Jackie Fielder, citing a mental health condition, will take leave of absence

<p>This article is from Power Play, a twice-weekly newsletter rounding up the latest City Hall and local politics gossip. To sign up, visit The Standard’s  newsletter page . Supervisor  Jackie Fielder ’s acute health crisis is a personal tragedy for a young politician at the inception of her career.  If she follows through on  her stated intentions to resign , it would also be a loss for progressive Democrats, winnowing a slender bloc on the Board of Supervisors into irrelevance. Fielder’s office Sunday evening released a statement saying she is taking a medical leave of absence, as she “ is currently navigating a mental health condition and needs time and space to recover before making any major decisions.” Publicly, Democrats are wishing Fielder a speedy recovery, with some hoping she reverses her intent — expressed to multiple people on Friday — to step down. Privately, moderate operatives are already gaming out strategies if she follows through and leaves office. Moderate Democrats are already floating potential candidates for Mayor  Daniel Lurie  to appoint to replace Fielder. Names Power Play reporters are hearing include  Moises Garcia , Lurie’s  community liaison  and former LGBTQ campaign outreach director, Planning Commission member  Lydia So , and  Joshua Arce , a program manager  with the Northern California District Council of Laborers  who  once ran  for District 9 supervisor. As for the progressives,  Jim Ross , a decades-long political consultant who ran  Gavin Newsom ’s first mayoral campaign, said the city’s lefties are undoubtedly considering committing more resources to  Natalie Gee ’s race in District 4, the Sunset and Parkside, to unseat Lurie’s recent appointment,  Alan Wong .  “That was a very important race for progressives before this – now it’s almost existential,” Ross said. The balance of power in San Francisco is at stake, imperiling progressive priorities: stalling layoffs, defeating charter reform, and softening the impacts of market-rate development, like evictions.  Fielder’s potential absence also takes away one of the most outspoken voices against President  Donald Trump  and his aggressive immigration policies, as others in the city, like Lurie, have taken a more cautious approach to the White House. The 11-member Board of Supervisors often serves as a counterweight to any sitting mayor, and in  London Breed ’s time, the body famously fought against her policy choices. Lurie has enjoyed more unanimity thanks to a six-member majority of mayor-aligned moderate Democrats. Supervisor  Myrna Melgar  sometimes serves as a seventh vote Lurie can court. “It actually hurts my stomach thinking about it,” said Melgar about the news regarding Fielder. “I really hope she doesn’t resign.” While the progressive bloc of four (and sometimes five) supervisors cannot, on its own, defeat Lurie’s preferred legislation, progressives wield enough power to negotiate on key issues, like when Supervisor  Connie Chan  successfully lowered the amount of homelessness funding Lurie wanted to redirect from Proposition C to shelters, away from housing,  to $34 million , when Lurie wanted $88 million. But if Lurie could appoint a replacement for Fielder, the game changes. Seven reliable votes are much closer to an eight-vote supermajority, which is the number needed to override any mayoral veto of board legislation. San Francisco State University professor  Jason McDaniel  said the scenario could “cement a board that is much more favorable to Lurie’s agenda.”  A weakened progressive flank could unlock multiple avenues for Lurie and his allies, including:  San Francisco’s budget.  Last year, Fielder was the lone dissenting vote against Lurie’s budget. One less progressive would make it tougher for Chan to stop the most severe Lurie austerity measures, like layoffs. OpenGov . Fielder was set to hold a hearing investigating Lurie’s OpenGov contract, which  The Standard found had troubling ties  to the nonprofit foundation Lurie founded, Tipping Point Community. If Fielder departs, the pressure may be off Lurie’s office.  Charter reform.  Lurie has already submitted paperwork to begin gathering signatures for his grand structural overhauls of city law, with progressive-aligned labor fiercely against ballot initiative regions. Fielder’s position as supervisor would give her a perch to speak out against them. The Great Highway.  Wong, a Lurie appointee, was a man alone when he tried to get a Great Highway measure on the June ballot, lacking his colleagues’ support. A District 9 appointee could help him get it on the November ballot, and helping Wong is a Lurie priority. Nearing a Board of Supervisors supermajority, and capturing the mayor’s office, has been a pie-in-the-sky dream of moderate Democrats since 1996, when voters approved the switch from citywide to district elections, which saw the rise of progressives like  Aaron Peskin , political observers told Power Play.  If Fielder steps down, which is by no means guaranteed, moderates would be closer to that goal than they have been in a quarter century, which would fuel energy to spend on contested races for the Board of Supervisors this November — like District 10, in the southeast, with their preferred candidate of  Theo Ellington  and District 8, in the Castro and Noe Valley, where they hope  Manny Yekutiel  takes the win.  “If they have a near veto-proof majority, they can fundamentally change San Francisco,” Ross said of moderates. “This is their chance, you gotta go all in, you’ve gotta spend every last dollar, do everything you can.” Peskin hoped moderates and progressives alike would pause and respect the health of a young politician, just 31, who has so much left to offer.  “That’s a moment when good people don’t use it as a political opportunity. It’s a time when they take care of one another,” Peskin said. “People who want to use it as a political opportunity should be ashamed.”  — J.F.R., G.G. and H.L. Got tips? Send to us at  powerplay@sfstandard.com . NEW NUMBERS:  We’re finally getting a look at polling in that heated race to succeed retiring Rep.  Nancy Pelosi . An internal memo  from  Saikat Chakrabarti ’s campaign, shared exclusively with Power Play, shows the former congressional staffer and tech engineer in second place, with 20%. He trails state Sen.  Scott Wiener , who is favored by 32% of voters. Supervisor Chan follows at 17%. About 13% of voters support other candidates, and 18% are undecided. The poll, conducted this month by Data for Progress, surveyed 800 likely voters via text and online in English and Chinese. The margin of error is 3 percentage points. It’s a rare snapshot of the race. The last  publicly reported poll  was conducted in September and  published by The Standard  earlier this year. The new memo compiles results from five polls conducted over the past year. As recently as January, Chan was in second place. The new poll shows Chakrabarti’s rising name recognition — from just 10% a year ago to about 50% today. While Wiener and Chan still have higher name recognition, both carry higher unfavorability ratings. Wiener’s favorability has declined, likely due to backlash over  his viral Gaza moment. Chakrabarti’s polling surge isn’t surprising due to his media blitz as of late. He has spent hundreds of thousands to air  TV ads  — drawing criticism from opponents who accuse him of  trying to buy a congressional seat . “Saikat has spent over $2 million to be in a statistical tie with a woman who has spent a fraction of that amount,” said  Julie Edwards , spokesperson for Chan. “We know voters are looking for a progressive fighter, not a corporate phony.” In its latest survey, the campaign tested messaging and biographical descriptions. Voters responded most positively to messages about refusing money from AI companies, Big Tech, and pro-Israel lobbying groups. Among biographical traits, the most popular ones are Chakrabarti’s upbringing in an immigrant family, raising a child in San Francisco, being a homeowner, and the potential to become the city’s first Asian American member of Congress — qualities that also apply to Chan.  — H.L. GAME ON : The San Francisco Chronicle is jumping into the political newsletter game, according to a LinkedIn job posting titled “California Confidential reporter.” The daily newsletter will focus on state legislation in partnership with USLege, an artificial intelligence tool that tracks bills and transcribes meetings. “The newsletter author will be a self-starter capable of unearthing news, reporting on daily developments, and big-picture conversations on the most urgent political topics of the day,” the  post  states.  “We are seeking someone with an entrepreneurial bent who is eager to launch a new project that they will own. This person should be passionate about how laws are made in California and how the process plays out throughout the state.” California Confidential will enter a crowded field. In addition to Power Play, it’ll go toe-to-toe with Politico’s California Playbook and CalMatters’ WhatMatters. It doesn’t appear the newspaper has swiftly identified a candidate for the job. LinkedIn shows it was reposted two weeks ago.  The Chronicle’s Editor-in-Chief,  Emilio Garcia-Ruiz , declined an interview request.  — G.G.</p>

Planning commissioner fined for ethics violations after Standard investigation

<p>Planning Commissioner Kathrin Moore has been fined $12,000 after city officials determined that she engaged in “severe violations” of conflict-of-interest laws involving her previous employer. The fines come after   The Standard   reported  in July that Moore had voted to approve projects involving Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, or SOM, while simultaneously receiving $15,000 in yearly retirement payments from the internationally renowned architecture firm.  The Ethics Commission charged Moore with four counts of violating conflict-of-interest rules for votes she participated in between 2021 and 2025.  “Although there is no evidence to suggest that [Moore] deliberately intended to benefit her financial interest by participating in the votes, her failure to recuse herself from the matters constitute severe violations of the conflict-of-interest laws for which she must be held accountable,” charging papers from the Ethics Commission state. Moore, who retired as an associate partner at SOM in 1999, has been on the Planning Commission since 2006. The seven-person governing body is one of the most influential commissions in the city, overseeing the approval or rejection of major development projects. “I made an unintentional, honest mistake in forgetting to recuse myself from the SOM-related votes,” Moore said in a statement. “And while I take full responsibility for the oversight, in hindsight, it’s vital to note that each project was unanimously approved, I was never a swing vote, no harm was done, nor did I benefit monetarily.” The Ethics Commission found that Moore had violated ethics rules based on votes involving developments at 1750 Van Ness Ave., 98 Franklin St., and 530 Sansome St./447 Battery St. The buildings totaled nearly $900 million in project costs. “Given the large scale of these developments and their substantial impact on community space in the City, Respondent’s participation in these matters despite a conflict of interest risked public confidence in the integrity of City decision-making,” the Ethics Commission wrote. In two instances, Moore recused herself from projects involving her former architecture firm, though it is unclear why she did not step away from other votes. City officials and commissioners are prohibited from making decisions involving an entity in which they received $500 or more over the previous year. Commissioners regularly recuse themselves from votes, often to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest. City attorneys had warned Moore that her votes on SOM could constitute a breach of local ethics laws, according to a 2012 memo. The memo cited Moore’s claim that she had been told by the city attorney that she did not have to include SOM’s retirement income in her required financial disclosure Form 700. “This office does not have any record of that advice,” an attorney wrote in response.  Moore has reported her SOM income since 2012. After The Standard’s reporting on the memo, Moore said she would no longer vote on SOM projects. The architecture firm is behind some of the world’s most famous buildings, including the Burj Khalifa in Dubai and the Sears Tower in Chicago. SOM also designed One Maritime Plaza and the trusses at San Francisco International Airport. Moore was appointed to the Planning Commission by former Supervisor Aaron Peskin, and then reappointed by former Supervisors David Chiu and Malia Cohen. She was most recently reappointed by Supervisor Shamann Walton. Her term will end in July.</p>

