Here’s the latest in our “Meet the Candidates” series for District 5, in which we ask each candidate to answer one question per week leading up to the election. Four candidates are challenging incumbent Supervisor Dean Preston to represent District 5, which spans from the east end of Golden Gate Park through Haight-Ashbury, Japantown and the Western Addition, the Lower Haight and Hayes Valley, and most of the Tenderloin.
้ฑ่ฎไธญๆ็/ Leer en espaรฑol
Current San Francisco law allows for rent control on apartment buildings constructed before 1979.
Proposition 33, a state measure on the November ballot, could repeal the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act of 1995, which prohibits local jurisdictions from imposing rent control for new tenancies.
In San Francisco, we already have a law ready to go into effect if Prop. 33 passes: The Board of Supervisors unanimously passed an ordinance last week that would move the rent control cutoff date to 1994.
So we asked the candidates: How do you think rent control should be applied in San Francisco? What limits should there be โ on the date a building was built, the type of development, etc?
Dean Preston
- Job: Incumbent, tenant attorney
- Age: 54
- Residency: Homeowner, in District 5 since 1996
- Transportation: Public transit
- Education: Bachelor’s degree from Bowdoin College, juris doctor degree from University of California Law, San Francisco
- Languages: English
All tenants deserve rent control and housing stability. Rent control helps working San Franciscans afford to live here.
As a longtime tenant-rights advocate, Iโve authored numerous laws to strengthen rent control, and helped lead the fight to save rent control when corporate landlords (who are now bankrolling my opponents) tried to abolish it through a state ballot measure. Iโm a strong supporter of Prop 33, which will allow SF to expand rent control to cover more units and regulate initial rents at the start of a tenancy.
I am the only candidate endorsed by the San Francisco Tenants Union.
Endorsed by: Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Bernie Sanders, Public Defender Mano Raju, United Educators of San Francisco, San Francisco Labor Council, San Francisco Tenants Union, National Union of Healthcare Workers … read more.
Scotty Jacobs
- Job: Marketing
- Age: 30
- Residency: Tenant in District 5 since November 2022, homeowner
- Transportation: Public bicycle
- Education: Bachelor’s degree from Washington University
- Languages: English
As a renter in favor of expanding rent control, housing affordability requires building at all levels. We have a supervisor who makes perfection the enemy of great โ and has a troubling housing record; heโs blocked several high-quality developments (including at 400 Divisadero St.)
I support applying rent control on a rolling 28-year lag from project completion; this pragmatic approach (supported by the YIMBYs) incentivizes new housing construction (including affordable) while adding to the rent-controlled stock.
Defeating Prop 33 is a critical imperative for ensuring we continue to build housing โ including affordable housing โ in San Francisco. Vote NO on 33 this November.
Endorsed by: Mark Farrell, TogetherSF Action, Marina Times, Alice B. Toklas Democratic Club, Raoul Wallenberg Jewish Democratic Club, Connected SF, and UA Local 38.
Allen Jones
- Job: Activist
- Age: 67
- Residency: Tenant in District 5 since November 2021
- Transportation: Wheelchair
- Education: Teaching Bible studies at juvenile hall
- Languages: English
I must hold back my opinion on this question. Blame Aaron Peskin, who got his colleagues to pass a law this past week that would extend rent control to thousands that hinge on an โif.โ
The if? โLetโs let the residents know where we are headed, and to come up with a process if Prop. 33 passes,โ reported SF Chronicle. I will never be dumb enough to buy that excuse.
I support the expansion of rent control. I voted โyesโ on Prop. 33. Aaron Peskin and Dean Preston are drinking out of the same City Hall water fountain. Not good.
Autumn Looijen
- Job: School board recall co-founder
- Age: 46
- Residency: Tenant in District 5 since December 2020, landowner
- Transportation: Public transit
- Education: Bachelor’s degree from California Institute of Technology
- Languages: English
I would keep rent control as-is. Rent control gives neighborhoods stability, preserving our neighborhoodsโ culture and letting people grow deep roots in their community.
The cost is that fewer housing units are built … which means rent prices rise more sharply for newcomers.
My focus would be on increasing the supply of rental homes in SF, especially at lower price points. Make it cheaper to build small family apartments like in Tokyo and Paris. Promote co-housing. Make it expensive to keep a second home here.
Bringing down prices lets us keep our promises to newcomers who need sanctuary.
Endorsed by: San Francisco police union, Marina Times, Chinese American Democratic Club.
Bilal Mahmood
- Job: Founder of private and philanthropic organizations
- Age: 37
- Residency: Tenant in District 5 since May 2023
- Transportation: Walking
- Education: Bachelor’s degree from Stanford University, master’s degree from University of Cambridge
- Languages: English, Urdu
As a lifelong renter, I am a proponent of Proposition 33, and also support the rent-control-expansion ordinance unanimously passed last week by the Board of Supervisors that would apply to rental buildings completed before 1994, with the potential to add thousands of rent stabilized units in San Francisco.
