Here’s what happened around the city for the week of September 20, 2026:
- Transit Cuts Could Double Bay Bridge Delays
- Mandarin Immersion School to Open in Noe Valley in 2027
- Public Power Bid Clears PG&E’s Environmental Appeal
- Grocery Stores and Pharmacies Could Skip Chain-Store Review
- City Permitting Problems Derail Butter & Crumble’s Second Shop

Election Countdown

38 days until the November 3, 2026 Election! You’re voting on up to 44 different things, which nobody with a family, job, or a social life has time to research. Luckily, we’ve compiled everything you need to make up your mind. Whether you agree with our endorsements or not, we hope you find our research useful! Read the GrowSF Voter Guide and share it with your friends!

Transit Cuts Could Double Bay Bridge Delays

Published September 24, 2026

The Facts

If Prop H and the Regional Transit Measure fail, severe cuts to public transit could add 33 minutes westbound in the morning and 43 minutes eastbound in the evening to Bay Bridge congestion delays, a new analysis projects. The model assumes low-ridership rail stations close and riders switch to driving, Rachel Swan reports at the San Francisco Chronicle.

The Context

Just about every group across the political spectrum endorses both RTM’s five-county sales tax and Prop H’s Muni parcel tax.

Without new funding, BART’s contingency plan calls for trains every 30 minutes starting January 2027, followed by potentially closing up to 15 stations in July.

The GrowSF Take

You don’t have to ride transit to benefit from keeping it running. This broad coalition is right to make the case to drivers, too. Vote yes on Proposition RTM and Proposition H to keep trains and buses running.

Mandarin Immersion School to Open in Noe Valley in 2027

Published September 24, 2026

The Facts

A new SFUSD Mandarin immersion school will open at 1670 Noe Street in fall 2027, starting with one transitional kindergarten class and three kindergarten classes. SFUSD plans to add a grade each year through eighth grade. The Noe Valley location is temporary, though; a move to a permanent campus is expected in fall 2028. Enrollment information becomes available in October 2026.

The Context

SFUSD currently offers just 66 kindergarten seats in Mandarin immersion at Starr King and Jose Ortega elementary schools. Parent advocates say the new school will double that capacity, reports Ezra Wallach at The San Francisco Standard.

Families have been pushing for more options for years. In August 2025, the school board rejected Dragon Gate Academy, a parent-led Mandarin immersion charter proposal, in a 7–0 vote while pursuing its own school.

The GrowSF Take

More public-school seats in programs families actually want is good news, and we’re happy to see more Mandarin immersion schools! The Board of Education should have allowed the Dragon Gate Academy Mandarin charter school while launching its own, though. More of a good thing is always better.

Public Power Bid Clears PG&E’s Environmental Appeal

Published September 24, 2026

The Facts

San Francisco’s bid to buy PG&E’s local electric grid advanced September 22 when supervisors unanimously rejected challenges to its environmental review. Supervisor Matt Dorsey called PG&E a “bad faith actor” using the process to delay a takeover, reports Alyce McFadden at the San Francisco Chronicle.

The Context

The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission values the grid at about $3.4 billion, with state regulators still determining its worth. Customers would repay acquisition bonds through electricity bills.

The high cost of PG&E’s assets isn’t the only barrier to a City takeover; low City wages are another. City lineworkers earn $85.30 an hour, while PG&E pays around $92–$97 per hour, according to their advertised base wage rates, combined with its 25% local premium for San Francisco, before overtime and retention incentives. A full comparison would also need to account for benefits.

The GrowSF Take

The city would have to compete for experienced crews while paying acquisition debt and upgrading the grid. That deserves more scrutiny than promises of cheaper public power. Before approving a purchase, supervisors should demand evidence that customers would save money after accounting for competitive compensation, debt, and upgrades.

We’re not here to say this is necessarily a bad idea (San Francisco runs a great water system and airport, after all), but we aren’t yet convinced it’s a responsible choice. We’re waiting to see more information before taking a position.

Grocery Stores and Pharmacies Could Skip Chain-Store Review

Published September 24, 2026

The Facts

Grocery and pharmacy chains could move into former chain-store spaces without an extra planning approval under Supervisor Bilal Mahmood’s new permitting proposal, reports Alyce McFadden at the San Francisco Chronicle. It would also ease approvals for chains operating inside grocery stores, such as cafés and pharmacies, and give grocery stores and pharmacies priority processing at locations not previously occupied by chains. Mahmood expects to introduce legislation in the coming weeks; Supervisors Stephen Sherrill and Myrna Melgar have signed on as co-sponsors.

The Context

San Francisco’s “formula retail” rules require chain stores to get special permission in many neighborhoods, aiming to protect independent businesses and neighborhood character. But the law itself acknowledges that chains generally charge lower prices and that excessive restrictions can raise storefront vacancy rates.

In GrowSF’s February 2025 poll, 75% of voters favored allowing more chain stores or repealing the restrictions.

The GrowSF Take

Thank you to Mahmood, Sherrill, and Melgar for backing a practical way to fill empty stores. Protecting neighborhood character should not mean making residents travel farther for groceries and prescriptions. A chain replacing another chain should be routine, not a political negotiation. The Board should pass this reform.

City Permitting Problems Derail Butter & Crumble’s Second Shop

Published September 24, 2026

The Facts

Butter & Crumble, the North Beach bakery, has abandoned its planned cake café at 301 Union Street, with owner Sophie Smith citing city permitting problems, reports Aaron Tolentino at KRON4. Smith will look for another location; the original bakery remains open on Francisco Street.

The Context

Supervisor Danny Sauter’s North Beach zoning reforms loosened restrictions on which businesses could occupy storefronts. But permitting still derailed this expansion.