War over Lurie upzoning plan officially starts after first key approval

<div class="content-grid article-content"><div class="Metadata_container__fxAzw"><div class="Metadata_metadata__W_0LF"><span>By <a class="" href="https://sfstandard.com/author/han-li/">Han Li</a></span><time datetime="2025-09-12T05:15:37.123Z">Published Sep. 11, 2025 • 10:15pm</time></div></div><div class="floats"><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">San Francisco is one step closer to allowing taller, denser buildings in parts of the city long seen as suburban, with little new housing development.</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">After eight hours of heated debate, planning commissioners voted 4–3 on Wednesday to approve Mayor Daniel Lurie’s “family zoning plan,” which aims to massively boost housing production on the city’s west and north sides. The proposal now advances to the Board of Supervisors for final approval.</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">The city is under pressure to overhaul its zoning rules to make room for 36,000 new housing units by early next year to meet state mandates. If the city fails to comply, the state could seize control of local housing approvals—an outcome city leaders are eager to avoid.</p></div><div class="!p-0 !m-0"><div class="hidden relative left-1/2 right-1/2 -ml-[50vw] -mr-[50vw] w-screen"><p class="text-xxs text-[#ABA29C] py-xs mx-auto">ADVERTISEMENT</p><div class="overflow-hidden w-full mx-auto flex justify-center article-body max-w-[728px] max-h-[90px]"><broadstreet-zone keywords="politics" zone-id="180071" zone-instance-id=":R2cj536:"></broadstreet-zone></div></div></div><div class="floats"><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">Planning Commission President Lydia So, who voted yes, said she had listened carefully to the many voices in the community and believes Lurie’s plan is the most reasonable path forward.</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">“We can take decisive action now so that future generations can still afford to live, work, and thrive in our city,” So said.</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">Lurie said in a statement praising the vote result.</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">“The Planning Commission’s vote is a critical step towards building that city, and I will continue my work with the Board of Supervisors to make sure we get this done,” Lurie said.</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">However, Commissioner Gilbert Williams, who voted against the measure, argued the rezoning plan is too extensive and should be decided by voters rather than political insiders.</p></div><div class="!p-0 !m-0"></div><div class="floats"><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">“If our city wants permanent changes in our zoning laws that should be decided by the voters,” he said. “Changing decades of land use controls … is too broad and too impactful not to be decided by all San Franciscan residents.”</p></div><h2 class="heading-block article-body text-left">What’s in the plan?</h2><div class="floats"><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">Under the proposal, most westside business corridors could see buildings rise 6–10 stories, with some corners along Geary Boulevard permitted to reach 30 stories. Certain pockets in the northside commercial area would allow up to 14 stories.</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">Van Ness Avenue, a major transit corridor, would be upzoned more dramatically to allow towers as tall as 60 stories. Developers could build higher if they take advantage of state or local density-bonus programs.</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">In most residential neighborhoods, height limits would remain at four stories, but density caps would be removed, meaning a single-unit mansion could be redeveloped into multi-unit apartments.</p></div><figure class="ImageBlock_ImageFigure__ZnquR inset-image mobile-grid-full mobile-grid-full" data-align="none"><div class="relative"><div><img alt="A busy city street with parked cars, a bus driving by, trees lining the sidewalk, and people walking near shops on a cloudy day." class="block lazyloaded" data-nimg="1" decoding="async" height="850" loading="lazy" sizes="(min-width: 1001px) 600px, (min-width: 768px) 700px, 100vw" src="https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_bahpu0c5hh5or04fltt58acr0a/-S3840x2807-FPNG" srcset="https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_bahpu0c5hh5or04fltt58acr0a/-S640x468-FPNG 640w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_bahpu0c5hh5or04fltt58acr0a/-S750x548-FPNG 750w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_bahpu0c5hh5or04fltt58acr0a/-S768x561-FPNG 768w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_bahpu0c5hh5or04fltt58acr0a/-S828x605-FPNG 828w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_bahpu0c5hh5or04fltt58acr0a/-S1024x748-FPNG 1024w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_bahpu0c5hh5or04fltt58acr0a/-S1080x789-FPNG 1080w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_bahpu0c5hh5or04fltt58acr0a/-S1200x877-FPNG 1200w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_bahpu0c5hh5or04fltt58acr0a/-S1920x1403-FPNG 1920w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_bahpu0c5hh5or04fltt58acr0a/-S2048x1497-FPNG 2048w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_bahpu0c5hh5or04fltt58acr0a/-S3840x2807-FPNG 3840w" style="color:transparent;background-size:cover;background-position:50% 50%;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-image:url(&quot;data:image/svg+xml;charset=utf-8,%3Csvg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' viewBox='0 0 1163 850'%3E%3Cfilter id='b' color-interpolation-filters='sRGB'%3E%3CfeGaussianBlur stdDeviation='20'/%3E%3CfeColorMatrix values='1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 100 -1' result='s'/%3E%3CfeFlood x='0' y='0' width='100%25' height='100%25'/%3E%3CfeComposite operator='out' in='s'/%3E%3CfeComposite in2='SourceGraphic'/%3E%3CfeGaussianBlur stdDeviation='20'/%3E%3C/filter%3E%3Cimage width='100%25' height='100%25' x='0' y='0' preserveAspectRatio='none' style='filter: url(%23b);' href=''/%3E%3C/svg%3E&quot;)" width="1163"/></div></div><figcaption class="basis-full mt-[10px] text-xs text-gray-550 font-inter leading-[18px]">Rendering of a 14-story building at Divisidero and Bush streets after the upzoning.<span class="image-caption-divider"> | </span><span class="image-credit"><span class="sr-only">Source: </span>SF Planning</span></figcaption></figure><div class="floats"><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">The plan has provoked sharp reaction sacross the political spectrum. Progressives are demanding stronger tenant protections, stricter affordability requirements, and safeguards against small-business displacement. Preservation-minded west-side homeowners argue that creating more housing there would erode <u><a data-post-id="5fce8bb2-d2b5-405e-bdf9-700a1984307c" href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/06/30/sf-historic-neighborhoods-ingleside-terraces/">historic architecture and neighborhood character</a></u>.</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">“This plan encourages and enables demolitions, conversions, and mergers of existing housing citywide,” said Fred Sherburn-Zimmer of the Housing Rights Committee, part of the San Francisco Anti-Displacement Coalition. “The upzoning rolls back decades of work by tenant and housing advocates to create a network of tenant protections.”</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">Supervisors Connie Chan and Myrna Melgar both spoke at the meeting, urging commissioners to add amendments strengthening tenant protections as the upzoning plan and new state law may bring an uptick in demolition.</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">“I am here to ask you to pass this item with recommendations or modifications today, paying special attention to the preservation of rent-controlled housing,” Melgar said.</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">But city planners countered with data showing demolitions are rare — averaging about 18 units lost per year over the past decade, compared to tens of thousands of new homes built.</p></div><h2 class="heading-block article-body text-left">Clashes outside City Hall</h2><div class="floats"><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">The fight outside City Hall was just as intense as the one inside. Right before the hearing, opponents and supporters of the upzoning plan both rallied on the City Hall steps, where shouting matches erupted.</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">When Lurie addressed the crowd, protesters interrupted him with chants of “Shame! Shame! Shame!” while supporters shouted back, “Let him speak!”</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">In a theatrical stunt, former Supervisor Aaron Peskin, an outspoken critic of Lurie’s plan, appeared in a costume resembling a luxury condo building. He didn’t disclose himself publicly before leaving the rally.</p></div><figure class="ImageBlock_ImageFigure__ZnquR inset-image mobile-grid-full mobile-grid-full" data-align="none"><div class="relative"><div><img alt='A person wears a colorful cityscape costume with a large red banner reading "RENT IS TOO DAMN LOW" at a street protest with other people nearby.' class="block lazyloaded" data-nimg="1" decoding="async" height="4032" loading="lazy" sizes="(min-width: 1001px) 600px, (min-width: 768px) 700px, 100vw" src="https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_9fnjrfthel6vn8r55hqh6j5u4p/-S3840x5120-FPNG" srcset="https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_9fnjrfthel6vn8r55hqh6j5u4p/-S640x853-FPNG 640w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_9fnjrfthel6vn8r55hqh6j5u4p/-S750x1000-FPNG 750w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_9fnjrfthel6vn8r55hqh6j5u4p/-S768x1024-FPNG 768w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_9fnjrfthel6vn8r55hqh6j5u4p/-S828x1104-FPNG 828w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_9fnjrfthel6vn8r55hqh6j5u4p/-S1024x1365-FPNG 1024w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_9fnjrfthel6vn8r55hqh6j5u4p/-S1080x1440-FPNG 1080w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_9fnjrfthel6vn8r55hqh6j5u4p/-S1200x1600-FPNG 1200w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_9fnjrfthel6vn8r55hqh6j5u4p/-S1920x2560-FPNG 1920w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_9fnjrfthel6vn8r55hqh6j5u4p/-S2048x2731-FPNG 2048w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_9fnjrfthel6vn8r55hqh6j5u4p/-S3840x5120-FPNG 3840w" style="color:transparent;background-size:cover;background-position:50% 50%;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-image:url(&quot;data:image/svg+xml;charset=utf-8,%3Csvg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' viewBox='0 0 3024 4032'%3E%3Cfilter id='b' color-interpolation-filters='sRGB'%3E%3CfeGaussianBlur stdDeviation='20'/%3E%3CfeColorMatrix values='1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 100 -1' result='s'/%3E%3CfeFlood x='0' y='0' width='100%25' height='100%25'/%3E%3CfeComposite operator='out' in='s'/%3E%3CfeComposite in2='SourceGraphic'/%3E%3CfeGaussianBlur stdDeviation='20'/%3E%3C/filter%3E%3Cimage width='100%25' height='100%25' x='0' y='0' preserveAspectRatio='none' style='filter: url(%23b);' href=''/%3E%3C/svg%3E&quot;)" width="3024"/></div></div><figcaption class="basis-full mt-[10px] text-xs text-gray-550 font-inter leading-[18px]">Former Supervisor Aaron Peskin dresses up resembling a luxury condo building.<span class="image-caption-divider"> | </span><span class="image-credit"><span class="sr-only">Source: </span>Han Li/The Standard</span></figcaption></figure><div class="floats"><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">Peskin has threatened to take the issue to the ballot if the city moves forward.</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">Meanwhile, the group Neighborhoods United  hired an attorney who’s threatening legal action, arguing the plan <u><a href="https://www.neighborhoodsunitedsf.org/_files/ugd/6aa347_d85c5d4bba3a403d8f989c9143b7c58d.pdf">conflicts with the city’s general plan</a></u> and requires a full environmental review. The state, however, has <u><a data-post-id="d8c3d00a-17fa-4786-8471-96bfa5a133fb" href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/09/11/newsom-gives-tentative-ok-sf-s-plan-juice-housing-construction/">endorsed Lurie’s plan as being compliant</a></u>.</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">For Lurie, the issue is an early test of his ability to navigate the political storm around his housing agenda. The Board of Supervisors, with its YIMBY-leaning majority, will likely brace for what could be an even fiercer showdown.</p></div></div>

