit at 822 Geary for people in urgent mental health or substance-use crisis.

The GrowSF Take

This is progress, but San Francisco is still mostly treading water. Even with 219 deaths through May, the city is still losing far too many people. We need a bigger shift: mandatory treatment, zero tolerance for sidewalk-level consumption, and rapid enforcement against street dealers. Better is good, but it is not enough.

GrowSF launches our new transparency portal

GrowSF became San Francisco’s most trusted voter guide by showing our work. Other groups tell people how to vote; we publish the evidence behind every endorsement and evaluate it fairly and honestly.

Now we’re showing our work on campaign finance too. Every dollar we raise and spend — every ad, mailer, and metric — is documented in detail, so our impact is clear.

Billionaire Tax Negotiations

Published June 19, 2026

The Facts

The billionaire tax qualified for the ballot this week, but with just 54% of voters indicating support, the union backing the measure is trying to negotiate a lower rate in exchange for Newsom’s support, according to Sophie Austin at The Associated Press.

They have until 5 p.m. on June 25, the deadline to certify or withdraw the measure, to find a negotiated deal. Any deal would have to be passed by the legislature.

The Context

The Legislative Analyst’s Office says the original 5% version could raise tens of billions of dollars over several years, with 90% earmarked for health care and 10% for food assistance or education-related programs. But it also warns California could lose hundreds of millions of dollars or more in annual income-tax revenue if wealthy residents leave.

Negotiations between Newsom’s office and the union have been ongoing for weeks. This week, odds of the measure appearing on the November ballot collapsed on Polymarket, possibly indicating someone with inside knowledge knew a deal had been reached. That ended up not being the case.

The GrowSF Take

Standard advice among political operatives is that you want your ballot measure to be winning with at least 60% before Election Day. So with just 54% expressing support in a May poll, the union must be feeling uneasy.

We hope this large-scale asset seizure is withdrawn. Everyone should pay their fair share, and sustainable tax policy requires that tax rates are stable, predictable, not punitive, and hard to game. Policies like a one-time asset seizure tell entrepreneurs: don’t build your company here. Some billionaires have already left the state, and more are likely to follow, whether or not the seizure ultimately ends up legal or not. This will have a big negative impact on tax revenues, innovation, and the broader economy.

California should focus on delivering the basics with a reasonable budget instead of chasing one-time wealth grabs that could push out the tax base we already depend on.

Recalled, Still in Office

Published June 18, 2026

The Facts

It’s nice to be reminded that San Francisco doesn’t have the most dysfunctional politics.

In Avenal, a small town in the Central Valley about halfway between SF and LA, voters recalled four city council members in an April 28 special election, but three have refused to leave office.

On June 11, the council took up a resolution declaring the recall unlawful and directing staff to keep recognizing the incumbents as still in office. On June 17, Attorney General Rob Bonta granted residents leave to file a quo warranto lawsuit to remove the officials.

The Context

In California, quo warranto is the formal court process used to test whether someone is unlawfully holding public office, and it cannot proceed without the Attorney General’s consent. That means this dispute has moved beyond campaign politics and into the basic question of who lawfully has the power to govern.

The GrowSF Take

As ridiculous as our politics are, remember that it can always get worse!

Golden Gate Bridge Tolls Rise July 1

Published June 18, 2026

The Facts

Golden Gate Bridge tolls rise July 1, with FasTrak at $10.25, pay-as-you-go at $10.50, mailed invoices at $11.25, and carpools at $8.25. Most Golden Gate Transit and Ferry fares also rise by up to 25 cents, though Marin and Sonoma local bus fares and Giants ferry fares stay flat.

The Context

The district approved this five-year toll program in March 2024, raising most bridge tolls by 50 cents each year through 2028 to help close a $220 million five-year shortfall. The district is also beginning a seismic retrofit that Rachel Swan at The Chronicle described as adding 38 shock absorbers and steel plates at the base of both towers.

The GrowSF Take

Great infrastructure requires constant maintenance, and a great society pays for it.

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of June 7, 2026:
- Lurie Trades a Housing Tax Cut for a Foreclosure Tax
- District 2 Rejects Anti-Growth Politics
- Fewer Tents and RVs
- Students Skip Makeup Week
- Congressional Clown Show

Lurie Trades a Housing Tax Cut for a Foreclosure Tax

Published June 12, 2026

The Facts

Mayor Lurie and Supervisor Bilal Mahmood paused the BUILD Act, and pivoted to taxing foreclosures.

Earlier this year, Mayor Lurie and Supervisor Bilal Mahmood proposed the BUILD Act, which would have cut San Francisco’s transfer tax back to pre-COVID tax rates. The point of the BUILD Act was to help new apartments get built. Developers usually build and sell buildings to operators, so taxing the first sale is effectively a tax on housing production.

Since 1984 foreclosures have been exempt from paying the transfer tax. The new measure repeals that exemption for foreclosed commercial and multifamily properties, though not single-family homes or buildings with fewer than five units. It’s projected to raise $200 million over three years, but if a competing transfer tax measure passes then that number may be cut in half. The bill already has six Supervisors in favor, so it is expected to qualify and appear on November’s ballot.

The Context

San Francisco charges a 5.5% transfer tax on sales from $10 million to $25 million and 6% above that, which is higher than every other city in America except Los Angeles at 6.1%. NYC’s transfer tax is 3.3%, Seattle’s 3.5%, Philadelphia’s ~4.3%, Chicago’s ~1.2%, and most other big cities are under 2%.

The BUILD Act would have halved those rates, spurring more development. The problem is timing: San Francisco faces a projected $642 million deficit, and the long-term benefit of lower rates will take too long to materialize.

There is also a competing ballot proposal, a Dean Preston/DSA initiative, that would reserve half of the existing 6% transfer-tax to affordable housing and tenant programs while preserving the BUILD act’s lower rate on the first sale (within five years of construction) of newly built multi-family housing.

If both measures pass, foreclosure transfers pay the full 5.5–6% — but half goes to the housing fund, cutting the foreclosure measure’s revenue in half and siphoning off half of the existing transfer tax revenue away from the general fund. The competing measure also declares it prevails over any other competing measures “regardless of the number of votes cast,” which is legally dubious. If both pass, expect litigation.

The GrowSF Take

We haven’t taken a position yet, but there’s a lot to dislike about this situation.

On the foreclosure tax:

• The case in favor: The foreclosure exemption was written for homeowners in distress, not institutional lenders moving nine-figure office buildings. If the exemption is being gamed in shrewd deals, removing the exemption would close a loophole and bolster city coffers.

• The case against: A foreclosure isn’t a market sale, and the tax comes out of the lender’s recovery on a loan already gone bad. At the margin it pushes lenders toward extending bad loans (”extend and pretend”) rather than reselling buildings to owners who’ll put them back to work. Downtown recovery depends on that reset happening fast. The foreclosure will also be taxed twice: once when the lender takes possession of the distressed property (taxed at the original value!) and again when the lender finds a new buyer. Double-taxing foreclosures won’t speed up recovery; it’ll slow it down.

On the competing transfer tax measure:

• The case in favor: Lowering the tax on new multifamily housing is great!

• The case against: Keeping the transfer tax at the second-highest in the nation in a city with a downtown still struggling to recover is a bad idea. And cordoning off a chunk of tax revenue while the city faces mounting budget deficits is just bad economics.

There’s still plenty of time to do more research to inform our ultimate endorsement.

District 2 Rejects Anti-Growth Politics

Published June 11, 2026

The Facts

Stephen Sherrill crushed Lori Brooke in District 2, winning 69.56% of the final ranked-choice vote. Housing was a central divide in the race: Brooke made anti-upzoning politics a defining issue, as Io Yeh Gilman and Kelly Waldron at Mission Local reported, while Sherrill backed Mayor Lurie’s Family Zoning Plan.

The Context

The problem for that message is the voters. GrowSF’s February 2026 District 2 poll found 84% support for Family Zoning, and 70% said they were more likely to vote for a supervisor who supports market-rate housing. A 2024 citywide housing poll found 77% support for 6-8 story buildings in the Sunset and Richmond, plus 75% support for new residential towers downtown, SoMa, and Mission Bay.

The GrowSF Take

For years, too many San Francisco politicians acted as if voters feared growth and change. They do not. They want more homes, and they want leaders willing to say yes out loud. GrowSF has spent years making that case and publishing polling that shows it. District 2 underscored it again: NIMBY-above-all politics are a losing recipe in San Francisco.

Fewer Tents and RVs

Published June 12, 2026

The Facts

San Francisco counted 115 tents and 315 occupied vehicles in its latest quarterly street tally, down from 155 tents and 433 occupied vehicles in February.

The Context

The city’s quarterly street count tracks tents, structures, and vehicles every three months. That is different from the biennial Point-in-Time count, which found 2,912 people sleeping unsheltered in January 2024, the lowest street count in a decade. Lurie’s earlier vehicular homelessness plan paired housing offers and outreach with citywide large-vehicle parking restrictions and towing.

The GrowSF Take

Fewer tents and RVs on the street is a real improvement. Sidewalks and streets are for public use, not for sleeping, and people should not have to navigate encampments or long-term vehicle storage. San Francisco should keep enforcing basic street rules and pair that enforcement with shelter, treatment, and housing that help people leave the streets for good.

Students Skip Makeup Week

Published June 11, 2026

The Facts

Many SFUSD students are skipping the extra week of school which was required after teachers went on strike earlier this year. Students at five high schools told Jessica Blough at The Standard that classes were at least half empty, grades were already finalized, and some teachers were simply showing movies.

The Context

After this February’s teacher strike wiped out five instructional days, SFUSD’s Board moved the last day to June 10. The district had already said finals and graduations would stay on their original schedule, so students were expected to show up with no negative personal consequences for skipping. California links school funding to attendance, which means students skipping means less money for the district. GrowSF previously covered the strike deal, and the expectation of its multi-million dollar negative impact on the district, which is proving true.

The GrowSF Take

If grades are done, classrooms are half empty, and students are wandering Stonestown, those are not meaningful instructional days. Lower student attendance means less state funding, which makes the teacher strike even more costly for a district already under fiscal pressure. The teachers union and SFUSD should not repeat this kind of mistake.