Smith discovered a property line running through the space in March. She says at least one city department assured her she could proceed, reports Tara Duggan at the Chronicle. She submitted permit applications in May. On July 23, she learned officials had found records of a previously removed dividing wall, raising structural and evacuation concerns. Smith had spent tens of thousands of dollars. She praised staff’s efforts to help, but ultimately walked away.

The GrowSF Take

City Hall deserves blame for a permitting process that gave this business confidence to proceed before identifying a deal-breaking problem. Helpful phone calls cannot recover Smith’s money or her employees’ lost opportunities.

Sauter was right to loosen zoning restrictions. The city now needs to make its permitting guidance reliable. Safety requirements should be identified early, with a clear answer about what fixes would make a space usable. The Office of Small Business should pair its existing commercial leasing assistance with coordinated building and fire review before entrepreneurs commit to a lease.

Here’s what happened around the city for the week of September 13, 2026:
- Proposition H Would Boost SF’s Economy by Up to $400 Million a Year
- Mail-In Ballots Safe From Trump’s Executive Order for November
- Dog Attack Shows San Francisco Needs a New Approach
- Melgar Proposes Housing Department and Co-op Program
- Overdose Deaths Fall 24% in 2026
- Sherrill Moves to Remove William Palmer From Sheriff Oversight Board
- Tenderloin Youth Center Reaches Nearly 100 Young People

Election Countdown

45 days until the November 3 Election! Read and share the GrowSF Voter Guide. Be the person all your friends ask for voting help.

Proposition H Would Boost SF’s Economy by Up to $400 Million a Year

Published September 18, 2026

The Facts

Proposition H would boost San Francisco’s economic output by up to $400 million a year, on average over the next 15 years, compared with deep Muni service cuts, according to Chief Economist Ted Egan’s analysis. That estimate accounts for the cost of the tax, not just the benefits of preserving transit.

The measure would raise $184 million annually for Muni. Commercial properties would provide about 75% of that revenue. Most single-family homes and condominiums would pay $129 per year.

The Context

Without new revenue, Muni faces a $307 million deficit that could grow to $434 million within five years. The modeled cuts would eliminate routes, increase traffic, and add more than 15,000 hours of weekday travel delays; residential property values would fall three to five times more than under the tax, reports Garrett Leahy at The Standard.

The City’s Chief Economist reviews legislation and ballot measures and estimates how they would affect jobs, businesses, development, tax revenue, and the broader city economy. His analysis informs policymakers and voters; he does not approve or veto proposals.

The GrowSF Take

The numbers make the choice easy. A $129 annual tax is not free, but broken transit would cost residents and businesses much more. Reliable Muni expands access to jobs and keeps San Francisco moving.

GrowSF recommends Yes on Proposition H. Vote yes this November.

Mail-In Ballots Safe From Trump’s Executive Order for November

Published September 18, 2026

The Facts

The Supreme Court declined to lift the injunction against President Donald Trump’s new mail-ballot restrictions for November’s election, preserving existing state procedures, reports Lindsey Whitehurst of the Associated Press in the San Francisco Chronicle. The rules would have required redesigned envelopes and voter information uploaded to a federal portal.

The Context

This is not a final ruling on the restrictions’ legality. The Court denied emergency relief, leaving a lower-court injunction in place. Justice Brett Kavanaugh agreed officials lacked time to implement the rules for 2026, but left open whether similar requirements could be lawful later.

California counties must begin mailing ballots no later than October 5 for the November 3 election. That schedule leaves little room for a federal overhaul.

The GrowSF Take

Good. Making voting harder through last-minute paperwork is not election integrity. California Attorney General Rob Bonta deserves credit for helping stop it: he co-led the coalition of 24 attorneys general and Pennsylvania’s governor that secured the injunction and defended it through the administration’s appeals. Thank you to Bonta and his fellow challengers for protecting voters’ access to mail ballots this November.

Check your voter registration now so your ballot reaches the right address, and use our November voter guide to prepare.

Dog Attack Shows San Francisco Needs a New Approach

Published September 18, 2026

The Facts

A pit bull mauled a woman and left her with life-threatening injuries on September 8 on Larkin Street. Police apprehended the dog, which died after being restrained, and did not find its owner, according to Brad Hamilton at CBS News.

In response, Supervisor Bilal Mahmood introduced a dog-safety resolution that calls on city-funded shelters and supportive housing to keep pet registration and vaccination records and report attacks. It also calls for stable funding for dangerous-dog hearings, reports George Kelly at The San Francisco Standard.

The Context

San Francisco already investigates dogs that bite, lunge, or chase people. A hearing officer may order training, muzzling, or confinement, and city law requires a formally designated dangerous dog outside its enclosure to be muzzled and held on a short, heavy-duty chain under its owner’s direct control.

But City Hall let those hearings stop for ten months, creating a 66-case backlog, according to Jennifer Wadsworth at The San Francisco Standard.

The GrowSF Take

We don’t think these reporting requirements will do anything to prevent dangerous-dog attacks. San Francisco should require owners to keep pit bulls on-leash and muzzled in public, before they attack.

That would require a change in state law. San Francisco’s dangerous-dog hearings address individual animals, but California prohibits breed-specific rules. The state’s narrow spay/neuter and breeding exception does not let cities require muzzles for an entire breed.

San Francisco should ask state lawmakers to authorize breed-wide leash and muzzle requirements, so these precautions can apply to all pit bulls without a separate dangerous-dog hearing for each animal.

Melgar Proposes Housing Department and Co-op Program

Published September 18, 2026

The Facts

Supervisor Myrna Melgar announced Tuesday that she plans to turn the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development into a standalone Department of Housing Development and Preservation covering both subsidized and market-rate housing, according to Alyce McFadden and contributor J.D. Morris at the San Francisco Chronicle.

