Update – Page 2 – Coalition for San Francisco Neighborhoods

November 20, 2025November 20, 2025

One of S.F.’s largest landlords could lose up to 428 units of housing

By Oscar Palma : missionlocal – excerpt

The California real estate empire of Mosser Living, a company that owns 61 buildings in San Francisco but has been selling off parts of its portfolio, could lose another 428 housing units in the coming months, according to documents obtained by Mission Local.

Mosser is one of the largest corporate landlords in San Francisco. The company, founded in 1955, received receivership orders for 14 of its San Francisco buildings — 13 residential and one commercial — between June 5 and Oct. 15.

Receivership typically occurs when two parties, like a landlord and a lender, are in disagreement. The affected buildings are in the Tenderloin, Nob Hill, Pacific Heights, SoMa and Hayes Valley, and house 428 units.

While receivership does not, on its own, mean buildings are for sale, many have already received notices for public auction.

“Notices of trustee sale,” which indicate a default on a loan and a subsequent sale, were sent to six Mosser buildings between August and October that house 141 units. Those face imminent foreclosure if Mosser doesn’t come to an agreement with its lender, JP Morgan Chase.

The rest of the buildings could soon follow. If Mosser offloads them, the sales would continue a trend in which the firm is shedding properties. The real-estate company, which owns 3,500 units in California, has struggled to recover from the pandemic…

Steven Edrington, a real estate broker and real estate expert, suspected that Mosser may not be meeting its debt-service coverage ratio — the ratio between a business’ revenue and the debt it has to pay back. That, he said, may be leading them to sell of units.

“I think that’s the issue,” said Edrington. “They have too many vacancies. They’ve had to lower the rent and there’s also higher operating costs.”

… (more)

Attached map indicates that most of the properties are located in the up-zoned Market and Van Ness area and around Marina Cow Hollow. If one were to hazard a guess, it appears that the REIT-profits are not paying off as expected. This should further tame to high-end real estate speculation by the gullible public. There is also a lack of competent real estate managers or appears to be. Somehow the business model is failing to work as promised.

October 4, 2025October 4, 2025

What did You Know, and When…

By John Crabtree : Though the Heavens Fall…

SF Rec & Park GM Phil Ginsburg should answer that… where is Sen. Howard Baker when you need him?

Yesterday I reported on the Order from Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California — The Parks Belong to the People — which requires that San Francisco address the city’s systemic failure to ensure that all San Franciscans, including those with disabilities, have access to the city’s parks, playgrounds, outdoor recreational facilities, and pedestrian rights of way.

This was a massive victory for the class of plaintiffs and for advocates for persons with disabilities. Judge Martinez-Olguin, in no uncertain terms, found SF Rec & Park to be fundamentally deficient in addressing access issues for disabled persons to Rec & Park sites and facilities. She issued a systemic injunction, in full recognition of the systemwide failures in both policy and practice that led to “dozens of violations at 10 facilities throughout San Francisco…” according to U.S. District Court Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin in Kirola, et. al. v. San Francisco...(more)

S.F. must improve disabled access to public spaces, federal judge rules

September 17, 2025September 17, 2025

Downtown S.F. revitalization funding group to be led by affordable housing executive

By Laura Waxman : sfchronicle – excerpt

A decade ago, Shola Olatoye was asked by New York City’s mayor to help turn around the city’s beleaguered public housing system. Now, the former affordable housing executive has been pulled into another high-stakes mission: steering millions of dollars in private investment toward projects aimed at bringing San Francisco’s downtown back to life.

The East Coast native has been tapped to serve as the CEO of the San Francisco Downtown Development Corporation, a new privately funded nonprofit tasked with raising the necessary capital to help boost Mayor Daniel Lurie’s vision for revitalizing the city’s faltering downtown core.

Olatoye, who served as the CEO of New York City’s Housing Authority prior to the pandemic before becoming chief operating officer of East Bay affordable housing developer Eden Housing, will start her term at DDC on Oct. 1.

Though quietly formed earlier this year, the organization was given a spotlight last week when Lurie announced that it had raised $40 million from unidentified sources. The announcement left many wondering about the forces shaping downtown’s next chapter — and any potential conflicts. Olatoye promised transparency moving forward: As a private nonprofit, DDC is beholden to bylaws and annual reporting requirements, she said, adding that its backers will be made public in the coming months… (more)

Makes sense if you want to turn SF into NYC to hire someone who already did it.

September 2, 2025September 2, 2025

What you should know about the Upzoning

If you live in SF, or in the state of California you have probably heard something about Upzoing plans. If you are confused about the maps and the plans, you are not alone. See the September meetings listed on the calendar for where you may go to learn more: https://csfn.net/csfn-events/

People who try to follow it are constantly finding themselves running down another rabbit hole that leads back to Sacramento and our most controversial State Senator Wiener. After Wiener and Newsom removed the authority of the California Coastal Coastal Commission to control development on the California coast, Wiener is pushing SB 79 to remove single family zoning from the entire state. See the map below that attempts to illustrate the effects of SB 79 on the SF Zoning map

This iMap is supposed to indicate he targeted areas for SB 79

Wieners enemies may outweigh his friends, but his friends hold a huge, powerful purse and they are shifting him toward Washington. Some would like to see him go just to get him out of Sacramento, but others want him permanently out of politics. Given his close ties to the most unpopular SF Supervisor in SF, and the disdain hundreds of cities and communities around the state have for him, Scott may need more than money to win the Washington post he covets. But we are here to look a the maps.

