Supervisor Sauter Will Cut North Beach Red Tape
PLUS: Dorsey Proposes "Recovery Cabins" Linking Treatment to Shelter
What You Need To Know
Here’s what happened around the city for the week of September 14, 2025:
- Supervisor Sauter Will Cut North Beach Red Tape
- Dorsey Proposes "Recovery Cabins" Linking Treatment to Shelter
- Melgar Proposes Funding Study for Westside Subsidized Housing
- SF Approves $40M Powell Street Revitalization Plan
- City Audit Exposes $4.6 Million Misspent by Dream Keeper Leader
Supervisor Sauter Will Cut North Beach Red Tape
Published September 17, 2025
The Facts
District 3 Supervisor Danny Sauter introduced legislation to simplify planning code restrictions that affect small businesses in North Beach, Nob Hill, and Jackson Square. The reforms will make it easier for small businesses to open, operate, and grow.
The reforms consolidate overlapping commercial districts and harmonize regulations with the rest of the city, repeal rules that prevent small businesses from expanding into adjacent storefronts, and ensure that businesses following the rules can open without requiring conversations or special deals with City Hall.
The Context
Sauter's reforms directly target regulations created by his predecessor, Aaron Peskin, whose extensive legislative record established many neighborhood-specific rules that effectively mandated special approval and handshake deals with Peskin to get anything done. The proposed ordinance would undo regulations like the ban on storefront mergers and limited restaurant approvals.
Milana Ram and Himanshu Bhaisare cannot open a planned coffee shop at a long-vacant site because city rules require a new cafe to replace a similar business, reports Patrick Hoge at The Examiner. Shadi Zughayar, owner of Alimento market, is prevented from expanding into an adjacent empty storefront because of a North Beach-specific ban on store mergers, according to Adam Lashinsky at The Standard.
The GrowSF Take
Sauter's willingness to challenge this regulatory dysfunction exemplifies a reform-minded approach to government that San Francisco needs. Complex rules that require expensive lawyers and "knowing a guy" in City Hall actively harm the small businesses they claim to protect. Let's make things simple, fair, and transparent so that entrepreneurs can open and operate their businesses without jumping through needless hoops.
Dorsey Proposes "Recovery Cabins" Linking Treatment to Shelter
Published September 19, 2025
The Facts
District 6 Supervisor Matt Dorsey has proposed creating "Recovery Cabins" by relocating a 60-unit tiny cabin village to provide temporary housing for fentanyl users who agree to take a monthly shot of long-acting buprenorphine, according to Maggie Angst at The Chronicle. The experimental program would move the cabin site to 428 11th Street in SoMa and require residents to begin medication-assisted treatment. City health officials report that most treatment dropouts occur in the first month, making stable housing during this critical period essential for recovery success.
The Context
The proposal builds on Dorsey's "Recovery First" approach, which Mayor Lurie approved on May 23, 2025, establishing long-term remission as the city's primary goal for substance abuse programs. The urgency is clear, as San Francisco recorded 460 accidental overdose deaths from January through August 2025.
This model uses extended-release injectable buprenorphine (marketed as Brixadi), which was approved by the FDA in May 2023 and offers weekly or monthly dosing. Tiny cabin villages offer a more dignified alternative to traditional congregate shelters, and this would be the first in San Francisco to have a treatment requirement. The initiative is part of Dorsey's wider strategy, which includes legislation requiring pharmacies to stock buprenorphine and advocating for the fair distribution of behavioral health facilities across all districts.
The GrowSF Take
Instead of just managing street suffering, Supervisor Dorsey's proposal uses evidence-based governance to tackle the fentanyl crisis. The "Recovery Cabins" model directly addresses the critical problem of treatment retention by linking housing stability to medical intervention during the most vulnerable recovery period.
Melgar Proposes Funding Study for Westside Subsidized Housing
Published September 19, 2025
The Facts
District 7 Supervisor Myrna Melgar introduced a resolution on September 15 requesting city staff to study a potential new funding stream for subsidized housing in San Francisco's western neighborhoods. The proposal, which passed unanimously at the Board's Land Use and Transportation Committee, would direct the Controller's Office and other departments to explore establishing an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD). According to Keith Menconi at The Examiner, such a district would capture future property tax growth from areas upzoned by Mayor Lurie's Family Zoning Plan and dedicate it to building subsidized homes. The resolution asks city staff to report back with recommendations by November 1, 2025.
The Context
The Family Zoning Plan is projected to create capacity for approximately 36,000 new homes, but Melgar has expressed concerns that "we currently do not have a strategy for affordable housing financing on the west side of town." This is critical, as the state requires that nearly half of the 82,069 new homes San Francisco must permit by 2031 be subsidized.