Kelly Waldron at Mission Local reports that Melgar is working with the mayor’s office, and the mayor would appoint the director. Which existing functions and authority would move remains unresolved. Melgar is also drafting a program to finance new housing cooperatives and provide existing co-op boards with training and technical support. In co-ops, residents buy shares in the corporation that owns their building rather than individual apartments.

The Context

Housing responsibilities are divided: the mayor’s housing office finances subsidized housing, SF Planning controls zoning and review, and the Department of Building Inspection handles permits and enforcement.

A 2022 city report counted 1,580 homes across 11 limited-equity co-ops. Only one received city development funding, and many face deferred maintenance, board conflict, or financing problems.

The GrowSF Take

Melgar is right to push for this. San Francisco needs a housing department responsible for helping deliver homes at every price point. The Board should create the department and give the mayor and its director flexibility to set priorities and adapt its work, with clear accountability for results.

Overdose Deaths Fall 24% in 2026

Published September 17, 2026

The Facts

San Francisco recorded 351 accidental overdose deaths from January through August 2026, down 24% from 460 during the same period last year. The preliminary count puts the city on pace for its lowest annual toll since 2019, reports Maggie Angst at The Standard.

The Context

The decline is not uniquely local. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that nationwide overdose deaths fell 12.3% year over year through March 2026, while California fell 8%.

San Francisco’s Department of Public Health served 16,804 people through substance-use programs in fiscal year 2025, 15% more than the prior year. The department cited easier access to buprenorphine and methadone plus more treatment and recovery beds. Nationally, federal testing found that fentanyl purity declined throughout 2024. No single intervention explains the improvement.

The GrowSF Take

This is real progress, and the Department of Public Health, treatment workers, police, and federal drug investigators all deserve credit for their part. And we’re pleased to see SF outperform both California and the nation!

Sherrill Moves to Remove William Palmer From Sheriff Oversight Board

Published September 17, 2026

The Facts

Supervisor Stephen Sherrill introduced a motion to suspend William Palmer from the Sheriff’s Department Oversight Board and file 12 official-misconduct charges. If supervisors approve it next week, the Ethics Commission would hold a hearing before the Board decides whether to remove Palmer by a three-fourths vote. Michael Barba and J.D. Morris reported the process for the San Francisco Chronicle.

The Inspector General found 14 ethics-law violations, including invoking his title during two law-enforcement encounters, using city email to contact the District Attorney’s Office about a personal matter, and trying to use his position to reach a potential witness in a secure hospital ward. Palmer disputes the findings.

The Context

Palmer joined the board in 2021. His 31 years of incarceration and later reentry work were central to his appointment to a public seat, as GrowSF previously reported. Supervisors reappointed him in 2023 through March 2027.

Current law protects oversight-board members from removal except through this misconduct process. Proposition F would generally let appointing authorities remove their own commissioners without cause.

The GrowSF Take

Sherrill was right to act. The findings are detailed and damning. Someone charged with overseeing law enforcement cannot invoke that office to intimidate deputies or reach a potential witness against him.

But Sherrill should not have to assemble 12 charges and push them through months of legal machinery to remove an appointed official who has plainly lost the Board’s confidence. The Board should be able to remove Palmer directly. That is why Sherrill supports Proposition F, and why GrowSF supports it, too.

Tenderloin Youth Center Reaches Nearly 100 Young People

Published September 18, 2026

The Facts

Nearly 100 young people ages 15–24 have visited a new Tenderloin youth center at 518 Ellis Street in its first six months, reports Adriana Gutierrez at Mission Local. The privately funded pilot, run by the Tenderloin Community Benefit District and United Playaz, offers mentorship, homework space, and job preparation. Staff say seven of ten participants who were on probation have gotten off it. Renewal funding remains uncertain when the one-year pilot ends in early 2027.

The Context

Supervisor Bilal Mahmood announced the $200,000 pilot in November 2025, backed by private donors rather than city funding. The neighborhood organizations built a place where teenagers and young adults could find support close to home.

By May, the operators reported reaching 57 youth, with participation more than doubling in two months through word of mouth. These are encouraging participation figures and individual successes, not proof that the program has reduced neighborhood violence.

The GrowSF Take

A safe place after school and an adult who helps you land your first job are worth celebrating. Thank you to United Playaz, the Tenderloin Community Benefit District, and their donors for turning a modest investment into practical help.

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 September 6, 2026:
- Lurie Backs GrowSF’s Five Supervisor Candidates
- Targeted Policing Helped Drive Car Break-Ins to a 22-Year Low
- Shamann Walton Proposes Data Center Moratorium With No Projects Pending
- Candlestick Point Redevelopment Breaks Ground After Years of Delay
- Lurie Offers 12% Raises and No Layoffs to 24,000 City Workers
- Mission BART Plaza Cleanup Continues After Modest Progress

Election Countdown

52 days until the November 3 SF General Election — All of our endorsements are now live! Read the GrowSF Voter Guide for the November 2026 election

Lurie Backs GrowSF’s Five Supervisor Candidates

Published September 11, 2026

The Facts

Mayor Lurie has endorsed all GrowSF-endorsed Supervisor candidates: Manny Yekutiel for the open District 8 seat, Theo Ellington for the open District 10 seat, and incumbent Supervisors Matt Dorsey, Stephen Sherrill, and Alan Wong.

The Context

GrowSF endorsed all five candidates earlier this year.

GrowSF’s and Lurie’s preferred candidates and measures swept the June election.

The GrowSF Take

Yekutiel and Ellington offer their districts a clear break from the politics of housing scarcity, street disorder, and endless red tape. Dorsey, Sherrill, and Wong have earned support as reliable partners in the moderate majority. Now voters should give Lurie a Board that can keep San Francisco moving forward.

