Amy Farah Weiss Mayoral Questionnaire

Please describe why you are running for office.

We cannot stand by and wait for established politicians to do the right thing when City Hall has repeatedly stalled on addressing the encampment crisis, protecting our residents from displacement, developing affordable housing for our workforce, and supporting a balanced climate. We must take responsibility for our City, neighborhoods, communities, and planet and create an actionable and sustainable vision for becoming an Epicenter of Equity with a “Fair Share” economy:

  1. Transitioning 1,000+ people off of the streets into Safe Organized Spaces this year
  2. Balancing the budget and lifting all boats with a “tighten from the top” approachthat bolsters the base (especially during lean budget cycles)
  3. Building thousands of affordable housing units for our low-to-mid incomeworkforce, residents, and families while supporting small property owners and thebuilding trades.
  4. Making our streets and BART stations safer, cleaner, and more vibrant through jobcreation for mental health workers, artists/musicians, and underemployed residents
  5. Supporting economic justice and reparations to sustain and grow our AfricanAmerican community.
  6. Making SF a state leader in equitable access to cannabis for harm reduction andhealing
  7. Ramping up climate justice mobilization and CleanPowerSF in support of 100%renewable energy
  8. Investing in a city-wide broadband and Wi-Fi network to provide high speed,affordable internet access for all SF residents
  9. Move San Francisco forward as the first major city in the United States to implementa public bank
  10. Using technology to support voter engagement and open source democracy
  11. Creating an actionable local strategy to regulate the number and behavior of TNCs(Uber/Lyft) while developing a North Star of a locally-regulated platform that is pro- driver and pro-passenger.

Please describe your qualifications for office:

For 20 years I have worked in service toward individual, organizational, and collective well-being as an educator, service provider, strategist, community organizer, and nonprofit Founder/Director. I have work experience in the fields of mental health, transitional housing, homelessness, harm reduction, youth leadership/development, anti-displacement, sustainable business practices, neighborhood development, and organizational development. I know how to take a concept such as “end homelessness” or “develop affordable housing” and collaboratively implement community-focused solutions with a budget, timeline, and measurable outcomes.

After graduating with an interdisciplinary master’s degree in Organizational Development and Training from SF State in 2010, I developed a service-learning course in SF State’s MPA Program to support strategic planning, communications, and evaluation for nonprofit organizations and graduate students through SF State’s Public Administration Department.

In 2011, I joined neighborhood activists to prevent local businesses from being displaced by a Chase Bank and learned how to shape City Hall’s guiding policies for development as an advocate for social and economic equity. I founded Neighbors Developing Divisadero as a nonprofit, public-benefit corporation to develop a “strategic yes” to inclusive, enriching, and sustainable development.

My solutions-focused 2015 Mayoral campaign inspired over 79,500 San Franciscans to choose me as their 1st, 2nd, or 3rd choice candidate. After the election I founded
the Saint Francis Homelessness Challenge to develop and pilot community-integrated solutions to San Francisco’s encampment and shelter/affordable housing-shortage crisis and served as a Board Member and Operations Manager at San Francisco Community Land Trust. I have spent the past 2+ years repeatedly reaching out to City Hall, including my fellow candidates who are on the Board of Supervisors, to align together on policies to address the encampment crisis with an actionable plan to no avail

 

What are the three main issues you will focus on if elected?

  1. End the encampment crisis by creating a new rung on the housing ladder! Ensure that NO ONE is living on our streets without a safe organized space to belong in community that meets essential human needs. I have an actionable plan to transition 1,000+ people off of the streets into 20- 50 community-integrated Transitional Villages in the least restrictive, most autonomous setting possible for each individual in a way that increases both individual and community well-being, health, and safety at a fraction of the cost of the City’s current $30 million budget for SFPD and DPW response to encampments.
  2. Activate Empty Units and Develop Affordable Housing! Develop a comprehensive program through MOHCD that supports activation of empty units by 1) Expanding the DAHLIA system to create a tenant pool of SF workforce/families, 2) Working with small property owners to activate vacant units if property owners rent to SF workers at a maximum of 30% of income, and 3) Developing a vacancy tax/impact fee
    • Develop a program through MOHCD to support the financing and construction of hundreds to thousands of ADU’s (additional dwelling units within the existing building envelop) specifically for SF’s workforce and families with SFUSD students at no more than 30% of income while simultaneously supporting the building trades.
    • Develop complimentary financing mechanisms and subsidies at the state/local levels to include 50% affordable in up-zoned development (stratified at 15%-120% AMI) in alignment with our ABAG/RHNA goals
  3. Increase public health and safety through unarmed community programming. Increase funding for community-integrated unarmed crisis de-escalation programming (e.g. Concrn), arts and culture programming that supports community engagement and “eyes on the streets”, and bathroom access and street cleaning services (with economic opportunity for employment-challenged residents, e.g. Downtown Streets Team) in high- incident neighborhoods.

Housing and Homelessness

Do you believe San Francisco is facing an affordability and displacement crisis? If so, what do you think caused it and how would you address it?

The first tech boom of the late 1990s/early 2000s displaced thousands of low-income residents and tenants with imbalanced job growth. Unfortunately City leadership paved the way for a similar pattern after the global financial collapse of the late 2000’s, which led to the displacement of hundreds of thousands of low-income residents. San Francisco was at a crossroads in 2011 and we missed an opportunity to build up the base by developing creative strategies to support economic stabilization and address commercial vacancies on Market Streets. Now we have the opportunity to strategically and sustainably develop our economy and housing stock as a balanced system.

As Mayor, my housing priorities will be to:

  • Ensure that NO ONE is living on our streets without a safe organized place to belong in community that meets essential human needs.
  • Develop a comprehensive program through MOHCD that supports the activation of units that are being kept empty.
  • Re-introduce and promote David Chiu’s Right of First Refusal legislation – which CCHO was recently working on under the name of “Community Opportunity to Purchase Act” – to enable nonprofit housing providers to partner with the City’s Small Sites Program and Housing Accelerator Fund and acquire properties before they can be put on the market.
  • Develop a program through MOHCD to support the financing and construction of hundreds to thousands of ADU’s.
  • Work with affordable housing developers, Department Heads, and interdepartmental staff to implement the MOHCD-facilitated working group recommendations for streamlining the permitting process in order to build the tens of thousands of projects that have already been entitled by the City.
  • Develop complimentary financing mechanisms and subsidies at the state/local levels to include 50% affordable in up-zoned development (stratified at 15%-120% AMI) in alignment with our ABAG/RHNA goals.