Tax increment financing works by capturing the increased property tax revenue generated when property values rise due to new development. Under an EIFD, the baseline property tax revenue continues flowing to existing services, while the "increment"—the additional tax revenue above that baseline—gets redirected to fund specific improvements like subsidized housing. California has used this financing tool successfully for decades. The city previously leveraged an EIFD to help fund the 2,600-unit Potrero Power Station project.
This approach offers significant advantages over San Francisco's current inclusionary zoning system, which charges fees on individual developments that often delay projects and reduce overall housing production. Unlike these upfront fees that burden each project separately, EIFDs create a sustainable funding stream that grows with neighborhood success while spreading costs across the entire neighborhood.
The legal landscape around development fees has become increasingly uncertain following the Supreme Court's unanimous 2024 Sheetz v. County of El Dorado decision, which held that legislative permit conditions must meet the same constitutional standards as administrative ones under the Takings Clause. This ruling subjects all impact fees to "essential nexus" and "rough proportionality" requirements, regardless of whether they're imposed through legislation or administrative action. The decision has emboldened legal challenges to inclusionary zoning programs, including an active federal lawsuit Wesley Yu v. City of East Palo Alto that argues such fees are unconstitutional. If courts rule that impact fees and inclusionary requirements fail these heightened constitutional tests, cities would need alternative funding mechanisms for subsidized housing.
The GrowSF Take
We're intrigued by Melgar's proposal. GrowSF has been investigating similar tax increment financing mechanisms to fund subsidized housing, and we're eager to see the Controller's detailed analysis of this approach. This study is particularly timely given the legal uncertainty surrounding current subsidized housing funding tools—having an alternative mechanism ready would ensure that upzoning can proceed without derailing subsidized housing production if courts strike down impact fees or inclusionary requirements.
SF Approves $40M Powell Street Revitalization Plan
Published September 19, 2025
The Facts
San Francisco's Arts Commission unanimously approved design plans on September 16 for a $40 million transformation of Powell Street between Market Street and Union Square, according to J.K. Dineen at The Chronicle. The project will add illuminated globes suspended in a zigzag pattern, widened sidewalks with cafe seating, and a programmable "golden lantern" sculpture above the cable car turnaround. The makeover, designed by Field Operations (the firm behind New York's High Line), also includes red brick roadways and gold-colored benches to revitalize the corridor of mostly vacant storefronts.
The Context
The project originated with $4 million in funding announced by Mayor Breed and then-Board President Aaron Peskin in 2023, with the Union Square Alliance leading the design phase. The Alliance unveiled the proposal in June 2024 and completed the design phase "on time and on budget" with $3.5 million remaining for initial implementation. The design advanced through the city's Civic Design Review Committee on September 15 before receiving Arts Commission approval with a detailed presentation outlining the full project scope.
The three-block corridor was hit hard by pandemic-era business closures, but has recently seen new investment from Nintendo and Pop Mart. The project aims for groundbreaking in fall 2026 with completion by 2027, though additional fundraising is needed to reach the full $40 million budget.
The GrowSF Take
Looks great! Check out the full design presentation here.
City Audit Exposes $4.6 Million Misspent by Dream Keeper Leader
Published September 17, 2025
The Facts
A city investigation released Tuesday found that the San Francisco Human Rights Commission (HRC) misspent $4.6 million in taxpayer dollars under its former executive director, Sheryl Davis. The audit from the Controller and City Attorney concluded Davis "knowingly violated city purchasing rules" and fostered an "unethical culture" to avoid oversight, according to Michael Barba at The Chronicle. The investigation reviewed $6.3 million in purchases from 2020 to 2024, finding questionable spending that included $38,000 on alcohol, a $6,800 luxury hotel stay for an instructor, and $8,000 for a nonprofit retreat with massage services, as reported by Gabe Greschler at The Standard.
The Context
Davis led the HRC when it was responsible for the Dream Keeper Initiative, a fund created by redirecting police funding to community organizations. She resigned in the fall of 2024 after reports revealed her undisclosed personal relationship with the head of Collective Impact, a major nonprofit recipient of Dream Keeper funds. The audit found Davis spent at least $75,000 on personal endeavors, and she remains under criminal investigation by the district attorney. The Controller's investigation represents part of ongoing scrutiny into how the city managed the Dream Keeper Initiative's substantial budget during a period when oversight mechanisms were reportedly circumvented through tactics like splitting invoices to avoid review thresholds.
The GrowSF Take
While the audit demonstrates that accountability mechanisms can work, it raises a more troubling question: why did it take five years for $4.6 million in obvious misconduct to be discovered? Davis systematically gamed the system—splitting invoices to avoid oversight, funding personal projects with taxpayer dollars—yet continued operating until 2024. This suggests fundamental gaps in real-time oversight that allowed flagrant abuse to continue unchecked. San Francisco needs automated spending alerts, mandatory quarterly audits for department heads, and whistleblower protections that encourage early reporting. The communities the Dream Keeper Initiative was designed to serve deserved better than a system that only catches misconduct after millions have been wasted.