Targeted Policing Helped Drive Car Break-Ins to a 22-Year Low

Published September 10, 2026

The Facts

Reported car break-ins are down 75% since 2024 and at a 22-year low.

The Context

The improvement is not purely local: thefts from vehicles fell 17.7% across California and about 15% nationally in 2024. San Francisco’s 57% drop that year far exceeded both baselines.

Our earlier analysis found the sharp local decline began around September 2023, after Mayor London Breed, Police Chief Bill Scott, and District Attorney Brooke Jenkins launched targeted patrols, bait cars, and investigations into organized burglary crews and stolen-goods networks.

The GrowSF Take

San Francisco voters were right to approve Proposition E, giving police access to drones and faster deployment of public-safety cameras. San Francisco’s large, abrupt, and sustained decline shows targeted enforcement works.

Shamann Walton Proposes Data Center Moratorium With No Projects Pending

Published September 11, 2026

The Facts

Supervisor Shamann Walton plans to introduce a 45-day moratorium on data centers, which could be extended to two years. No new data centers are currently being proposed in San Francisco, so the moratorium will have no ultimate effect.

The Context

For those unfamiliar with data centers: they are warehouses full of computers that run the internet. Every news article, every Instagram post, and every email moves through and ultimately ends up in a data center. Data centers power our modern world.

There are currently seven data center sites inside city limits, with all but one open for over a decade.

The national political dust-up over data centers is around their purported water use, but this is based on bad data. Brian Potter at Construction Physics explains why the popular narrative is wrong and that data centers use approximately 275 million gallons per day (by contrast, almond farming uses 4.4 billion gallons per day). San Francisco’s newest data center advertises water-free cooling.

Similarly, data centers across the United States collectively use less than 5% of all power. For something so absolutely instrumental every aspect of our daily lives, that hardly seems worth any concern at all. And many new data centers are building power production on-site or are powered with 100% renewable energy.

The GrowSF Take

Walton is importing a national political panic into San Francisco land-use policy. San Francisco has power problems, yes, but that’s because PG&E can’t keep their lines and transformers in good shape. And several of the data centers already in San Francisco already use 100% renewable power. We have no water problems to speak of.

This is nothing more than political signaling.

Candlestick Point Redevelopment Breaks Ground After Years of Delay

Published September 11, 2026

The Facts

FivePoint broke ground Wednesday on roads, sidewalks, and utilities for Candlestick Point, reports Kevin V. Nguyen at The Standard. The 270-acre redevelopment is planned for 7,218 homes, 2.8 million square feet of office and research space, retail, parks, and other public amenities.

The Context

After more than a decade of delays, the city amended the project in 2024 to let Candlestick proceed separately from Navy cleanup at Hunters Point Shipyard. In June 2026, the Board approved a phased final map sponsored by Supervisors Shamann Walton and Rafael Mandelman, clearing land and infrastructure work for a portion of the site. Candlestick is among roughly 20,000 approved homes still unbuilt across District 10.

The GrowSF Take

Finally! Bayview deserves the promised homes, stores, parks, and services.

Lurie Offers 12% Raises and No Layoffs to 24,000 City Workers

Published September 10, 2026

The Facts

Mayor Daniel Lurie reached an early tentative agreement with 10 unions representing 24,000 city workers: 12% raises across 2027 to 2031 (3% per year) and no layoffs through June 30, 2029. Union members must still ratify the deal, report Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez, Gabriel Lorenzo Greschler, and Maggie Angst at The Standard.

The Context

The agreement heads off bargaining that was expected to become contentious after police received 14% raises. Earlier this year, unions threatened San Francisco’s first major city-worker strike in roughly 50 years as Lurie pursued layoffs and spending cuts.

Lurie has already reduced the size of city government. His first budget eliminated 1,237 authorized positions in 2025–26 and another 25 the following year. His latest budget schedules 249 more position reductions in 2027–28. The Controller says that budget also contains about $300 million in ongoing savings, cutting the projected 2028–29 shortfall from $742 million to about $450 million.

The fiscal problem remains. The City’s March forecast projected its annual deficit growing to $1.09 billion by 2029–30, with salaries and benefits the largest spending-growth category. The Mayor’s Office has not publicly explained how it will fund the raises, but we expect it will be similar to strategies used in the past: closing open roles and counting on attrition and retirement.

The GrowSF Take

Absolutely nobody wants a City worker strike, so we’re glad to lock in a mutually agreeable solution early. But committing to a new contract as we’re facing a looming billion dollar deficit is a risky strategy.

The Board should approve this agreement only if recurring savings or revenue fully cover it without degrading core services.

Mission BART Plaza Cleanup Continues After Modest Progress

Published September 10, 2026

The Facts

It’s getting a little bit better around the Mission BART plazas, according to the official numbers. Mayor Lurie’s “90-day cleanup” resulted in “534 notices of violations, 93 first-time citations, 14 second-time citations and three misdemeanors” according to Mission Local and it will now continue indefinitely.

Police assigned to the effort made 481 arrests and citations around 16th Street in 90 days, about half for drug violations.

The Context

Supervisor Jackie Fielder previously requested 24/7 ambassadors, but the administration rejected the expansion over a quadrupling of costs.

Police are able to crack down on the sale of stolen goods due to a 2025 state law authored by Senator Scott Wiener. SF now requires permits for selling merchandise commonly targeted by retail theft and can escalate repeat violations from warnings to citations and misdemeanors.

The GrowSF Take

We’re thankful for some progress, but it isn’t really noticeable to people walking through the plaza. Right now the plazas act as a “Schelling point,” meaning sellers and buyers know they can go to these BART plazas to buy and sell stolen goods and drugs. The only way that can change is through consistent enforcement so the plazas stop being the known places to break the law.