State gives crucial OK to SF’s plan to juice home building

<div class="content-grid article-content"><div class="Metadata_container__fxAzw"><div class="Metadata_metadata__W_0LF"><span>By <a class="" href="https://sfstandard.com/author/joe-fitzgerald-rodriguez/">Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez</a> and <a class="" href="https://sfstandard.com/author/gabriel-greschler/">Gabe Greschler</a></span><time datetime="2025-09-11T18:20:30.235Z">Published Sep. 11, 2025 • 11:20am</time></div></div><div class="floats"><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">California’s housing department has given a much-needed rubber stamp to Mayor Daniel Lurie’s <a data-post-id="d603a89a-ec31-4fc6-96a6-4a3a6af378d7" href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/04/04/daniel-lurie-yimby-housing-rezoning-west-side/">plan to increase housing construction</a> in San Francisco. </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">It’s wind under Lurie’s sails as his proposed “family zoning plan” hurtles toward a key vote Thursday afternoon before the San Francisco Planning Commission.</p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">The upzoning effort is expected to pass, due in no small part to the political makeup of the commission, which is majority-held by members appointed by the mayor’s office. The commission's approval is needed to advance the plan to the Board of Supervisors. </p></div><div class="!p-0 !m-0"><div class="hidden relative left-1/2 right-1/2 -ml-[50vw] -mr-[50vw] w-screen"><p class="text-xxs text-[#ABA29C] py-xs mx-auto">ADVERTISEMENT</p><div class="overflow-hidden w-full mx-auto flex justify-center article-body max-w-[728px] max-h-[90px]"><broadstreet-zone keywords="politics" zone-id="180071" zone-instance-id=":R2cj536:"></broadstreet-zone></div></div></div><div class="floats"><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">Without the blessing of the state, which requires all cities to meet certain targets for building new housing, San Francisco risks losing local control of the approvals process for housing production. </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">The nod by the California Department of Housing and Community Development is a blow to some San Francisco progressives and housing preservationists who have asked for a slew of amendments to protect tenants and small businesses from displacement. </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">The state’s approval is preliminary — and tenuous if substantial changes are made to the zoning plan. Progressives are threatening a lawsuit should Lurie's plan not include substantial protections for tenants. But a housing expert said the letter from the state may offer significant legal protections for the city. </p></div><figure class="ImageBlock_ImageFigure__ZnquR inset-image mobile-grid-full mobile-grid-full" data-align="none"><div class="relative"><div><img alt="San Francisco skyscrapers." class="block lazyloaded" data-nimg="1" decoding="async" height="1999" loading="lazy" sizes="(min-width: 1001px) 600px, (min-width: 768px) 700px, 100vw" src="https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_jqckmele997r38ppnt9evdun6k/-S3840x2559-FPNG" srcset="https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_jqckmele997r38ppnt9evdun6k/-S640x426-FPNG 640w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_jqckmele997r38ppnt9evdun6k/-S750x500-FPNG 750w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_jqckmele997r38ppnt9evdun6k/-S768x512-FPNG 768w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_jqckmele997r38ppnt9evdun6k/-S828x552-FPNG 828w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_jqckmele997r38ppnt9evdun6k/-S1024x682-FPNG 1024w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_jqckmele997r38ppnt9evdun6k/-S1080x720-FPNG 1080w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_jqckmele997r38ppnt9evdun6k/-S1200x800-FPNG 1200w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_jqckmele997r38ppnt9evdun6k/-S1920x1279-FPNG 1920w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_jqckmele997r38ppnt9evdun6k/-S2048x1365-FPNG 2048w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_jqckmele997r38ppnt9evdun6k/-S3840x2559-FPNG 3840w" style="color:transparent;background-size:cover;background-position:50% 50%;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-image:url(&quot;data:image/svg+xml;charset=utf-8,%3Csvg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' viewBox='0 0 3000 1999'%3E%3Cfilter id='b' color-interpolation-filters='sRGB'%3E%3CfeGaussianBlur stdDeviation='20'/%3E%3CfeColorMatrix values='1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 100 -1' result='s'/%3E%3CfeFlood x='0' y='0' width='100%25' height='100%25'/%3E%3CfeComposite operator='out' in='s'/%3E%3CfeComposite in2='SourceGraphic'/%3E%3CfeGaussianBlur stdDeviation='20'/%3E%3C/filter%3E%3Cimage width='100%25' height='100%25' x='0' y='0' preserveAspectRatio='none' style='filter: url(%23b);' href=''/%3E%3C/svg%3E&quot;)" width="3000"/></div></div><figcaption class="basis-full mt-[10px] text-xs text-gray-550 font-inter leading-[18px]">The city must submit a final housing plan to the state by 2026. <span class="image-caption-divider"> | </span><span class="image-credit"><span class="sr-only">Source: </span>Justin Katigbak/The Standard</span></figcaption></figure><div class="floats"><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">The California housing department found Lurie’s plan to be in “substantial compliance” with the state’s housing element law, a senior program manager wrote in a Sept. 9 letter to the San Francisco Planning Department. </p></div><div class="!p-0 !m-0"></div><div class="floats"><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">“While preliminary, the notice from the state affirms that this rezoning package will deliver the housing we need to avoid losing local control,” Planning Director Sarah Dennis-Phillips said in a statement. “It’s important that we maintain state approval for the final adopted (new zoning plan) so San Francisco can stay on track to deliver the homes future generations need to afford to live here.” </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">By contrast, a coalition of more than 50 local groups called <a data-post-id="0fac4ba6-99c8-47c7-b4c7-7003d29f4e8e" href="https://sfstandard.com/2024/06/07/san-francisco-zoning-housing-element-united-neighborhoods/">Neighborhoods United SF</a> alleged this week that the zoning effort runs afoul of the city’s general plan. </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">“This plan would reshape San Francisco for generations without clear predictability on what gets built or where,” said Lori Brooke, cofounder of the coalition. “San Franciscans deserve full transparency about the land‑use decisions that will shape every neighborhood.” </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">The preliminary state approval is a relief for the Planning Department and the mayor’s office. The new zoning maps, pending approval by the Board of Supervisors, must be in place by January. </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">The Lurie administration has taken its lumps for the plan, which would see the construction of taller housing on the west side, in the Sunset and Richmond districts, and north in the Marina district. </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">Those areas contain mostly single-family homes — and many residents like it that way. Lurie secured backing for his plan from the San Francisco Firefighters Union Local 798 and San Francisco Police Officers Association. </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">Lurie announced Thursday that he would accept proposed amendments from progressive Supervisor Myrna Melgar, and introduce some of his own, including early notifications for businesses when new housing project applications are filed, grants to assist businesses displaced by new construction, and height allowance bonuses for developers if they offer improvements that help businesses move in. </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">Cynthia Huie, president of the San Francisco Small Business Commission, praised the plan. </p></div><figure class="ImageBlock_ImageFigure__ZnquR inset-image mobile-grid-full mobile-grid-full" data-align="none"><div class="relative"><div><img alt="A man in a dark suit, white shirt, and red tie is speaking at a wooden podium with a microphone, with an American flag and flowers nearby." class="block lazyloaded" data-nimg="1" decoding="async" height="5504" loading="lazy" sizes="(min-width: 1001px) 600px, (min-width: 768px) 700px, 100vw" src="https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_g5khj1jfi57uj7erfegdjp8e5j/-S3840x2560-FPNG" srcset="https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_g5khj1jfi57uj7erfegdjp8e5j/-S640x427-FPNG 640w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_g5khj1jfi57uj7erfegdjp8e5j/-S750x500-FPNG 750w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_g5khj1jfi57uj7erfegdjp8e5j/-S768x512-FPNG 768w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_g5khj1jfi57uj7erfegdjp8e5j/-S828x552-FPNG 828w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_g5khj1jfi57uj7erfegdjp8e5j/-S1024x683-FPNG 1024w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_g5khj1jfi57uj7erfegdjp8e5j/-S1080x720-FPNG 1080w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_g5khj1jfi57uj7erfegdjp8e5j/-S1200x800-FPNG 1200w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_g5khj1jfi57uj7erfegdjp8e5j/-S1920x1280-FPNG 1920w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_g5khj1jfi57uj7erfegdjp8e5j/-S2048x1365-FPNG 2048w, https://assets.sfstandard.com/image/994911177489/image_g5khj1jfi57uj7erfegdjp8e5j/-S3840x2560-FPNG 3840w" style="color:transparent;background-size:cover;background-position:50% 50%;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-image:url(&quot;data:image/svg+xml;charset=utf-8,%3Csvg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' viewBox='0 0 8256 5504'%3E%3Cfilter id='b' color-interpolation-filters='sRGB'%3E%3CfeGaussianBlur stdDeviation='20'/%3E%3CfeColorMatrix values='1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 100 -1' result='s'/%3E%3CfeFlood x='0' y='0' width='100%25' height='100%25'/%3E%3CfeComposite operator='out' in='s'/%3E%3CfeComposite in2='SourceGraphic'/%3E%3CfeGaussianBlur stdDeviation='20'/%3E%3C/filter%3E%3Cimage width='100%25' height='100%25' x='0' y='0' preserveAspectRatio='none' style='filter: url(%23b);' href=''/%3E%3C/svg%3E&quot;)" width="8256"/></div></div><figcaption class="basis-full mt-[10px] text-xs text-gray-550 font-inter leading-[18px]">Mayor Daniel Lurie has proposed a “family zoning plan” that just received key support from the state.<span class="image-caption-divider"> | </span><span class="image-credit"><span class="sr-only">Source: </span>Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images</span></figcaption></figure><div class="floats"><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">“The family zoning plan is a thoughtful step to boost foot traffic, increase worker housing, and strengthen community connections — essentials for helping our businesses thrive and preserving the unique character of our city,” Huie said. </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">At a neighborhood gathering Wednesday night, more than 80 residents packed into the Richmond Recreation Center on 18th Avenue. Their concerns were many. Will small businesses face displacement under the zoning plan? Will taller buildings create wind tunnels? Will towering high-rises erode neighborhood character? Will new housing be spacious enough for families? </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">“Are we going to rely on market-rate developers to build what we need in terms of affordable housing?” asked Christin Evans, owner of The Booksmith on Haight Street, and a leader of the progressive group Small Business Forward. “They’re not even building now, because they’re waiting for market rates to decrease so they can make more profits.” </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">At the meeting, Supervisor Connie Chan, who represents the Richmond, told constituents they have to strike a balance between tempering “extreme upzoning” and running afoul of the state. If San Francisco doesn’t come together over a plan, “we will be in violation,” she said, “which is really a threat coming from the state saying, ‘If you don’t build it, we’ll build it for you.’ And all hell breaks loose.” </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">Still, Chan said, “can we make that plan better? I most definitely think we can.” Chan submitted a letter to the Planning Commission Sept. 9 asking that it make numerous changes to the rezoning plan. She proposed boosting affordable family housing, tenant protections, historic preservation, prevailing wage and labor standards, and small business support, among other tweaks. </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">Chris Elmendorf, a UC Davis law professor and housing expert, said Chan’s edits could come into conflict with the state. In its letter of support to the city, the state housing department said its preliminary stamp of approval could be yanked if revisions include “potential constraints on development,” among other adjustments. </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">“Basically, everything [Chan is] asking for is in conflict with that letter,” said Elmendorf. </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">He said the state’s letter provides some protection to the city against legal challenges that may try to stop the zoning plan from moving forward. </p><p class="paragraph-block article-body undefined text-left">“It is always possible that a third party will bring a lawsuit,” said Elmendorf. “If a city is sued, it is very much to that city’s advantage to be able to point to a letter that the city has done all that it needs to do.”</p></div></div>