The SF Planning Department has created many maps and overlays and new ones are popping up all the time. Everyone appears to be confused.

The below map that indicates where density decontrol may be applied is perhaps the most disturbing as it covers the entire city, including those neighborhoods that were already up zoned in the Eastern Neighborhoods.
Density decontrol is a new term that applies to the minimum size of a unit. It appears there is no minimum requirement where destiny decontrol is applied.

We understand the height limits along the pink areas are also open to density decontrol.

Given all the various maps and re-zoning at the state and local levels, the one question no one can answer is, how do all the state and local density laws affect each other? Can developers apply state density bonuses on top of city height limit increases? No one seems to know the answer.

Find out more by attending one of the September meetings where discussion will be held and SF Planning explains the plans and the public gets to ask what is means to them.

August 31, 2025August 31, 2025

High Drama at Bayview Opera House

By John Crabtree : substack (excerpt)

Supervisor Joel Engardio loses again, but by the narrowest of margins at SF DCCC

It had all the makings of a grand political soap opera, when the San Francisco Democratic County Central Committee gathered for their monthly meeting at the Ruth Williams Bayview Opera House on Wednesday night. The true excitement, the high at the old Opera House, was down the agenda a bit at #7 and innocuously labeled — 7. Endorsement of Local Measures for the September 16, District 4 Special Election.

That is, of course, the matter of the recall of Supervisor Joel Engardio. After hours of public testimony and a lengthier that usual debate among the DCCC members, a vote on whether or not to endorse the special recall election, the body ended up deadlocked 11 to 11 and the San Francisco Democratic Party officially took no position.

Now that may not sound like high drama, but it was. Most political observers expected the county Democratic Party, which is dominated by political moderates and conservatives, to side with Engardio. Without a doubt Engardio and his campaign were counting on it. And the Recallers spared no effort to keep the party on the sidelines, as many of them who testified said, “let The Sunset decide” or some variation on that theme…

“Time and again, candidates in the city have come to the Chinese community when they need votes. They come when they need campaign volunteers. They come when they want to win. But when it comes to policy, when it comes to listening to our concerns and our voices, too often we are ignored.”

Wilson Chu, Chinese American Democratic Club, in support of Engardio Recall…

… I believe this recall is more justified than earlier ones. As so many have stated this evening and over the past year, Supervisor Engardio misled voters about one of the most contentious issues in our district, presenting one position in order to get elected and then reversing himself once in office. Not only that but he then led the effort to put a citywide measure on the ballot, without input from the constituents he had misled. And while much of his campaign for Supervisor was built on fueling the divisiveness and anger around the 2022 recalls, he now argues that he shouldn’t be subject to similar anger when it comes to neighborhood street issues. That contradiction has not gone unnoticed in our community.”

Gordon Mar, DCCC member and former District 4 Supervisor…

Below the screenshot of Engardio’s voter intimidation video I have shared excerpts from California DOJ Division of Law Enforcement Bulletin #2024-DLE-11. I share it because I think it is important to understand what violations of these laws can mean.

…(more)

Could this be a case of a desperate man who will stoop at nothing to save his career? Or is he just not very smart enough to follow campaign laws? Either way, he is winning a prize for the most egregious politician. He should lay off the nasty.

August 25, 2025

Problems with SB 79 after Amendments

SB 79 still does not provide for enough affordable housing.
SB 79 will reduce affordable housing by allowing older, naturally affordable buildings to be replaced by largely market-rate buildings.
Local control of affordable inclusionary housing in SB 79 projects is a red herring – HCD severely limits this “option”. Local inclusionary built under
SB 79 should override any limitations by state administrative agencies.
SB 79 is a major state override of local control. – overrides the state approved housing element and mandates unneeded density in inappropriate places.
The bill is misleading by offering local control through allowing alternate plans by localities. – Any such plan still requires inappropriate density, overrides the state approved housing element, and requires approval of HCD.
Bus routes are an inappropriate basis for rezoning property. Routes can change or be manipulated in weeks. The housing built under SB 79 will be permanent.
SB 79 needs a 5 year sunset clause.

August 11, 2025August 11, 2025

New SF economic and workforce head predicts brighter times

By Patrick Hoge : sfexaminer – excerpt (audio)

Anne Taupier, the new executive director of San Francisco’s Office of Economic and Workforce Development: “We want to be a partner with our businesses and with our citizens and with everyone who wants to be doing business in San Francisco.”…

Anne Taupier said she feels fortunate — not just to have been named the new executive director of San Francisco’s Office of Economic and Workforce Development, but because she’s been given the job at this moment in history, as she believes The City is heading into a brighter future.

