Welcome back to our โMeet the Candidatesโ series, where District 8 supervisor candidates respond to a question in 100 words or fewer. Answers are published every Wednesday.
District 8 includes neighborhoods in the center of the city, including the Castro, Noe Valley, Glen Park, Twin Peaks, Duboce Triangle, Dolores Heights, Parnassus Heights, Ashbury Heights, Corona Heights, and Diamond Heights.
Last December, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed an upzoning plan to allow taller buildings on commercial corridors in San Franciscoโs west and north.
Up until that vote, District 8 only allowed four-story buildings on Haight, 24th Street, Church, Stanyan, Carl, and Parnassus. Now, developers can build up to six stories. On Market, even taller 16-story buildings are allowed.
California mandated that San Francisco rezone. If the city had refused, it would have ceded control over approval of new housing projects to the state.
But the form that rezoning took was contentious. The final vote approving the plan was close: 7-4.
Proponents of the upzoning plan argued that it would allow more housing to be built across San Francisco and help lower housing costs.
Opponents, meanwhile, worried that the new plan didnโt have enough protections for tenants and small businesses who would be displaced if their buildings were torn down to build something new.
This weekโs question: Would you have voted for the plan to upzone San Francisco?
Mission Local color codes the answers to yes/no questions. A green background means the candidate answered yes, a red background means no, and a yellow background means that the candidate dodged the question.
Michael Nguyen
- Job: Patent attorney
- Age: 44
- Residency: Renter, has lived in District 8 since 2006
- Transportation: Driving, public transit and walking
- Education: Bachelorโs degree from Southwestern University, law degree from University of California Law, San Francisco
- Languages: English, some Spanish, some Vietnamese
I opposed the Family Zoning Plan as enacted because it did not do enough to protect renters or prevent displacement. I support more housing, but only with strong tenant protections and a focus on transit-rich corridors and underused commercial sites, not blanket upzoning everywhere.
We should prioritize permanently affordable social housing and preserve at-risk rent-controlled buildings through Small Sites acquisition. The goal should be to add homes where displacement risk is lowest and public benefit is highest. My common sense approach to housing is more measured and not as extreme as some of my opponents.
Endorsed by: GLBTQ+ Asian Pacific Alliance, Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club (#2), San Francisco Green Party, former supervisor Dean Preston … see more here.
Darshini Patel
- Job: Former DoorDash employee, worked on the 2012 Obama campaign and the 2024 Harris campaign, former Obama staffer
- Age: 38
- Residency: Homeowner, has lived in District 8 for 10 cumulative years since 2010
- Transportation: Public transit, walking and biking
- Education: Bachelorโs degree from Wellesley College
- Languages: Gujarati, English
Yes, though I wouldn’t call it a victory. Nearly 50 years after we downzoned, ending the freeze was necessary, but zoning alone is insufficient.
The city’s own economist projects we’ll build under 15,000 homes over 20 years; we need 82,000 in five. District 8 has completed only sixteen homes this year, and over 20,000 approved homes remain stalled citywide. Upzoning won’t unblock those homes.
On day one, I’ll move to publish a tracker for approved multi-family homes and implement enforceable permitting timelines. A city that works for all of us measures homes approved and keys in hand.
Endorsed by: N/A
Manny Yekutiel
- Job: Founder and owner of Manny’s, co-founder and former executive director of Civic Joy Fund
- Age: 36
- Residency: Renter, has lived in San Francisco since 2012 and District 8 since 2013
- Transportation: Driving, public transit and walking
- Education: Bachelorโs degree from Williams College
- Languages: English, Hebrew
I supported the Family Zoning Plan and would have voted for it. San Francisco cannot solve its housing crisis without allowing more homes to be built, especially in transit-rich neighborhoods like ours.
But changing a zoning map is only the beginning. My plan to build 10,000 homes in District 8 is focused on the next step: identifying where housing can actually go, removing the barriers that stop it from getting built, and holding City Hall accountable for delivering results.
Endorsed by: District 8 Supervisor Rafael Mandelman, Assemblymember Catherine Stefani, former Mayor Willie L. Brown Jr, Supervisor Bilal Mahmood, Jane Fonda, Senator Cory Booker, Grow SF, Abundant SF, San Francisco Apartment Association … see more here.
