I’ve been digging into public records about San Francisco’s housing politics, especially in the Mission.
What I’m seeing confirms what many of us already sense: The way nonprofit developers operate is completely broken.
Let me try to explain... 🧵
What I’m seeing confirms what many of us already sense: The way nonprofit developers operate is completely broken.
Let me try to explain... 🧵
Let’s start with this:
If private developers had the kind of backdoor access to City Hall that nonprofit developers have, it would immediately be called corruption.
But when MEDA or Mission Housing do it, it gets labeled “community engagement.” The double standard is real.
If private developers had the kind of backdoor access to City Hall that nonprofit developers have, it would immediately be called corruption.
But when MEDA or Mission Housing do it, it gets labeled “community engagement.” The double standard is real.
With *one* public records request regarding *one* development site, I've received 300 pages of emails, memos, attachments, etc between the D9 office (Campos, Ronen, Fielder) and MEDA and Mission Housing.
The coordination is uncanny.
The coordination is uncanny.
Let's take a step back and acknowledge that the Mission has a concentration of SROs, shelters, transitional housing, overdose prevention sites. All in a few neighborhoods.
Meanwhile, wealthier areas do almost *none* of the lifting.
Folks! That isn't equity. That's offloading.
Meanwhile, wealthier areas do almost *none* of the lifting.
Folks! That isn't equity. That's offloading.
These nonprofits aren’t just service providers. They’re political machines.
They:
– Lobby supervisors
– Orchestrate opposition to market-rate housing
– Absorb public funding
– Block private investment
– Then position themselves to acquire the land or subsidies (aka acquire $$$)
They:
– Lobby supervisors
– Orchestrate opposition to market-rate housing
– Absorb public funding
– Block private investment
– Then position themselves to acquire the land or subsidies (aka acquire $$$)
The incentives are warped:
– More visible homelessness = more grants
– Slower private development = more nonprofit control
– Private investment is sidelined, even when it's needed to scale solutions
So what do we get? An imbalance of public disorder and cash-filled nonprofits.
– More visible homelessness = more grants
– Slower private development = more nonprofit control
– Private investment is sidelined, even when it's needed to scale solutions
So what do we get? An imbalance of public disorder and cash-filled nonprofits.
And just so everyone is clear: I’m not anti-nonprofit. My fiscal sponsor is a nonprofit. What I am is anti-broken system.
The Mission needs to rebalance:
– Spread services across all neighborhoods
– Build housing of all types
– Bring in private investment where appropriate
The Mission needs to rebalance:
– Spread services across all neighborhoods
– Build housing of all types
– Bring in private investment where appropriate
If your neighborhood feels like it’s drowning in public disorder, homelessness, and dysfunction, it’s probably because it is.
And the city’s current nonprofit-led housing approach isn’t solving the problem. They just manage it – and profit from it – indefinitely.
And the city’s current nonprofit-led housing approach isn’t solving the problem. They just manage it – and profit from it – indefinitely.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