Congressional Clown Show

Published June 11, 2026

The Facts

SFUSD Superintendent Maria Su testified Wednesday before the House Education and Workforce Committee. Republican members pressed Su on drag queen story hour, pronouns, bathrooms, and parental-rights policy.

It wasn’t all bluster, though. In a rare across-the-aisle moment, Republican-turned-Independent Representative Kevin Kiley called recent SFUSD changes “encouraging,” pointing to the district’s improved finances and the return of Algebra 1 in middle school.

On Monday, the Justice Department opened a compliance review of SFUSD and three other California districts over parent opt-outs for sexual-orientation and gender-identity instruction.

The Context

Su has spent the past year trying to steady the district: SFUSD adopted a balanced $1.3 billion budget, restored Algebra 1 in eighth grade, and says its core goals are third-grade literacy and eighth-grade math.

The GrowSF Take

Congress can stage culture-war hearings if it wants, but San Franciscans should stay focused on whether SFUSD can raise reading performance and math performance. That is what matters for kids.

How did San Francisco vote?

We’re extremely thrilled to see Supervisors Stephen Sherrill and Alan Wong win their elections decisively, both with a commanding 69% of the vote. We’re also happy to see Prop A pass and Prop D fail. Here’s a quick rundown of the GrowSF Voter Guide recommendations compared to the voting outcomes — as you can see, voters generally agreed with us! (We should note: we don’t expect these results to change, but only about 65% of votes have been counted so far.)

Our state recommendations didn’t fare quite as well, but that’s not unexpected. We explicitly focus on San Francisco and there just aren’t enough SF voters to meaningfully move state races.

Turnout and slow vote counting

Despite the pronouncements of historically low turnout by several media organizations, turnout was higher than June 2022 by about 50,000 voters. As we reported last week, before polls had closed, turnout was consistent with past elections and we predicted between 200,000 and 220,000 total ballots cast. The final number looks like it will beat that estimate, clocking in at about 270,000 ballots.

But let’s talk about what’s really on our minds: why does it take so long to count the results? It shouldn’t be this way. We should know on election night who won, and if we don’t, the Department of Elections should be working 24/7 until they have an answer. Instead, we get just about half of the votes counted on election night, no votes counted the day after, and then a slow trickle of results over the following days. The Department of Elections isn’t even working this weekend, today and tomorrow.

Look, I love the Department of Elections, and I really do think they do an excellent job, but they do fall flat on speed of counting. We shouldn’t be complacent and just say “that’s the way it is.” This needs to be fixed.

Here’s why it’s so slow, and how we can fix it:

The problem: The Department stops counting mail-in ballots the day before the election because they’re preparing the voter rolls for in-person voting. The Department wants to give normal ballots, not provisional ballots, to people who show up at their polling place, so they need to know if someone voted or not.

Since all in-person votes are counted the night of the election, when the department resumes counting mail-in ballots the day after the election, they will flag any mail-in ballots from someone who already voted in person. This means that over 50% ballots are held hostage by the 10% that vote in person.

The fix: Don’t stop counting the mail-in ballots and either verify in real time if someone has already voted (we have computers and telecommunications!) or treat all in-person ballots as provisional.

If the voter had already voted, then when their vote-by-mail ballot is processed, it will be flagged as a duplicate. This will basically never happen because almost nobody votes twice. (I say almost because some people mis-mark or realize they forgot to vote for a race and then show up at a polling place hoping to cast a corrected ballot.)

Also, the department should be counting votes 24/7 until all ballots are counted, and updated results should come out every hour, not every day or every-couple-of-days. Knowing the outcome of our elections—the most sacred aspect of democracy—is too important to delay.

Did you vote yet? Get to it! There’s still 3 days until the June 2 SF Primary Election, and turnout has remained below expectation. Voting is apace with past turnout trends, clocking in at around 70,000 ballots cast. We estimate turnout will land around 200,000 to 220,000 voters.

So if you’re one of the ~150,000 people who haven’t voted yet, now is the time!

Read the GrowSF Voter Guide for fiscal analysis of each ballot measure, deep dives into what they do and annotated legal texts (check out Prop D!), detailed questionnaires for candidates, and our arguments for how we think you should vote.

Here’s a quick rundown of GrowSF’s endorsements:

San Francisco

• Supervisor, District 2: Stephen Sherrill

• Supervisor, District 4: Alan Wong

• Board of Education: Phil Kim

• Superior Court Judge: Phoebe Maffei

California

• Governor: Matt Mahan

• Lieutenant Governor: Josh Fryday

• Attorney General: Rob Bonta

• Secretary of State: Shirley N. Weber

• Controller: Malia M. Cohen

• Treasurer: Eleni Kounalakis

• Insurance Commissioner: Patrick Wolff

• State Superintendent of Public Instruction: Josh Newman

• Board of Equalization: Sally J. Lieber

• State Assemblymember, District 17: Matt Haney

• State Assemblymember, District 19: Catherine Stefani

Federal

• House of Representatives, District 11: Scott Wiener

Ballot Measures

• ✅ Yes on Prop A: Earthquake Safety and Emergency Response Bond

• ✅ Yes on Prop B: Lifetime Term Limits for Mayor and Supervisors

• ✅ Yes on Prop C: Decreases to Business Taxes

• ❌ No on Prop D: Increases to Business Tax Based on Comparison of Top Executive’s Pay to Employees’ Pay

Read our full endorsement rationale in the GrowSF Voter Guide.

After you’re done voting, party with GrowSF on election night at Anina in Hayes Valley. There will be great drinks, a live election results dashboard that we’re beta testing, and there will surely be guest appearances by some elected officials, so don’t miss it!

What You Need To Know

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of May 24, 2026:
- Wiener, Chakrabarti, Chan Split on Housing
- Mahmood Targets Hidden Rental Fees
- Aly Bonde Is Lurie’s New Chief of Staff
- Muni Funding Tax Qualifies For November

Wiener, Chakrabarti, Chan Split on Housing

Published May 28, 2026

The Facts

When asked if SF needs more market-rate homes (which is what about 90% of SF residents live in), only Scott Wiener gave an emphatic “yes.”

Wiener says the private market “has built the vast majority of new housing” in the US, and supports government subsidized housing as an additional tool to help lower income people afford to live in high-opportunity areas. Saikat Chakrabarti says market-rate housing is just “part of” the solution, but favors huge government programs. While Connie Chan argued San Francisco does not need more market-rate housing (forgetting to mention that she lives in market-rate housing like almost all of us), and SF should only build government subsidized low income housing.

Wiener’s campaign platform promises 8 million homes over ten years, while Chakrabarti’s housing plan calls for millions of new homes, faster approvals, and much larger public-housing investment.

The Context

Connie Chan voted against Mayor Lurie’s Family Zoning Plan last December, and has consistently blocked construction of new homes.

Scott Wiener, on the other hand, has authored dozens of pieces of legislation to unlock new home construction, and qualifying developments in the city now get nearly automatic approval under Wiener’s SB 423 bill, which sharply limits the old discretionary process for new housing.

The GrowSF Take

GrowSF’s view is simple: San Francisco cannot subsidize its way out of a shortage. It would require 100% of San Franciso’s budget for five full years just to hit out 8-year construction goals. That means zero money for the airport, for roads, for schools, for libraries, for police, for healthcare, for literally anything but construction costs. Anyone who seriously pitches this as a solution is delusional, lying, or both.

The serious housing lane is one that recognizes the importance of market-rate homebuilding. Candidates who oppose market-rate supply are offering a scarcity strategy that San Francisco has already tried, and which has failed.

Mahmood Targets Hidden Rental Fees

Published May 28, 2026

The Facts

Renting an apartment shouldn’t come with surprise fees. Supervisor Bilal Mahmood will make sure renters know what they’ll owe and not get hit with hidden fees with his No Hidden Rent Act, which will require rental listings and the first page of leases to show total monthly housing costs, with tenants allowed to exit without penalty if recurring charges were not disclosed.

The Context

In San Francisco, the advertised rent is not always the full monthly bill. Landlords can separately charge for parking or storage and other add-on services if the tenant agrees, so two apartments listed at the same base rent can end up costing very different amounts each month. In a city where one-bedroom asking rent just topped $4,000, that kind of price opacity matters. Other states are starting to respond too: Colorado’s 2025 law requires clearer total-price disclosure and bans some landlord fees.

The GrowSF Take

We’re big fans of fee transparency - from rent to restaurant bills, people should know the real price before they commit.

Aly Bonde Is Lurie’s New Chief of Staff

Published May 28, 2026

The Facts

Mayor Daniel Lurie named Aly Bonde his new chief of staff, replacing outgoing chief of staff Staci Slaughter. Bonde had been serving as deputy chief of staff and led policy for Lurie’s campaign.

The Context

Bonde is a high agency policy wonk. She was the Lurie campaign’s policy lead, a former government-relations director at Planned Parenthood Northern California, and a leader at Oakland Thrives who helped secure a $100 million public-private partnership for East Oakland.

The GrowSF Take

This is a promotion for a proven operator. Bonde has already proven herself in the Lurie administration, showing she can move ideas from campaign promise to City Hall execution. San Francisco needs more of that.

Muni Funding Tax Qualifies For November

Published May 28, 2026

The Facts

About $160 million a year for Muni is headed to San Francisco voters after the Stronger Muni for All campaign submitted 18,469 signatures for the November ballot. Under a 15-year parcel tax with size-based rates, most single-family homes would pay $129 a year starting July 1, 2027; apartment buildings would start at $249 and commercial properties at $799. In rent-controlled units, landlords could pass through up to half the tax, capped at $65 per year, or about $5.42 a month.

The Context

SFMTA has spent the past year cutting its projected deficit through hiring freezes, function consolidation, management cuts, and modest service adjustments. Its balanced two-year budget preserved core Muni service, paratransit, and discount fares. Without new revenue, however, SFMTA says up to 20 Muni lines could be cut and waits on many other routes could double.

The GrowSF Take

We support this measure. SFMTA has made real cuts and operational changes, and San Francisco cannot have a strong downtown, less traffic, and reliable transit without paying for transit. Voters should fund Muni and keep demanding fast, clean, accountable service.