City attorneys warned commissioner about potential ethics breach. She ignored them


<p>A San Francisco planning commissioner was warned more than a decade ago that she risked a conflict of interest&nbsp;if she continued to vote on projects involving her former employer, a document obtained by The Standard shows.&nbsp;</p>



<p>In spite of that warning, commissioner Kathrin Moore voted to approve multiple projects linked to <a href="https://www.som.com/">Skidmore, Owings &amp; Merrill</a>, the internationally renowned architecture firm, from which she retired as an associate partner in 1999. All the while, Moore continued to receive annual $15,000 retirement payments from the firm, known as SOM.</p>



<p>In response to an investigation into her conduct by The Standard, Moore said in a statement Monday that she would no longer vote on projects involving SOM.</p>



<p>“To remove even the appearance of any impropriety regarding my actions going forward, I will recuse myself from participating in any decisions relating to any project in which SOM is involved,” she wrote.</p>



<p>Moore, who was first appointed to the Planning Commission in 2006 and now serves as its vice president, approved the SOM projects even after being told in 2012 by the city attorney’s office that her votes could breach city and state ethics rules because of her financial interest in the company. In a four-page memo from April of that year, Andrew Shen, a deputy city attorney at the time, said he was writing to “confirm our prior advice” about potential conflicts of interest related to decisions Moore made regarding SOM in her capacity as a city official.&nbsp;</p>



<p>Shen’s memo outlined examples under which Moore&#8217;s decisions involving SOM could qualify as conflicts of interest. Those situations included voting on projects that would have “material financial effect” on the firm or involved individuals with whom Moore might have a &#8220;personal, business or professional relationship.&#8221;&nbsp;</p>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-documentcloud-document" data-document-id="418859"></div>



<p>The city attorney’s office also noted that Moore’s fixed retirement payments from SOM qualified as a financial interest under a state ethics law’s definition of income.</p>



<p>The seven-member planning commission, one of the city&#8217;s most powerful boards, votes on development projects and advises the mayor and Board of Supervisors on land use and transportation matters.&nbsp;</p>



<p>City officials, including planning commissioners, <a href="https://sfethics.org/laws/conflict-of-interest/conflict-of-interest-other-prohibited-activities-regulations-san-francisco-campaign-and-governmental-conduct-code-section-3-200-et-seq#:~:text=of%20general%20application.-,Regulation%203.214%2D4.%20Disclosure%20of%20Personal%2C%20Professional%20%26%20Business%20Relationships%20%E2%80%93%20Determining%20Whether%20an%20Individual%20has%20an%20Ownership%20or%20Financial%20Interest%20in%20the%20Subject%20of%20a%20Governmental%20Decision,-An%20individual%20has">are prohibited</a> from making government decisions involving an entity from which they have received $500 or more in income over the previous year. Commissioners <a href="https://sfethics.org/disclosures/city-officer-disclosure/notification-of-recusal">regularly recuse themselves</a> from votes, even if there is merely the appearance of a conflict.&nbsp;</p>



<p>The Standard previously reported that <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/07/03/san-francisco-planning-commission-kathrin-moore-architecture/">Moore&nbsp;voted to advance two SOM projects</a> in San Francisco, a Buddhist temple on <a href="https://sfyimby.com/2022/02/som-designed-san-bao-temple-redesigned-and-approved-for-1750-van-ness-avenue-nob-hill-san-francisco.html">1750 Van Ness Ave</a>, approved in 2021, and a building at <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/06/25/related-california-office-development-jackson-square/">520 Sansome St./447 Battery</a>, which is still pending before the commission. In response to The Standard’s reporting, the Planning Commission’s president, Lydia So, called for an investigation into Moore’s votes.&nbsp;</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1667" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/8907937419_housingmapsf_004.jpg?w=2500" alt="A person in a hat speaks at a podium in a wood-paneled room, addressing seated officials at a long desk. Laptops and flags add to the formal setting." class="wp-image-387286" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/8907937419_housingmapsf_004.jpg 8059w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/8907937419_housingmapsf_004.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/8907937419_housingmapsf_004.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/8907937419_housingmapsf_004.jpg?resize=2500,1667 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/8907937419_housingmapsf_004.jpg?resize=1536,1024 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/8907937419_housingmapsf_004.jpg?resize=2048,1366 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">The Planning Commission, whose members vote on development projects, is one of the city&#8217;s most powerful boards.</figcaption></figure>



<p>Since then, The Standard has discovered at least three more SOM projects that Moore voted to approve: <a href="https://www.som.com/projects/350-mission-street/">350 Mission</a> in 2011; <a href="https://www.som.com/projects/india-basin/">India Basin</a> in 2018; and <a href="https://sfyimby.com/2022/12/som-updates-design-for-98-franklin-street-san-francisco.html">98 Franklin</a> in 2023.&nbsp;</p>



<p>In at least two instances, Moore recused herself from projects involving SOM: the <a href="https://www.som.com/projects/moscone-center-expansion/">Moscone Center expansion</a> in 2014 and <a href="https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/approval-of-high-rise-at-75-howard-st-continues-sf-skyline-transformation/article_7b898157-9a8b-50e8-ae07-0cff7e75bc40.html">One Steuart Lane</a> in 2015.&nbsp;</p>



<p>“I worked for SOM for a long period of time, almost three decades, and have an ongoing relationship with the firm,” Moore said during a vote for One Steuart Lane.</p>



<p>It’s unclear why Moore recused herself on certain projects but not others. Moore&nbsp;said in her statement that she believed she could vote on matters related to the architecture firm as long as she disclosed her relationship with the company.</p>



<p>“I have tried to consistently make that disclosure but it appears sometimes I neglected to do so,” she wrote. &#8220;Since I have been on the Planning Commission I have voted for and voted against projects in which SOM has been involved. I have sometimes praised and sometimes criticized projects in which SOM has been involved. I have never been influenced by anything other than the merits of each project, and I certainly have never been influenced by the fixed retirement payments I receive — payments which would never go up or down based on how I voted on a project.&#8221;</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="1397" height="931" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/9547109895_kathrin-moore-01_fe40dd.jpg?w=1397" alt="A person in white pants and a black jacket walks down a corridor, while another figure is silhouetted in the foreground. A third person stands to the side." class="wp-image-418802" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/9547109895_kathrin-moore-01_fe40dd.jpg 1397w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/9547109895_kathrin-moore-01_fe40dd.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/9547109895_kathrin-moore-01_fe40dd.jpg?resize=768,512 768w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 1397px) 100vw, 1397px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Commissioner Moore worked at architecture firm Skidmore, Owings &amp; Merrill until 1999.</figcaption></figure>



