First wave of fixes to S.F. permitting red tape would help bars and nightclubs
Mayor Daniel Lurie floated the first reforms in his promised overhaul of San Francisco's famously convoluted permitting process on Monday, proposing to cut red tape for bar and nightclub owners looking to extend hours or offer live music.
Speaking at the annual Nightlife and Entertainment Summit, Lurie told a room full of nightclub owners and impresarios that the reforms would make 'permitting faster, more predictable and more transparent.'
Lurie said he plans to introduce legislation next week that would eliminate the need for Planning Department approvals for two types of permits: limited live performance and fixed-place amplified sound. About 60 of these types of permits were sent to the Planning Department during the last fiscal year, which cost about $12,000.
In addition, businesses will no longer need the Department of Building Inspection approval for permits for entertainment and extended hours. The changes will shave 30 days from the approval process.
'You are the visionaries and operators who help this city shine after dark,' said Lurie.
'Our job at City Hall and in government is to create the conditions for your success. We want people off the couches, and I want them in your bars and on your dance floors.'
The modest changes are the start of an initiative Lurie is calling PermitSF, which the mayor has promised will speed up approval for housing and small businesses and improve permit tracking technology. Lurie also vowed to implement a 'shot clock' that would limit the amount of time that the city can review permits, potentially ending instances where applications languish for months or years.
'We are going to be cutting red tape by ensuring that entertainment permits only go to the departments that actually need to review them,' said Lurie. 'That means no unnecessary reviews from planning or building inspection when they are not relevant.'
In mid-February, Lurie said the reforms would be introduced within 100 days.
While the streamlining would only cut a few of the dozens of bureaucratic sign-offs bar and nightclub owners have to deal with, business owners at the entertainment summit applauded the proposed changes.
David Kiely, who owns Mars Bar in SoMa, said making it easier and faster to obtain permits 'is tantamount to our economic survival.' He said Mars Bar is currently trying to extend its hours and get special entertainment permits.
'It's what we need,' said Kiely. 'Anything we can do that is going to draw people to come in and have events is only going to help us.'
Entertainment Commission President Ben Bleiman said at the summit that the city's permitting process for bars and nightclubs is 'a hodgepodge of rules overlapped on one another.' The regulations change from neighborhood to neighborhood, often driven by complaints from residents.
'There was no vision or forward thinking on how these things were put together,' he said. 'These things are extremely frustrating for us and more importantly, frustrating for our faith in our government. If we don't believe our government works, everything falls apart.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
7 hours ago
- CBS News
Embattled San Francisco Zoo CEO refuses to step down
Mayor Daniel Lurie has joined a growing chorus of voices calling for new leadership at the San Francisco Zoo, citing stability concerns at the cherished city institution. "I am confident that stable, permanent leadership will strengthen the zoo and our city's ability to welcome pandas, and the zoo board's decision to identify a new COO and develop a plan to name a new CEO represents real steps in the right direction," Lurie said in a statement released Friday. However, Zoo CEO Tanya Peterson has made it clear she has no intention of resigning. "She has always said that she would resign if it was in the best interest of the zoo," said zoo spokesperson Sam Singer. "But no one has asked her to resign, nor has she offered her resignation. She's plowing full speed ahead to try to bring the giant pandas to San Francisco." The debate over leadership comes amid tensions between zoo management and employees. The union representing many zoo workers recently passed a vote of "no confidence" in Peterson's leadership, citing concerns about safety conditions for visitors, staff, and animals. Critics have pointed directly to Peterson, who has served as CEO for 17 years, as a central figure in the zoo's problems. Some members of the zoo board have reportedly made attempts to remove her, but so far, those efforts have failed. And those board members resigned. Officially, only the board has the authority to remove Peterson. "She's got the skin of an elephant. This doesn't bother her at all. It's like water off her back. She's going to keep doing what's right for the kids and families in San Francisco," Singer added. On Sunday, at the city's Pride celebration, Mayor Lurie declined to answer specific questions about efforts to oust Peterson, saying only, "We're going to talk to the zoo board in the coming days. More to come on that one." Meanwhile, many zoo visitors remain unaware of the political turmoil behind the scenes. "The zoo is always the same and always fun," said Drew Bernier, a father of two young children who makes monthly visits with his family from San Bruno. "We love the zoo. We've got a guest pass. We have the kiddos, one and a half and three and a half [years old]." Bernier said their experiences at the zoo have been consistently positive. "I've never felt not safe at the zoo," he said. "You wouldn't know that there's anything outside that's creating tension." Despite the calls for change, the zoo continues its efforts to grow and improve. Most recently, it hired Cassandra Costello as its new Chief Operating Officer. Peterson is reportedly focused on one of her marquee projects: bringing a pair of giant pandas from China to San Francisco next year.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
If Zohran Mamdani is the future of the Democrats, they're doomed