What is your opinion on the zoning regulations in San Francisco? Do you believe that dense, urban infill development is environmentally beneficially?

I was happy to see that City Hall passed new legislation in mid-2017 to allow for additional dwelling units to be permitted City-wide without a conditional use permit in RH1 zoning areas.

I support dense, urban infill development IF it has sufficient inclusionary affordable housing (which we need to create new financing mechanisms/subsidies for) and truly has an accompanying transit-first plan that doesn’t lead to greater traffic congestion.

 

What neighborhoods do you think are best for the creation of new housing in San Francisco?

I support housing development in all neighborhoods, with a focus on transit corridors and the 37,000 parcels City-wide that can accommodate an additional dwelling unit within the building envelop.

Do you support inclusionary housing requirements for new housing developments in San Francisco? If so, would you support raising the inclusionary rate higher than the current agreement reached by the Board of Supervisors?

I am a proponent of developing new financing mechanisms to require 50% affordable housing inclusionary, especially for upzoned projects, with stratified amounts of 15-120% AMI. This is both economically feasible AND important for a healthy worker and resident eco-system.

There are quite a few ways forward for us to capture revenue for affordable housing development to finance and subsidize the 50% affordable requirement, including California’s multi-billion dollar budget surplus, the drastic decrease in federal corporate tax rates from 35% to 21%, and the upcoming state ballot initiative for Prop 13 reform. We should also be ensuring that every candidate for Governor is on board with investing considerable state resources into affordable housing development (as well as following in the footsteps of North Dakota and creating a State Bank that allows us to invest in our values statewide). My preference would be to create a program similar to San Francisco’s MOHCD Small Sites Program at the State level that provides zero-to-low interest loans to ensure that developers are able to pencil out a reasonable ROI. I also recently spoke with a tax credit and affordable housing expert at a SPUR event about the potential to create State Tax Credits that allow financing for stratified affordable (i.e. ranges of affordability from 15%-120% so that the project is financially feasible, rather than restrictions from Federal Tax Credits that only allow support for projects that are 60% AMI or less).

At the local level we can: 1) Work with pension funds – including SFERS that has hundreds of millions of dollars that they are poised to divest from fossil fuels, 2) Promote a public bank, and 3) Pass legislation to capture revenue from commercial properties for affordable housing development.

 

Do you support allowing safe injection sites in San Francisco? Would you support a declaration of a state of emergency regarding public drug use on San Francisco’s streets?

Yes, I support safe injection sites in SF. Drug addiction should be treated as a health and mental health issue and approached with a harm reduction model while working to stop the sale of meth and opioids on the black market.

On a related note, I worked at the Santa Cruz AIDS Project in the mid-2000s and in addition to being the outreach and education coordinator, volunteer coordinator, and food bank coordinator, I also worked shifts at the needle-exchange program. I have worked in the medical cannabis field as well and believe that equitable access to high quality medicinal cannabis and an emphasis on mindful consumption is also part of the solution for our opioid epidemic.

 

Economy & Jobs

Have you opposed any new major construction projects (Treasure Island, Shipyard, Parkmerced, Mission Rock, etc) in San Francisco over the past 10 years? If so, why?

I opposed the destruction of rent-controlled units at Parkmerced.

The Shipyard development should be halted until we are certain that we are not exposing residents to dangerous levels of toxicity, especially after recent findings that almost half of toxic cleanup at Hunters Point shipyard is questionable or has been faked.

 

Do you support a citywide mandated Project Labor Agreement (PLA) for public work or improvement projects, and if so do you support it at the threshold of over $1 million?

Yes. We need to invest in creating pathways to prosperity for local residents by growing the building trades and creating local jobs with living wages.

 

What do you propose as a solution to the problem of rising rents for local businesses?

As Mayor I will work with the City Attorney’s office as well as local/statewide advocacy organizations and legislators to explore available options for rent stabilization for local businesses. I will also work to develop policies that disincentivize property owners from maintaining empty storefronts with incentives for working with OEWD to activate storefronts with short-to-mid-term renewable leases and insurance while their property seeks a long-term tenant.

 

Do you support more economic development and job growth? Do you support the creation of more office space in San Francisco?

Since 2010, SF added jobs eight times faster than housing, which has led to massive displacement. I support balanced economic development and job growth that caters to our existing residents with pathways to prosperity for graduates of SFUSD, CCSF, and SF State. We cannot continue to create office space without linking it to local hire requirements. We must stop the displacement of PDR and ensure that 1986’ Proposition M is not undone in a way that exacerbates our housing crisis.

 

Do you support the recent compromise at the Board of Supervisors regarding retail cannabis licenses? Do you support allowing more retail cannabis licenses in San Francisco?

Yes. I was very impressed with the activists that led the charge to ensure that retail cannabis licenses will be reserved for equity orgs for the foreseeable future.

As Mayor I will work with the cannabis community and neighborhoods to ensure that our retail and consumption-site licenses promote mindful consumption and a career pathway for residents with employment barriers.

 

Which, if any, local tax measures have you supported in the past? Are there any you’d support or advocate for moving forward?

I support local tax measures such as the June 2018 Parcel Tax and June 2018 commercial gross receipts tax measures to increase salaries for SFUSD teachers and childcare workers. Real Estate sales and transfer taxes have also been valuable tools to keep our budget balanced in lean times as well as support important programming such as free City College.

I am a strong advocate for Prop 13 reform in order to make corporations pay their fair share of property tax.

As Mayor I will work with diverse stakeholders, including our large local and regional corporations, to capture revenue for affordable housing development, education, mental health services, and affordable wages in light of the drastic federal tax reduction from 35% to 21%.

 

According to the Brookings Institution, income inequality, has reached a point in San Francisco whereby the gap between rich and poor residents has been growing faster than in any other city in the nation. Explain what you believe the cause(s) to be and what do you see as short or long term remedies.

As mentioned previously, City leadership failed San Francisco residents by passing a Twitter Tax break and changing the tax code in order to cater to a certain type of economic growth at the expense of displacing hundreds of thousands of San Francisco residents.

As Mayor I will help ensure that CCSF and SF State programming and certification programs are directly linked to career opportunities for local hiring programs. These could include careers in renewable energy (CleanPowerSF), Health Care, the cannabis industry, building trades, childcare, technology, healing our encampment/mental health/addiction crisis, etc. I will work as Mayor to ensure that CCSF and SF State graduates are qualified candidates for positions in these local industries and are given priority in the screening and selection process.

