Sponsored link
Thursday, February 5, 2026

Sponsored link

News + PoliticsThe rich aren't leaving SF -- they own it

The rich aren’t leaving SF — they own it

Developers cry crocodile tears to win political points -- but in the end, planners may have to admit they bungled the future of Soma.

-

San Francisco, the Chronicle noted a few days ago, had a $6 billion massive development plan for Soma. The COVID hit, and it’s all on hold.

This entire effort had serious problems from the start – the amount of office space, and the new jobs that come with it, was way out of synch with the amount of affordable housing.

This vision for 88 Bluxome, like most Soma development, came at the cost of the city’s blue-collar history.

But two things:

Developers and commercial real-estate folks are starting to cry poverty, in an effort to convince voters not to support Prop. 15, which is the most important measure on the fall ballot, a change in Prop. 13, and San Francisco’s Prop. I, an increase in the transfer tax on high-end real-estate.

John Elberling, who has been watching real-estate in Soma for 40 years, says it’s all crap: “Of course there will be renewed growth at a future time,” he told the Chron. “This doom and gloom is BS.”

It’s political BS. The people who own big commercial real-estate in San Francisco aren’t leaving. Their tenants are having to leave, but they are holding on. As Elberling put it to me, “they aren’t leaving San Francisco. They own it.”

But there’s also this:

If the office market in downtown starts to collapse, and it turns out that the city doesn’t need as much office space or luxury housing, then San Francisco will have sacrificed thousands of blue-collar jobs in what was once a light-industrial area in the name of a vision that may never come to pass.

For years, city planners have taken the position that production, distribution, and repair jobs were less important than tech, finance, insurance, and real-estate offices.

So much warehouse and industrial space was demolished for the dream of highrise offices and luxury condos, with no concern about where the people who serviced those offices and condos would live.

Now maybe the planners will have to admit what a terrible mistake that was.

But of course, they won’t.

48 Hills welcomes comments in the form of letters to the editor, which you can submit here. We also invite you to join the conversation on our FacebookTwitter, and Instagram

Tim Redmond
Tim Redmond
Tim Redmond has been a political and investigative reporter in San Francisco for more than 30 years. He spent much of that time as executive editor of the Bay Guardian. He is the founder of 48hills.
Sponsored link

Featured

Supes approve affordable senior housing project—but discussion raises larger issue

Nonprofit housers are good neighbors. Speculators are not. But Wiener's law treats both the same way

Party Radar: ‘Heated Rivalry’ rave rivalry heats up

Forget the Super Bowl: SF gets *seven* parties dedicated to HBO's hot gay hockey hunk hit in a month.

Meghna Sharma paints the loneliness and joy of immigrant experience

South Bay artist's work seeks to challenge your perception of mundanity.

More by this author

Supes approve affordable senior housing project—but discussion raises larger issue

Nonprofit housers are good neighbors. Speculators are not. But Wiener's law treats both the same way

Hardly anyone opposes low-income senior housing, but there’s an appeal anyway

Bernal Heights project will go before the supes—but why?

Lurie wants to give away $40 million in public money for a private hotel—but it may not be legal

Plus: Is somebody really, seriously, organizing a "March for Billionaires?" If it's a hoax, it's a good one. That's The Agenda for Feb. 1-8
Sponsored link

You might also likeRELATED