“I really do feel this energy and excitement,” said Taupier, the agency’s former director of development, who was appointed in mid-June to the top job by Mayor Daniel Lurie. “I feel like I’m lucky, because I am stepping into this role when you can feel that change in the air.”

Taupier’s optimism comes despite a decrease of millions of dollars to her agency’s budget in the recently adopted two-year city budget that closed a deficit of about $800 million, and a downtown that among other things has been grappling with high office-vacancy rates since the COVID-19 pandemic that stood at 34.8% in the second quarter, according to the real-estate firm CBRE…

In 2009, Taupier joined the Office of Economic and Workforce Development, where she worked on real estate, and she was appointed director of development in 2020 to oversee large projects, including the Treasure Island, Stonestown Galleria and Potrero Power Station developments, among others. She also worked on housing and development policies on behalf of the Mayor’s Office.

Taupier succeeds Sarah Dennis Phillips, whose appointment to be The City’s planning director was announced at the same time as Taupier’s move within OEWD.

The agency Taupier now leads has 151 budgeted full-time employees in multiple divisions, including a business-development team that works to attract and retain companies, and another that focuses on supporting neighborhood commercial corridors. Its biggest division — the workforce development unit — performs various tasks that include working with organizations that provide job training and placement services.

The agency’s budget declined by $54.9 million in the fiscal-year 2025–26 budget. About $26 million of that decrease is due to the transfer of community-ambassador programs to the Department of Emergency Management, which now provides oversight for certain city-funded community-safety ambassadors in neighborhoods that include Mid-Market, the Tenderloin and the Mission…(more)

Apparently the priority is to build the economy rather than protect the residents and businesses. We suspect there are a few places that $26 million could come from for the neighborhoods who want to keep their ambassadors. If we believe the AI media, the estimated pay range for a Community Ambassador at City and County of San Francisco is $21–$32 per hour, which includes base salary and additional pay. A lot less than most city employees, yet they are the first to go.

Why does the government keep piling on improvements that destroy the programs people like and support? Will someone please figure this out and stop the practice?

July 30, 2025August 1, 2025

The looming threat to hundreds of small businesses in San Francisco

By Tim Redmond : 48hills – excerpt

Almost a third of all the small businesses in the city’s neighborhood commercial districts could face displacement under Mayor Daniel Lurie’s plan to allow more and denser housing in neighborhoods, data from the City Planning Department shows.

In some neighborhoods—the Geary corridor, for example—nearly half the small local merchants are endangered, the data shows.

That’s because the so-called “family housing” plan would encourage developers to demolish small buildings to put up larger ones—and many of those small buildings have small commercial tenants.

City planners tell me that they will discourage the demolition of existing rent-controlled housing (although SB 79) a bill by Sen. Scott Wiener would encourage that practice.)

But 1,769 small businesses are in vulnerable places (sites that are prime for new development where there are no existing residential units)—and 47 are officially recognized “legacy businesses.”

As the planning report notes:.. (more)

The Small Business Commissioners agreed at their meeting on Monday. They took no action, pending plans to talk to neighborhood merchants and consider legislative remedies. They do not fee that any of the current Board of Supervisors are working on anything of substance yet. (July 28, 25 meeting)

July 11, 2025July 11, 2025

S.F. IS FINALLY CULLING COMMISSIONS, BUT THE FIRST CUT ONLY TARGETS ‘INACTIVE’ BODIES

by KELLY WALDRON : missionlocal – excerpt

“The Task Force Desparately wants the {public to get Involved…”

Eight months after dueling ballot measures promised to take a hard look at San Francisco’s 149 city commissions, it’s happening: Next week, a newly convened task force will vote on whether to eliminate 34 bodies that are currently inactive, the first step in a long streamlining process.

“Obviously we want to do the easy ones first, then we’ll tackle the other groups piece by piece,” said Jean Fraser, vice chair of the Commission Streamlining Task Force, which was formed after voters approved Proposition E on Nov. 5, 2024.

The Advisory Council on Human Rights is slated to be cut; its last known meeting date was more than 15 years ago. Others to be eliminated from the city’s code include the Graffiti Oversight Board, the Delinquency Prevention Commission and the Industrial Waste Review Board. Thirty-two of the 34 inactive bodies have not met in the last year…

If 34 are eliminated next week, the Prop. E task force will have 115 advisory boards, committees, councils, commissions and other bodies left to review. All are generally tasked with overseeing department decisions or collecting public input about department decisions.

The task force largely consists of City Hall veterans: Harrington, who was also on the Prop. E campaign and appointed to the body by the measure’s chief proponent; former Supervisor Aaron Peskin; Sophie Hayward from the City Administrator’s Office; Natasha Mihal from the Controller’s Office; and Andrea Bruss from the City Attorney’s Office…(more)

Please consider how some of the Neighborhood groups might be able to participate in the process. This is the first we have heard about this.

Thanks for letting us know the Task Force that is cutting commissions etc. wants public input. That is sort a vague bit of information. What kind of help and engagement do they want? And how do they want the public to be involved? Are they looking for a lot of emailed suggestions or do they want to reach out to neighborhood groups, or professionals or what exactly do they want from the public. We look forward to hearing more.