Paid for by GrowSF Voter Guide. FPPC # 1433436. Not authorized by any candidate, candidate’s committee, or committee controlled by a candidate. Financial disclosures are available at sfethics.org.

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of May 17, 2026:
- SFUSD Pushes Back Enrollment Overhaul
- Three More Charter Measures
- Weak Case Against PermitSF
- FBI Probes Breed Appointment

Election Countdown

10 days until the June 2 SF Primary Election! Turnout is still very low, so fill out that ballot and send your friends the GrowSF Voter Guide!

Election Night Party

After you’re done voting, party with GrowSF on election night at Anina in Hayes Valley. There will be great drinks, a live election results dashboard that we’re beta testing, and there will surely be guest appearances by some elected officials, so don’t miss it!

RSVP on Luma

SFUSD Pushes Back Enrollment Overhaul

Published May 21, 2026

The Facts

SFUSD is pushing back its enrollment overhaul: Superintendent Maria Su says a new student assignment proposal will not reach the Board of Education until April 2027 and would not take effect until 2028-29.

For the 2026-27 school year, families will stay in the current citywide-choice system rather than the zone-based elementary model the board approved at the end of 2020. Under that revised schedule, school closures or mergers now move to 2029-30 at the earliest, and commissioners told Ezra Wallach at The Standard they still lacked clarity on the next steps.

The Context

SFUSD has been trying to replace its current assignment system for years. In Board Policy 5101.2, the district said the existing districtwide-choice model had not reversed racial isolation and was too hard for families to navigate, and it set three goals for a new system: diversity, predictability, and proximity.

The stakes are bigger than enrollment paperwork. SFUSD’s forecasting consultant projected a 4,600-student decline over the decade ending in 2032-33, on top of losses the district had already absorbed after the pandemic. That is why assignment reform and school consolidation became linked. We argued in February that SFUSD could not postpone both decisions forever.

The GrowSF Take

Families need a school assignment system that is simpler, more predictable, and easier to plan around than today’s citywide-choice process. And it shouldn’t take ten years for the district to implement what should be a simple change.

Three More Charter Measures

Published May 21, 2026

The Facts

Keep your eyes out for three more charter amendments on the November ballot, according to Patrick Hoge at the Examiner. A Housing Trust Fund expansion would leverage rising property values into more annual funding for subsidized housing, growing the fund from $52 million to $125 million, and allowing revenues to be bonded. A public-bank framework would create a municipal financial corporation as a precursor to a city bank. And a commissions overhaul would move some bodies from the City Charter to the Administrative Code and eliminate others - the outcome of a year of work by the commission streamlining task force.

The Context

The current Housing Trust Fund was created by voters in 2012, ramps up to $50.8 million by FY 2024-25, and expires in 2043. On commissions, voters already approved Prop. E in 2024, which created the streamlining task force and set up a 2026 path for charter changes.

The GrowSF Take

A bondable tax-increment financing system for subsidizing low-income housing is a smart idea that is simpler than it seems. In short: rather than taxing the creation of new housing (with “inclusionary zoning”), the system instead relies on broader prosperity and captures a small percentage of rising property values across the city (that’s the “tax increment” part). Those revenues are fairly predictable (global pandemics notwithstanding) and can be bonded to let the city access a larger lump sum and pay it off over time with inflated dollars. This unlocks immediate development funding while removing the tax disincentive on new home building.

We’re also glad to see the commission streamlining progressing - we’ve been big fans of the process and of the recommended outcomes.

The public-bank idea is a tougher sell, though. The bank has been pitched as serving the very clients that are most risky for banks to serve, which all but guarantees taxpayers will be left holding the bag. We think the oversight that independent banks bring is more of a feature than a bug, and a public bank is a solution in search of a problem.

Weak Case Against PermitSF

Published May 20, 2026

The Facts

A former city planner alleges that Mayor Lurie’s signature PermitSF initiative reduces work for City Hall staff and used the OpenGov team to produce a research report that City Hall staff should have been asked to do.

In other words, this is not the “whistleblower” complaint he pitches to the press, but the complaints of an employee unhappy with a new system.

You can read his complaints here and judge for yourself, but here are some excerpts:

OpenGov is specifically designed in a manner that will preclude City staff from performing roles they have held for years. [...] Under the Commission’s PSC Policy, the existence of a civil service class capable of performing the work means contracting out requires a compelling justification.

My second whistleblower complaint to the Controller’s Office concerned the use of OpenGov staff, through the contract, to research and author a white paper on San Francisco’s permitting process [...] Using contract personnel to perform this work is [...] a further displacement of civil service responsibilities

The Context

San Francisco launched PermitSF because its permit process still runs across 30 software systems. City staff told the commission that the pilot had already handled 1,500+ permits and cut Fire wait times 56%. Local 21’s formal objection makes a similar labor argument, saying the city is outsourcing work that internal staff could do.

The GrowSF Take

The existing permit tracking system, Accela, has fallen far short of its promises since it was selected in 2011. The system is expensive, slow, and complex. When GrowSF co-founder Steven Bacio was part of Google.org and embedded in the Planning Department to study its deficiencies, his team found that planners ended up using it as a time-tracking system rather than a project tracking system, and much of the work was done in offline spreadsheets and printed stacks of paper. The research project was unable to answer the question of “how many homes have been approved” because the data simply didn’t exist in any useful form. At the time, public dashboards and reports were compiled by hand, not via a simple query on the Accela system.

The Accela system needs to go. It’s a failure that has kept SF permitting unnecessarily complex, slow, opaque, and prone to failure. The new system may not be perfect yet, but we’re only a year in, and Accela has had over 15 years to get its act together.

FBI Probes Breed Appointment

Published May 20, 2026

The Facts

Federal investigators have contacted at least two people about allegations that former Mayor London Breed appointed Stephen Sherrill to the Board of Supervisors in hopes of improving her chances of future employment with Michael Bloomberg, according to Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez and Han Li at The Standard. Breed denied the claims.

The Context

The obvious national parallel is former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who was convicted after trying to trade Barack Obama’s vacant U.S. Senate seat for personal or political benefit. San Franciscans have seen other corruption scandals from the Breed era too: former Public Works director Mohammed Nuru admitted to a long bribery scheme tied to city business, and a city audit found the Human Rights Commission under former executive director Sheryl Davis misused over $4 million in public funds.

Breed appointed Sherrill on Dec. 18, 2024 to replace Catherine Stefani after Stefani won a State Assembly seat. Sherrill is currently up for re-election at the June 2 primary election. GrowSF has endorsed Sherrill.

The GrowSF Take

This story is about decisions London Breed made. Breed’s choices are her own, and if she broke the law then that’s on her shoulders.

Sherrill should be evaluated on his own record, not on Breed’s. Stephen Sherrill has shown himself to be a highly competent, transparent, and effective Supervisor.

Paid for by GrowSF Voter Guide. FPPC # 1433436. Not authorized by any candidate, candidate’s committee, or committee controlled by a candidate. Financial disclosures are available at sfethics.org.

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of May 10, 2026:
- Chronicle: No on D
- SF may see first city strikes in 50 years
- Shadows to no longer be considered toxic waste
- Congress Summons Maria Su

Election Countdown

Just 17 days until the June 2 Primary Election! So far turnout is below expectations, at just 22,000 ballots cast. Using the June 2022 election as a baseline, we’d expect over 35,000 ballots to have been cast by now.

Low turnout means your vote carries more weight! Be sure to read and share the GrowSF Voter Guide, and let’s keep making San Francisco better.

Chronicle: No on D

Published May 15, 2026

The Facts

The Chronicle says voters should reject Prop D. The editorial board says the measure is being sold as a tax on overpaid CEOs with revenues that would fund healthcare, but in reality the tax is paid by businesses, not executives, which would pass those costs on to consumers, and the funds it raises will be put in the general fund, not dedicated to healthcare.

Prop D supporters say it would protect hospitals and essential services without raising taxes on working families. The Chronicle argues that is misleading because the money is not dedicated to health care, and because the measure would likely hit low-income consumers and retailers, grocery stores, and pharmacies harder than the tech giants and wealthy CEOs voters may picture from the campaign’s rhetoric.

The Context

Prop D is the big fight on this June’s ballot. It is being run by SEIU, a large City Hall labor union, who wants the money available for potential raises in upcoming contract negotiations (see next story, below), though they are telling voters that the money will be used for healthcare. It will significantly impact low-margin businesses like grocery stores and wealthy CEOs will be completely insulated from its impacts.

The GrowSF Take

We fully agree with the SF Chronicle: Prop D is not a CEO tax. It is a big increase to San Francisco’s existing gross-receipts tax, and the costs will land on employers, workers, shoppers, or all three. If proponents want to argue for a general tax increase, they should do that honestly. Dressing it up as a strike against billionaire CEOs is not honest, and it is not good policy.

SF may see first city strikes in 50 years

Published May 15, 2026

The Facts

San Francisco may see its first City Hall worker strike in 50 years soon. Due to a California Public Employment Relations Board ruling in 2023 which struck down the city’s strike ban, first enacted in 1976, unions are gearing up for a big fight.

A $642.8 million deficit over the next two years is colliding head-on with these new rules. After Mayor Lurie sent a palty 127 pink slips in April, SEIU 1021’s Kristin Hardy told Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez at The Standard that city workers could “shut down the whole city” if deeper cuts continue.

The Context

San Francisco’s Charter still contains 1970s-era rules threatening mandatory dismissal for city workers who strike, part of a voter-driven backlash to major strikes that shut down the city for weeks. Instead of strikes, interest arbitration has been used to ensure labor contract negotiations don’t shut down the city every few years. The 2023 ruling found the strike ban unlawful and unenforceable for most non-public-safety workers.

SEIU is running Prop D, telling voters that the money will be used for healthcare. But in reality, if it passes the money will go into the general fund and SEIU will try to use it to get raises.

The GrowSF Take

San Francisco cannot budget by wishful thinking, and the unions cannot get everything they want when the city is losing money. The city needs a disciplined budget, clear priorities, and faster economic growth, and that means voting No on Prop D.

Shadows to no longer be considered toxic waste

Published May 15, 2026

The Facts

Shadows will no longer be considered toxic waste that can stop new housing if Supervisor Mahmood’s SHADE Act passes. Mahmood says shadow-based California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) appeals have stalled 2,195 homes over the past decade.