<p>In a statement, Skidmore, Owings &amp; Merrill spokesperson Ana Cuadra said Moore&#8217;s retirement payments are not connected to her activities at the planning commission.</p>



<p>&#8220;As a private-sector firm, it was our expectation that required disclosures, recusals, or potential conflicts of interest by the Commissioner were appropriately resolved with the City,&#8221; Cuadra wrote.</p>



<p>The 2012 memo didn’t explain what legal advice had previously been given to Moore. Jen Kwart, spokesperson for the city attorney’s office, said the office does not disclose privileged conversations, which are often provided to clients verbally. Kwart said it is up to officials to ask for an analysis by the city attorney or the SF Ethics Commission regarding decisions that may pose a conflict of interest.&nbsp;</p>



<p>The memo referenced a claim by Moore that she had previously been advised by&nbsp;the city attorney’s office that she was not required to report the SOM retirement payments on her annual disclosure forms.&nbsp;</p>



<p>“This office does not have any record of that advice,” Shen wrote. Moore began reporting her retirement payments on annual disclosure forms in 2012.</p>



<p>Sean McMorris, an ethics expert at the nonprofit California Common Cause, said rules prohibiting conflicts of interest exist “to prevent decisions based on real or perceived self-interest over the people&#8217;s interest.”</p>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-posts-container">
<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>
</div>



<p>“When in doubt, a public official should seek advice from counsel, which it appears the commissioner did at some point, but perhaps did not heed entirely,” McMorris said. “On matters of conflict of interest, it is best to operate out of an abundance of caution than engage in action that could diminish the public&#8217;s trust.”&nbsp;</p>



<p>Moore was first appointed to the Planning Commission by former Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin and was most recently reappointed by Supervisor Shamann Walton. Her term ends in July 2026. </p>



<p>Walton’s office did not respond to a request for comment.</p>



<p>Three of the planning commissioners are appointed by the board president, a role currently held by Supervisor Rafael Mandelman, while the mayor chooses the remaining four.</p>


City official got paid by architecture firm while approving its projects


<p>A longtime San Francisco planning commissioner supported the development of at least two projects in the city by a well-known architecture firm from which she also receives income, according to city disclosure forms, an arrangement that appears to breach the city’s conflict of interest rules.</p>



<p>Kathrin Moore, who was appointed to the planning commission in 2006 and currently serves as the body’s vice president, has reported earning between $10,000 and $100,000 each year since 2012 from the global firm Skidmore, Owings &amp; Merrill, also known by the acronym SOM.</p>



<p>In a 2012 financial disclosure, Moore reported that she retired from the company in 1999 and described the income as a “retirement payment.” Since then, she has listed herself on the forms as a retired associate partner.</p>



<p>Meanwhile, Moore voted in September 2021 to approve the firm’s <a href="https://sfyimby.com/2022/02/som-designed-san-bao-temple-redesigned-and-approved-for-1750-van-ness-avenue-nob-hill-san-francisco.html">San Bao Temple</a> at 1750 Van Ness Ave. This May, she cast a vote supporting the company’s initial plans for a <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/06/25/related-california-office-development-jackson-square/">building</a> at 520 Sansome St./447 Battery St., a project still making its way through the commission.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1667" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/8907937419_housingmapsf_004.jpg?w=2500" alt="A person in a hat speaks at a podium in a wood-paneled room, addressing seated officials at a long desk. Laptops and flags add to the formal setting." class="wp-image-387286" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/8907937419_housingmapsf_004.jpg 8059w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/8907937419_housingmapsf_004.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/8907937419_housingmapsf_004.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/8907937419_housingmapsf_004.jpg?resize=2500,1667 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/8907937419_housingmapsf_004.jpg?resize=1536,1024 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/8907937419_housingmapsf_004.jpg?resize=2048,1366 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">The city&#8217;s seven-member planning commission has significant sway over the look and feel of the city&#8217;s development plans.</figcaption></figure>



<p>The city’s conflict of interest rules <a href="https://sfethics.org/laws/conflict-of-interest/conflict-of-interest-other-prohibited-activities-regulations-san-francisco-campaign-and-governmental-conduct-code-section-3-200-et-seq#:~:text=of%20general%20application.-,Regulation%203.214%2D4.%20Disclosure%20of%20Personal%2C%20Professional%20%26%20Business%20Relationships%20%E2%80%93%20Determining%20Whether%20an%20Individual%20has%20an%20Ownership%20or%20Financial%20Interest%20in%20the%20Subject%20of%20a%20Governmental%20Decision,-An%20individual%20has">prohibit</a> city officials, including planning commissioners, from making decisions that involve entities from which an individual has received more than $500 in the past year. The <a href="https://www.fppc.ca.gov/learn/conflicts-of-interest-rules.html">state</a> has similar regulations.</p>



<p>The seven-member commission advises the mayor and board of supervisors on land use, transportation, and development in the city and votes to approve project permits.&nbsp;</p>



<p>Sean McMorris, an ethics expert from the good governance nonprofit Common Cause, said Moore’s votes appear to be a conflict of interest because she was paid by the firm.&nbsp;</p>



<p>“If there is anything that you could presumably be involved in that even gives the appearance of enriching yourself, then you need to recuse yourself,” McMorris said. “That’s why we have conflict-of-interest laws. Our representatives work for us, not for themselves. The public trust is diminished when things like this happen.”</p>



<p>In an emailed statement received after this story&#8217;s publication, Moore defended her votes on Skidmore, Owings &amp; Merrill projects.</p>



<p>&#8220;Having retired as an Associate Partner of SOM in 1999, I receive a pension from SOM which I report on my annual public financial disclosure,&#8221; she wrote. &#8220;In accordance with legal advice from the Office of the City Attorney given to me many years ago, because my pension is unconditional, I have been&nbsp;assured&nbsp;that there is no conflict of interest and do not need to recuse myself from voting on matters involving SOM. My fixed pension does not influence nor is&nbsp;it&nbsp;effected by how I render my decisions. I will continue to hold myself to the highest legal and ethical standards as I have since I first was appointed to the Planning Commission in 2006.&#8221;</p>



<p>An inquiry to Skidmore, Owings &amp; Merrill went unanswered. </p>



<p>During a May 15 hearing on the 520 Sansome St./447 Battery St. project, Moore thanked a Skidmore, Owings &amp; Merrill representative after his presentation and lauded the plans, saying they would positively impact the city’s beleaguered downtown.</p>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-posts-container">
<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>
</div>



<p>“This project addresses all the critical points, including the major investment of the <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2024/05/06/transamerica-pyramid-renovation-beacon/">refurbishing</a> of the Transamerica Pyramid,” she said. “I think you’re doing that very skillfully.”</p>



<p>During a September 2021 hearing to approve the Buddhist temple at 1750 Van Ness Ave., Moore similarly advocated for the Skidmore, Owings &amp; Merrill design.</p>



<p>“I am in full support of the project, and I consider the project thoughtful, and as one of the [public] speakers just said, inspirational,” Moore said. “I think it will be a wonderful addition.”</p>



<p>Skidmore, Owings &amp; Merrill is an internationally renowned firm behind <a href="https://www.som.com/">iconic buildings</a> such as 7 World Trade Center in New York, the Sears Tower in Chicago, and the Burj Khalifa in Dubai, the world’s tallest building. Its San Francisco designs include One Maritime Plaza and the San Francisco International Airport trusses.</p>



<p>Lydia So, the planning commission’s president, said she was “shocked” to learn of Moore’s connection to the architecture firm and called for an investigation.&nbsp;</p>



<p>“We need to restore public trust in our government,” she said.</p>



<p>The Ethics Commission, which enforces the city’s conflict of interest rules, declined to comment.</p>



<p>“All complaints and enforcement matters are handled confidentially as required by the City Charter,” Michael Canning, the Ethics Commission’s policy and legislative affairs manager, said in a statement. “This requires that we do not disclose any information about any enforcement matters we may be handling, including if we have received a complaint or are carrying out an investigation.”</p>



<p>City officials <a href="https://sfethics.org/disclosures/city-officer-disclosure/notification-of-recusal">regularly</a> recuse themselves from votes due to conflicts of interest, actual or perceived. More than 20 city officials have withdrawn from government decisions this year, including a San Francisco Retirement Healthcare Trust Fund member who in June recused himself from a vote to invest in a company because he had worked there over a decade ago.&nbsp;</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="2500" width="2186" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/20241112_smogday_aar_9_97746f.jpg?w=2186" alt="The image shows a dense cityscape with tall skyscrapers, including a shiny, cylindrical tower. Streets and lower buildings are visible in the foreground." class="wp-image-349056" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/20241112_smogday_aar_9_97746f.jpg 4191w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/20241112_smogday_aar_9_97746f.jpg?resize=262,300 262w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/20241112_smogday_aar_9_97746f.jpg?resize=768,878 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/20241112_smogday_aar_9_97746f.jpg?resize=2186,2500 2186w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/20241112_smogday_aar_9_97746f.jpg?resize=1343,1536 1343w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/20241112_smogday_aar_9_97746f.jpg?resize=1791,2048 1791w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2186px) 100vw, 2186px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">The architecture firm Skidmore, Owings &amp; Merrill is behind multiple San Francisco projects, including One Maritime Plaza. </figcaption></figure>



<p>In 2023, Moore recused herself from approving a project on Taylor Street because she resides within 500 feet of the property.</p>



<p>Moore’s links to the architecture firm come to light amid recent turmoil that has shaken the planning commission.</p>



<p>Mission Local reported last month that three commissioners, including Moore, <a href="https://missionlocal.org/2025/06/walkout-planning-commission-san-francisco-lurie/">walked out of a closed-door meeting</a> to appoint a new planning director. The members said they left the meeting in protest over frustrations with Mayor Daniel Lurie’s process of choosing Sarah Dennis Phillips to lead the commission as director. Phillips was later <a href="https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/planning-director-sarah-dennis-phillips-20384050.php">confirmed</a>.&nbsp;</p>



<p>Moore then <a href="https://missionlocal.org/2025/06/sf-planning-director-process-illegal-commission/">accused</a> So of violating a state law that requires local agencies to hold open meetings for public access.</p>



