279 New treatment & interim-housing beds coming soon
PLUS: Waymo robotaxis are safer than human drivers
What You Need To Know
Here’s what happened around the city for the week of April 27, 2025:
- 279 New treatment & interim-housing beds coming soon
- Waymo robotaxis are safer than human drivers
- Fare evasion down 30%, but fares alone won’t solve MUNI’s budget deficit
- New audit finds $332M is left idle in San Francisco's work orders
- SF Parks Alliance faces $5.5M operating deficit
Recent & upcoming openings:
- Dingles Public House fires up the Opera House
Research:
- San Francisco’s budget is bigger than 17 U.S. states
279 New treatment & interim-housing beds coming soon
Published April 29, 2025
Photo Credit: Harbor Light, Salvation Army
Mayor Daniel Lurie announced the opening of 279 new treatment and recovery beds—delivering on his “Breaking the Cycle” vision to address chronic street homelessness.
The Facts
San Francisco will open 279 new beds across five sites by late summer—four in SoMa (Sharon Hotel, Baldwin Place, Kean Hotel, Harbor Light) and one in the Marina (Marina Inn)—as part of Mayor Daniel Lurie’s commitment to add 1,500 beds for people experiencing homelessness with substance-use or mental-health challenges.
The plan features a first-ever “recovery-focused shelter,” additional sober-living units, and a 76-bed medical-respite program. Nonprofits like the Salvation Army and Westside Community Services will run the operations for these shelters. The beds are part of Lurie's “Breaking the Cycle” initiative and were fast-tracked thanks to San Francisco’s fentanyl State of Emergency law.
The Context
San Francisco continues to face a deadly overdose crisis, with about two people dying every day — most from fentanyl. At the same time, over 8,000 people are experiencing homelessness every night. Many cycle through jails, emergency rooms, and temporary shelters without ever getting the help they need.
Lurie’s plan aims to break that cycle by expanding access to treatment and recovery services, and this latest rollout of beds marks the largest expansion in years. By offering more comprehensive services in multiple neighborhoods, the city hopes to reduce overdose deaths and help more people off the streets for good.
The GrowSF Take
This is exactly what San Francisco needs: focused, fast action with real results. These beds give hundreds of people a shot at recovery instead of being left to languish on our streets.
This wouldn’t have been possible without a supportive Board of Supervisors—the State of Emergency law enabling this rollout passed 10–1. It’s proof that when our leaders work together and focus on outcomes, the city can move fast.
Waymo robotaxis are safer than human drivers
Published May 2, 2025
Photo Credit: Waymo
The Facts
Waymo compared crash data from its driverless vehicles with national human-driver data across 11 common scenarios. The results are hard to ignore:
92% fewer crashes that injure pedestrians
82% fewer that injure cyclists or motorcyclists
96% fewer injury crashes at intersections
85% fewer crashes involving suspected serious injuries overall
The study was accepted by Traffic Injury Prevention and builds on the company’s Safety Impact Hub, an open data initiative to improve transparency and public understanding.
The Context
In 2024, San Francisco saw 42 traffic deaths—more than the number of homicides, and the most in a decade. Pedestrian safety remains a top concern: 77% of residents support sidewalk-protection barriers, and nearly half say they or someone they know has been hit by a car.
Meanwhile, robotaxis don’t speed, text, or drink. They obey traffic laws, see in all directions, and don’t get tired. The data keeps piling up: they’re simply safer.
The GrowSF Take
We’ve known for years that autonomous vehicles are safer than human drivers—and now we have even more data to back it up. Waymo’s crash reductions aren’t theoretical; they’re real-world results from millions of miles on city streets.
San Francisco should keep expanding access to this life-saving technology. Let’s stop making pedestrian safety a political issue and start treating it like a public safety priority.
Fare evasion down 30%, but fares alone won’t solve MUNI’s budget deficit
Published May 2, 2025
San Francisco’s Muni system is finally seeing progress on fare compliance. A new report from SFMTA shows that fare evasion is down, inspections are up, and revenue per rider is increasing—all thanks to a smarter, more visible enforcement strategy.
