Supervisors Scott Wiener and David Campos don’t always see eye to eye on public policy, but they share a common vision for the Mission: maintaining a robust neighborhood sensitive to its rich past but accommodating to a rapidly evolving future.
Their disagreements often lie in how — not whether — to implement comprehensive legislative reform that appeases both longtime Missionites and newcomers, and that strikes a balance between the old and the new.
“We have constructive, productive dialogue, and when we disagree, it’s in a way that’s respectful,” Campos said at a recent meeting with Mission Local staff. The question that concerns both of them, he said, is “How do we have a city that works for everyone, the San Francisco that truly works for every resident?”
Wiener and Campos, who represent districts 8 and 9, respectively, are equally concerned with maintaining public safety, developing affordable housing, increasing efficient public transportation and improving education — key issues affecting everyday life in the Mission.
Both candidates agree that the 16-year-old moratorium on new liquor licenses is outdated. They concur that schools — like Everett Middle School and Mission High — thrive with increased funding. They also agree that skyrocketing rents are threatening the Mission’s core, and that affordable housing policy requires creative, proactive fiscal planning.
As for the liquor license moratorium, Wiener believes that it has “outlived its usefulness.” Campos, however, believes that original concerns about public drunkenness and crime are still relevant today, and has been holding meetings to consider potential amendments to the moratorium.
Wiener is in favor of reducing the minimum allowable living space to relieve pressure on the housing market, while Campos is concerned with maintaining livability in confined areas.
Campos argues that the Affordable Housing Trust Fund on the November ballot, while necessary, doesn’t go far enough. Wiener is more optimistic that the measure will push the private sector to meet market-rate housing demands.
“How do we keep San Francisco on this trajectory of attracting young people, keeping young people here to have real diversity of generations in the city?” Wiener asked. “Are we making sure we’re culturally having enough to keep people wanting to be in the city, and that we’re actually helping businesses open and thrive?”
While both supervisors are striving to address what they see as the Mission’s needs, their differing platforms and controversial measures will ultimately be in the hands of voters.
Campos is running unopposed this November — Wiener’s seat isn’t up this year — but both will continue to face the challenges of an urban neighborhood that is adapting to new realities.
“You have an obligation to have your finger on the pulse of a neighborhood … that you continue to monitor issues because there are changes that happen all the time,” Campos said. “It’s a nice problem that so many people want to live in the Mission. It’s a better problem than having empty storefronts, but with that benefit comes a number of other challenges.”
What are Supervisors Campos and Wiener doing to improve the terrible Muni service? Their view of the city is built on the need for good public transit, something we definitely do not have.
The current Examiner says Muni is currently performing at a 57.2% on time rate. Who gets to be at work on time barely half the time/
I think Muni is so so and could be better….I would like to see fewer stops especially on Van Ness, Mission, and Fillmore streets. Stopping at every street (hills excepted) really slows Muni down.
Campos wants to build more housing projects but cares nothing about reducing crime or helping business. So unfortunate that nobody stepped up to oppose him.
i share that concern as well.
The deal on Muni is that Ed Lee’s team (Willie Brown, Rose Pak and Steve Kawa) see the MTA as an ATM for their pet projects. This is why they want to cut service, raise fares and put parking meters wherever possible. Scott Wiener has no problems with this as he plays for that team. David Campos is constrained by the fact that Brown’s team conditions funding for nonprofits on not touching the corruption in service delivery. Thus, we suffer with both ineffective Muni and nonprofits that get funded whether they produce social services outcomes or not, just so long as they do their part to keep the ATM of the MTA dispensing cash to the SFPD and developers.
Campos cares at least as much about existing residents in the Mission as about newcomers.
But for supervisors bought and paid for by developers like Weiner, existing east side neighborhoods are problems that need to be solved by making them more “vibrant,” which in plannerese means “more people than are here now, only whiter and with more disposable income.”
Well put. Newsom pushed the prop that allowed for looting MUNI through work orders. In the past few months, MUNI has become worse than ever. I do wonder when people will realize that corruption needs to end.