I support revenue measures such as the June 2018 Parcel Tax and June 2018 commercial gross receipts tax measures to increase salaries for SFUSD teachers and childcare workers.

Transportation

Do you support the expansion of bus lanes and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) on existing major city streets?

I am a low-income resident who solely rode a bike, walked, took Muni and BART for my transportation needs for nearly ten years in San Francisco. But last year I also started driving a truck for work and can testify firsthand that the red lanes and lack of turns on Mission Street make it undesirable for drivers. Red lanes are popping up throughout the City and are definitely causing pain to drivers of private vehicles, especially with the number of TNCs. But if we are truly to get to a transit first goal we must often make decisions that create challenges for the status quo. For instance, it’s hard to imagine the City and Bay Area without BART, but back in the 60s/70s there was a huge amount of pushback against BART development as a form of gentrification and displacement (which has merits in its arguments, because of the communities of color who were directly impacted by the original development).

As Mayor I would like to explore the development of a publicly/non-profit managed shared fleet of cars that would be required for new developments to discourage individual car ownership. City Care Share, the only non-profit car sharing service, recently merged with Get-Around, and we are in the infancy stages of bike share, electric bike share, and scooter sharing.

 

What is your opinion on ride-sharing services (Uber, Lyft, Chariot, Scoot)?

The City has horribly mismanaged the taxi industry and subsequent regulations of the tens of thousands of TNCs that congest our streets. Although we are somewhat hamstrung by the CPUC’s currently authority over TNC regulations, we should be exploring ways to target TNCs for behaviors that increase risk for cyclists and pedestrians. A recent 3-month SFPD report in 2017 showed that TNC drivers accounted for the bulk of moving violations for obstructing bike lanes, driving in bike lanes, illegal u-turns in business districts, illegal use of transit lanes, and failure to yield for pedestrians. Our north star should be the development of a locally-regulated pro- worker and pro-passenger transit platform that supports our Vision Zero goals.

 

Do you support policies to incentivize the use of modes of transportation other than private vehicles? If so, which policies in particular?

I support policies that incentivize the use of public transit and bike riding. San Francisco should look into programming that makes up for the recent Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that now prevent tax-free bicycle commuting reimbursements and employer deductions for tax-free qualified transportation fringe benefits.

As Mayor I will also look into the feasibility of developing a locally-managed pro- driver/pro-passenger transit platform as well as expanding shared car ownership programs at new developments in order to discourage private car ownership.

Quality of Life

San Francisco currently has the lowest percentage of children of any major city in the United States. What would you do to make San Francisco more hospitable to families and children?

In order to make San Francisco more hospitable to families and children we must develop adequate levels of affordable housing, invest in our public education, and ensure that our streets are safe for everyone by investing in unarmed “eyes on the streets” and crisis de- escalation programming.

 

What will you do to promote greater public safety in San Francisco?

If I become Mayor we will have the opportunity to truly reform the Police Department through new appointments to the Police Commission and direct engagement and directives to the Chief of Police with a focus on de-escalation and full implementation of CIT, the creation of complimentary unarmed stewards of peace, harm reduction, and a restorative justice framework that aims to heal a history of racial and economic oppression. I look forward to getting up to speed on the current state of proposed reforms and am truly excited about the Mayor’s ability to support transformative healing and change through oversight of SFPD.

Since 2015 I have been promoting the development of an unarmed “Stewards of Peace” program as a complimentary arm of our public safety efforts, whether housed within or outside of the SFPD. I want our police force to be nationally renowned as de-escalation experts.

I will increase funding for community-integrated crisis de-escalation, mental health, and arts and culture programming in high-incident neighborhoods.

Recently there has been an increase in property crimes and “smash and grab” car burglaries. How would you address this issue?

I have heard my fellow candidates talk about pouring more money into the coffers of DPW and SFPD to address the symptoms of economic and racial injustice, but I know that we have increased funds already without getting the desired outcomes. I offer a comprehensive and outcomes-driven approach to healing the root causes of car break-ins. We can lower the amount of car burglaries by investing in unarmed “eyes on the streets” programming, addressing our shelter shortage crisis, investing in economic opportunities and pathways to prosperity for SFUSD and CCSF graduates, and putting a focus on investigation work via SFPD to target crime syndicates and high-incident areas.

 

Do you support allowing SFPD officers to carry tasers?

No. SFPD should be putting an emphasis on fully implementing crisis de-escalation methods before receiving an additional weapon. There has been only one article in the media comparing candidate responses on an issue thus, and it happens to be on taser reform: http://www.sfexaminer.com/mayoral-hopefuls-split-whether-arm-sfpd-officers- tasers/

London Breed Mayoral Questionnaire

Please describe why you are running for office.

I’m running for Mayor to ensure that every San Franciscan has the opportunity of a good paying job, a safe and affordable place to live, and the peace of mind that comes from feeling safe in our homes and on the streets of our City.

My first priority in housing and homelessness is to create an affordable city for ALL of us. I’ll protect and expand our affordable and rent-controlled stock, and honor Mayor Lee’s commitment to build 5,000 units per year. I’ll continue to work with unions to build homes for low and middle income people, and build on underutilized sites around the City like the McDonald’s on Haight and Stanyan.

San Francisco needs a Mayor who will make our neighborhoods safer—and on issues of public safety, I don’t back down. This means confronting the property crime wave, as I’ve done by working to add more police officers to keep up with our rising population. This means reducing emergency response times, as I did when I fought the ambulance crisis in 2014. And this means crafting smart policy that aligns with our values: Championing our sanctuary status, implementing systemic reform, and reintegrating people coming out of jail. Just as I’ve always done.

 

Please describe your qualifications for office.

I have dedicated my entire adult life to serving our communities and improving San Francisco’s housing, environment, public safety, transportation, and quality of life. I have a strong track record and I’m not afraid of addressing tough challenges. I have helped transform unused public housing units into homes for homeless families, and I am leading the effort to renovate thousands more. I have fought for more navigation centers for the homeless and I launched a task force to study whether safe injection facilities can help IV drug users off the streets and into treatment.  My policy positions have been consistent and based on the needs of my constituents — not what is politically popular. My dedication to affordable housing, homelessness public safety, and economic justice makes me an ideal mayor for San Francisco.

 

What are the three main issues you will focus on if elected? 

Housing, homelessness, and public safety.