The Facts
Since July 2024, SFMTA has nearly doubled fare inspections and cut fare evasion by 30 percent. Transit Fare Inspectors are more efficient than ever, with productivity up 86 percent compared to last year. Revenue per rider has grown by 6 percent, and single-ride payments are increasing faster than ridership.
They’re also planning more weekend and subway checks, a “Don’t Be a Dodger” ad campaign, and upgraded Clipper 2.0 tap-and-go payments to make paying easier and more consistent across the system. Inspectors now carry handouts about free and discounted fare programs and are trained in de-escalation, ensuring enforcement is fair and equitable.
The Context
Fare revenue once made up more than 15 percent of Muni’s budget. Today, it’s just 7 percent. That drop is due to a combination of lower ridership, frozen fares, and widespread fare evasion. Riders have reported confusion, payment barriers, and the belief that skipping payment has no real consequences.
SFMTA responded by rethinking how and where inspectors are deployed—and by making enforcement more visible to riders. The early results show that this new approach is working, and that a thoughtful, consistent presence on the system can change behavior.
The GrowSF Take
Fare enforcement is working—and we support it. It’s improving fairness, boosting revenue, and showing that smart public policy can deliver results.
But let’s be clear: fare enforcement alone won’t solve Muni’s money problems. The extra $5 million expected from increased compliance is tiny compared to the agency’s $322 million budget deficit. It’s not even close.
If we want a world-class transit system, we need to treat this like the crisis it is. That means bold structural reforms and long-term, stable funding. Fare enforcement helps—but it’s nowhere near enough.
New audit finds $332M is left idle in San Francisco's work orders
Published April 28, 2025
A recent audit found that $332M meant to pay for expenses from other city departments is left unused in city accounts. Over half of the sampled agreements also had no written contract, were frequently months late, and lacked any performance checkpoints.
The Facts
An audit released on April 28 2025 looked at five years of “work orders,” the system San Francisco uses when one city department pays another for services like legal help, fleet repairs, or tech support. Between 2019 and 2023 the city consistently over-budgeted these deals, setting aside $53 million to $80 million more than it actually spent each year. By the end of the 2022-23 fiscal year, money left idle in these accounts added up to $332 million—about 10% of all funds budgeted for work orders.
Auditors found that half of the 48 sampled agreements had no written contract, most bills reached departments only every three months, and some City Attorney invoices arrived roughly three months late. They issued 24 recommendations, such as creating real-time tracking in the city’s PeopleSoft system, requiring short contracts with performance checkpoints, and tightening rules on carrying money forward. City finance officials said they agree with almost all of the fixes.
The Context
Work orders have been around for decades, but a big change came in 2017 when the city replaced its old accounting software with PeopleSoft. During that switch the unique ID number that once linked every work order to its spending vanished. Since then departments have relied on homemade spreadsheets to track costs, which makes errors and blind spots likely. Because many large work-order charges—utility bills, IT infrastructure, legal services—are “centrally loaded” into the budget without negotiation, supervisors reviewing the budget for just a few weeks each summer rarely dig into whether the numbers make sense.
When departments spend less than planned, the leftover cash often rolls into the next year instead of returning to the general pool where it could support programs like youth recreation or street cleaning. Delayed quarterly bills add another layer of fog: departments may not realize they are overspending or underspending until the fiscal year is almost over, leaving little time to course-correct.
Our Take
We believe the city should adopt the audit’s changes right away. Live tracking would show every department, at any moment, how much of a work-order budget is left. We need much greater transparency with where money is spent.
SF Parks Alliance faces $5.5M operating deficit
Published April 27, 2025
Past leadership at the SF Parks Alliance let costs outrun revenue and dozens of partner projects are on hold while the Parks Alliance seeks bridge loans and renegotiates grants.
The Facts
The San Francisco Parks Alliance—the nonprofit that fiscally sponsors more than 200 community park and open-space groups—has a $5.5 million operating deficit, has laid off staff, and is behind on reimbursing neighborhood groups for pre-approved expenses.
Interim CEO Robert Ogilvie confirmed that past leadership let costs outrun revenue and that dozens of partner projects (including work at Buena Vista Park and Lafayette Park) are on hold while the Parks Alliance seeks bridge loans and renegotiates grants. The board says it will honor every obligation, but several volunteer groups have already cut ties, citing unpaid invoices and lack of financial transparency.