Paid for by GrowSF Voter Guide. GrowSF.org. 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 30, 2026:
- Lurie Will Tie Homelessness Contracts to Results
- Fielder Proposes Minimum Unpaid-Rent Threshold for Evictions
- Manny Yekutiel Proposes a 24-Mile Citywide Subway
- Urban Alchemy Study Finds Fewer Police Reports, Not Necessarily Less Crime
- Vacant Storefront Tax Now Hits Just 27 Properties
- Sixty Shelter Cabins Sit Empty After Recovery Site Falls Through

Election Countdown

59 days until the November 3 SF General Election — the one that decides whether our commonsense Board majority survives. Read the GrowSF Voter Guide for the November election

GrowSF’s endorsements (some more coming soon!):

San Francisco

• Assessor-Recorder: Joaquin Torres

• Supervisor, District 2: Stephen Sherrill

• Supervisor, District 4: Alan Wong

• Supervisor, District 6: Matt Dorsey

• Supervisor, District 8: Manny Yekutiel

• Supervisor, District 10: Theo Ellington

• Board of Education: Autumn Brown Garibay, Phil Kim, Tim Tung

• City College: Erwin Tam, Elijah Ball, Monroe Lace

• City College (partial term): Ruth Ferguson

• BART: Sara Barz

California

• Governor: Xavier Becerra

• Lieutenant Governor: Fiona Ma

• Secretary of State: Shirley Weber

• Controller: Malia Cohen

• Treasurer: Eleni Kounalakis

• Attorney General: Rob Bonta

• Insurance Commissioner: Benjamin Allen

• Board of Equalization: John Pimentel

• Superintendent: Coming soon

• 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: Charter Changes Affecting Various City Departments and Commissions

• ❌ No on Prop B: Establishing a Municipal Finance Corporation and a Public Bank

• ✅ Yes on Prop C: Contributions to the Housing Fund

• ✅ Yes on Prop D: Changes to Ballot Measure Process

• ✅ Yes on Prop E: City Administrator’s Authority and Changes to City Contracting

• ✅ Yes on Prop F: Changes to Executive Branch Management

• ❌ No on Prop G: Allowing Private Vehicles on the Great Highway in Sunset Dunes Park

• ✅ Yes on Prop H: Parcel Tax to Fund Public Muni Operations

• ❌ No on Prop I: Changes to Real Property Transfer Tax

• Decision coming soon on Prop J: Foreclosure Tax

State measures coming next week!

Read our full endorsement rationale in the GrowSF Voter Guide.

Lurie Will Tie Homelessness Contracts to Results

Published August 31, 2026

The Facts

San Francisco will re-bid all homelessness-service contracts over several years and tie funding more closely to results, reports Alyce McFadden at the Chronicle. Currently, most contracts reimburse providers for expenses without clearly connecting costs to outcomes.

The Context

City audits have identified this problem for years. A 2023 Civil Grand Jury report found that 40% of contracts reviewed mislabeled activities as outcomes. A 2024 performance audit found $73 million of $180.6 million in supportive-housing contract budgets went unspent in fiscal year 2021–22, while performance measures were applied inconsistently. We have previously documented how nonprofit spending doubled while oversight lagged.

The GrowSF Take

This is such an obviously good move that we wonder why it has taken this long to get here. Every city contract should have clear deliverables, and if we aren’t getting what we’re paying for, then we should end the contract.

Fielder Proposes Minimum Unpaid-Rent Threshold for Evictions

Published September 4, 2026

The Facts

Supervisor Jackie Fielder has a proposal to protect renters from eviction. Her minimum-debt ordinance would bar nonpayment evictions until a tenant owes more than one month of federal fair market rent for a comparable apartment, Yujie Zhou reports at Mission Local. The debt would remain collectible.

The current thresholds are $2,485 for a studio, $2,977 for a one-bedroom, and $3,604 for a two-bedroom.

The Context

Other cities have similar policies. Oakland requires at least one month of federal fair market rent to support a nonpayment eviction, and Berkeley adopted the same basic rule.

The ordinance is co-sponsored by Supervisors Myrna Melgar, Shamann Walton, Connie Chan, Chyanne Chen, Bilal Mahmood, and Danny Sauter.

The GrowSF Take

Fielder is right to stop landlords from using a few unpaid dollars to dislodge tenants. Eviction is an extreme response to a trivial, accidental, or even temporary shortfall. The legal text is short and simple, and we support it.

San Francisco must keep making it easier to build new homes, and we should keep finding ways to help people struggling to stay here.

Manny Yekutiel Proposes a 24-Mile Citywide Subway

Published September 3, 2026

The Facts

District 8 candidate Manny Yekutiel has proposed a 24-mile subway network with four lines: a fully underground T line extended north to the Marina and south to Bayshore, plus new lines under Geary Boulevard, Divisadero Street, and 19th Avenue.

At San Francisco’s recent construction cost of $1.15 billion per mile, Yekutiel estimates the network would cost $27.5 billion. He says standardized stations, automated trains, continuous construction, and a dedicated building authority could cut that to $350 million per mile, or $8.4 billion total. Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez, John Mulholland, Omar Rashad, and Maggie Angst at The Standard reported on the proposal.

The Context

The San Francisco County Transportation Authority is already studying a roughly 10-mile Geary and 19th Avenue subway estimated at $20 billion to $30 billion. Yekutiel’s $8.4 billion citywide estimate therefore depends on cutting per-mile costs by nearly 70%, not ordinary efficiencies.

San Francisco’s Central Subway cost $1.95 billion for 1.7 miles — about $1.15 billion per mile, against a global average of $406 million per mile across the 755 lines tracked by NYU’s Transit Costs Project. Even among American tunneled projects, which average roughly $570 million per mile versus $346 million abroad, that is about double the going rate.