 

Housing and Homelessness

Do you believe San Francisco is facing an affordability and displacement crisis? If so, what do you think caused it and how would you address it?

I do believe San Francisco is facing an affordability and displacement crisis. I grew up in public housing and so housing insecurity isn’t just an abstract point of policy for me. I’ve lived it. When I was in college, we were told our home was being torn down. It was up to me and my grandmother, the woman who cared for me all my life, to find a new place to live. Affordable housing is essential to preserving San Francisco’s diverse identity and we need to act locally and regionally.

I secured $2 million to renovate vacant public housing units for 179 formerly homeless families, ensuring they were not left waiting in our shelters. I’ve helped invest city resources to create more affordable housing in San Francisco, with a particular focus on addressing the teacher shortage we’re facing today.

Here are the actions I intend to take as mayor:

  • Create an affordable city for ALL San Franciscans.
  • Protect and expand our affordable and rent-controlled housing stock.
  • Increase funding for all types of housing preservation and creation.
  • Keep Mayor Lee’s commitment to build 5,000 units per year.
  • Build housing on underutilized sites, working with neighbors and property owners as we did at a McDonald’s.
  • Reform San Francisco’s archaic approval process for code-compliant new housing and streamline the application process, with automatic approval for code-compliant, 100% affordable projects.

 

What is your opinion on the zoning regulations in San Francisco? Do you believe that dense, urban infill development is environmentally beneficially?

Yes, urban infill development is good for the environment and will be key to California meeting its carbon reduction goals over the coming years. I am supportive of Senator Wiener’s SB827 with amendments, which are currently in process in the legislature. I believe that transit-oriented development throughout the state is necessary to address our housing crisis.

 

What neighborhoods do you think are best for the creation of new housing in San Francisco?

 I will push forward Mayor Lee’s directive to build 5,000 new homes every year. We have historically failed to build enough homes for our residents and this effort is an important piece of creating homes for all San Franciscans.

  • During the last 30 years, SF only built on average about 1, 900 units per year
  • Even though we have built or preserved 17,000 units in the last five years, it is not enough

Every neighborhood will need to do its part, I don’t think there is one area in particular that can be responsible for addressing the housing crisis.

 

Do you support inclusionary housing requirements for new housing developments in San Francisco? If so, would you support raising the inclusionary rate higher than the current agreement reached by the Board of Supervisors?

I have fought for the creation of affordable housing and I was instrumental in reforming our City’s inclusionary housing policies for more middle income housing, for anti-displacement preference for individuals seeking housing and displaced from their neighborhoods, and for the preservation of our existing housing stock. In doing so, I fought to make sure that the city remained within the Controller’s recommendations, as to not stifle the production of new housing.

 

Do you support allowing safe injection sites in San Francisco? Would you support a declaration of a state of emergency regarding public drug use on San Francisco’s streets? 

Yes, and I have led on this issue even when it was not politically popular. San Francisco should establish safe injection sites in high-need areas, which provide an alternative to injecting drugs unsupervised – and possibly overdosing – and reduce the risk of needle sharing and spreading diseases, such as HIV and Hepatitis C, in the process. Injection sites should also provide, though not require, individuals access to treatment and social services to address their needs.

This would have an added benefit of reducing the amount of discarded needles we see on our streets.

 

Economy & Jobs

Have you opposed any new major construction projects (Treasure Island, Shipyard, Parkmerced, Mission Rock, etc) in San Francisco over the past 10 years? If so, why?

No.

 

Do you support a citywide mandated Project Labor Agreement (PLA) for public work or improvement projects, and if so do you support it at the threshold of over $1 million?

Yes, I am a co-sponsor of the legislation at the current threshold of $1,000,000. I support the Project Labor Agreement because the agreement is a pathway to higher wages for workers, better protections for workers, and better opportunities for local residents — all of which I have long advocated for and will continue to support.  

Additionally, I am am a proponent of veteran hiring. The PLA requires the use of Helmets to Hardhats program, a program I believe offers real sustainable careers for veterans.

 

What do you propose as a solution to the problem of rising rents for local businesses?

This is a difficult issue that I’m eager to work with our small business community on. It’s a problem that I see as interconnected to other land use challenges we face in the city. I’ve heard from a number of merchants who would benefit from increased foot traffic in major transit corridors, which would come with the creation of new homes in the area.

I would also explore ways for the city to work directly with owners of vacant storefronts to find creative solutions to find tenants for these properties to ensure the vibrancy of our commercial corridors.

I have sponsored and passed legislation to protect and support local small businesses including first-in-the-country legislation to protect live music venues, rewriting San Francisco’s outdated game laws to help three small businesses open including the one currently activating the famous Harding Theater, and working to establish the Japantown Community Benefit District which will improve one of only three remaining Japantowns in the country.

 

Do you support more economic development and job growth? Do you support the creation of more office space in San Francisco?

Yes. An unfortunate byproduct of the housing crisis is that some people, as a result of rising rents and home prices, think an economic downturn would be good for the city. I remember the Great Recession, and I know that economic recessions hurt the most vulnerable among us the hardest. 

We need to ensure that we do our part to create enough housing to keep pace with our growing economy. With this growth, we also need to ensure that we’re investing in our transit and transportation infrastructure to keep pace.

 

Do you support the recent compromise at the Board of Supervisors regarding retail cannabis licenses? Do you support allowing more retail cannabis licenses in San Francisco?

Yes. I support San Francisco following Oakland’s footsteps and developing an equity framework for recreational cannabis business that prioritizes applicants who have borne the brunt of the failed war on drugs.

 

Which, if any, local tax measures have you supported in the past? Are there any you’d support or advocate for moving forward?

I am currently supportive of the Housing for All ballot measure, a commercial rent tax which will provide needed funding for housing for all communities including working families, teachers, and formerly homeless individuals.

 

According to the Brookings Institution, income inequality, has reached a point in San Francisco whereby the gap between rich and poor residents has been growing faster than in any other city in the nation. Explain what you believe the cause(s) to be and what do you see as short or long term remedies.

There are a number of historical causes, both national and local, that have resulted in the income inequality gap we see in our city today. Today, our biggest challenge to addressing this gap is addressing our housing crisis.

I have seen generations of my family, friends, and classmates leave San Francisco. Today, my housing situation is like many living in San Francisco. My home is a rent-controlled apartment in the Lower Haight. Until three months ago I still had a roommate. I’m still paying off my student loans. I drive a fourteen-year-old car and bring coupons to the store. San Francisco is experiencing an affordability crisis, and I’m right there with you.