The Context

The proposal would not end shadow studies, but it would stop CEQA appeals based on “shadow impacts.” An appeal is when an outside individual or interest group attempts to stop a development by appealing their permit. This triggers a lengthy study, review, and hearing period that often makes projects financially infeasible.

The proposal would not repeal San Francisco’s sunlight law, which requires extra review when buildings over 40 feet cast new shadow on Rec and Park property. The studies, which require diagrams, calculations, and technical memos, will still be done, but vague “environmental impact harms” would not longer be considered adequate basis for appeal.

The GrowSF Take

Supervisor Mahmood is right to pick this fight. The 2,195 homes he cites getting blocked by shadow appeals doesn’t include the thousands of homes that were never attempted due to the threat of CEQA shadow appeals. In a city that’s getting hotter, shadows are not a good reason to say no to new homes.

Congress Summons Maria Su

Published May 15, 2026

The Facts

Maria Su has been summoned to testify at a June 10 Congressional hearing alongside Loudoun County superintendent Aaron Spence and Chicago Public Schools CEO Macquline King. The Standard’s Ezra Wallach reports Republicans plan to question SFUSD over ethnic studies, transgender-related lessons, and staff training materials.

The Context

A Republican-led House committee is scrutinizing several major school districts around the country over ethnic studies, transgender policies, sexuality/gender instruction, and parental-rights claims. SFUSD requires high schoolers to complete two semesters of ethnic studies, has a policy to protect students from discrimination or harassment based on sex, gender, or sexual orientation. SFUSD also gives parents advance notice of sexuality instruction with the option to opt out.

Under California Education Code 221.5(f), schools are required to let students use facilities and participate in sex-segregated school programs consistent with their gender identity, regardless of what is listed in school records.

The GrowSF Take

Congress should really be asking why San Francisco schools are failing to educate so many students in math and reading, with 53.2% of proficient in reading and 46% in math (in raw numbers, that’s about 25,000 children that the district is failing to adequately teach. San Francisco’s children need better academic outcomes and clear accountability, not a made-for-TV fight that does nothing to help them learn.

Paid for by GrowSF Voter Guide. FPPC # 1433436. Not authorized by any candidate, candidate’s committee, or committee controlled by a candidate. Financial disclosures are available at sfethics.org.

Week:

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of May 3, 2026:
- Prop D Raises Taxes
- Opposition to Billionaire Tax Grows
- Muni Pushes Visible Payment
- Board Bans Redevelopment of Warehouses
- Michael Moritz’s Crankstart Awards 223 College Scholarships
- Faster Paid Parental Leave

Election Countdown

24 days until the June 2 SF Primary Election — the one that decides whether our commonsense Board majority survives. Read the GrowSF Voter Guide for the June election

Prop D Raises Taxes

Published May 8, 2026

The Facts

Prop D would sharply raise an existing San Francisco gross receipts tax starting in 2027. That means it taxes sales attributed to San Francisco, not profits, and for most affected companies the rate would jump by about 800%. These higher costs will mostly be passed on to consumers and reflected in higher grocery, pharmacy, food, and retail prices.

This so-called “CEO tax” doesn’t actually tax CEOs - it taxes your groceries.

The Context

Businesses with low margins, like grocery stores, pharmacies, and retailers, will be impacted the hardest. The food retail industry’s average net profit margin was just 1.6% in 2023, according to FMI, so a tax on total sales hits especially hard. This will be the fifth time since 2018 a ballot measure altered the gross receipts tax. 2018’s effort caused Stripe and other employers to leave the city. 2024’s Proposition M fixed a number of problems with 2018’s version, but 2026’s Prop D will bring the problems back and make the rates even more punitive.

The GrowSF Take

GrowSF recommends voting no on Prop D. San Francisco should not make groceries, household basics, and other everyday purchases more expensive with a large new tax on sales.

And we MUST stop screwing around with taxes at the ballot box so much. Tax policy is complicated and both businesses and individuals need stable and predictable tax policy in order to plan their own lives and investments. Thrashing rates up by 800% doesn’t serve anyone’s interests, it just makes San Francisco harder to exist in.

Got feedback on the voter guide? We want to hear from you!

We’re looking for feedback on how we can make the GrowSF Voter Guide more useful. If you’re open to sharing your input, we’d love to have a 30-minute conversation with you — sign up here.

Opposition to Billionaire Tax Grows

Published May 8, 2026

The Facts

More California Democrats are lining up against the proposed billionaire tax. State Sen. Scott Wiener said he doesn’t support the measure, telling Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez, Gabe Greschler, and Han Li at The Standard that a one-time wealth tax is not “the best approach.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom and San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan have also come out against it.

The initiative would impose a one-time seizure of up to 5% on covered assets over $1 billion, including businesses, securities, art, collectibles, and intellectual property, while exempting that revenue from the state’s normal rules on school funding, reserves, and the spending limit.

The Context

California already depends on a volatile tax base. The Legislative Analyst’s Office says capital gains are extremely volatile and are a major reason state revenues swing so sharply from boom to bust.

Critics argue this measure could make that problem worse by encouraging capital flight. The Jan. 1, 2026 residency cutoff has already become part of the political war: Sergey Brin moved to Nevada and later gave $45 million to a PAC opposing the measure, according to Dara Kerr at The Guardian. The anti-tax campaign now includes multiple billionaire-backed committees and a separate ballot measure aimed at blocking retroactive taxes.

The GrowSF Take

GrowSF supports broad-based taxes where everyone pays their fair share. We do not support punitive, populist asset seizures aimed at a tiny number of people and marketed as an easy fix for ongoing spending.

Even if this tax is defeated, it’s already done damage: recurring tax revenue has been lost by wealthy people leaving the state and steering their investments elsewhere.

Muni Pushes Visible Payment

Published May 8, 2026

The Facts

Fare enforcement is rising on Muni. The agency is hiring 17 more fare inspectors, boosting the team from 59 to 76, and pushing what officials call a culture of visible payment.

That means more riders physically tapping when they board. Muni’s monthly passes are only available on Clipper, and SFMTA’s proof-of-payment rules require riders using Clipper to tap every time they board. Rachel Swan at The Chronicle reports SFMTA is also looking at tap-based fare media for some youth, low-income, and employee riders who now may board without a visible tap.

The Context

This is about money, but it is also about norms. Riders without valid proof can be removed and fined more than $100, and SFMTA says fare inspections per hour are up 86% since July 2024. The agency is making that push while facing a projected $307 million deficit beginning in fiscal year 2026-27.

The GrowSF Take

Visible payment matters. On a system with all-door boarding, social norms do real work: when everyone taps, everyone sees that paying is expected. Free and discount programs should remain, but SFMTA is right to move toward a system where riders visibly show eligibility too. We all need to chip in for a vital city service, and people who do not pay should face real consequences.

Board Bans Redevelopment of Warehouses

Published May 8, 2026

The Facts

The Board of Supervisors blocked housing again. This time, they permanently cordoned off industrial land (think warehouses and auto body shops) near transit. This permanent exemption to the state’s SB79 law slipped in at the last minute via an “alternative plan“ and Land Use Committee chair Myrna Melgar refused to consider letter it ever expire.

The Context

San Francisco pursued the SB 79 alternative-plan process because Family Zoning had already added substantial transit-area capacity. That’s not the controversial part, though. Rather, it’s the permanent carve-out for warehouse-heavy industrial areas that was never part of any prior negotiation and which sailed through without any serious policy engagement.

The GrowSF Take

This goes to show that even when we get great people elected, they’ll still let us down once in a while. The Board of Supervisors should have pushed back firmly on the SF Planning Department which pitched this permanent exemption without being asked.

This is a foolish and backwards choice.

Michael Moritz’s Crankstart Awards 223 College Scholarships

Published May 8, 2026

The Facts

Michael Moritz’s Crankstart Foundation awarded 223 San Francisco high school seniors college scholarships worth up to $15,000 a year. The Crankstart Scholarship can last up to six years and includes college advising, workshops, and emergency aid. In the first cohort, the program backed 200 students, with 83% first-generation and 91% at the highest level of financial need, according to Jill Tucker at The Chronicle.

The Context

The program launched in San Francisco with a 2025 uAspire grant focused on Balboa, Burton, Galileo, and Mission high schools. Crankstart was founded by Michael Moritz and Harriet Heyman and has become one of the city’s biggest philanthropic players. For students who get into college but still face housing, food, or tuition gaps, flexible aid and hands-on advising can matter as much as the scholarship check itself.

The GrowSF Take

Bravo to Moritz!

Faster Paid Parental Leave

Published May 7, 2026

The Facts

San Francisco could make newer workers eligible for fully paid parental leave sooner. Supervisor Danny Sauter’s April 28 bill, would make workers eligible after 90 days on the job instead of 180. It is partly aimed at workers in high-turnover industries.

The Context

San Francisco’s paid parental leave law, applies to employers with 20 or more employees worldwide and currently requires 180 days on the job before leave starts. A 2020 Health Affairs study found the policy increased leave-taking among fathers.

The GrowSF Take

We’re glad to see more pro-family policy getting enacted in San Francisco. Our only worry is the negative incentive for companies to hire people starting a family, which points to a more robust social program as a better alternative. But hey, baby steps.

Paid for by GrowSF Voter Guide. Not authorized by a candidate, candidate’s committee, or a committee controlled by a candidate. Financial disclosures are available at sfethics.org.

As always, you can find the full GrowSF Voter Guide at growsf.org/voter-guide, but we have an abridged version below.

How to vote. Mail it back (free postage, postmarked by June 2). Drop it in any city ballot box by 8pm on Election Day. Or vote in person at City Hall through June 2, or at your polling place on Election Day.