The GrowSF Take

It’s a wonderful vision, and we need more Supervisors with the vision to do big things. But given the high price tag and long timeline, let’s start with driverless rapid buses on these same lines. We can get 50% of the benefit for 10% of the cost and meaningfully improve the lives of tens of thousands quickly.

Urban Alchemy Study Finds Fewer Police Reports, Not Necessarily Less Crime

Published September 3, 2026

The Facts

A new peer-reviewed study associates Urban Alchemy staffing with 20% fewer police-recorded incidents at 41 intersections, but it cannot distinguish a net reduction in crime from changes in reporting or crime moving to other streets. Property crime showed no change.

The Context

The study compared recorded police incidents at intersections with and without Urban Alchemy workers. If a worker moves criminal activity a few blocks away, the study may record a reduction at the staffed corner even though the activity was merely relocated.

The authors tested this by removing immediately adjacent intersections from the comparison group, and the daytime effect became statistically insignificant.

In January, San Francisco awarded Urban Alchemy a $22.51 million contract through June 2027.

The GrowSF Take

Overall we’re glad that Urban Alchemy exists. A consistent street presence and overdose response can improve daily life for residents in the area.

But this study cannot prove if they actually reduce crime or just move it around.

The lesson for City Hall should be that outsourcing basic safety services to nonprofits isn’t a silver bullet. We need to build internal institutional capacity, instead.

Vacant Storefront Tax Now Hits Just 27 Properties

Published September 4, 2026

The Facts

Due to a recent law change, only 27 storefront vacancies were subject to San Francisco’s commercial vacancy tax in 2025, down from 241 in 2024, when it collected just $2.74 million, according to Delilah Brumer at the San Francisco Chronicle. The change covers every eligible storefront in a commercial district where a City construction project lasts more than 180 days. It turns out that this covers almost every commercial zone.

The Context

Voters approved the tax in 2020 to discourage landlords from intentionally awaiting higher rents. A storefront vacant more than 182 days can owe a frontage tax of $250 to $1,000 per linear foot, depending on how long it remains empty.

But vacancies also come from weak retail demand and San Francisco’s own rules. GrowSF’s retail vacancy research found that the City requires unwanted ground-floor retail in many new buildings while restricting conversion of empty shops into housing, offices, restaurants, or other useful spaces.

The GrowSF Take

We will not mourn the disappearance of this tax. It treats every vacancy as landlord greed when City Hall often blocks tenants, bans alternative uses, and mandates excess retail space. The Board should set the tax rate to zero, then make storefront conversions legal by right.

Sixty Shelter Cabins Sit Empty After Recovery Site Falls Through

Published September 4, 2026

The Facts

Sixty city-owned shelter cabins have sat unused in the Bayview for nearly a year. But the proposed recovery site at 428 11th Street was not workable: it potentially needed a Pacific Gas and Electric service upgrade, officials considered temporary power and opening at partial capacity, and the landlord demanded a firm three-year lease without a short-term exit clause, reports Maggie Angst at The Standard.

The city canceled the plan after spending $219,000. GrowSF also learned that available state operating funds did not support the recovery programming intended for the site.

The Context

Mayor Daniel Lurie pledged to add 1,500 shelter and treatment beds within six months of taking office. The city’s expansion plan included transitional housing, stabilization centers, sober housing, and residential treatment, reflecting the need for placements that address the intersection of addiction and homelessness.

The cabins are one possible tool. They offer more privacy than congregate shelters, but they still require a suitable site, adequate utilities, responsible lease terms, operating funds, and services.

The GrowSF Take

We’re disappointed all around. Sixty usable cabins have sat empty for nearly a year while people remain on the street.

The 11th Street site was not viable, but that cannot be the end of the effort. Private cabins do not work for everyone, but they help some people. The Lurie administration should find a technically sound site and an operating model that puts them back to use.

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 23, 2026:
- Connie Chan Quiet Quits the Board of Supervisors
- SF Democrats Add Seven GrowSF-Backed Endorsements
- San Francisco Democrats Reject Proposition 40 Billionaire Tax
- Official Misconduct Shows Why We Need Prop F
- Rents Hit $4,180 as Developers Prepare to Build

Connie Chan Quiet Quits the Board of Supervisors

Published August 28, 2026

The Facts

Connie Chan appears to have stopped working at the Board of Supervisors in the run-up to the November election, where she is running for Congress against Scott Wiener. The assignments effective August 17 show she is no longer part of any committees with active work.

She does remain on Budget and Appropriations, but it will not meet until February of next year.

The Context

Chan previously chaired Budget and served on the Rules Committee under the Board’s January assignments. She is now running against Scott Wiener for Congress after finishing second in the June primary with 29.7% of the vote to Wiener’s 40.7%.

The GrowSF Take

Connie Chan has quiet quit her job. She is effectively campaigning for her next job full-time while her District 1 constituents are left without representation.

Chan should accept committee work and serve her district, or resign so District 1 can have a supervisor focused on San Francisco.

SF Democrats Add Seven GrowSF-Backed Endorsements

Published August 28, 2026

The Facts

The San Francisco Democratic Party has just endorsed seven more candidates and ballot positions also backed in the GrowSF voter guide: Manny Yekutiel for District 8 supervisor, Autumn Brown Garibay, Phil Kim, and Tim Tung for Board of Education, plus No on Propositions G, I, and 40.

The Context

Yekutiel offers an ambitious plan to build homes, improve public safety, and support small businesses. The school-board slate combines an educator focused on measurable outcomes, a parent demanding that district goals reach classrooms, and an auditor with deep public-finance experience.