<p><em>Update: This story was updated with a response from Kathrin Moore.</em></p>


The latest strategy by SF neighborhoods to avoid development? Be ‘historic’


<p>When Donna Howe meets new friends in her cozy Ingleside Terraces neighborhood, she often quizzes them on the age of local Craftsman and revival-style homes.</p>



<p>Howe’s family has lived in the southwestern San Francisco neighborhood — known for its distinctive architecture and single-family homes — for five generations, since the 1940s.</p>



<p>But as the city faces a dire housing shortage and increasing pressure from state officials to build residential units, many locals are increasingly concerned that Ingleside Terraces could be targeted for rampant development.</p>



<p>“I have deep roots and deep love for this neighborhood,” Howe, 72, told The Standard. “I don’t want to see it go.”</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image alignwide size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1667" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_012.jpg?w=2500" alt="The image shows a hilly neighborhood with colorful houses and lush greenery. Cars line the street, and a foggy sky hovers above the distant hills." class="wp-image-413908" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_012.jpg 7632w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_012.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_012.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_012.jpg?resize=2500,1667 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_012.jpg?resize=1536,1024 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_012.jpg?resize=2048,1366 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Ingleside Terraces homeowners are seeking historic status for their neighborhood.</figcaption></figure>



<p>San Francisco faces a state mandate to add tens of thousands of residential units over the next six years. To address that goal, Mayor Daniel Lurie last week released a zoning plan that would add more than 36,000 units in west-side neighborhoods, including Ingleside Terraces, where opposition to development has historically been strong.</p>



<p>To avoid that, the Ingleside Terraces Homes Association is pushing to designate the neighborhood as a “historic district,” a state-recognized status that critics see as a tool to stall development. The association hired an architectural consulting firm and three months ago submitted an application to the California Office of Historic Preservation.&nbsp;</p>



<p>The pursuit of a “historic” designation is an increasingly popular tactic in San Francisco and other California cities. Residents of St. Francis Wood successfully <a href="https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/housing/st-francis-wood-earns-historic-designation-sparks-backlash/article_bff67cf0-02e0-11ed-87c7-e3d2da717575.html">petitioned the state for historic status</a> in 2022, while a proposal submitted in 2024 by a coalition of North Beach residents is in the final stage of review at the State Historical Resources Commission.&nbsp;</p>



<p>Wealthy neighborhoods in <a href="https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/housing-nimby-historic-baywood-18450990.php">San Mateo</a>,<a href="https://padailypost.com/2022/03/21/city-takes-an-historic-approach-to-dealing-with-new-housing-law/"> Palo Alto</a>, and <a href="https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-puts-city-pasadena-notice-violating-state-housing-laws">Pasadena</a> have taken similar steps in recent years in attempts at avoiding new development.</p>



<p>The trend has generated criticism from groups that want California cities to build more housing. The North Beach proposal in particular has <a href="https://sfstandard.com/opinion/2024/03/29/a-modest-proposal-its-time-for-north-beach-to-secede-from-the-city/">sparked intense debate.</a></p>



<p>Ryan Patterson, an attorney for the pro-housing groups YIMBY Law and YIMBY Action, called the movement “a last-ditch, desperate effort” to block development.</p>



<p>“The anti-growth NIMBYs are trying to create new historic districts just to avoid state housing laws,” Patterson said. “It&#8217;s very unfortunate that they&#8217;ve taken this approach, and I hope people recognize what they&#8217;re actually doing and say no to it.”</p>



<div class="wp-block-group alignwide"><div class="wp-block-group__inner-container is-layout-constrained wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained">
<div class="wp-block-columns is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-1 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex">
<div class="wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow">
<figure class="wp-block-video no-credit"><video autoplay loop muted preload="none" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/sequence-01.mp4" playsinline></video></figure>
</div>



<div class="wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow">
<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="1408" height="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_009_a45bfb.jpg?w=1408" alt="A beige stucco house with a tower-like structure and red tiled roof is partially visible, surrounded by lush greenery and tall plants." class="wp-image-413919" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_009_a45bfb.jpg 1408w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_009_a45bfb.jpg?resize=169,300 169w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_009_a45bfb.jpg?resize=768,1364 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_009_a45bfb.jpg?resize=865,1536 865w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_009_a45bfb.jpg?resize=1153,2048 1153w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 1408px) 100vw, 1408px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">A Mediterranean Revival-style home in Ingleside Terraces.</figcaption></figure>
</div>
</div>
</div></div>



<p>Ingleside Terraces was built in the wake of the 1906 earthquake on the site of a former racetrack. The neighborhood of around 750 single-family homes is known for its architectural diversity and central 28-foot concrete sundial.</p>



<p>Homeowners have for decades contemplated petitioning for historic status, but their efforts recently gained momentum. And they’re not the only ones.</p>



<p>Woody LaBounty, president of the preservation group San Francisco Heritage, said more neighborhoods are exploring the historic designation route as the state intensifies pressure on cities to increase their housing supplies.</p>



<p>LaBounty said that until recently, historic status was largely a symbolic, apolitical achievement. But with a barrage of new state laws that aim to expedite housing production in areas previously immune to more construction, many locals became worried that “the whole decision will be taken out of my hands,” LaBounty said.&nbsp;</p>



<p>“You could see some big changes with unintended consequences that won’t add tons of housing,” LaBounty said. “But they may mess up the way a neighborhood looks and feels.”</p>



<figure class="wp-block-video alignwide no-credit"><video autoplay loop muted src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/untitled_109cfc.mp4" playsinline></video></figure>



<div class="wp-block-group alignfull"><div class="wp-block-group__inner-container is-layout-constrained wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained">
<div class="wp-block-columns is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-2 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex">
<div class="wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow">
<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1667" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_004.jpg?w=2500" alt="A charming gray house with a sloped roof is surrounded by lush green bushes, colorful flowers, and a well-maintained garden path leading to the entrance." class="wp-image-413922" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_004.jpg 8002w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_004.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_004.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_004.jpg?resize=2500,1667 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_004.jpg?resize=1536,1024 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_004.jpg?resize=2048,1366 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">A craftsman-style home.</figcaption></figure>
</div>



<div class="wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow">
<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1667" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_006.jpg?w=2500" alt="A yellow, two-story house with blue window frames and a red-tiled roof is surrounded by lush greenery and desert plants, with tiled steps leading up to it." class="wp-image-413923" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_006.jpg 7732w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_006.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_006.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_006.jpg?resize=2500,1667 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_006.jpg?resize=1536,1024 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_006.jpg?resize=2048,1366 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">A Spanish Revival-style home.</figcaption></figure>
</div>
</div>
</div></div>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-can-neighborhoods-be-both-pro-housing-and-historic">Can neighborhoods be both pro-housing and historic?</h2>



<p>Individual properties and neighborhoods can achieve historic status across three levels: local, state, and federal. Local historic status in San Francisco offers protections against development because the designation requires that major remodels or construction be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission and the San Francisco Planning Department.</p>



<p>For example, the Jackson Square Historic District <a href="https://sfplanninggis.org/pim/map/">is under historic protection</a>, and City Hall and Fairmont Hotel are designated local landmarks.</p>



<p>St. Francis Wood Historic District is not recognized on the city level but is listed as historic on state and national lists. State and federal designation come with benefits such as tax credits for property restoration projects and, crucially, potential exemptions from certain state housing laws.</p>



<p>California lawmakers have over the last decade approved a slew of laws to streamline housing production and limit local authority to reject certain projects. Those include Senate Bill 423, which <a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-07-04/california-affordable-housing-red-tape-san-francisco">cut the approval time for housing projects</a>, and Senate Bill 9, which allows homeowners to build up to <a href="https://www.latimes.com/homeless-housing/story/2021-12-02/facing-housing-crisis-l-a-voters-back-duplexes-in-single-family-neighborhoods">four units on single-family lots</a>.</p>



<p>Both laws provide limited protections for historical buildings and neighborhoods that exempt them from more construction. The state’s density bonus law, which allows developers to build more units in a project as long as they set aside a percentage for low-income residents, similarly carves out some exceptions for historic areas.&nbsp;</p>



<p>Historic status doesn’t necessarily stop housing but often makes it more difficult to construct homes or demolish an old house to replace it with a multi-family building.&nbsp;</p>



<p>Still, neighborhood preservation and new development can both be achieved, said Rachael Tanner, San Francisco’s director of citywide planning.&nbsp;</p>



<p>“Preserving our city’s historic resources doesn’t need to be the enemy of building new homes,” Tanner said. “Development and historic preservation can coexist in harmony.”</p>



<p>San Francisco Planning Commission President Lydia So said it’s possible to achieve a more tailored approach to preservation, such as designating individual buildings, rather than entire neighborhoods, as historic.</p>



<p>“People sometimes misunderstand ‘historic preservation.’ They think it means freezing things in time,” she said.&nbsp;</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image alignwide size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1406" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_020.jpg?w=2500" alt="Aerial view of a residential neighborhood featuring houses with varied architecture, lush trees, and parked cars lining the curved streets." class="wp-image-413935" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_020.jpg 3959w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_020.jpg?resize=300,169 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_020.jpg?resize=768,432 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_020.jpg?resize=2500,1406 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_020.jpg?resize=1536,864 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/9195468954_homeownersfight_020.jpg?resize=2048,1152 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /></figure>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-the-debate-continues">The debate continues</h2>



<p>While Ingleside Terraces is the latest San Francisco neighborhood to apply for historic status, it’s hardly the most controversial.&nbsp;</p>



<p>The North Beach proposal, which faces a final decision by state regulators, has generated criticism from housing advocates who say exempting an entire neighborhood from development would worsen San Francisco’s housing crunch.&nbsp;</p>



<p>Pro-housing activists in April <a href="https://link.sfstandard.com/view/6436ea099b26044931999510nepz7.1af/34ef191a">hosted a satirical tour</a> in North Beach to highlight how an empty parking lot and burned building site would be listed as historic under the proposal.</p>