GrowSF Voter Guide at a glance

San Francisco

• D2 Supervisor: Stephen Sherrill

• D4 Supervisor: Alan Wong

• SF Board of Education: Phil Kim

• Superior Court Judge: Phoebe Maffei

• Prop A (Earthquake Safety Bond): Yes

• Prop B (Lifetime Term Limits): Yes

• Prop C (Decreases to Small Business Taxes): Yes

• Prop D (Grocery Tax): No

State

• Governor: Matt Mahan

• Lieutenant Governor: Josh Fryday

• Attorney General: Rob Bonta

• Secretary of State: Shirley Weber

• Controller: Malia Cohen

• Treasurer: Eleni Kounalakis

• Insurance Commissioner: Patrick Wolff

• State Superintendent of Public Instruction: Josh Newman

• Board of Equalization: Sally Lieber

• State Assembly D17: Matt Haney

• State Assembly D19: Catherine Stefani

Federal

• House D11: Scott Wiener

D2 Supervisor: Stephen Sherrill

Stephen Sherrill brings real policy experience (senior advisor in the Bloomberg administration in NYC, then ran SF’s Mayor’s Office of Innovation), and he’s used it. As Supervisor, he co-sponsored the resolution speeding up 911 response near schools, co-sponsored Mayor Lurie’s RV homelessness legislation, and backed the Recovery First sober-housing ordinance. On small business: he passed the chain-store ordinance to fill long-vacant storefronts on Van Ness (which has 53% ground-floor vacancy), and helped extend First Year Free, which has now helped over 13,000 small businesses. He voted yes on Mayor Lurie’s Family Zoning Plan and supported the unanimous office-to-residential conversion law.

D4 Supervisor: Alan Wong

Mayor Lurie picked Alan Wong out of five finalists in an open process last December. Wong is a Sunset native with a public-service resume that includes labor organizer, community safety volunteer and organizer, Community College Board trustee, and First Lieutenant in the Army National Guard. To help close SFPD’s 500-officer shortage, he wants bilingual recruiting and civilianizing desk roles so sworn officers can return to patrol. He’s pledged half his staff time to constituent services with a 24-hour reply commitment, and he wants to replace the current red-tape maze for new businesses with a simple checklist. His first vote was yes on Mayor Lurie’s Family Zoning Plan.

SF Board of Education: Phil Kim

Phil Kim is a former public-school teacher who’s led K-12 STEM education across 20+ states and 300+ schools. He joined the Board in 2024 and was unanimously elected Board President. Under his leadership, SFUSD’s finances are back on track and no teachers were laid off.

He was also the deciding vote to bring algebra back to 8th grade, ending a 12-year ban. The vote was 4-3. He’s stayed relentlessly focused on 3rd-grade reading, 8th-grade math, and college readiness, and for the first time in years, those numbers are moving up.

Yes on Prop A: Earthquake Safety and Emergency Response Bond

Prop A is a $535M bond for earthquake safety and emergency response, which will finance the Emergency Firefighting Water System, fire stations, police stations, and a replacement for the Potrero bus yard. Bonds in SF don’t raise taxes; new ones are timed as old ones retire. Average annual cost works out to about $7.45 per $100K of assessed value, taken out of your existing property taxes.

The Westside still has no dedicated high-pressure firefighting water system. If a major earthquake hits, firefighters in the Sunset and Richmond may not have reliable water (this just happened in the Palisades fire). Prop A expands pipes, cisterns, and tunnels to those neighborhoods. The Potrero bus yard was built in 1915, can’t house electric buses, and would likely collapse in a major quake. The $200M replacement meets seismic standards and lets Muni keep running after a quake. A citizens’ oversight committee will audit spending annually.

Yes on Prop B: Lifetime Term Limits for Mayor and Supervisors

Prop B changes term limits for Mayor and Supervisors from consecutive to lifetime. Still two four-year terms total, just no coming back for more after sitting out a cycle. The practical stakes are tiny: since SF adopted term limits in 1990, exactly one person (Aaron Peskin) has ever come back for nonconsecutive terms. Everyone else moved on or retired.

The academic research on strict term limits is genuinely mixed: some studies say they make races more competitive, others say they shift power to lobbyists and insiders. But since most people already think these offices have lifetime limits, we’re supporting Prop B just to makes the law match common understanding.

Yes on Prop C: Decreases to Small Business Taxes

Prop C raises the small-business tax exemption from $5M to $7.5M in yearly revenue, indexed to inflation, so thousands more small businesses will owe less. Rates go up slightly on larger businesses to offset some of the cost. Net fiscal impact: about $30-40M less City revenue per year.

The $5M exemption that voters passed in 2024 was a good start, but Bay Area prices are up ~15% since 2021, and rent, labor, and supply costs have risen even more. A neighborhood restaurant doing $6M isn’t a corporate giant; it’s a small business with thin margins getting squeezed. The rate increases on larger businesses are small, and were already scheduled to take effect in 2028. Prop C just speeds them up a little.

No on Prop D: Grocery Tax

Prop D is marketed as a “CEO tax.” It isn’t. It’s a Grocery Tax. It’s an 800% increase in the gross receipts tax (paid on sales, not on executive pay) calculated using the ratio between a company’s CEO and its median worker. Companies with lots of hourly workers (cashiers, stock clerks, pharmacy techs) have high pay ratios because the median employee earns ~$30K. Tech companies whose median employee is a $300K+ engineer have low pay ratios and stay under the threshold.

The result: Google (32:1 pay ratio), Meta (65:1), and Amazon (43:1) are exempt. Walgreens (410:1), Safeway (506:1), and Starbucks (6,666:1) get hit with an 800% increase.

Grocery stores run on 1-3% net margins. They have two options: raise prices, or leave.

Insurance Commissioner: Patrick Wolff

Patrick Wolff is the only candidate in the race with a California insurance license. He spent four years at Capital One building a home and auto insurance business, and 25 years analyzing insurance markets. In a field of career politicians, he’s an actual expert. His plan will cut filing review timelines, strengthen the Sustainable Insurance Strategy, and publish a public claims report card grading every insurer, shown before you buy.

Ben Allen is also a strong pick (State Senator from the Palisades fire zone, authored the $10B Prop 4 climate bond).

Do not vote for Jane Kim. She wants to replace private insurance with a state-run program where San Franciscans would subsidize people living in dangerous wildfire prone areas. It’s the exact opposite of how insurance should function - people should pay MORE to live in dangerous areas, and LESS to live in safe areas. Kim’s plan would raise your rates and bankrupt the state at the next big disaster.

State Superintendent of Public Instruction: Josh Newman

Only 47% of California kids read at grade level, and SFUSD is in the bottom 10% of California districts. We know how to fix this. Mississippi switched to phonics in 2013 and went from 49th to 9th for 4th-grade reading. California finally passed its own phonics law (AB 1454) in 2025, but adoption is voluntary. The Superintendent’s job is to make districts actually adopt it. Josh Newman chaired the Senate Education Committee and has the most specific plan in the field: a California Literacy Coaching Corps modeled on Mississippi’s, universal early screening, and transparent dashboards so parents can see who’s using proven methods and who isn’t. He’s also the only candidate willing to say this office should probably be appointed by the Governor, not elected. We agree.

The rest of your ballot, in one sentence each

• Superior Court Judge: Phoebe Maffei. 15 years in the DA’s office across homicide, domestic violence, elder abuse, and mental-health cases; led the David DePape prosecution and secured a life sentence.

• Governor: Matt Mahan. As Mayor of San Jose, unsheltered homelessness is down ~23% from 2019, San Jose became America’s safest big city, and thousands of new homes got unlocked through fee cuts and faster permitting.

• Lieutenant Governor: Josh Fryday. The most ambitious housing plan in the field: use the LG’s seats on UC Regents, CSU Trustees, and State Lands to push 1 million homes committed or permitted on public and campus land.

• Attorney General: Rob Bonta. Effective incumbent who co-sponsored SB 1037 with Scott Wiener, then actually used it to fine cities blocking housing; also got a $7M settlement from Greystar for algorithmic rent collusion.

• Secretary of State: Shirley Weber. Runs California’s elections without drama, hit a record 22.6M registered voters, and refused (and won in court) when the federal government demanded California’s voter database.

• Controller: Malia Cohen. Knows public finance and SF; ran SFERS ($35B), now sits on CalPERS and CalSTRS boards (~$1T combined), and led the task force on California’s largest-ever charter school fraud.

• Treasurer: Eleni Kounalakis. The only candidate with private-sector experience actually building housing and managing real money, and the Treasurer chairs CDLAC and CTCAC, the agencies that decide which housing gets financed.

• Board of Equalization: Sally Lieber. Most BOE powers were stripped in 2017; what’s left is narrow tax administration. Office should probably be abolished, but until then, vote for the competent incumbent.

• State Assembly D17: Matt Haney. Got AB 507 signed (statewide office-to-housing conversions) and AB 2475 (no releasing violent state-hospital patients without a plan); running unopposed and earned another term.

• State Assembly D19: Catherine Stefani. Got seven bills signed in her first term, including Wyland’s Law (gun violence prevention), the Restitution First Act, and a license-plate-cover ban.

• House D11: Scott Wiener. Wrote SB 35, SB 423, and SB 79, the laws that forced housing approvals statewide and legalized mid-rise apartments near transit. Built the coalition that got $1.1B in emergency funding to keep Muni and BART running.

Before you go

Want more on any race? The full voter guide has comparison tables, candidate questionnaires, prop legal text, and the full reasoning on every endorsement above.

If this email helped you fill out your ballot, forward it to a friend or neighbor who hasn’t sent theirs in yet. Every cycle, readers tell us the GrowSF Voter Guide is what their family and friends use to vote.

Happy voting, from all of us at GrowSF.

— Steven, Sachin, McKenna, Graham, and Jess

Paid for by GrowSF Voter Guide. Not authorized by a candidate, candidate's committee, or a committee controlled by a candidate. Financial disclosures are available at sfethics.org.

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of April 19, 2026:
- Muni Budget Buys Time
- SFUSD may require full year of ethnic studies
- Vaillancourt Fountain Removal Begins
- 19th Avenue repaving “Carmageddon” for the next three weekends
- California Hospice Fraud Bust

Election Countdown

38 days until the June 2 SF Primary Election — the one that decides whether our commonsense Board majority survives. Read the GrowSF Voter Guide for the June election

Here’s a cheat sheet for San Francisco:

• Supervisor, District 2: Stephen Sherrill

• Supervisor, District 4: Alan Wong

• Board of Education: Phil Kim

• Superior Court Judge: Phoebe Maffei

Ballot Measures

• ✅ Yes on Prop A: Earthquake Safety and Emergency Response Bond

• ✅ Yes on Prop B: Lifetime Term Limits for Mayor and Supervisors

• ✅ Yes on Prop C: Decreases to Business Taxes

• ❌ No on Prop D: Increases to Business Tax Based on Comparison of Top Executive’s Pay to Employees’ Pay

Read all of our endorsements in the GrowSF Voter Guide.