San Francisco is facing a housing shortage and the best way to serve District 5โs diverse population of seniors, immigrants, and young folks over the long term is to build more housing at all levels, and ensure we meet our housing element goals of 82,000 units of housing.
Endorsed by: Mayor London Breed, TogetherSF Action, San Francisco YIMBY, State Sen. Scott Wiener and DCCC Chair Honey Mahogany … read more.
The order of candidates is rotated each week. Answers are capped at 100 words, and may be lightly edited for formatting, spelling, and grammar. If you have questions for the candidates, please let us know at eleni@missionlocal.com.
Read all of the District 5 candidates' answers here, and the entire "Meet the Candidates" series here. Illustrations for the series by Neil Ballard.
You can register to vote via the sf.gov website.
It is unfortunate that candidate (and Marin landlord) Scotty party zone Jacobs is not a full throated supporter of an expansion of rent control for San Franciscans. Even worse, he seeks to DEFEAT Prop 33, the Justice for Renters ballot measure that would allow individual cities across California to determine tenant protections. How could Scotty know (having only very recently moved to D5 from the Presidio and D2) that our home district of D5 is one of the most tenant rich districts in all of San Francisco? The Tenderloin is 90% renters; most are low income elders and families. Maybe Scotty should run for City Council in Ross or Mill Valley? Or for Prom King?
At a forum a few weeks ago, Bilal bellyached that his landlord raised his rent, trying to make himself come across as an average TL renter. The guy is rich enough to blow $600,000 of his personal wealth to try to buy himself a state assembly seat. His attempt to bond with TL renters is gross. He could have bought a condo in the TL (fancy one bedroom with an enclosed terrace in a beautiful art deco high rise for less than that – Google it: 631 O’Farrell Street, Unit 1606) with the money he found in his sock drawer (or wherever he’d put it) that he used to try to buy himself a job.
Bilal attacked Supervisor Preston for pointing out the difference between a rent increase for Bilal and one for a working-class family of five. Bilal thought Supervisor Preston was attacking his family, which quite simply is not what happened. Though of course Supervisor Preston (and his family) are fair game for the rightwing (damn, I mean moderate) billionaires and their puppets who want to unseat him, all Bilal could do was become indignant and belligerent because someone suggested his substantial wealth cushioned him from the pain of a rent increase.
Bilal’s YIMBY ideas are simply stupid. If a project won’t “pencil out” now when rents are high (ostensibly because of lack of supply), how the fuck is it going to pencil out for a developer after a flood of new luxury units will ostensibly push the rental price so low that it working class families will magically be able to afford the rent?
We know landlords don’t let the “free market” decide the price of rent. Apartment units aren’t end of the day perishable fruit at the farmer’s market that the farmer will let go for half price or less rather than throw it in the compost before heading home. Even the the recent concrete apartment blocks with shiny coverings (and perhaps a “whimsical’ element) have a longer shelf life than produce – despite their low quality construction. Billionaire developers and REITs just hang onto them rather than lower the price.
That market manipulation is exactly what happened along mid-Market before Ed Lee thought Twitter needed a tax break. If the market worked the way the “moderates” say, there wouldn’t have been any room for Twitter to move in. The rents on long-vacant offices in the area would have plummeted, making it possible for many of the artists and non-profits that were displaced during the first tech bubble to move to those still empty offices rather than close up shop or skip town.
Affordable housing is a good idea . Rent control with reasonable rates of increase may be ok. But then all business must be controlled on how much they can increase what they charge . Then we donโt have a democracy or a capitalism.
Not everyone can pitch a tent in Beverly Hills and demand housing there .
Most who cannot afford to live in one place move to a place they can .
Life is unfair .
The government , and thus other taxpayers should not have to or need to help pay for someones shelter longterm, unless disabled .
Most would move to a place where they can get a job and help support themselves and contribute.
In SF , there is this unrealistic expectation that one doesnt need to work , one can demand they live whereever they want , the others must pay for it and one can hang out and do drugs or do nothing and others need to take care of them .
Get real . Currently there are no jobs downtown. Where is a housed addict by SF taxpayers in the Tenderloin going to work ? How many homeless or addicts on the government dime are working and where ? Housing them in the Tenderloin is the wrong place to place them.
This is not ok.
Go to a socialist country . They would put these persons in a dormitory and one would be working in a factory . At least they would be productive and not strung out on drugs in a shelter .
Temporary help for shelter food and clothing is ok but expecting the government check to come every month is really selfish and should make people question their motives and self worth
People should be able to have shelter but maybe they cannot all live where they want .
That is how most of us live .