We had another daytime shooting in the Mission yesterday, right next to a children’s playground. It was fatal. I wonder when Campos will work *constructively* with the police to work to reduce crime in the neighborhood. As long as we protect and coddle the gang culture in the Mission, more people will die. As long as Campos and some community meeting attendees continue to foster open hatred and mistrust of the police, more people will die. In most societies it is the police and the government that protect unarmed citizens. Why does idea this fail so badly in the Mission? And of course cops need to be watched and monitored but they also must be able to and want to do their job. With thousands of guns in the Mission, we can’t just let everyone fend for themselves. We need leadership and cooperation between the city and the police.
We’re not getting any leadership from Campos; quite the opposite. Once again, he is being very quiet about the continued violence/murders in District 9.
It’s time to put a stop to gangs and gang violence in the Mission. This violence is not alright and we need an activist supervisor who will work with the police and those with a stake in the community to put a stop to it….not invent excuses for bad behavior and not kow tow to crime enablers
@Fred – agreed! We need to crush the gangs! That should be a #1 priority, above affordable housing and all that. Safe streets make for good neighborhoods.
I’ve heard of one good idea — anyone convicted of a crime looses their right to rent control. That would put a real damper on the petty thieves and gang-members who pollute our neighborhood! Why should landlords subsidize criminals to live here?
I would love to see Campos offering more creative solutions on how to drive the gangs and thieves out of town. I’m open to ideas, but I’m not hearing them.
These people are killers. They murder people. Losing rent control should be the least of their worries. We need cops with guns here who patrol and know everyone in the neighborhood. We need a judicial system that doesn’t mock the police by sending arrestees back into the neighborhood without trial. It’s pretty simple. But many local people who go to community meetings here fight everything the cops do. They hate all cops and they support Campos. Campos in turn supports them. It’s wrong and it’s literally killing our community. People who don’t want gun violence need to stand up or we lose this place to it.
Neither am I
Less…not more alcohol.
yeah..the ban on alcohol needs to stay in place. We are swimming in alcohol…we don’t need more.
More liquor? Take a walk through North Beach on a weekend night and you will witness the severe alcohol related problems.
Supervisor Weiner please talk to your counterpart about the North Beach issues and you will realize that the Mission doesn’t need the problems.
We have plenty of alcohol in the Mission already. So we should bend the rules because a different class of people are getting drunk and obnoxious…..I see.
There are a couple of good businesses that are being kept out by the old alcohol policy. Local Mission Eatery wants to put in a grocery store on Harrison but cannot sell beer or wine in the grocery due to these old rules.
A corner store selling mini bottles of vodka has the same rules as a healthy grocery store who sells wine. It’s broken. It’s keeping healthy & local organic food from the Mission.
No…it really isn’t. Rainbow is in the Mission District, last time I checked. And it’s utter nonsense that a well stocked organic grocery in the Mission, particularly one on 24th street is somehow going to magically be denied customers because they can’t sell alcohol.
Well Rainbow does sell beer and wine. It’s also huge so they can get around the special district laws. The same thing with Fresh & Easy. They can sell beer and wine but the new locally owned store down the street cannot because it’s smaller.
Anyone who can’t find liquor in the Mission hasn’t walked more than a block or two.
There is enough wine and beer and booze for everyone already.
There are way too many intoxicated people in the Mission already.
The law was designed to combat public drunkenness….let’s keep it that way.
This is a health issue for everyone. Not just people of color get drunk or low income folks. White wealthy folks drink also.
Whether they buy it at a corner liquor store or grocery store or drinking in a high end restaurant. They also urinate on the streets, become alcholics and have drug problems as well. History repeats itself. For the new folks in the mission, the Mission before gentrification and gangs and homeless was a popular, thriving working class family neighborhood. Theaters, restaurants,
roller skating rings, great parks, and great transportation.
Restaurants and liquor stores and bars began to flourish here. Liquor became available very easily and promotion of liquor was everywhere and at every corner store and restaurant and then down hill we went. We had no controls in place until 1996. Polk street went through the same cycle and is facing a saturation of bars and restaurants and are feeling the negative effects from them. The residents are fighting back . Noe Valley on 24th have controls in place that have limited certain types of business and restaurants.