Muni Budget Buys Time

Published April 24, 2026

The Facts

Muni avoided immediate deep cuts when the SFMTA board approved a two-year operating budget of $1.5 billion for FY 2026-27 and $1.6 billion for FY 2027-28. The plan closes a $307 million shortfall in the coming fiscal year in part with a $200 million state loan and fare and parking changes. But Rachel Swan at The Chronicle reports that if new transit taxes fail in November, SFMTA may eliminate up to 20 routes, cut evening service after 9 p.m. by up to 60%, and slash cable car, F-Market, and special-event service.

The Context

SFMTA has been working hard to trim its budget for the past year and it’s paying off. The agency already made summer 2025 service cuts to help close a $50 million gap, and city officials warned last year that the agency’s deficit could reach $322 million by July 2026. GrowSF previously wrote about that fiscal cliff, which was driven by weak parking and ridership revenue after the pandemic and the exhaustion of one-time aid.

The GrowSF Take

Muni is a core city service, and SFMTA has done real work to narrow the budget gap without immediately gutting service. San Francisco should support both the coming regional transit measure and the proposed local Muni parcel tax. Reliable transit matters for workers, students, seniors, downtown recovery, and the city’s long-term fiscal health.

SFUSD may require full year of ethnic studies

Published April 25, 2026

The Facts

SFUSD plans to auto-enroll all ninth graders in a yearlong ethnic studies course using Voices: An Ethnic Studies Survey. Because it runs the full school year, it takes up an entire ninth-grade course slot that could otherwise go to other academic or elective classes.

The vote to adopt the new Ethnic Studies curriculum will happen at the Tuesday, April 28th Board of Education meeting. However, the year-long mandate is not on the agenda and is a holdover from the School Board that voters recalled in 2022. It will remain the default unless the current Board takes action to change it.

The Context

California’s AB 101 was written so the ethnic studies graduation requirement only takes effect once the Legislature appropriates funding for it. The 2025-26 state budget did not include that funding, and EdSource reports the omission effectively halted the mandate for now. Districts are not currently bound by the fall 2025 deadline to offer the course, and the latent class-of-2030 requirement — if and when it activates — is one semester. A full-year requirement is a local policy choice, not a state mandate.

Other California districts are scaling back. Mountain View-Los Altos recently cut its required yearlong course to one semester.

SFUSD is still working through deep budget cuts and ongoing fiscal pressure. The district’s progress monitoring reported eighth-grade math proficiency at 41% in 2024-25.

The GrowSF Take

We support changing the curriculum from SF’s homegrown course to an established curriculum like Voices, but we wish the Board would take this opportunity to right-size the requirement to one semester.

SFUSD is choosing the most expansive version of a policy the state has not even funded into existence. AB 101’s eventual requirement is one semester, and right now it isn’t even an active requirement. Mandating a full year is a local choice, and it’s the wrong one when core academic outcomes — like 41% eighth-grade math proficiency — still need attention.

The full-year ninth grade mandate that students will face takes up an entire elective slot that many students could otherwise use to build skills for AP and honors coursework, start a language sequence, or explore college and career pathways. There are limited elective slots, so every required class crowds out something else.

Vaillancourt Fountain Removal Begins

Published April 24, 2026

The Facts

The Vaillancourt Fountain comes down Monday, ending the 55 year run of the icon/eyesore. It’s a fountain that some love, and some love to hate, but it’s being removed because it’s been completely non-functional since May 2024, and had been slowly degrading for many more years. (And who can forget the green water!)

An official CEQA notice says the 1971 fountain has been inoperable since May 2024 and will be moved to off-site storage for up to three years while the city decides its long-term future. (Yes, the California Environmental Quality Act requires an environmental impact study for the removal of a broken fountain in the middle of a city. California is a weird state.)

The Context

The removal is tied to a 32.5 million redesign of Embarcadero Plaza and Sue Bierman Park into a larger waterfront civic space across from the Ferry Building, funded by city bond money, private fundraising, and BXP.

On its project page, Recreation and Park describes the effort as a roughly five-acre public space. We previously covered the pending removal in August of 2025, when it was reported that repairs could cost far more than removal.

The GrowSF Take

Your author counts himself among the many who love to hate the fountain, and won’t shed a tear over its removal. The promised usable, welcoming waterfront plaza will be a big upgrade over preserving an eyesore.

19th Avenue repaving “Carmaggedon” for the next three weekends

Published April 24, 2026

The Facts

Northbound 19th Avenue will be down to one open lane this weekend as Caltrans repaves the busy route. Officials recommend detouring to Sunset or avoiding the trip entirely.

This first closure is on northbound lanes between Sloat Boulevard and Lincoln Way from 7 a.m. Friday, April 24, to 5 a.m. Monday, April 27. Southbound lanes will be closed Friday, May 8 from 7 a.m. until Monday, May 10 at 5 a.m., and both directions will be closed from Sloat Boulevard to Halloway Avenue Friday, May 22 from 7 p.m. until Monday, May 25 at 10 p.m.

The Context

Despite the big disruption, this is the fast version! The city said it pressed Caltrans to speed up the work, shortening the disruption from about 40 days to just 9. A time-lapse video posted to Reddit from the first day of closure shows how quickly crews are moving.

The GrowSF Take

The repaving was desperately needed, and the faster schedule is better than dragging this out for months. But regular maintenance is better than emergency-style disruption, and road agencies should not let major corridors wear down so badly before fixing them.

California Hospice Fraud Bust

Published April 24, 2026

The Facts

California Attorney General Rob Bonta charged 21 people in an alleged $267 million hospice fraud scheme. Unlike the child care fraud allegations now in the news, hospice fraud is one area where California and Washington are publicly aligned. Sara DiNatale at The Chronicle reports that providers still worry a broader Sacramento-Washington feud could make coordination harder.

California Department of Health Care Services Director Michelle Baass said “Our safeguards worked as designed: we identified irregularities early, stopped further improper payments, and suspended the fraudulent providers.”

The Context

This problem is not new. A 2022 state audit found California’s weak licensing and oversight created the conditions for large-scale hospice fraud and abuse. Lawmakers responded with SB 664, which blocked most new hospice licenses starting in 2022, and the Newsom administration says California has since revoked 280+ licenses.

The GrowSF Take

This alleged quarter-billion-dollar fraud against a program meant to care for people at the end of life is a huge tragedy. Hopefully the state can recover the stolen dollars.

Paid for by GrowSF Voter Guide. Committee Top Funder:
Nick Josefowitz
Not authorized by a candidate or a committee controlled by a candidate. Financial disclosures are available at sfethics.org.

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of April 12, 2026:
- Unfunded Mandates Hurt LA - A Lesson for SF
- Housing Math Hits Zero
- Reading Is Off Track
- Presidio Trustees Removed
- Swalwell Resigns

Election Countdown

45 days until the June 2 SF Primary Election — the one that decides whether our commonsense Board majority survives. Read the GrowSF Voter Guide for the June election

GrowSF’s full endorsements:

San Francisco

• Supervisor, District 2: Stephen Sherrill

• Supervisor, District 4: Alan Wong

• Board of Education: Phil Kim

• Superior Court Judge: Phoebe Maffei

California

• Governor: Matt Mahan

• Lieutenant Governor: Josh Fryday

• Attorney General: Rob Bonta

• Secretary of State: Shirley N. Weber

• Controller: Malia M. Cohen

• Treasurer: Eleni Kounalakis

• Insurance Commissioner: Patrick Wolff

• State Superintendent of Public Instruction: Josh Newman

• Board of Equalization: Sally J. Lieber

• State Assemblymember, District 17: Matt Haney

• State Assemblymember, District 19: Catherine Stefani

Federal

• House of Representatives, District 11: Scott Wiener

Ballot Measures

• ✅ Yes on Prop A: Earthquake Safety and Emergency Response Bond

• ✅ Yes on Prop B: Lifetime Term Limits for Mayor and Supervisors

• ✅ Yes on Prop C: Decreases to Business Taxes

• ❌ No on Prop D: Increases to Business Tax Based on Comparison of Top Executive’s Pay to Employees’ Pay

Read our full endorsement rationale in the GrowSF Voter Guide.

Unfunded Mandates Hurt LA - A Lesson for SF

Published April 16, 2026

The Facts

More potholes and fewer safety upgrades are the result of a street-safety ballot measure that Los Angeles passed in March 2024. Measure HLA requires bus, bike, and pedestrian safety upgrades when the city repaves qualifying streets. Two years later, Los Angeles has delivered only about 300 feet of HLA-triggered improvements across a city with over 7,500 miles of streets.

The Context

Before the election, city officials warned HLA could impose roughly a $3.1 billion cost. The math is simple: if each qualifying repaving job gets more expensive and the maintenance budget stays flat, fewer streets get done. That is a predictable outcome for any agency working under a fixed budget.

The GrowSF Take

San Francisco should take this as a budgeting lesson, not an argument against safer streets. Voters cannot be promised repaving and safety upgrades without a realistic funding plan. Big promises plus no money usually means worse delivery.

Housing Math Hits Zero

Published April 17, 2026

The Facts

Zero. That is the Controller’s recommended inclusionary rate for San Francisco right now. This rate determines how many subsidized below-market-rate units a home builder is required to include in new construction.

New data from the City Economist’s office and an independent Technical Adivsory Committee says builders can’t afford to build any subsidized units. In fact, they can’t afford to build anything at all right now. Nearly every housing type that was modeled was financially infeasible under current market conditions.

The Context

San Francisco’s inclusionary program usually requires projects with 10 or more units to provide below-market homes, land, or fees.

This fight is not new. In 2017, the Technical Adivsory Committee recommended initial on-site rates of 14% to 18%, with a warning that 18% was the maximum feasible without being net-negative. But the pre-GrowSF Board of Supervisors promptly ignored that warning and set the mandatory minimum at 18% and scheduled it to increase by half a percent every year for the next fifteen years.