Proposition G would close Sunset Dunes Park and allow cars back on the Great Highway on most weekdays. Proposition I would divert roughly $120 million annually from the General Fund into restricted housing programs and make San Francisco’s high transfer tax harder to change. Proposition 40 would impose a one-time 5% tax on wealth, risking future tax revenue by encouraging wealthy residents to leave California and inviting years of expensive legal challenges.

The GrowSF Take

San Francisco’s political center of gravity keeps moving toward growth, accountability, and competent government. These candidates are serious about results, and the party was right to reject three ballot measures that would reopen a settled fight, weaken the city budget, and threaten California’s tax base.

The Democratic Party made seven good calls. Voters should do the same in November.

San Francisco Democrats Reject Proposition 40 Billionaire Tax

Published August 27, 2026

The Facts

The San Francisco Democratic Party voted overwhelmingly to oppose Proposition 40: 17 of the 22 committee members present rejected the one-time billionaire wealth tax.

That vote broke with the California Democratic Party, which endorsed Proposition 40 earlier in August.

The Context

Under the official fiscal analysis, Proposition 40 would tax up to 5% of covered wealth belonging to people who were California residents on January 1, 2026. Analysts project “tens of billions of dollars” in temporary revenue, but warn that out-migration and behavioral changes could reduce ongoing income-tax revenue by less than $1 billion annually.

GrowSF has already warned that a one-time asset seizure could weaken California’s economy and future tax base.

The GrowSF Take

We’re glad that the local Democratic party rejected the state party’s position. A one-time windfall does not justify telling founders and investors that California may confiscate part of their companies whenever Sacramento wants cash. That warning would outlast the revenue.

Voters should reject Proposition 40 in November.

Official Misconduct Shows Why We Need Prop F

Published August 27, 2026

The Facts

William Palmer, president of the Sheriff’s Department Oversight Board, remains in office while police investigate a woman’s allegation that he gave her drugs and coerced her into sex during a mental-health crisis; he has not been arrested or charged, according to Michael Barba at the Chronicle.

Michael Barba at the Chronicle found four other women had accused Palmer of violence; he denied those accusations. Supervisor Stephen Sherrill asked the Inspector General to investigate possible official misconduct, the legal basis for removing him.

The Context

Palmer served 31 years in prison for kidnapping for robbery when he was 17, and was released in 2019. The Board appointed him in 2021 after receiving an endorsement from organizations including GLIDE, the San Francisco Public Defender’s Office, San Francisco Pretrial Diversion Project, and Young Community Developers, and the Young Women’s Freedom Center.

Palmer was reappointed unanimously in 2023. Because he is a Board appointee, removing him under the current Charter process requires formal misconduct charges, an Ethics Commission hearing, and support from three-fourths of the Board of Supervisors.

Proposition F would let each appointing authority remove most of its own commissioners without cause.

The GrowSF Take

Palmer has been arrested, accused of violence by five women, and spent months in jail while serving on the Sheriff’s Department Oversight Board. He’s clearly unfit to serve yet cannot be easily removed. We can, and should, fix that this November by voting yes on Prop F.

Rents Hit $4,180 as Developers Prepare to Build

Published August 26, 2026

The Facts

San Francisco’s median asking rent for a one-bedroom hit $4,180 in July, up 22.9% in a year, according to Zumper’s latest report. Developers now predict that another 15% to 20% increase could make many stalled apartment buildings financially viable and trigger construction within 12 to 24 months, reports Max Harrison-Caldwell at The San Francisco Standard.

The Context

San Francisco’s Family Zoning Plan legalized capacity for 36,200 additional homes, but zoning is permission, not financing. The city completed only 405 homes in the first half of 2026.

To spur new homebuilding, the Supervisors reduced most development impact fees by 67% and lowered the on-site “inclusionary zoning” subsidized-housing requirement to 5% for buildings with at least 25 homes. The Board passed it 9-2: Supervisors Chan, Dorsey, Fielder, Mahmood, Mandelman, Melgar, Sauter, Sherrill, and Wong voted yes; Chyanne Chen and Shamann Walton voted no. New UC Irvine research found that “inclusionary zoning” taxation schemes cut new home construction by nearly a third.

The GrowSF Take

A 23% rent increase is the bill for years of blocking supply. San Francisco could have built 100,000 new homes over the past twenty years to absorb the reignited demand to live in the city, but the dominant political forces blocked that growth.

Tenant advocates are wrong to treat construction as a threat. A San Francisco study found that new market-rate housing lowered nearby rents about 2% and reduced incumbent renters’ risk of moving to a lower-income area. Mayor Lurie and the Supervisors were right to cut costs.

Now builders should build. If construction does not rise over the next year, the Board should follow the Controller’s math and cut the inclusionary requirement to zero.

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 16, 2026:
- Hundreds of 311 Drug-Use Reports Never Reached Police
- Mandelman Removes Bilal Mahmood From Committees After Housing Clash
- Homeless Shelters Face New Neighborhood Standards
- Cinderella Bakery Opens After Calle 24 Blocked It for Eight Years
- Ethics Commission Proposes One Good Campaign Finance Rule and Two Bad Ones

Hundreds of 311 Drug-Use Reports Never Reached Police

Published August 21, 2026

The Facts

San Franciscans used 311 to report public drug use at least 8,000 times this year, but none of those reports were forwarded to police, Garrett Leahy reports at The Standard. Instead, 311 closed requests and told residents to call police themselves, despite the Department of Emergency Management advising residents to only use 911 for true emergencies.

SolveSF records show residents repeatedly receiving “call PD” responses after their cases were closed.

The Context

The city presents 311 online services as one place to report street problems. Its public dataset even includes fields for the responsible agency and status notes, so routing a digital report should be routine.

The GrowSF Take

We shouldn’t have to study City Hall’s org chart before asking for help. The Mayor should order 311 to properly handle these requests for help instead of closing them with no action, and if they refuse, then he should find new leadership to run the department.