The post-recession boom created tens of thousands of jobs in a city that was already feeling the squeeze of high housing prices and a chronic housing shortage. Unfortunately, not many of us have access to the high-paying jobs that pay enough to afford San Francisco’s market rate prices.

We aren’t producing enough affordable housing to meet the needs of our low-income population. People who earn middle-class incomes — teachers, nurses, non-profit workers, police officers — make too much to qualify for affordable housing, but not enough to afford market prices without a second job. The result is rising income inequality and the out-migration of many communities of color from San Francisco. This crisis has dramatically weakened the most essential structures of support in our community.

I am the only candidate in this race to release a detailed housing platform, which you can find on my website at www.LondonForMayor.com. In it I describe how I will lead the City to create more homes while ensuring protections for our most vulnerable populations.

 

Transportation

Do you support the expansion of bus lanes and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) on existing major city streets?

Yes, we must increase our subway system dramatically, not just to relieve the congestion we currently have but to be prepared for the population growth we anticipate.  I’ve supported BRT expansion in San Francisco, and hope we can learn from the delays we are experiencing with Van Ness BRT in future projects.

 

What is your opinion on ride-sharing services (Uber, Lyft, Chariot, Scoot)? 

After months of urging from the City Attorney’s Office, Lyft has finally agreed to share data with the City, and it seems likely that Uber will follow suit. We need to take a look at the practices of these companies and figure out how we can best coordinate to make a San Francisco that works for everyone.

 

Quality of Life

San Francisco currently has the lowest percentage of children of any major city in the United States. What would you do to make San Francisco more hospitable to families and children?

The housing crisis has forced many too people to move farther away from San Francisco. We need to build more affordable housing for young families, working people and folks who want to stay here in our great city. We need to invest in our schools to make them worthy of our children and commit to funding the Free City College program so anyone has the opportunity to further their education.

 

What will you do to promote greater public safety in San Francisco?

I know what it’s like to grow up in a community ravaged by drugs and violence, held down by unemployment, and held back by neglect. I’ve lost friends; I’ve lost family to gunfire, drugs, and despair.

Now, years later, and living only a few blocks away, I know what it’s like to have your car window broken not once, but repeatedly, even when you had nothing inside to steal.

San Francisco needs a Mayor who will make all our neighborhoods safe, a Mayor with a record of standing up for public safety and fighting for the resources we need. I am that Mayor.

I’ve released a comprehensive public safety plan on my website that describes how I will address the public safety challenges we face, which you can read at www.LondonforMayor.com.

This includes 1) increasing our police presence and fully staffing the SFPD 2) fixing loopholes in our laws that allow for property crime suspects to evade prosecution 3) working with the SFPD to create dedicated teams for property crimes that use predictive policing methods and 4) educating our residents and tourists on how to best protect themselves and their property.

 

Recently there has been an increase in property crimes and “smash and grab” car burglaries. How would you address this issue?

Please see the above response.

 

Do you support allowing SFPD officers to carry tasers?

The Department of Justice (DoJ) conducted a thorough review of the SFPD’s policies and practices, motivated by requests from Mayor Lee, myself, and others.  The DoJ report contained 94 findings and 272 best practice recommendations, one of which was for the SFPD to implement tasers.

I respect the judgement of the Obama Justice Department.  I respect SFPD Chief Scott.  I respect the careful deliberation and decision of our Police Commission.  I recognize that Sheriff Deputies in City Hall, where I work every day, carry tasers.  And with all I’ve seen and experienced in my life, I hate guns. If tasers — with thorough training and oversight — can stop one shooting, then I support tasers.

I will fund their implementation.  And NO ONE will be more vigilant than me in making sure they are implemented and used appropriately.

Jane Kim Mayoral Questionnaire

Please describe why you are running for office.

San Francisco can and should be, a beacon for the rest of the country. We have the resources to make progressive ideas into reality if we have strong leadership that has the vision and will to act; I have proven that my ideas and values are not simply words – I have repeatedly fought, led and won battles to bring progressive initiatives into fruition.

My vision for San Francisco has us setting a higher standard for quality of life and city services, addressing income inequality and the opportunity gap, tackling homelessness, and reactivating our civic pride, starting with demanding clean streets.

 

Please describe your qualifications for office.

I have represented one of the more complicated neighborhoods of San Francisco– representing our wealthiest and our poorest, a district with the most new construction and growth, as well as the areas that need the most help.

As a member of the Board of Supervisors, I taken this lesson to heart and worked for a city that works for everyone. I have fought for policies to expand opportunities for everyone and have asked those who are doing very well to give a little back to support the city we all love.

I’m proud to have led the fight to make City College free for all our residents so everyone has the chance to continue their education and acquire new skills. We funded this by levying a modest tax increase on ultra luxury property valued over $5M so that the people who make San Francisco what it is should benefit from our growth and prosperity.

And I’ve not just advocated for these policies – I’ve won for our residents.

I will fight for concrete policies that will help us maneuver through this period of great transition, support San Francisco values while making services better for everyone.

 

What are the three main issues you will focus on if elected?

Income inequality has created interwoven issues that we must address: our affordability crisis, homelessness and decline in city services and quality of life. We are a wealthy city with dirty streets – it’s unacceptable and addressing street cleanliness this will be my top priority at City Hall.

We also need to do more to retain and re-grow our working and middle class families. We need to address the financial burdens our working families are facing. We need to preserve and build more affordable housing necessary to retain our low- and middle-income families and move people off of our streets. I’m proud to have fought for the highest levels of affordable housing– I’m not afraid to step up and negotiate for my residents. I am also fighting for free and affordable childcare to reduce the cost burdens for our working families.

We need to continue to work to make progress on homelessness. Far too often, a homeless resident dealing with serious mental health or substance abuse concerns is shifted into our criminal justice system or taken to emergency rooms rather than getting the treatment they need. I’ve advocated for more medical respite shelters and a Behavioral Justice Center to support individuals who need sustained help.

Finally, we need to be investing in smart education policies like Free City College and universal affordable early education for 0-3 year olds – to help us expand opportunity for every residents.

Housing and Homelessness

Do you believe San Francisco is facing an affordability and displacement crisis? If so, what do you think caused it and how would you address it?

Absolutely. Between 1980 to present, the federal government has cut funding for subsidized and affordable housing in half– our country used to be in the business of building affordable housing for low-income and working class households. As the federal government invested less, homelessness and related indicators went up.

