by Randy Shaw on October 14, 2025 (BeyondChron.org)
Civic Joy Fund events boost “Comeback”
“S.F. Rent Surge is Outpacing Every U.S. City. Nowhere else in America is seeing anything like it” says the SF Chronicle. But San Francisco rents are still below those of 2019. In contrast, rents in New York City, Chicago, Baltimore and other large cities far exceed pre-COVID levels; nationally, rents in major cities are up 20% over 2019.
San Francisco is an exception.
So are rising rents from 2024-2025 proof of SF’s “comeback?” Or do rents below 2019 reflect a city with a long way to go?
And is closing sidewalk drug markets essential for a real comeback?
Defining a “Comeback”
Mayor Lurie promotes San Francisco’s “Comeback” whenever anything positive happens in the city. People like that. Lurie’s optimism fuels his widespread popularity. San Franciscans want a mayor who is fighting to get the city back on track. Daniel Lurie is the perfect fit.
But evidence that San Francisco is returning to its pre-2020 life is mixed at best. Consider the factors behind a true San Francisco comeback.
New Housing Development
I wrote in February 2023, “Lenders see the market for new housing in San Francisco as dead. They don’t know who will move into new housing and they are not encouraged by what they see happening on the streets of the city.” See “Is San Francisco’s New Housing Market Dead?”
Sadly, the “comeback” of new market rate housing still awaits. The approval process has vastly improved. And Governor Newsom’s signing of Scott Wiener’s landmark SB79 (upzoning housing on transit corridors) will expand development opportunities.
But most of the roughly 70,000 entitled units are still not breaking ground. And while more builders are getting projects entitled, I’m told by industry leaders not to expect much groundbreaking prior to 2027. Which means San Francisco won’t see many people moving into newly built housing until 2029.
Housing development is a key job creator. It’s absence hurts a wide range of businesses. Trump’s tariffs have made a tough economic situation for builders even worse; why start a project when the President could change the economic rules midway?
Tourism
San Francisco’s tourist market was making major strides before Trump discouraged international tourism. The large convention hotels are doing well but the smaller hotels across the city are not. High occupancy rates can be misleading as they often reflect a sharp reduction in room prices.
Will the Super Bowl and World Cup in 2026 help? I’m told the former won’t make much difference but the latter will. This assumes Trump doesn’t shift World Cup games out of cities with Democratic mayors as he has threatened to do.
Overall, San Francisco’s tourist industry has not returned to pre-COVID levels.
Downtown
The mayor has prioritized downtown and Union Square as key to the city’s economic comeback. Clearly, San Francisco’s economy cannot come back with a downtown office vacancy rate around 30%. The exodus of downtown workers hurts businesses across the city, particularly bars, restaurants and entertainment venues. The loss of transit revenue from these missing workers also hurts BART and MUNI.
Lurie has unveiled a blizzard of directives, programs, and new laws to revive downtown. He has also raised $40 million in private funds for the Downtown Development Corporation to boost the area.
The mayor gets an A+ for effort. He’s doing everything possible to revive downtown. But San Francisco still remains far behind other major cities in downtown office vacancies. As Don Catalano wrote last month, “The City with the Most Empty Office Buildings is San Francisco.”
Despite local and state legislation facilitating such conversions, we have not seen many downtown office buildings becoming housing. I don’t see this ever happening in any meaningful way. The economics simply don’t work.
As for the planned arrival of a college or university—it may be time for an update on the city’s talks with Vanderbilt University. I don’t see major educational institutions making a game-changing investment in downtown but credit to the mayor’s team for considering all options.
San Francisco politics in the 1970’s and 1980’s was divided over downtown development (progressives criticized it as “Manhattinization”). Few attack downtown today. Many nonprofits and vital city services depend on downtown revenue. It’s why virtually the entire city supports Lurie’s efforts for a downtown comeback.
But the comeback remains in the distance. Large turnouts at monthly Civic Joy Fund events downtown are great. But they do not signal a downtown comeback.
Union Square
I’ve told the mayor that I don’t share his view that Union Square’s revival positively impacts the Tenderloin, Mid-Market, SOMA or other neighborhoods still needing a comeback. Union Square was booming for decades while these other neighborhoods were not.
Nevertheless, the demise of Powell Street between Market and Union Square is psychologically destructive for San Francisco. Reviving that once thriving tourist-filled retail corridor must be part of any “Comeback.” Lurie is right to prioritize it.
Otherwise, I don’t see evidence of the transformation Union Square must undergo for a vibrant future. Union Square still operates as it were still the 1950’s. It’s no surprise that businesses are leaving that area for the Stonestown Galleria. Stonestown is what a real comeback looks like. It has transformed to meet the current consumer world.
A Comeback With Sidewalk Drug Markets?
The moderate group SF Blueprint wrote last week, “while videos on Instagram tout our economic recovery and are helping shape the narrative that we are a ‘city on the rise,’ our rise is still tethered to the reality on the ground: the addiction crisis is not getting better. Until it improves, our mayor’s glass half full will begin to more closely resemble a leaky bucket.”
Is San Francisco’s comeback held back by neighborhood drug activities? I clearly think so. But I realize that the city’s boom times in the 1980’s and late 1990’s was not doubted due to drug problems in the Tenderloin, Mid-Market, and Sixth Street. Historically, San Francisco’s comeback has not depended on success in Central City neighborhoods.
But fentanyl changed the drug game. The open air markets are bigger, more consistent, and more visible. Van Ness didn’t have open air drug activities in those prior boom periods; it does now.
Tourists weren’t posting photos of scary sidewalk scenes in those past boom times. And residents weren’t afraid to get off Civic Center transit stations out of fear of confronting drug users or dealers.
The mayor has dramatically reduced tent encampments. But everyone I talk to agrees with SF Blueprint that sidewalk drug activities remain as widespread as when he took office.
San Francisco must be much more aggressive in closing open air drug markets. Drug-free sidewalks are essential for San Francisco to truly come back.
Let’s make it happen!
Randy Shaw
<I>Randy Shaw is the Editor of Beyond Chron and the Director of San Francisco’s Tenderloin Housing Clinic, which publishes Beyond Chron. Shaw’s new book is the revised and updated, The Tenderloin: Sex, Crime and Resistance in the Heart of San Francisco. His prior books include Generation Priced Out: Who Gets to Live in the New Urban America. The Activist’s Handbook: Winning Social Change in the 21st Century, and Beyond the Fields: Cesar Chavez, the UFW and the Struggle for Justice in the 21st Century. </I>
