In his five terms representing the northern edge of San Francisco, former District 3 Supervisor Aaron Peskin authored 1,264 pieces of legislation that became law. I know this because in December, on his last day as president of the Board of Supervisors, his colleagues passed a resolution commending, among other things, his “distinguished and trusted leadership” and “beloved friendship,” while listing the many battles Peskin successfully fought during his long tenure.
Danny Sauter, his 37-year-old successor, who was elected last year over Peskin’s opposition, is seeking to dismantle a massive chunk of his predecessor’s handiwork in one fell swoop. Sauter, a former entrepreneur and community organizer, has offered one 28-page bill that would eliminate a patchwork of planning-code sludge Peskin spent decades enacting in the name of preserving the neighborhoods in his realm.
If he succeeds, Sauter will enable businesses in North Beach, Nob Hill, and Jackson Square, and along Pacific Avenue and Upper Polk Street, to operate more like small establishments in the rest of the city, where a relatively consistent set of rules encourages, rather than restricts, their ability to start and expand operations.
ADVERTISEMENT
If he fails, it will demonstrate the power of a very-much-still-in-the-game Peskin — and signal the limitations of Mayor Daniel Lurie’s efforts to bring pro-development, commonsensical, and efficiency-over-bureaucracy policies to city governance.
I am reliably informed that Peskin is plenty annoyed by Sauter, and his allies are already maneuvering to thwart provisions of the new supervisor’s legislation.
The way Sauter sees his district, “the planning code is pretty out of sync with the rest of the city,” he told me last week at a café near City Hall. “Really complex rules only favor the people that have the money, the political connections, and the power to navigate this process.”
This argument echoes one made by a Small Business Commission member, William Ortiz-Cartagena, whom I wrote about a few weeks ago. He, too, was lamenting the eagerness of progressive lawmakers — in this case, Peskin protégé Connie Chan — to create hoops that businesses must jump through in order to thrive and grow.
Sauter told me about Shadi Zughayar, the very definition of a San Francisco mom-and-pop shopkeeper, who owns several small retail establishments, including Alimento, “a quirky little market” with entrances on Columbus and Green streets in North Beach. Zughayar wants to expand his corner store into the tiny, vacant storefront next door, a former jewelry shop. He can’t, though, because North Beach’s Peskin-authored restrictions prevent two stores from merging, an ordinance meant to prevent big chain stores from moving into the quaint neighborhood.
Sauter could write bespoke legislation for Alimento — which is exactly what Peskin did last year for Bob’s Donuts on Polk Street to get around restrictions he himself created that made it difficult for the bakery to change locations. (I wrote about Peskin’s maneuver as a way of illustrating how he operated — and what a Peskin mayoralty would look like.) Instead of legislating on behalf of one constituent, Sauter wants to make things easier for all of them.
When I visited Zughayar last week, he was busy preparing coffee drinks and bagel sandwiches at another of his shops, Café Angolo, which is next to Alimento. He showed me why he wants to knock through a wall next to his bodega. “All my storage boxes are on top of my refrigerator, because I don’t have enough space,” said Zughayar, a Spaniard of Palestinian descent who has been in San Francisco for almost 30 years.
I spoke to Zughayar’s lawyer, Nick Colla, who explained that Alimento faces two hurdles: the prohibition on merged storefronts and another that prevents him from “intensifying” his market to include a liquor license. Sauter’s legislation will give Zughayar a chance on both counts.
Peskin hasn’t spoken publicly about Sauter’s effort, but he has been making himself felt and heard of late as an opponent of Lurie’s plan to allow more housing to be built along commercial corridors in much of the city. At a community meeting Wednesday night in the Richmond, he joked with the adoring crowd about his semi-retirement — the point being that, at 61, he’s not even a little retired — and said that despite not being elected mayor last year, “I’m having a great life right now.”
I am reliably informed, however, that Peskin is plenty annoyed by Sauter, and his allies are already maneuvering to thwart provisions of the new supervisor’s legislation. When I reached out to Peskin for comment, he suggested I talk to Stuart Watts, president of the North Beach Business Association, a merchants group that Peskin recently joined as board treasurer. Watts told me his members are neither publicly opposing nor supporting Sauter’s bill for now. “We are still in conversations with Sauter’s office, and I’m thankful they are in conversations with us,” he said.
Less reticent to criticize Sauter is the Telegraph Hill Dwellers, an organization Peskin has been associated with for years. It detailed its “strong opposition” to Sauter’s bill in a Sept. 8 letter to the Planning Commission. The organization objects to the young supervisor’s attempt to consolidate the North Beach Special Use District, which has its own set of precious rules, into the North Beach Neighborhood Commercial District. (Sauter thinks one special district is enough.) It calls his elimination of prohibitions on merged storefronts a “solution looking for a problem.” (See Alimento for a problem and the solution.) And it objects to Sauter’s changes to make it easier for restaurants to open. (“The neighborhood would be happy to have a little bit more diversity in food,” Sauter deadpanned.)
The deeper I dig into the legislation, in fact, the more bonkers all the restrictions are. Retail shops that host “arts activities” flat-out aren’t allowed on Nob Hill, for instance. New walk-up establishments, like the much-beloved Golden Boy Pizza on Green Street, are prohibited in North Beach. (Golden Boy is grandfathered.) And “health services” aren’t allowed on the ground floor in North Beach or on District 3’s section of Polk Street.
Said Sauter about the latter restriction: “We don’t want a massive CPMC-style hospital in North Beach. What we want to enable is dentists, chiropractors, and those sorts of things to be closer to where people live.”
I pointed out to the supervisor, who is a supporter of the mayor’s upzoning plan, that with this legislation, he has positioned himself squarely behind the direction Lurie is leading the city, a move that may annoy some of his constituents. It is lost on neither of us that his fellow moderate colleague Joel Engardio very likely will lose his office Tuesday after defying a core chunk of his base by championing a park they hate — and the rest of the city loves. Sauter’s response is telling.
“It’s a different way of doing things,” he said, and certainly different from Peskin’s way. “But I think it’s much more in line with the everyday San Franciscan who wants more housing, who wants more small businesses in their neighborhood. I feel confident.”
Sauter said he isn’t ignoring constituents. “I’m aware of feedback and critiques, and we’re spending time meeting with all the folks who have concerns. And I mull over all the unintended consequences and the impact of this all the time.”
But he also isn’t concerned about provoking Peskin, who many think will run against him in 2028 — or throw his weight behind someone who will.
“If we get in a situation where everyone is running scared and thinking about every decision through the lens of an election, then I don’t think that brings us to a good place,” he said. “I think we need bold leadership.”
Amen to that. If Sauter makes it easier to do business in his corner of the city, he ought to be congratulated for it. It’d be a pity if he were punished instead.