The Context
The Parks Alliance has long been City Hall’s go-to for private dollars that improve playgrounds, plazas, and pop-up events. Our parks are beautiful, safe, and well-programmed in no small part because of the Parks Alliance. JFK promenade, Sundown Cinema, and Crane Cove are a handful of the projects supported by their team.
In February, former CEO of the Parks Alliance Drew Becher quietly left the Parks Alliance after leading the organization for eight years. The San Francisco Standard reports that the organization had seen declining revenue since 2019, noting their 2023 IRS filings of $9.3M in revenue and almost $15M in expenses.
GrowSF Take
Leaders need to make the difficult decisions sooner, even when it means letting go of jobs. The Parks Alliance has served our neighborhoods for years, and we’re grateful for the staff and volunteers who pour their hearts into our shared green spaces. Transparency is an act of care, too, and we’re glad to see the Parks Alliance make changes and get back on track.
Recent & upcoming openings
A great city is constantly changing and growing, let’s celebrate what’s new!
Dingles Public House fires up the Opera House
WHERE: 333 Fulton St
Michelin-trained chef George “Georgie Pie” Dingle and wine pro Anissa Dingle are turning the former Pläj Scandinavian Restaurant into a modern British gastropub—think Scotch eggs, sticky-toffee pudding, and fat-cut chips, all backed by English ales and an under-$100 wine list. Expect racing-green walls, a fireplace, and Victorian-animal portraits when doors open this fall.
Research
San Francisco’s budget is bigger than 17 U.S. states
Published April 27, 2025
San Francisco’s budget is larger than 17 U.S. states including New Mexico ($10.5B), Alabama ($12.6B), and Oklahoma ($12.6B). At $15.9B total, the scale of our city budget is massive. This analysis is based on fiscal year 2024, when our city budget was $14.6B.
Our city budget has surged by 54% since 2012 (inflation-adjusted) – adding $5.5B extra dollars– and city hall staffing has risen 27%. And yet the San Francisco population is down 45,000 people since 2019, a 5% decrease in population that brings us back to 2012 population levels. This has been the largest population exodus from our city since 1906. So we have added 7,000 staff and $5.5B dollars to our budget since 2012 but have the same population as we did in 2012. So perhaps it comes as no surprise that the official city forecast of our annual budget deficit is $1.5B by FY 2030.
Our city budget is unique because San Francisco is a combined city and county. The services a county would usually provide such as public health, welfare, and elections are all bundled into our budget. This has benefits like streamlined services but also redundancies like the fact that we have both a Police Department and Sheriff. Our city budget also includes “enterprise departments” which are run like independent entities and are largely self-funding because they charge their users fees for service. These enterprise departments include the Airport, Port, Public Utilities Commission, and the MTA. Technically speaking, each of these enterprise departments should be self-sustaining – and in practice, all of them except the MTA are. The MTA receives significant general fund support to the tune of $540M+. MTA alone has grown $345M since 2012.
While this combined city/county system makes comparison to other cities difficult, there are eight other city/county combinations in the U.S. with similar populations – from one half to two times San Francisco’s. These are Denver, Philadelphia, Honolulu, Jacksonville, Indianapolis, Kansas City, Nashville, and New Orleans. To make sure the comparison is appropriate, we remove the enterprise departments from each of these city budgets (such as the airport and public utilities). The average budget per capita of these eight cities is $6,300, when adjusted to reflect the cost of living in San Francisco. Yet San Francisco’s budget per capita is $12,100.
City Budget Benchmarks (Consolidated Cities and Counties)
Source: Peer City Budget Books, Budget | DataSF
How did the SF budget end up twice as big per capita as its peer cities? Are we getting twice the services, or twice the quality? Let's dig into why the San Francisco budget has surged by 54% to $14.6B since 2012.
9 Departments grew $146M-$871M each, leading to $2.9B in cost increase from 2012-2025 (inflation-adjusted)
Source: Budget | DataSF
Just two of these nine departments accounted for half of the $3B budget increase: the Department of Public Health and the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing.