In practice, supervisors treated the maximum possible of the feasible range as a floor and planned to go higher, reality be damned.

The GrowSF Take

Homebuilders can’t afford to build anything right now, let alone homes they are required to sell for below cost. The math indicates builders should be getting public subsidies to build market-rate homes, but that’s not politically feasible. So we’ll be stuck waiting for prices to keep rising unless the city futs more fees, speeds up timeliness, and loosens their grip on new home building.

Reading Is Off Track

Published April 17, 2026

The Facts

Reading scores at SFUSD are not on track. SFUSD’s winter literacy proficiency for third graders fell to 51.8% from 53.1% in fall 2025, against a 62% year-end target, and English learner proficiency was 12.4%. SFUSD’s stated goal is 70% third-grade literacy by 2027.

Math scores, however, have ticked up slightly since 2023.

The Context

That goal started from a 52% baseline in 2022, so SFUSD is not building steady momentum yet. Mississippi shows improvement is possible, but not quick: its 2013 literacy law paired reading instruction, intervention, and promotion standards, and more than a decade later its fourth graders scored 219 in NAEP reading, above the national 214, moving from 49th in the country to 9th.

The GrowSF Take

There is no quick fix here. SFUSD should commit to the basics for years: phonics-based reading instruction, extra tutoring for kids who are behind, and holding back students who are not ready to move forward. That is also why GrowSF is backing Josh Newman for State Superintendent: California needs sustained, evidence-based literacy reform, not more drift.

Presidio Trustees Removed

Published April 15, 2026

The Facts

President Trump removed all six presidential appointees from the Presidio Trust board. Under the 1996 Presidio Trust Act, six seats are appointed by the president and a seventh belongs to the Interior secretary or designee. The board shakeup does not mean the park is closing: outgoing chair Mark Buell said he expects new appointees to continue the Trust’s mission.

The Context

The Presidio is unusual because it is financially self-sustaining. The Trust says it earned $182 million in 2024 by renting rehabilitated buildings and operating park assets, and that it has not taken annual appropriations since 2013. The park also includes 200 commercial tenants and 2,900 housing residents.

The GrowSF Take

Board reshuffles matter, but San Franciscans should not confuse them with an immediate park closure or operational collapse. We hope the new trustees show the same responsible stewardship as we’ve been lucky to have for so many years.

Swalwell Resigns

Published April 15, 2026

The Facts

After serious and credible allegations were made from four women that Eric Swalwell sexually assaulted or raped them, he dropped out of the race for Governor and now has resigned from Congress. The House Ethics Committee has opened an investigation into whether he violated the Code of Official Conduct, and the Manhattan District Attorney is investigating allegations tied to conduct in New York.

The Context

East Bay voters in California’s 14th Congressional District will choose a replacement through a June 16 special primary and an Aug. 18 special election. Under California’s special-election rules, the governor had to act quickly once the seat became vacant.

The GrowSF Take

Good riddance.

Paid for by GrowSF Voter Guide. Committee Top Funder:
Nick Josefowitz
Not authorized by a candidate or a committee controlled by a candidate. Financial disclosures are available at sfethics.org.

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of April 5, 2026:
- Swalwell Accused of Sexual Assault - He Should Drop Out
- Crime Falls Further, But Gun Violence Up
- Michael Levine will be the new Homelessness Director
- Transfer Tax Fix Threatened
- City Targets Battery Fires
- Fielder Seeks 3-Month Leave

Election Countdown

52 days until the June 2 SF Primary Election — the one that decides whether our commonsense Board majority survives. Read the GrowSF Voter Guide for the June election

GrowSF endorses Alan Wong in District 4, Stephen Sherrill in District 2, and Phil Kim for Board of Education. This week we also endorsed Scott Wiener for Congress, and Matt Mahan for Governor.

On the local ballot measures, GrowSF endorses Yes on A, Yes on B, Yes on C, and No on D. Stay tuned for more!

Read our full endorsement rationale in the GrowSF Voter Guide.

Swalwell Accused of Sexual Assault - He Should Drop Out

Published April 11, 2026

The Facts

Rep. Eric Swalwell is facing serious sexual-assault allegations from a former employee, as revealed in a bombshell report from Alexei Koseff and Sophia Bollag at The Chronicle. Other reporting describes one allegation as possible rape. Dozens of top Democratic officials have called for him to drop out of the race. Swalwell has denied wrongdoing.

The Context

The allegations have already reshaped the California governor’s race: campaign staff resigned, Swalwell’s endorsements collapsed, and rivals publicly said he should leave. On Polymarket, odds for Swalwell winning the governors race collapsed from 60% to under 4%.

The GrowSF Take

Swalwell should drop out. A candidate credibly accused of sexually assaulting an employee, and possibly raping her, should not continue a campaign for higher office while asking voters to trust his judgment and character.

Last week we endorsed Matt Mahan for governor, and we think voters looking for a pragmatic and effective leader should vote for him.

Crime Falls Further, But Gun Violence Up

Published April 11, 2026

The Facts

San Francisco’s April 1 crime report shows total reported crime down 28% year over year through March 29, with robbery down 33%, assault down 10%, and property crime down 30%.

But gun violence has not improved at the same pace. The same SFPD report shows 29 shooting incidents and 33 gun-violence victims citywide, up from 26 incidents and 28 victims at the same point in 2025. Aidin Vaziri at the Chronicle also reports a person was critically injured in a Mission District shooting on April 9, hours after city leaders publicly called for a 24-hour ceasefire.

The Context

In January, SFPD announced that 2025 ended with 28 homicides, the city’s lowest annual total since 1954, while crediting close work with the Mayor’s Office, District Attorney Brooke Jenkins, and other public-safety partners.

An SFPD technology update said the Real-Time Investigation Center, drones, license plate readers, and public safety cameras had already helped officers make over 500 arrests. And after voters passed Proposition E, City Hall moved to cut duplicative reporting rules and expand those tools.

The GrowSF Take

This is still real progress, and the people who pushed for it deserve credit. Brooke Jenkins has helped restore accountability. SFPD’s tech tools are producing results. And after Prop E, the Police Commission is no longer as free to bury officers in process while crime victims wait. But the rise in shootings is a warning: San Francisco should keep backing what works and intensify pressure on the small number of people driving gun violence.

Michael Levine will be the new Homelessness Director

Published April 11, 2026

The Facts

Mayor Daniel Lurie plans to appoint Michael Levine to lead the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing. Levine is currently assistant secretary for MassHealth, and where he helped oversee a $23 billion program covering nearly 2 million residents of Massachusetts. He will replace Shireen McSpadden. HSH runs a $785.6 million budget.

The Context

San Francisco’s 2024 count found 8,323 people experiencing homelessness, so this is one of the mayor’s most important hires. MassHealth has backed housing-related services and built one-stop behavioral health centers for mental health and substance-use care. A UMass Chan study found one MassHealth support program cut hospitalizations by 23% and ER visits by 13%.

The GrowSF Take

A great résumé does not guarantee success in San Francisco, but it certainly helps! The city doesn’t need just another shelter administrator; it needs someone who can connect homelessness policy, behavioral health, and public dollars into one accountable system. If Levine can bring that kind of results-focused management here, he may go down as Lurie’s most important hires. No pressure, though, Michael!

Transfer Tax Fix Threatened

Published April 11, 2026

The Facts

San Francisco leaders are fighting over the city’s Prop. I transfer tax on large property sales. Mayor Daniel Lurie and Supervisor Bilal Mahmood teamed up to lower the tax rates charged on sales of large buildings: from 5.5% to 2.75% on sales from $10 million to $25 million and from 6% to 3% above $25 million. But subsidized housing advocates are threatening to run a November ballot initiative that would keep rates high and lock at least 60% of the tax revenue to new subsudized housing construction.

The Context

Voters approved Prop. I in 2020, raising taxes on property sales above $10 million. It was pitched as a “mansion tax” by Supervisor Dean Preston, but it actually only applies to large apartment buildings and office buildings. Urban think-tank and good-government group, SPUR, opposed the measure.

The GrowSF Take

Right now, San Francisco’s need for budget flexibility is higher than its need for more subsidized housing. If the city has to cut back on vital services because millions of dollars are sitting in a bank account that can only be used to build very expensive subsidized housing, are we really coming out ahead? We don’t think so. A tax that falls hardest on large multifamily and commercial deals can suppress the very construction the city says it wants. Lowering these rates is the better move; City Hall should not double down on a tax that makes building harder.

City Targets Battery Fires

Published April 11, 2026

The Facts

Low quality or knock-off chargers and batteries without a UL certification will soon be banned in San Francisco. This week, Supervisor Bilal Mahmood introduced legislation to ban the sale of uncertified lithium-ion batteries and powered devices used in e-bikes and scooters after a December fire at 50 Golden Gate Ave. was linked to a battery malfunction.

The Context

San Francisco adopted a fire code ordinance in 2024 that restricted damaged and reconditioned batteries in powered mobility devices. That legislation required the use of certified devices but didn’t restrict the purchase thereof.

The GrowSF Take

Far from being government overreach, requiring consumer-grade electronic devices to obtain a UL certification is just common sense. UL certification is already required to pass city inspection for electrical work, so applying the same standards to what we plug into the wall makes sense.

Fielder Seeks 3-Month Leave

Published April 10, 2026

The Facts

District 9 Supervisor Jackie Fielder asked Tuesday to be excused from Board and committee meetings through June after a mental health crisis, according to Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez at The Standard. Under the Board’s Rules of Order, excusing a supervisor from a Board meeting requires a majority vote of supervisors present. Fielder has held the District 9 seat for just over a year.

The Context

Fielder was hospitalized March 27, during what her office described as an acute personal health crisis. Rumors are still circulating that her office was the source of a leaked legal memo, in violation of the law. As we noted last month, a resignation would have let Mayor Daniel Lurie appoint a replacement; a leave does not change the seat, but it does leave District 9 without its elected voice in regular Board and committee debates. Last week we said a three month leave would be reasonable, but any longer should prompt a discussion about her constituent’s right to active representation.

The GrowSF Take

We hope Fielder makes a full recovery. If she still needs more time after her three month leave, then we expect calls for her replacement to grow louder so that District 9 residents have representation in City Hall.