Thank you to Supervisor Mahmood for “working with the mayor’s office to stop these complaints from falling through the cracks.”

Mandelman Removes Bilal Mahmood From Committees After Housing Clash

Published August 21, 2026

The Facts

Board President Rafael Mandelman stripped Supervisor Bilal Mahmood of his roles on the Land Use and Government Audit & Oversight committees after a disagreement over Mahmood’s proposed amendments to Mandelman’s historic preservation ordinance. J.D. Morris and Alyce McFadden at The Chronicle report that Mahmood received no warning and suspects retaliation over the amendments.

The Context

Mandelman and Mayor Daniel Lurie want to designate about 2,500 additional landmarks by 2030 while accelerating the approval process. The pending ordinance would govern landmark and historic-district designations.

Mahmood proposed sensible amendments calculating how much housing capacity would be removed by landmarking, and where the city must replace that lost capacity.

The GrowSF Take

Mahmood is right, and Mandelman handled this terribly. Removing Mahmood without warning after a policy clash is petty.

Calling Mahmood’s amendment “red tape” is particularly rich. Landmarking is permanent red tape on future construction. Counting how many homes it blocks is basic due diligence, not obstruction.

We consider Mandelman an ally, but allies do not get a free pass. He should restore Mahmood to Land Use or at the very least give his amendments a hearing and a vote.

Homeless Shelters Face New Neighborhood Standards

Published August 21, 2026

The Facts

In an effort to clean up the sidewalks, City-funded shelters must now comply with new neighborhood rules requiring three daily perimeter checks, trash removal, and posted QR codes for complaints. Repeated violations can trigger staffing changes or contractual action when enforcement begins in January, reports Delilah Brumer at the San Francisco Chronicle.

The Context

Dirty streets remain a persistent problem. In nearly 2,600 inspections during the year ending June 2025, the Controller found feces on 34% of evaluated routes, at least one large dumped item on 32%, and an average of 23 instances of graffiti per route. Ordinary litter was essentially unchanged from the prior year.

The GrowSF Take

Neighborhood disorder should not be the price of helping people indoors. Clear rules protect shelter residents and neighbors while making it easier to open the shelter beds San Francisco needs.

Cinderella Bakery Opens After Calle 24 Blocked It for Eight Years

Published August 20, 2026

The Facts

Cinderella Bakery will finally open its second San Francisco location at 2937 24th Street on Friday, August 28, reports Oscar Palma at Mission Local. The neighborhood group Calle 24 blocked the opening for nearly eight years, driven by activists who didn’t like that Cinderella was not a Latino business.

The Jewish-owned Russian bakery has operated in the Richmond since 1953 and joined the city’s Legacy Business Registry in 2017.

The Context

The former space was vacated by La Victoria’s after its owners forced the bakery out after years of financial trouble and internal disputes; a former employee later reopened it nearby.

Calle 24 pressured City Hall to enact special cultural conditions for businesses in the corridor.

The GrowSF Take

Calle 24 targeted a Jewish-owned legacy business because its roots were Russian rather than Latino.

This was a shakedown dressed up as activism. Cinderella doesn’t owe anyone proof that they belong, and City Hall should stop tolerating this kind of behavior from neighborhood groups.

City Hall should repeal Calle 24’s special conditions and let independent businesses open without a self-appointed neighborhood dictator’s approval.

Ethics Commission Proposes One Good Campaign Finance Rule and Two Bad Ones

Published August 21, 2026

The Facts

The Ethics Commission voted 4-0 to propose three campaign finance changes: apply the city’s contribution limit to other committees a candidate controls, count PAC republication of a candidate’s campaign materials (e.g. using a photo or video clip from the candidate in an ad) as a contribution to that candidate, and restrict the use of committee money to pay ethics penalties.

The proposal needs eight votes at the Board of Supervisors and would take effect no earlier than January 1, 2027.

The Context

The draft ordinance counts any reuse of a candidate’s campaign materials “in whole or in part” — written, graphic, audio, or video — as a contribution to that candidate, subject to the $500 limit. (A separate bill would raise the limit to $1,000.)

That language is similar to the federal republication rule, which the FEC has effectively abandoned, with commissioners warning that penalizing republication without proof of actual coordination is unlikely to survive a court challenge. San Francisco would be adopting this same abandoned rule.

In the November 2024 mayoral race, Mark Farrell paid the largest ethics fine on record, $108,000, for improperly using a candidate-controlled ballot measure committee to subsidize his mayoral campaign.

The GrowSF Take

There’s one good change and two bad ones in this proposal.

First, the good: Contributions to candidate-controlled committees should absolutely be subject to the same contribution limits as candidate committees. The current rules impose a $500 limit on donations to John Smith for Mayor, but allow unlimited contributions to Yes on A, run by the same John Smith. Candidates use this loophole to plaster their face and name around the city saying things like “Yes on A, endorsed by John Smith!” These are campaign expenditures in everything but name and should be treated as such.

Now, the bad:

The republication rule invites a lawsuit. A PAC using a few seconds of publicly available campaign footage inside its own independently produced ad is not coordination, and the federal government has declined to punish the exact same conduct under the exact same rule because it doubts the rule would survive in court. San Francisco should not pick a legal fight with well-resourced groups that the city is likely to lose.

The ethics fine rule goes further than it should. Under the proposal, a candidate’s committee could still pay fines for ordinary compliance mistakes, but candidates found to have acted knowingly or willfully must pay personally, and legal defense funds are barred from paying personal penalties entirely. Personal exposure to five- and six-figure fines — with the same commission that levies the fine deciding whether the violation was “willful” — will scare away all but the wealthiest candidates.

The Board should narrow this measure to the contribution limit, the one clearly good rule the Ethics Commission is proposing.

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 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.