In less than ten years, we’ve added 100,000 residents – that’s equivalent to New York City adding a million residents in the same period of time. Our infrastructure and housing has not kept up with our growth. During this time, low-income residents and increasingly middle-income residents have been displaced and pushed out.

Displacement isn’t just a tragedy for the individual families affected; it hurts our city and overall community. We cannot be a healthy city if we are a hollow city with room for only the very rich and very poor and everyone else commuting in. I’ve fought hard for increasing inclusionary housing requirements in our market rate development and spearheaded the effort to include middle-income families in private developments for the first time. As we add housing we need to make sure we’re adding housing the majority of San Franciscans can afford.

 

What is your opinion on the zoning regulations in San Francisco? Do you believe that dense, urban infill development is environmentally beneficially?

I’m all for revisiting zoning regulations, as well as administration, post entitlement process and enforcement. Dense, urban infill that is affordable will allow residents to remain in San Francisco close to their jobs reducing their need to commute by car or endure long transit trips. Transit is the #1 source of greenhouse gas emissions in California. The growth must also occur on a regional level– San Francisco cannot solve the housing and affordability crisis alone. We need to coordinate the region and ensure we are all building together.

 

What neighborhoods do you think are best for the creation of new housing in San Francisco?

There are large development sites I’d like to see built more quickly– Park Merced, Shipyard, Pier 70, Candlestick and Treasure Island are large entitled projects with higher levels of affordable housing and are being slowed down by lack of funding for infrastructure. In addition, we need to look at the long tail– the huge numbers of smaller dwellings (1-15 unit residential developments) that could accommodate additional dwelling units throughout the City. There are tens of thousands of potential additional units we could build more quickly and affordability if we can streamline the process and standardize planning and fire requirement guidelines.

 

Do you support inclusionary housing requirements for new housing developments in San Francisco? If so, would you support raising the inclusionary rate higher than the current agreement reached by the Board of Supervisors?

Yes. As the Supervisor responsible for adjusting the rate from 12% previously set in the City’s constitution to allowing the legislative body to adjust the City’s affordable housing requirements on private development based on fiscal feasibility studies and our economy, I strongly support our inclusionary policy as one vehicle to build more affordable and middle income housing. I also negotiated record numbers including 40% affordable and middle incoming housing at the Giants Project, 5M, and 160 Folsom and other large projects by increasing height and density to fund the affordable units. These negotiations yield more market rate and affordable units. Only 12% of San Franciscans can afford a median priced home in San Francisco, we need to maximize affordable housing for working and middle class residents now. It’s important to push the envelope while maintaining project feasibility.

 

Do you support allowing safe injection sites in San Francisco? Would you support a declaration of a state of emergency regarding public drug use on San Francisco’s streets?

Yes I support safe injections sites.

I have called for a state of emergency on homelessness. There are many reasons why people end up on the streets – substance abuse, job loss, mental health conditions, evictions and domestic abuse are just a few of the causes. A state of emergency would allow us to better marshal public resources to confront every aspect of this crisis.

Economy & Jobs

Have you opposed any new major construction projects (Treasure Island, Shipyard, Parkmerced, Mission Rock, etc) in San Francisco over the past 10 years? If so, why?

I have not opposed any development project in my District- instead I have sat down at the table with our developers and negotiated strong deals for San Francisco residents to ensure we are building for our residents. I authored and led the process that led to the approval of Treasure Island and Mission Rock. I’m proud to have fought hard and won for our city.

 

Do you support a citywide mandated Project Labor Agreement (PLA) for public work or improvement projects, and if so do you support it at the threshold of over $1 million?

Yes. Defining project benefits in terms of jobs and wages and connecting these jobs to training programs gives San Franciscans a pipeline to jobs which support our families. I also strongly supported the PLA when I served on the San Francisco Board of Education. Project Labor Agreements reduces delays which often increase costs.

 

What do you propose as a solution to the problem of rising rents for local businesses?

Rising rents threatens to shudder our local businesses that make San Francisco special. I support grants and rent subsidies for our legacy businesses. We need to stabilize rents for small businesses that are the backbone of our neighborhood corridors and create disincentives so that landlords do not keep their storefronts vacant while they wait for tenants who can afford higher rents. We need to get creative with zoning and other tools to encourage micro spaces that are more affordable for emerging businesses and understand the changing landscape of retail driving consumers to shop online.

 

Do you support more economic development and job growth? Do you support the creation of more office space in San Francisco?

Yes. We also need to balance our office growth with supporting housing and transit needs for new workers all across the income spectrum. Rapid growth has brought great wealth to our city but that growth has not been felt evenly by our residents. We have many San Franciscans who struggle to find good, family-sustaining jobs. We can leverage our prosperity to help our residents obtain good jobs and create good jobs in communities with higher levels of unemployment. I pushed for Free City and funding our only life-long learning institution to help residents acquire the skills needed to get great jobs. I’ve urged our partners in the tech community to develop mentorships and pipeline opportunities for members of our historically disadvantaged communities to learn the skills and build relationships to enter into growing sectors of our economy such as the tech, hospitality and healthcare sector.

 

Do you support the recent compromise at the Board of Supervisors regarding retail cannabis licenses? Do you support allowing more retail cannabis licenses in San Francisco?

I’ve long supported the legalization of medical and recreational marijuana and worked with my colleagues on the Board of Supervisors to develop a balanced regulatory framework for the legalization of recreational marijuana which launched on January 5, 2018.

Now we must begin the more challenging work of building more equity and opportunities for women, people of color and individuals negatively impacted by the Drug War into this growing industry so that they can generate jobs and wealth in all our neighborhoods as well.

Which, if any, local tax measures have you supported in the past? Are there any you’d support or advocate for moving forward?

I have supported progressive revenue measures which ask our residents and businesses who have prospered in San Francisco to invest in our city and fund programs that expand economic opportunity – such as the luxury real estate transfer tax to fund Free City College. I’m currently the co-author of a commercial gross receipts tax on office landlords to fund universal, affordable early childhood education for low-income and middle class families. We have one of the lowest gross receipts rates in comparison to cities like Los Angeles and New York – a modest increase can help fund quality education programs for our youngest learners before they enter Kindergarten and invest in increasing the productivity of our workers, in particular our women workers.

 

According to the Brookings Institution, income inequality, has reached a point in San Francisco whereby the gap between rich and poor residents has been growing faster than in any other city in the nation. Explain what you believe the cause(s) to be and what do you see as short or long term remedies.