Between 2010 and 2020, the Department of Public Health’s (DPH) budget grew by 66.1%, rising from $1.46 billion in FY 2010-11 to $2.43 billion in FY 2019-20. During the pandemic, DPH’s budget grew by 1 billion dollars. As of 2024, DPH’s budget was $3.2 billion. The main drivers of this growth were the hiring of 1,216 additional employees — a 21% increase in staff — and a 39.2% increase in behavioral health contracts, which now account for $1.3 billion in multi-year funding.
The Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing (HSH), founded only in 2016, has also seen rapid cost growth in a short period. Most of HSH’s spending goes toward its “Housing First” initiative, which has dedicated hundreds of millions of dollars to developing permanent supportive housing across the city.
San Francisco employs 22,000 people for core city/county functions and the average salary is $205K
Source: https://www.sfchronicle.com/projects/2025/sf-city-employees/
Because San Francisco is both a city and a county and operates large enterprise departments — like the airport, public utilities, and the port — we need to adjust when evaluating employee spending. Enterprise departments are largely self-funded through fees and charges, and their staffing levels can obscure the true size of the general government workforce. After accounting for these factors, San Francisco’s employee compensation is about $3,200 per resident — 42% higher than Los Angeles, the next highest city, and over 200% higher than the median peer city in California.
A major driver of San Francisco’s rising budget is the growth in city employees. The city employs approximately 33,000 people in total, but when excluding enterprise departments and focusing only on core city and county services, that number falls to about 22,000 employees.
This translates to 24.4 employees per 1,000 residents — 13% higher than Baltimore, which has the next-highest ratio. Compared to other major cities, San Francisco’s staffing is 18% higher than New York City, 40% higher than Los Angeles, and 42% higher than Portland and Boston.
Between 2018 and 2025, San Francisco’s employee headcount grew by 2,344 employees (an 8% increase). Five departments — Public Health, Human Services, Homelessness, City Administration, and MTA — account for 61% of that growth. If San Francisco returned to 2018 staffing levels, it would mean a 12% reduction in workforce, or about 4,100 fewer employees.
Meanwhile, 58% of city employees live outside of San Francisco, and 25% work from home two or more days per week. The six departments that have hired the most since 2018 now make up half of the city’s current work-from-home workforce (5,292 employees).
(Source: San Francisco Examiner)
$5.8B spent across 10,900 active contracts with 4K+ outside vendors
San Francisco currently spends $5.8 billion on contracts with outside vendors, managing 10,900 active contracts across more than 4,000 vendors. Of these vendors, about 600 (15%) are nonprofit organizations. As of 2023, 52 of those nonprofits had their nonprofit status revoked, suspended, or marked delinquent by the California Attorney General’s Office.
Among the city’s largest vendors — those with contracts worth more than $100 million — nonprofits make up an even larger share: 36%, more than twice the overall rate.
The city’s grant program has also expanded significantly. Since 2018, the grant budget has grown by $1 billion, reaching $1.6 billion in 2025. This funding is concentrated in six departments: Homelessness, Early Childhood, Children and Families, Human Services, Economic and Workforce Development, and the Office of the Mayor.
The Civil Grand Jury has raised concerns about San Francisco’s contracting practices, calling for stronger goals, clearer metrics, and better oversight. They found a “significant opportunity to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse[…] without materially impacting outcomes for residents,” particularly in light of the $1 billion increase in grants since 2018.
Looking Ahead
San Francisco’s $14.6 billion budget is larger than the budgets of 17 U.S. states, yet the city faces mounting challenges: rising costs, shrinking population, and a looming $1.5 billion deficit by 2030. Staffing has grown by thousands even as resident numbers have fallen, spending on departments and contracts has surged, and our per-resident budget now doubles that of comparable cities. Despite San Francisco’s unique combined city-county structure, the scale of growth — in headcount, compensation, grants, and vendor contracts — far outpaces reasonable comparisons. As budget season begins, the city faces an urgent question: are we truly getting better services, better outcomes, and better value for the billions we are spending? It’s time for a serious examination of what we fund, why we fund it, and how we can ensure that San Francisco’s government is truly serving its residents effectively.