It gets reviewed every 5 years. So be careful for what you ask for, you might be running yourself out of this neighborhood. As a person who has lived through this history, I have learned. I support the current ban. Please don’t let greed destroy our neighborhood again.
The current alcohol ban is overly restrictive. New stores and restaurants should be able to sell wine and beer, at a minimum.
Wow – Talk about opposite sides of the spectrum! One thing District 9 does not need is more low/no income housing aka public housing projects.The district has more than enough already as well as too many SROs. Many of the corner stores in the Mission sell more liquor than groceries; they need to be shut down as they only blight the area. FredS describes perfectly what Campos is not doing to improve District 9. However, the Mission is slowly changing for the better with more educated, white collar professionals moving in, buying & upgrading their properties. It is not due to anything Campos has done; if anything he just looks the other way when it comes to criminal behavior.
agreed! there is a big difference between a seedy corner store selling cheap booze to the homeless drunks and a restaurant or grocer selling quality drinks.
and agreed, we don’t need more low income housing. I would love to see all the SRO’s shut down, they just bring crime into the neighborhood. Clearly there are plenty of people who can afford market rate housing in the mission — just see how many houses are sold with many competitive bids on them. If housing or rents were overpriced and there were not enough people who could afford them, prices would drop.
I haven’t seen a seedy drunk on most weekends. There are loads of loud drunks of a different caliber trampling the area.
They get a pass?
No doubt people of all stripes can be seen getting way too drunk on weekends. No one should get a pass. But trashed people pissing on the street and screaming at 2AM aren’t buying their booze from an organic grocery store. Nor would they if one were to exist in the inner Mission.
Wow! I work in the Mission and lived in the Mission since the age of 17. I’m now 32 and have a family. Last year I had to move to San Leandro thinking that it would be more affordable because of affordable rent there. I was wrong. Because of travel costs and day care it did not work out. I can not afford a 1 bedroom apartment in the Mission any more because they have raised the rents to $3,000 a month or more. It is a shame that my children have been raised here, I work here in the Mission yet I can not afford to live in my own neihborhood. I am not a gang member, “homeless drunk”, or a white collar proffessional. I am a hard working mother with 4 latino children (not gang members either), who works for her community and can not live in it. If they want all white collar neihbors try moving to Snob Hill and give the Mission back to humble working families. There are many other families/indaviduals who are being or have been displaced.
Thank you for your comment Melissa
Absolutely agree…the future of the mission depends on an upwardly mobile and diverse population….not folks who hang out, commit crimes and their tiresome enablers.
We have more then enough organic produce stores in the neighborhood. We don’t need one that sells wine or beer.
Sit up, David. Stop slouching. Makes you appear sloppy.
Campos is a joke. What a worthless politician.
“You have an obligation to have your finger on the pulse of a neighborhood … ”
The pulse of the Mission??!! WTF? The pulse is simple. It’s crime, gangs, garbage and disorderly homeless. I’ve lived in between Mission and Valencia a few blocks from the police station for five years. The crime has not improved, the streets are filthy, potholes on most streets, trash is everywhere.
Pulse? That quote is an insult to those of us who live in the pulse – cleaning human feces off our sidewalks, sweeping broken glass up and always keeping an eye on who is on our block.
Who is this guy kidding?! I’ve written his office multiple times without any response. If you don’t represent a union, a special interest group or a developer he just doesn’t care. …
Been in the Mission for over 20 years and it has improved but not nearly enough. There are too many homeless/garbage people and there are too many gang types hanging around. We need a stronger more results oriented supervisor who will actively fight to bring more civilization to the Mission.
Local mission eatery is a joke!!! How do they stay in business? there is never any customers when i walk past. I’ve lived here all my life and their restaurant “locals Corner” is a joke, not a single local person can afford to eat there, and now they want to open a vegan fancy organic market!! if they really were local they would see there already is a lot of real local markets on most corners, but i think they are too rich and better than us to shop there, so they need their own rich people market! But try to blackmail us, oh if we dont get a liquer license you dont get a health food store!! your just greedy!
I think both places are pretty good….been to them and have enjoyed. Very glad about all the new eateries in the Mission