Long term wages have been stagnant since the 1980s. Over the same time period, we’ve asked workers to take on far more responsibility for their retirement, healthcare and education expenses– costs that were previously born by employers and government. We have divested from public institutions such as housing, education and health care which long supported our working and middle class. Meanwhile, San Francisco’s economy and wealth have exploded during the same period and we have seen an exacerbated inequity because of the confluence of these trends.

We can solve this if we work together. As a wealthy and progressive city, we have the opportunity to leverage our wealth to better support our most vulnerable residents and lift up our working families to expand opportunity throughout our city.

In the short-term, we can and should improve our quality of life and our city services. Clean streets, Free City, affordable child care – these are steps we can take now to expand opportunity and make our city more pleasant for everyone.

In the longer term, we need to push for more affordable housing throughout our city – not just large developments but smaller projects – accessory dwelling units and 3-15 unit projects which can expand capacity without overwhelming or changing the character of our neighborhoods.

We must evaluate how we build housing, how we invest in our infrastructure, and how we lean into our regional partners to support addressing this crisis together.

 

Transportation

Do you support the expansion of bus lanes and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) on existing major city streets?

Yes.

 

What is your opinion on ride-sharing services (Uber, Lyft, Chariot, Scoot)?

It’s clear that taxi services were not meeting the need of our residents and ride-sharing services smartly stepped in to fill the gap. However, that doesn’t mean those services should be exempt from common-sense regulation.

Recent reports show that ride-hailing services represent about 20% of the traffic on our already congested streets. They also cause the majority of moving vehicle violations on our streets. Many of the drivers are not San Francisco residents which makes it difficult to control what these commercial businesses are doing on our streets.

Ride-sharing services use a public resource (our taxpayer funded city streets) to do business. It’s only right that we ask them to fund the resources they use. We need to change state law to allow cities (or the state) to levy a per ride fee on these services – the revenue can be used to repair our roads and improve transit. I use ride-sharing services but I also support a cap on the number of drivers in our city (if permitted by the state). Further we should explore how we can ensure drivers from other jurisdictions are licensed and regulated to make sure they meet the high standards we expect in San Francisco.

 

Do you support policies to incentivize the use of modes of transportation other than private vehicles? If so, which policies in particular?

I support a robust public transportation infrastructure that moves people around at a competitive price. Specifically, I think about regional transportation like ferries– I’m really excited about the terminal that’s been approved for 16th street near UCSF, and how that will connect that part of town to the East Bay, as well as to the 3rd street MUNI line. I’m supportive of extra cars on MUNI, and extra busses, as well as new technologies that may help us plan smarter. I’m willing to consider a lot of options here, and will do so in connection with how we think about new housing.

Quality of Life

San Francisco currently has the lowest percentage of children of any major city in the United States. What would you do to make San Francisco more hospitable to families and children?

Clean streets, parks, quality public schools and affordable housing are important for retaining children and families in San Francisco. My track record demonstrates my commitment to supporting working families and my commitment to reducing the costs of housing, childcare, school enrichment programs while advocating for cleaner streets and activated open space.

San Francisco boasts incredible natural resources and cultural institutions. Cost of living is one of the biggest hurdle for families. Further, the very people who support working families, childcare providers, teachers and paraprofessionals cannot afford to live here. Educators are pillars of every community and we need to ensure that they can afford to live in the communities they serve. We can do better.

What will you do to promote greater public safety in San Francisco?

We can and should double the resources to clean our streets, house our most vulnerable and provide higher quality education and workforce opportunities to all our residents. Income inequality is at the root of our public safety issues. In addition, we must also fund near term improvements, additional foot and bike beat police officers, better lighting, cameras and doorbell cameras to assist our public safety agencies.

While we have one of the lowest rates of violent crime and homicides, we have one of the higher rates non-violent property crime also known as “crimes of opportunity.” We need to invest in our vulnerable residents and also create a dedicated district attorney unit and centralized investigative unit in SFPD to address auto burglaries and other theft to disrupt the larger pattern of property crimes we are seeing city-wide.

Recently there has been an increase in property crimes and “smash and grab” car burglaries. How would you address this issue?

We must create a dedicated unit in the District Attorney’s office and a centralized investigative unit at SFPD to address and disrupt property crime. We also need to be smarter about how we deploy our public safety and police officers. One of my priorities is addressing congestion and pedestrian safety issues– instead of asking SFPD to shift resources away from serious crime, I worked creatively with SFMTA to utilize our parking control officers (PCO) to enforce “blocking the box” and double parking as non-moving violations.

Do you support allowing SFPD officers to carry tasers?

I do not currently support adding tasers as an additional weapon utilized by SFPD. We must first build trust with all our communities and fully implement de-escalation strategies and other Department of Justice (DOJ) reforms before we consider tasers. I am sensitive to voices of officers, including our women officers, who are asking us to consider tasers as an alternative to guns while acknowledging that tasers have led to unintended deaths recently in near by cities like Daly City and Oakland. We must continue the conversation but first we must in good faith continue our good work in implement DOJ reforms that build a safer city for us all.

Angela Alioto Mayoral Questionnaire

Please describe why you are running for office. I am running for mayor because I am a dedicated, public servant who is heartbroken at the current state of our city. As a born and raised San Franciscan who raised a family here, I know just how special our city is. I could not tolerate another […]

Neighbors Speak: Why Has Portland Led the Way on ADU’s?

In 2010, Portland, Oregon, adopted an ordinance encouraging the construction of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in single-family homes.  Construction of ADUs immediately began to rise and then spiked, increasing seven times in six years.  Today, ADU permits account for about 10% of all housing permits.  In 2016 the California legislature passed legislation mandating local regulation of ADUs in a form that parallels the Portland model.[1]  Could a spike in ADU construction for single-family homes be on the horizon for San Francisco?  It depends on the manner of implementing the state law.

The Portland ordinance, as amended in 2010, provides a flexible framework for the architectural design of ADUs.  The most essential provisions relate to size and location.  For example, the size of an ADU “may be no more than 75 percent of the living area of the primary dwelling or 800 square feet of living area, whichever is less.”[2]  Detached ADUs may not occupy more than 15% of the lot area and must be behind the rear wall of the house and set back 40 feet from the front lot line.  ADUs attached to the primary residence may share a common entranceway.