Gary McCoy
- Job: Former staffer to Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi and former vice president of policy and public affairs at HealthRIGHT 360
- Age: 48
- Residency: Renter, has lived in San Francisco for 24 years and District 8 for 15 years
- Transportation: Driving, biking, public transit and walking
- Education: Former City College of San Francisco student, certified phlebotomy technician from Bay Area Medical Academy
- Languages: English
Yes.
SF spent decades building new housing in only a few neighborhoods while the north and west sides built almost nothing. The result: A city with not enough homes for workers, families, seniors and young people. Family Zoning is a correction to that.
It will also create thousands of jobs for our construction workforce, using registered labor apprenticeship programs to train the next generation of young people to quickly build new homes. We have to say yes to housing at every level, from permanent supportive housing to market rate. I support rent control and oppose demolishing rent-controlled housing.
See McCoy’s full response here.
Endorsed by: Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, Supervisor Matt Dorsey, San Francisco Labor Council, Alice B. Toklas LGBTQ Democratic Club, Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club, San Francisco Tenants Union … see more here.
Candidates are ordered alphabetically and rotated each week. Answers may be lightly edited for formatting, spelling, and grammar. If you have questions for the candidates, please let us know at io@missionlocal.com.
Election Day is on Nov. 3, 2026. You can register to vote via the sf.gov website.
Should S.F. allow taller apartment buildings?
Hell, NO!
So if more housing is bad for affordability, as you appear to claim, does that mean that less housing is good for affordability?
In which case we need to start demolishing tall buildings and replace them with short ones!
Living in San Francisco, the home of some of the nationโs tallest structures, and thinking more apartment buildings are a problem.
More housing is supply and demand, BUT… the actual theory behind most yimby folks reasoning is called “filtering”, where even multi million dollar luxury condos will reduce the potential increase rate of housing. However, the effect goes down by orders of magnitude as you move from one market sector to another and that effect is also delayed by years, sometimes decades, depending on the market sector disparity. So an apartment building with *rental* 400 units at $2500/month each will have a large effect right now, while a building with 400 million dollar condos with $1500/month HOAs will potentially effect a small decrease in the rate of increase of rental homes at $2500 in a decade. Now, there are literally a finite number of construction and investment groups in the region who only handle one or two projects a year. They make decisions**solely** on what profits the most, is simplest business process, and returns profits the fastest. That happens to be luxury condos and affordable rental apartments happens to take the longest time to return profit, it is complicated, and doesn’t make as high a percentage. So, if we want more housing *because* there is a lack of affordable housing, then we need to use our power to smooth the track for affordable rental buildings and make that more profitable and *not* rally behind every single tower of million dollar condos. We can build more, but being absolutely mindless about how and where and what we promote is only going to continue the problem. Seriously, we need to get the ~10 companies that do this to focus on what will best help, because we can’t just expect them to build complex projects out of the goodness of their hearts when they could have an immediate Payday with luxury condos.
Real estate is trickle down. If a new million dollar condo is available then a new arrival will buy it. If not he will OMI a rent-controlled tenant and live in an existing unit of housing.
We build luxury housing to take the pressure off cheaper housing and existing residents.
Great point, Bill! It’s like i always say: the way to make entry-level vehicles more afforable for lower income people is to build more and more Lamborghinis and Bentleys, with all the environmental regulations removed! I’m sure you’d agree that building only luxury sports cars would put incredible downward pressure on low-end model prices..
Yes, it’s really about providing supply at all income levels.
When I arrived in this city 30 years ago I wanted to buy a new build condo. But there were none available at that time, at least in the areas I was looking at.
So instead I bought a 4-unit rental building and did an OMI to get the best unit for myself. Then as the other units turned over, I sold them off as TICs, Eventually the building converted to condos, so that is 4 affordable housing units that are no longer available for rent.
In hindsight wouldn’t it have been better for renters if I had bought a new unit?
There’s a reason for 40 feet …
I was a firefighter for 5 years 50 years ago.
The highest we could reach with a ground ladder (aluminum) was 45 feet.
Therefore, the highest you should build in an earthquake zone is 45 feet.
Because in a big shake you won’t be able to get mechanized ladders thru rubble.
The Japanese have hand drawn carts for hose and gear as they’ve been there.
SF has been there too.
Yet, we’ve approved residential buildings nearing a thousand feet.
I say we go the other way and burrow deeply into the earth.
Back in the day Joe O’Donoghue agreed with me.
go Niners !!
h.