It would be easy to call San Francisco mayor Daniel Lurie the 'anti-Zohran Mamandi,' but that would fail to do the first-term leader justice. Sworn into office this past January, Lurie – like Mamdani – hails from a storied family, in this case the founders of the Levi Strauss denim dynasty. But that is where the similarities end. Lurie was elected to City Hall last November following nearly a decade of decay across San Francisco. Fuelled by the soft-on-crime policies of former district attorney Chesa Boudin, San Francisco – an urban jewel of technology and wealth – was close to becoming a failed state. Violent crime, open-air drug camps, hundreds of annual drug overdose deaths, a declining population base and desolate downtown plagued the city where I was born and raised. San Francisco's ills were akin to many large American urban centres: Philadelphia with its gruesome 'Tranq' crisis; the epidemic of deadly violent crime devastating Chicago. And, of course, Los Angeles – similarly battling an inhospitable mix of homelessness, drugs and criminality. But sized a mere 49 square miles (one-tenth that of Los Angeles), San Francisco's blight has felt uniquely acute and everywhere – all at the same time. Back in 2022, fed up voters ousted district attorney Boudin, whose laissez-faire prosecutorial approach directly led to the city's spiralling quality of life. Former San Francisco mayor London Breed attempted, honourably, to steer San Francisco back to sanity. But with a record 806 drug-related deaths in 2023 alone – and San Francisco's abandoned business core dubbed a 'ghost town' by major media – Breed lost to Lurie last November. Despite a lack of formal political experience, Lurie is hardly new to politics. His career has been shaped by public service, mostly leading large non-profits focused on tackling urban ills – often in association with scions of other local family dynasties. Lurie's flagship $500 million Tipping Point Community organisation, for instance, was established alongside the daughter of Financial Services billionaire Charles Schwab. The reliance on – rather than rejection of – the private sector for public good has been a key Lurie manoeuvre and stands in sharp contrast to Mamdani's platform. Indeed, much like former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg a decade ago, Lurie has tapped major corporations and philanthropists to fund ambitious city programs hit hard by San Francisco's $800 million budget deficit. Earlier this month, for instance, he set up an entire department, the San Francisco Downtown Development Corporation, to steer private funding to city projects. Lurie has also heavily leaned into San Francisco's abundance of visionary innovators, most notably – and understandably – in the tech world. OpenAI head Sam Altman helped lead Lurie's transition team after his election last year. Such schemes – and there are many – stand in sharp contrast to the economic expansion plan touted by Mamdani, which mostly relies on added taxes levied on New York's wealthiest residents and corporations. And not just any wealthy residents and corporations: Mamdani's own website describes his strategy as shifting 'the tax burden from overtaxed homeowners in the outer boroughs to more expensive homes in richer and whiter neighbourhoods.' Such taxes would then be used to pay for low cost basic services including housing, transport and child care, even groceries. In other words – DEI meets Socialism. If this is the future of the Democrats, they are doomed. The problem with Mamdani's plans is that they rarely benefit – or are even desired – by those for whom they are designed. How else to explain the mostly white, mostly affluent New Yorkers who voted for Mamdani this week. Poor people don't need cheap housing – they need quality housing. They don't want free subway services, but reliable – and never more so – safe public transport. This requires funding, which taxes would supply, but also know-how, supply chains, available workforces and long-term commitments. And these are best delivered by partnering with the private sector. Earlier this month, for instance, crypto billionaire Chris Larsen gave $9.4 million to fund a Real Time Investigation Centre for the SFPD. Investment in law enforcement is another key area where Mamdani could learn from Lurie. Last month the mayor announced that the SFPD would be spared the 15 per cent budget cut he's implementing across city departments. Lurie has also signed an executive order to add 500 police officers to the department by, among other strategies, re-hiring recently retired officers. Lurie's law-and-order focus appears to be working: this week the SFPD made 97 arrests in a single day in San Francisco drug dens – 'the largest one-day fugitive-focused enforcement in recent history,' according to the city. While Lurie boosts officer numbers in San Francisco, Mandani has pledged to slash them. In their place, he will create a Department of Community Safety that relies on social-service schemes – 'evidence-based strategies that prevent violence and crime before they occur,' as he has described it – to maintain public order. This is a city that has finally seen a decrease in spiralling violent crime numbers – precisely because of an increase in police patrols. In 2023, for instance, New York City experienced a 20 per cent rise in arrests, a five-year record according to NYPD Chief John Chell. San Francisco may be far smaller than New York City, but its challenges – rising costs, a decreasing tax base, middle- and upper-class population declines – are eerily similar. Five years after Covid decimated both cities' business bases, mayor Lurie appears to understand that fixing San Francisco requires, above all else, public safety and a robust private-sector. Zohran Mandani should pay attention. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
San Francisco Chronicle
a day ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Video appears to show Mayor Lurie booed out of Trans March
As thousands of transgender people and their allies marched through San Francisco in protest of President Donald Trump's attacks on transgender rights, one local politician became the target of some hostility: Mayor Daniel Lurie. A video posted to X Friday evening appeared to show the mayor confronted by a handful of attendees at Dolores Park, with one declaring that Lurie was 'not wanted here.' Lurie and his attendants then exit the park, the video shows, followed by a few people chanting, 'How dare you come here!' At least one other person can be heard booing Lurie, who meets and hugs Supervisor Rafael Mandelman. The video does not make it clear what prompted the encounter, though San Francisco resident Dimitry Yakoushkin, who posted the video, previously criticized Lurie and the Board of Supervisors for not including the transgender flag in the city's Pride flag raising ceremony this month. Lurie, a moderate Democrat, has generally steered clear of directly criticizing Trump, instead insisting on his own support for LGBTQ+ communities and other vulnerable groups. His reticence has frustrated some progressives who want him to be more explicit in his criticism. Trans March attendees have a history of rejecting politicians they feel are using the event for political purposes. In 2016, then-Supervisor Scott Wiener, who is gay, and Mayor Ed Lee were booed out of the march when they attempted to speak from a stage.