<p>Aaron Peskin, a former Board of Supervisors presidents who represented North Beach and is an advocate for preserving neighborhood character over development, said there is widespread support for designating North Beach as a historic district. He cited a <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/15iB44nLx_aCGWlT92n4psgLXm00YzEjw/view?usp=sharing">June poll</a> of 600 people that showed 63% of respondents supported the initiative.</p>



<p>“North Beach has been San Francisco’s historic living room for generations. It’s beloved and celebrated all over the city,” Peskin said.</p>



<p>Despite the pushback, interest in historic designation continues to grow. At a recent town hall in the Sunset, residents expressed interest in pursuing historic status as the neighborhood faces more development under Lurie’s zoning plans. A <a href="https://files.sfplanning.org/documents/preservation/sfsurvey-OuterSunsetParksideFindings-MapTable.pdf">city planning survey</a> identified a small portion of the area that could qualify as historic but determined that almost 800 properties were not qualified or ineligible.</p>



<p>Annie Fryman, director of special projects at the think tank SPUR, said westside neighborhoods with more single-family homes and homeowners are more ideal for denser development. </p>



<p>&#8220;When these neighborhoods try to wiggle out of housing obligations by establishing historic districts,&#8221; Fryman said, &#8220;it pushes development pressure into areas where it could be more disruptive to renters and small businesses.&#8221;</p>



<p>LaBounty disagreed with criticism that preservation efforts are ill-intentioned, arguing that the process is “not something that can be casually abused.”&nbsp;</p>



<p>“People who do it are 99% trying to support and preserve special places,” the SF Heritage leader said.</p>



<p>He also noted that commercial corridors such as Clement Street in the Inner Richmond and Chestnut Street in the Marina, as well as Chinatown and Japantown, have historic value.</p>



<p>But designating large swaths of San Francisco as historic would almost certainly complicate Lurie’s goal of building tens of thousands of units across the city — a plan YIMBY groups have argued is not ambitious enough.</p>



<p>The movement for historic status adds another layer of complexity and sets the stage for a political battle in the months ahead.</p>



<p>“Everybody is in support of preserving the special places,” LaBounty said. “It&#8217;s how. And that&#8217;s where politics usually come in.”</p>


SF Zoo to debut panda next April, dismisses tariff concerns


<p>The escalating trade war between the U.S. and China may threaten to derail the San Francisco Zoo’s deal to import a pair of pandas, but so far it’s proceeding as planned —&nbsp;knock on bamboo.</p>



<p>Zoo CEO Tanya Peterson says she&#8217;s optimistic about the pandas’ arrival despite the mounting geopolitical tensions. She’s less certain whether the arrangement will be subject to tariffs but is prepared to make the case for an exemption.</p>



<p>“Pandas are an endangered species, so obviously, they should be exempt from tariffs,” Peterson told The Standard on Wednesday. “Who’s going to tax the cute animal?”</p>



<p>Peterson is expected to announce the official panda arrival timeline at Thursday’s Recreation and Park Commission meeting. She revealed that the animals will need to undergo a quarantine and acclimation period after their arrival, likely at the end of the year. If everything goes according to plan, the zoo’s panda zone will open to the public next April.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1668" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/20241203-pandahome_0365_40dcec.jpg?w=2500" alt="A person wearing a wide-brimmed hat and a black jacket with a zoo logo stands smiling beside a mesh enclosure and solar panel with foliage around." class="wp-image-339664" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/20241203-pandahome_0365_40dcec.jpg 5000w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/20241203-pandahome_0365_40dcec.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/20241203-pandahome_0365_40dcec.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/20241203-pandahome_0365_40dcec.jpg?resize=2500,1668 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/20241203-pandahome_0365_40dcec.jpg?resize=1536,1025 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/20241203-pandahome_0365_40dcec.jpg?resize=2048,1366 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Zoo CEO Tanya Peterson says she&#8217;s optimistic about the pandas’ arrival despite the mounting geopolitical tensions.</figcaption></figure>



<p>“So far, no one has told me &#8216;no&#8217; — and in today’s political climate, that’s a very good sign,” Peterson said. “We’re feeling optimistic on all fronts.”</p>



<p>Technically, the pandas will be considered rentals. A <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/04/16/trump-china-tariff-245-percent-trade-war/83114710007/">245% tariff</a> could more than triple the $1 million annual price tag.</p>



<p>Darlene Chiu-Bryant, head of Global SF, an international trade advocacy group, called it a tricky and extraordinary situation.</p>



<p>“If you look purely at the transaction, there’s the value of the product — and typically, that would incur a tariff,” Chiu-Bryant said. “But in this case, it’s neither a lease nor a sale, but more of a cultural exchange. So how can you put a tariff on a pair of pandas?”</p>



<p>Peterson said she plans to travel to China this fall to meet the selected pandas. She expressed confidence in the zoo’s fundraising efforts to support the initiative but declined to share the numbers.</p>



<p>The panda deal was locked in last year by former Mayor London Breed during a visit to Beijing. The zoo has been designing its <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2024/12/05/panda-new-home-sf-zoo/">panda habitat</a>, which is under review by the city’s Planning Commission.</p>



<p>Thursday’s commission meeting will also cover operational and management issues at the zoo, which faced accusations of mismanagement last year as the panda negotiations became increasingly politicized. The zoo is <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2024/12/11/sf-zoo-audit-panda/">undergoing an audit</a> ordered by the Board of Supervisors.</p>


‘Outrageous betrayal’: Lurie’s rezoning plan riles some west-side supporters


<p>In the year and a half that Mayor Daniel Lurie has been in the public spotlight, his stance on housing has been a bit of a mystery. On other issues, he has been clear.&nbsp;Public safety? He wants more cops. Homelessness? More shelter. But housing development? His statements on the campaign trail were nebulous.</p>



<p>That changed Thursday, when San Francisco’s state-mandated rezoning plan was made public, with Lurie’s support. The plan calls for upzoning much of the city, including the west side, an area that hasn’t seen significant development for decades and holds a voter base that’s traditionally opposed to more housing.&nbsp;</p>



<p>Those same west-side voters in large part propelled Lurie, with his moderate messaging and tough-on-crime policies, into the mayor’s office. And some of them — <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/03/10/prop-k-lawsuit-great-highway-closure/">already riled by the closure of the Great Highway</a> that&#8217;s <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/01/22/great-highway-recall-signature-gathering-joel-engardio/">sparked a supervisorial recall</a> — feel they’ve been stabbed in the back.</p>



<p>“I think it is going to be perceived as an outrageous betrayal,” said Deidre Von Rock, president of the West Portal Merchants Association. “I don’t think there’s going to be a recall. But it will turn people off for another election.”</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1668" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/8420072128_luriepublicsafety-9.jpg?w=2500" alt="Mayor Daniel Lurie is calling the state-mandated housing proposal that upzones neighborhoods &quot;family zoning.&quot;" class="wp-image-364423" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/8420072128_luriepublicsafety-9.jpg 6000w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/8420072128_luriepublicsafety-9.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/8420072128_luriepublicsafety-9.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/8420072128_luriepublicsafety-9.jpg?resize=2500,1668 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/8420072128_luriepublicsafety-9.jpg?resize=1536,1025 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/8420072128_luriepublicsafety-9.jpg?resize=2048,1366 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Mayor Daniel Lurie earned much of his support during the November election from voters on the west side.</figcaption></figure>



<p>Lurie said Thursday that the city has made it “easier to block new homes than to build them” and that the state provided “a clear mandate to build more housing, with real consequences if we don’t.” (In an apparent effort to make the plan more palatable, the mayor is avoiding the word “upzoning” and instead using “family zoning.”)&nbsp;</p>



<p>So, what does the <a href="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/rezoning.pdf">zoning proposal</a> entail?</p>



<p>The most significant change will allow more homeowners to divide their property into multiple dwellings. Previously, only property owners in certain pockets of the city could take advantage of this opportunity, but the rezoning will make it available en masse.</p>



<p>The other big difference will be in west-side commercial and transit streets, such as the Richmond’s California, Geary, Balboa, and Fulton corridors, where allowable building heights will be raised to six to eight stories. The same will apply to the Sunset on Lincoln, Irving, Judah, Noriega, and Taraval — heights on some corners could reach 14 stories. Other parts of the city, such as the Marina, Divisadero, Haight, Van Ness Avenue, Fisherman’s Wharf, and the southern part of Market, will also see height increases.&nbsp;</p>



<p>The proposal needs approval from the Planning Commission; it will then go to the Board of Supervisors and the mayor before the state gives it a final pass. Lurie’s statement Thursday alluded to “real consequences” if the city doesn’t reach a certain housing capacity, which means the potential for lawsuits or, in the worst-case scenario, the loss of local control over zoning.</p>



<p>The city has until January 2026 to send its blueprints to Sacramento. But little building is expected to happen immediately, considering that <a href="https://app.slack.com/client/T0296B09RBK/D06HDLEEXMJ#:~:text=were%20insanely%20bad-,https%3A//sfplanning.org/sites/default/files/resources/2025%2D04/2024_Housing%2520Inventory.pdf,-Gabe%20Greschler">construction has dramatically slowed in recent years</a> because of cloudy economic conditions and high interest rates.</p>



<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" height="1667" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/mg_6824.jpg?w=2500" alt="A woman with long hair stands near a concrete railing, overlooking a park and cityscape with a mix of buildings, including tall apartments and houses. The Golden Gate Bridge is visible in the background." class="wp-image-281878" srcset="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/mg_6824.jpg 6240w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/mg_6824.jpg?resize=300,200 300w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/mg_6824.jpg?resize=768,512 768w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/mg_6824.jpg?resize=2500,1667 2500w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/mg_6824.jpg?resize=1536,1024 1536w, https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/mg_6824.jpg?resize=2048,1365 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 2500px) 100vw, 2500px" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Lori Brooke, a founder of Neighborhoods United SF, said Lurie&#8217;s predecessor, Mayor London Breed, faced backlash from voters over support for upzoning.</figcaption></figure>