With such mild restrictions, ADUs are permitted in the “great majority of single-family lots”[3] and have displayed a highly individualistic character, reflecting the taste, preferences, and quirks of the primary homeowner.  The most common form of ADU has proved to be the detached unit suited to the suburban pattern of land use in much of the city.  About one fifth of the ADUs, however, are attached to the primary residence as a wing or backyard addition.  In a city with many free standing garages, homeowners have also found creative ways to construct ADUs above and adjoining a garage structure.

The city of Portland has actively promoted ADUs by providing technical assistance, workshops, and tours of individual homes.  Since 2010 the city has waived development fees for permits that meet certain generous criteria, and it processes applications as a matter of right with limited design review, or none at all, depending on the location and type of ADU.

The California legislation enacted in 2016 mandates that local governments adopt ordinances following precisely the same format as the Portland ordinance: the size of  “an attached accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed 50 percent of the existing living area” or “1200 square feet.,” which ever is less.  And the size of  “a detached accessory dwelling shall not exceed 1200 square feet.”[4]  Like the Portland ordinance, the Legislation places certain limits on fees for utility connections and requires ministerial approval “without discretionary review or a hearing” of all permit applications within a period of 120 days.[5]  But as a state law rather than a local ordinance, the legislation has two aspects that distinguish it from the Portland ordinance; the law provides an avenue for local modification of the mandated standards and a unique system of enforcement.

The leeway to modify the standards of state law is found in a provision giving the local government the power to “impose standards of accessory dwelling units that include, but are not limited to, parking, height, setback, lot coverage, landscape, architectural review, maximum size of a unit,…”[6]  An interpretative memorandum of the California Department of Housing and Community Development, explains that “a local government may reduce the maximum unit size below 1,200 square feet so long as the requirement is “not burdensome” and does not “unreasonably restrict opportunities” to build ADUs.[7]  It mentions 800 square feet as a possible maximum unit size.  In San Francisco, a maximum unit size of 700 square feet would probably pass the bar of state law.

Although the memorandum does not itself have the force of law, it provides an entirely reasonable interpretation, and it can doubtlessly be applied in other contexts.   Setbacks and lot coverage requirements in particular can dramatically curtail opportunities for ADU construction.  Accordingly, they must be tailored so as to avoid unreasonably restricting such opportunities.  How this is to be done presents a complex issue.  A limitation that is appropriate in the Richmond District may unreasonably restrict ADU construction in Bernal Heights or Telegraph Hill.  The state law contains only one provisions affording guidance: “No setback shall be required for an existing garage that is converted to an accessory dwelling unit, and a set back of no more than five feet from the side and rear lot lines shall be required for an accessory dwelling unit that is constructed above a garage.[8]

On its face, the state legislation may appear to have a weak, even quixotic enforcement mechanism.  It states that an ordinance regulating ADUs that “fails to meet the requirements of this subdivision … shall be null and void.”[9] Homeowners may rely directly on state law in applying for ADU permits if a local government fails to enact an ADU ordinance or adopts provisions that are void under state law.[10]  In effect, the law establishes a system of self-regulation.  Local governments are expected to comply with state standards or face the confusion of conflicting local and state requirements.  The system unquestionably opens the door to evasion of state law, but it is probably wise.  The urban landscape of California is so varied that rigid state-wide standards would inevitably cause mischief at a local level.

Conclusion

A detailed study of the Portland ADU success story by the Terner Center for Housing Innovation finds that “websites, events, and tours promoting ADUs .. have a high ‘bang for buck’ ratio; they cost very little but can have a surprisingly large impact.”[11]  But the Portland experience also shows that promotion succeeds where there is an attractive product to sell.  ADU permit requirements must accommodate the individual needs and preferences of homeowners.

The 2016 amendments set the stage for creation of ADU-friendly ordinances at the local level.  San Francisco took a first step to comply with state law on May 12 when it adopted ordinance 95-17 calling for ministerial approval of a certain category of ADU applications.  But there is much more work to be done.  The San Francisco ADU Manual offers no prototype for the sort of backyard additions that would probably be the most popular form of ADU in the Richmond District where I live. The four prototypes for single-family homes now included in the Manual each contain disincentives, or outright obstacles, to ADU construction.  Still, they point the way to an efficient mode of regulation to the extent that they offer a rudimentary kind of form-based coding.  The city may draw on the expertise of practitioners of form-based coding to create a new set of prototypes conforming to state law and the desires of homeowners.

Michael Murphy worked for roughly 20 years as a research attorney for the California Court of Appeal, First District, serving first as an aide to Justice William Newsom. He has degrees from Harvard College and Stanford Law School. In the past 12 years, he has written nine law review articles in well known journals including the Santa Clara Law Review, the NYU Journal of Law and Business, the Virginia Law and Business Review, The Business Lawyer, and the Delaware Journal of Corporate Law.

Footnotes:

[1] Now codified as Gov. Code section 65852.2.

[2] Title 33, Planning and Zoning, section 33.205.040 C.3.

[3] Accessory dwelling units in Portland Oregon: evaluation and interpretation of a survey of ADU owners, Martin J. Brown andJordanPalmeri, p. 6, (Oregon Depart of Environmental Quality, 2014)

[4] Gov. Code section 65852.2(a)(1)(D)(iii) and (iv).

[5] Gov. Code section 65852.2(a)(3). The requirement of ministerial approval has the effect of removing ADU applications from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).  Public Resources Code section 21080(b) states that CEQA does not apply to ministerial projects to be carried out or approved by public agencies.

[6] Gov. Code section 65852.2(a)(1)(B).  Section (a)(8) expressly provides that ADU applications may not be subject to standards for “allowable density.”

[7] California Department of Housing and Community Development, Accessory Dwelling Unit Memorandum, December 2016, pp. 9-10.

[8] Gov. Code section (a)(1)(D)(vii).

[9] Gov. Code section 65852.2(a)(4).

[10] Gov Code section 65852.2(b)

[11] Karen Chapple, Jake Wegmann, Farzad Mashhood, and Rebecca Coleman, Jumpstarting the Market for Accessory Dwelling Units: Lessons Learned from Portland, Seattle and Vancouver, pp 19-20 (Terner Center for Housing Innovation, UC Berkeley, 2017)

Supervisor Tang Introduces HOME – SF

Everyone deserves a home. Supervisor Katy Tang recently introduced HOME-SF, which is designed to address San Francisco’s housing crisis and the lack of available family and workforce housing. You can read more at The Bay City Beacon here.