Paid for by GrowSF Voter Guide. Committee Top Funder:
Nick Josefowitz
Not authorized by a candidate or a committee controlled by a candidate. Financial disclosures are available at sfethics.org.

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of March 29, 2026:
- City Attorney Investigating Board for Illegal Leak
- Algebra Returns
- Fielder on Medical Leave for Mental Health
- Dream Keeper Chief Faces Felonies
- Deficit Shrinks, Cuts Loom
- John Elberling, a Political Force, Dies at 79
- Police Watchdog Gets Review

Election Countdown

59 days until the June 2 SF Primary Election — the one that decides whether our commonsense Board majority survives. Read the GrowSF Voter Guide for the June election.

GrowSF endorses Alan Wong in District 4, Stephen Sherrill in District 2, and Phil Kim for Board of Education. This week we also endorsed Scott Wiener for Congress, and Matt Mahan for Governor.

On the local ballot measures, GrowSF endorses Yes on A, Yes on B, Yes on C, and No on D. Stay tuned for more!

Read our full endorsement rationale in the GrowSF Voter Guide.

City Attorney Investigating Board for Illegal Leak

Published April 3, 2026

The Facts

City Attorney David Chiu is investigating the Board of Supervisors to determine who leaked a confidential legal brief. According to his letter dated February 13 reported by Josh Koehn, City Attorney David Chiu warned that whoever leaked the confidential legal memo could face investigations, discipline, or removal from office.

The leak appears to be the same one behind Mission Local’s Feb. 10 story on the legal risks surrounding a proposed sobering center. The letter was first disclosed by Lee Edwards on twitter, who obtained it via a public records request.

Only two Supervisors voted against the sobering center: Jackie Fielder and Connie Chan. Since the City Attorney’s memo on the legal consequences, one of Jackie Fielder’s staff has resigned and Fielder has gone on mental health leave after being briefly hospitalized. Chan’s office has not experienced similar disruption. Fielders office has denied leaking the legal memo, and Chan’s office has not commented on the leak.

The Context

San Francisco’s ethics code bars city officers and employees from knowingly disclosing confidential or privileged information. A 2009 City Attorney memo laid out the same principle and said unauthorized disclosure of confidential legal advice can lead to administrative, civil, or criminal penalties and removal for official misconduct under Charter Section 15.105.

The leak explicitly does not fall under “whistleblower” rules that allow insiders to leak information. The memo in question was an attorney-client privileged legal document, and the entire Board would have needed to vote on it in order to disclose it and break privilege. Breaking privilege makes the city’s internal legal reasoning both discoverable and admissable in any future lawsuits the city may face.

The GrowSF Take

Leaking privileged legal advice is not transparency, and it is irresponsible. If an elected official wants to oppose a policy, they are obligated to make the case in public and keep sensitive legal memos privileged. We hope whoever leaked it is held responsible and removed from office.

Algebra Returns

Published April 3, 2026

The Facts

SFUSD’s Board of Education approved a revised math policy on March 24, 2026, by a 4-3 vote, restoring Algebra I to all middle and K-8 schools starting in the coming school year. Students can elect to take just Algebra 1 or both standard 8th grade math and Algebra 1 at the same time. Alice Fong Yu and Hoover will pilot an accelerated pathway that compresses 6th, 7th, and 8th grade math into just 6th and 7th grades.

After a 12-year hiatus, the board finally returned SFUSD to sanity.

The Context

SFUSD removed Algebra I from middle school in 2014 as part of a misguided effort that sought to achieve equity by slowing everyone down to the same pathway. A Stanford study later found AP math participation immediately dropped 15%, and large racial gaps in advanced math course-taking remained. By all accounts, this “equity-driven” experiment achieved the very opposite of its goals.

San Franciscans were clear about wanting a reset: 81.75% of voters backed Proposition G in March 2024, urging the district to restore eighth-grade algebra.

The GrowSF Take

Restoring Algebra is the right call, but the 4-3 margin is a reminder that this progress is still politically fragile.

And it could get fragile again fast. Board President Phil Kim is on the June 2, 2026 ballot, and if he loses, a future board could easily backslide on algebra, acceleration, and academic standards. Families should treat this as progress worth defending, not a fight that is over.

Fielder on Medical Leave for Mental Health

Published April 3, 2026

The Facts

District 9 Supervisor Jackie Fielder said she is taking medical leave while navigating a mental health condition. This announcement follows news last week that Fielder had been hospitalized for “an acute personal health crisis” and that she would resign.

The Context

Fielder was elected in November 2024. Since taking office, she has positioned herself as a fierce and unapologetic critic of the Lurie administration. She has used her platform to engage in targeted harassment of her critics outside of City Hall.

The backdrop of her mental health leave is a leak probe and resignation talk. GrowSF previously reported sources who believed a confidential City Attorney memo may have been leaked from Fielder’s office. Today, Fielder’s office denied leaking the legal memo.

Under a City Attorney guidance memo and the city’s ethics penalty rules, unauthorized disclosure of privileged information can carry civil fines, misdemeanor penalties, and removal from office.

The GrowSF Take

We hope Fielder recovers, and we appreciate the transparency about her health. If her leave lasts longer than three months, then we should have a conversation about whether she should step down to ensure her district gets the representation it deserves, but she deserves the chance to recover and return to work.

And if the City Attorney’s investigation shows that she leaked the legal memo, she should resign.

Dream Keeper Chief Faces Felonies

Published April 3, 2026

The Facts

The District Attorney’s Office charged a former City Hall Official, Sheryl Davis, on March 30 with 13 felony conflict-of-interest counts, felony misappropriation of public funds, three felony perjury counts, and two misdemeanor ethics charges. Former Collective Impact chief James Spingola was charged with four felonies. Prosecutors said the 18-month case involved more than 50 search warrants. The pair were booked Monday morning, according to St. John Barned-Smith and Michael Barba at the Chronicle.

The Context

Davis was the executive director of San Francisco’s Human Rights Commission. The Dream Keeper Initiative, which was created in 2021 to funnell $60 million per year into San Francisco’s Black community, has been racked with scandal.

A 2025 city audit found more than $4 million in misuse and rule-breaking at the Human Rights Commission, and the Ethics Commission found probable cause on 31 counts tied to gifts, conflicts, and disclosure failures.

The GrowSF Take

These charges are not just about one official. They are an indictment of a City Hall culture that let a fast-growing program led by friends of the powerful move millions of taxpayer without basic controls. As we argued in our September 2025 audit write-up, San Francisco needs real-time spending oversight, enforced disclosures, and clear executive accountability.

Deficit Shrinks, Cuts Loom

Published April 3, 2026

The Facts

San Francisco’s March 31 budget update says the city’s projected two-year General Fund shortfall for FY 2026-27 and FY 2027-28 fell to $642.8 million, down $293.8 million from December, with stronger hotel, sales, transfer, and business tax collections, higher hospital revenue, and lower pension costs helping the outlook.

Lucy Hodgman at the San Francisco Chronicle reports that despite the improvement, City Hall is still preparing cuts and possible layoffs before the June 1 budget deadline.

The Context

Mayor Lurie’s budget proposal last year sought to close an $817.5 million deficit, eliminate more than 1,400 positions, mostly vacant, and set aside $400 million in reserve. As we wrote in our budget overview, San Francisco’s government is enormous even by national standards.

The GrowSF Take

A smaller deficit is welcome, but it does not change the core lesson: San Francisco’s problem is not just revenue volatility. It is a city government that has grown faster than results. Protect core services, demand measurable outcomes from contractors and departments, and keep cutting low-value bureaucracy.

John Elberling, a Political Force, Dies at 79

Published April 3, 2026

The Facts

John Elberling, the longtime head of TODCO, died of leukemia at 79 on April 2 after decades as one of San Francisco’s most influential land-use figures, J.K. Dineen at The Chronicle reports. TODCO operates eight South of Market buildings that house more than 1,000 families, but The Chronicle reports the group stopped building in the early 2000s. Elberling instead became a major political force, using ballot measures, lawsuits, and negotiations to fight projects he opposed.

The Context

Elberling’s legacy is inseparable from San Francisco’s housing shortage. A 2021 Chronicle profile described him as the figure many YIMBYs saw as the face of San Francisco’s anti-housing politics. That same reporting said critics accused him of using money generated by refinancing federally subsidized buildings to bankroll ballot measures and housing fights. GrowSF’s campaign to support 469 Stevenson came after he helped rally opposition to a nearly 500-home tower on a parking lot near Market Street, a fight that drew state scrutiny. California’s first Housing Policy and Practice Review later said San Francisco is on track to miss its 82,000-home target by 2031 and must reduce delay, discretion, and political obstruction.

The GrowSF Take

That record should be described plainly. Elberling managed an existing subsidized housing portfolio, but he did not keep adding homes as San Francisco became less affordable. Worse, he became one of the city’s most effective anti-housing operators, helping block new development and reinforcing the scarcity that drives up costs. San Francisco needs a very different model: keep vulnerable residents housed, approve far more homes, and stop empowering people who treat new housing as a threat.

Police Watchdog Gets Review

Published April 3, 2026

The Facts

San Francisco’s Police Commission is set to evaluate Department of Police Accountability director Paul Henderson after a March 17 lawsuit by former policy director Janelle Caywood alleged retaliation, racism, and misspent funds. Eleni Balakrishnan at Mission Local reported that general evaluations of either the DPA director or police chief appear to be extremely rare, and the last ones came amid controversy nearly a decade ago.

The Context

The DPA is a powerful oversight body: Charter Section 4.136 gives it authority to investigate misconduct complaints and push police discipline, while the department’s mission includes audits and policy recommendations for SFPD. Henderson also leads an agency that has posted measurable output: the 2024 DPA annual report says it closed 828 cases last year. But good output does not replace basic management oversight.

The GrowSF Take

A police watchdog should be independent, but it should not be exempt from routine review. If San Francisco only evaluates top public-safety leaders after lawsuits or internal revolt, that is a governance failure. The city should require regular performance reviews and keep advancing commission reform so accountability is predictable, not crisis-driven.

Paid for by GrowSF Voter Guide. Committee Top Funder:
Nick Josefowitz
Not authorized by a candidate or a committee controlled by a candidate. Financial disclosures are available at sfethics.org.