<p>Since taking office, <a href="https://sfstandard.com/2025/03/04/san-francisco-yimby-mayor-daniel-lurie-rezoning/">Lurie has been lobbied by members of the YIMBY coalition</a>, who have cautioned him of the political liabilities that could come with a housing plan that isn’t aggressive enough. That includes scenarios where the city would have to commit to more rezoning in 2027, an inopportune time that would overlap with Lurie’s potential reelection bid.</p>



<p>The warnings appear to have worked. Lurie delayed the release of the housing plan until this week and got the help of the UC Berkeley Terner Center for Housing Innovation <a href="https://link.sfstandard.com/view/65c28f2e664d5a5d7e0849a8ncna9.13l/36cc1fbc">after YIMBYs argued that the proposal wasn’t ambitious enough</a>.&nbsp;</p>



<p>Lurie also met with rezoning skeptics such as Neighborhoods United SF, one of the most visible groups fighting against the plans.</p>



<p>Katherine Petrin, a native west-sider and historic preservationist who has been critical of the rezoning plans, said she remains in support of Lurie, but neighbors are already feeling disappointed over his stance.</p>



<p>“The unveiling of the upzoning plan was the moment where Lurie had to take a hard stand that reveals his true position and alignment,” said Petrin, a founding member of Neighborhoods United SF. “Throughout his campaign, he seemed to understand the issues of concern of voters on the west side, housing and zoning being the biggest. Lurie made the decision to choose YIMBY over his constituents.”</p>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-posts-container">
<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>



<div class="wp-block-sf-standard-related-post"></div>
</div>



<p>Lori Brooke, also a founding member of the organization, said she thinks former Mayor London Breed lost reelection partly because of her YIMBY stance. Breed introduced a map last year that is mostly the same as the one Lurie is backing.&nbsp;</p>



<p>“If the map was toxic to Breed, I think it could be tricky for Lurie to navigate how the perception of this map will be to his constituents,” said Brooke. “I think everyone was hoping he would push back on the state. … Lurie is caught between those two worlds: his constituents, and the state and their unrealistic demands.”</p>



<p>But not everyone is let down.&nbsp;</p>



<p>District 7 Supervisor Myrna Melgar, who supported Breed during the November election, called Lurie’s move a “courageous gamble.”</p>



<p>“He is going to piss off a bunch of people,” said Melgar. “And a bunch of people who supported him. So, it is courageous that he is standing up for doing what I think is right. Even though it is going to cost him.”</p>


Why Aaron Peskin’s progressive cred may not be enough to win

The Planning Commission oversees San Francisco's land use and development. It approves permits, maintains the General Plan, and conducts public hearings. It advises city officials on long-term planning and delegates certain approvals to the Planning Department.

Planning Commission

Theresa Imperial

Amy Campbell

Sean McGarry

Planning Commission Commissioner 1

Planning Commission Commissioner 2

Planning Commission Commissioner 3

Planning Commission Commissioner 4

Asian Art Museum

Office of the City Administrator

Adult Probation Department

Airport

Arts Commission

Office of the Assessor-Recorder

Board of Appeals

Office of the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors

Office of the City Attorney

Department of Children, Youth and Their Families

Controller's Office

Planning Department

Civil Service Commission

District Attorney's Office

Department of Building Inspection

Department of Early Childhood

Department of Emergency Management

Department of Police Accountability

Department of Public Health

Department of Public Works

Office of Economic and Workforce Development

Environment Department

Ethics Commission

Fine Arts Museums

Fire Department

Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing

Human Rights Commission

Department of Human Resources

Human Services Agency

Health Service System

Juvenile Probation Department

Public Library

Municipal Transportation Agency

Office of the Mayor

Public Defender's Office

Police Department

Port

Public Utilities Commission

Recreation and Park Department

Department of Elections

Retirement System

Rent Board

Sheriff's Department Office of Inspector General

Sheriff's Department

Department of Technology

Office of the Treasurer & Tax Collector

War Memorial

Department on the Status of Women

General City Responsibilities

General Administration & Finance

Culture & Recreation

Community Health

Human Welfare & Neighborhood Development

Public Works, Transportation & Commerce

Public Protection

SF Civil Grand Jury

SF Superior Court

SF Superior Court Presiding Judge

judicial assignments; court administration (CRC 10.603); CEO direction

The Abatement Appeals Board provides a final review process for City permitting decisions. It ensures fair and efficient adjudication of permit-related disputes before an impartial panel. The board holds authority to make binding decisions on appeals concerning notices of abatement.

Abatement Appeals Board

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 1

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 2

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 3

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 4

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 5

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 6

Abatement Appeals Board Commissioner 7

The Access Appeals Commission provides final reviews for a wide range of City permitting decisions. It ensures an efficient, fair, and expeditious permit issuance process through an impartial panel. The commission holds authority to make binding decisions on appeals related to City permits.

Access Appeals Commission

Access Appeals Commission Commissioner 1

Access Appeals Commission Commissioner 2

Access Appeals Commission Commissioner 3

Access Appeals Commission Commissioner 4

Access Appeals Commission Commissioner 5

The Adult Day Health Care Planning Council advises on the development and improvement of adult day health care services. It provides expertise in healthcare planning, policy recommendations, and program evaluation. Key responsibilities include assessing community needs and advising on service delivery enhancements.

Adult Day Health Care Planning Council

Adult Probation Department supervises individuals on probation and facilitates their reintegration into the community. It provides reentry and rehabilitative services, including victim restitution and financial assistance for crime victims. The department values public safety, offender rehabilitation, and community partnerships.

Cristel Tullock

The Advisory Committee of Street Artists and Crafts Examiners evaluates arts and crafts applicants and monitors program compliance. It conducts studio visits and public screenings to ensure adherence to established criteria. Members also revise program criteria and undertake additional tasks as needed.

Advisory Committee of Street Artists and Crafts Examiners

The Advisory Council on Human Rights advises on anti-discrimination laws and racial equity initiatives. It provides expertise on reparations and public policy impacts on Black communities. It guides efforts to establish partnerships with Historically Black Colleges and Universities in San Francisco.

Advisory Council on Human Rights

San Francisco Airport manages air traffic operations and ensures safe aircraft movement. It provides parking facilities and maintains airport infrastructure to accommodate travelers and staff. The department oversees ground transportation and coordinates with airlines for efficient passenger services.

Mike Nakornkhet

The Airport Commission oversees policy and strategic planning for San Francisco International Airport. It makes key decisions on airport development projects and financial management. It ensures compliance with regulations and collaborates on initiatives like terminal naming.

Airport Commission

Airport Commission Commissioner 1

Malcolm Yeung

Jose F. Almanza

Mark Buell

Susan Leal

Airport Director

Animal Care and Control Department manages animal sheltering, adoption, and emergency response services. It enforces animal-related laws and regulations, ensuring the humane treatment and safety of animals. The department also provides public education on responsible pet ownership and animal welfare.

Animal Care and Control Department

Virginia Donohue

Animal Care and Control Department, Director

The San Francisco Arts Commission oversees the integration of arts into city life and ensures public access to cultural experiences. It makes decisions on public art programs and allocates grants to support local artists and performances. The commission actively shapes policies affecting the arts ecosystem in San Francisco.

Arts Commission Commissioner 1

Arts Commission Commissioner 2

Arts Commission Commissioner 3

Arts Commission Commissioner 4

Debra Walker

Suzanne Ferras

Jessica Rothschild

Seth Brenzel

JD Beltran

Marcus Shelby

J Riccardo Benavides

Nabiel Musleh

Charles (Chuck) Collins

Lydia So

Arts Commission Commissioner 15

San Francisco Arts Commission invests in a vibrant arts community and shapes cultural policy. It enlivens the urban environment through public art programs and supports diverse artistic expressions. The commission facilitates meetings and discussions to engage the community in cultural development.

Ralph Remington

Arts Commission, Director of Cultural Affairs

The Asian Art Commission determines policy and administers the Asian Art Museum of San Francisco. It oversees museum operations and collaborates with the Asian Art Museum Foundation on fundraising efforts. Commissioners ensure the museum's strategic direction and financial sustainability.

Asian Art Commission

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 1

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 2

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 3

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 4

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 5

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 6

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 7

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 8

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 9

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 10

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 11

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 12

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 13

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 14

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 15

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 16

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 17

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 18

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 19

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 20

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 21

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 22

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 23

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 24

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 25

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 26

Asian Art Commission Commissioner 27

Asian Art Museum showcases Asian art and culture through exhibitions and educational programs. It offers diverse collections and hosts special events to engage the community. The museum fosters cultural appreciation and understanding by providing access to its extensive art collections.

Dr. Soyoung Lee

Asian Art Museum, Director

The Assessment Appeals Board #1 hears property tax assessment appeals in San Francisco. It evaluates evidence presented by taxpayers and the Assessor to determine property values. The Board has the authority to make final decisions on assessments regardless of property type or value.

Assessment Appeals Board #1

Assessment Appeals Board #1 Commissioner 1

Assessment Appeals Board #1 Commissioner 2

Richard Lee

Stephen Wasserman

Adena Gilbert

Paul Bellar

Quirina Mitchell

Hilary Winslow

The Assessment Appeals Board #2 adjudicates property tax assessment appeals for San Francisco taxpayers. It evaluates evidence presented by taxpayers and the Assessor to determine accurate property values. The Board exercises authority to render final decisions on residential properties and specific real estate assessments.

Assessment Appeals Board #2

Assessment Appeals Board #2 Commissioner 1

Assessment Appeals Board #2 Commissioner 2

Assessment Appeals Board #2 Commissioner 3

Claire Ervin Lee

Louisa Mendoza

Joyce Lewis

Nicholas Goldman

Michelle Domingo

The Assessment Appeals Board #3 provides a platform for San Francisco taxpayers to contest property tax assessments. It conducts hearings where evidence from both taxpayers and the Assessor is evaluated. The Board makes binding decisions on property assessments based on presented evidence.

Assessment Appeals Board #3

Assessment Appeals Board #3 Commissioner 1

Assessment Appeals Board #3 Commissioner 2

Assessment Appeals Board #3 Commissioner 3