S.F. billionaire says he won't take back comments that Aaron Peskin calls ‘untrue and defamatory'
Neil Mehta, managing partner at Greenoaks Capital, mentioned Peskin during a recent appearance on the 'Invest like the Best' podcast in which he spoke about his controversial plans to revitalize the Upper Fillmore area. Mehta's purchase of buildings along the popular commercial strip drew blowback from Peskin and other city leaders last year amid concerns about small businesses being displaced from the neighborhood.
In his remarks on the podcast, Mehta said Peskin 'had picket signs with my face on them, marching down the street, 'billionaire taking over city'.' But Peskin said that didn't happen, though he has spoken critically of Mehta's dealings on Upper Fillmore and he did author successful legislation to create new eviction protections for the city's oldest businesses.
'I have never possessed, carried nor marched down any street with any picket sign with your face on it nor for that matter any sign saying 'billionaire taking over city',' Peskin wrote. 'I hereby request that you issue a public statement acknowledging that your statement was untruthful and incorrect and that you retract it.'
Mehta declined to walk his comments back in a statement Monday issued by his spokesperson Sam Singer.
'We respect Mr. Peskin, but what was said on the record reflects the spirit of the situation,' Singer said. 'We do not intend to apologize or issue a retraction.'
Peskin told the Chronicle that he suspected that Mehta was 'exaggerating what happened' at a news conference Peskin held last year about the eviction legislation. Peskin spoke to reporters about the legislation while standing in front of the longstanding restaurant La Mediterranee. At the time, the restaurant's owner was worried about the business's future after Mehta bought the Fillmore Street building where it is located. La Mediterranee and Mehta later announced that the restaurant would stay at its current location through 2028.
'There was no march. There was a press conference in front of La Mediterranee,' Peskin said. 'It was a very normal formal political announcement of a piece of legislation by a legislator.'
Peskin, who was termed out of office in January, has been critical of Mehta's real estate deals on Upper Fillmore.
'We will not let venture capitalists engage in hostile takeovers of our neighborhoods,' he said last year when talking about his legacy business legislation. 'The fight to save legacy and neighborhood-serving businesses like Cafe La Mediterranee is a fight for the soul of our city.'
In the same podcast appearance where he mentioned Peskin, Mehta also spoke more broadly about his motivations for buying property on Upper Fillmore, saying he plans to restore the former Clay Theater and open an all-day diner.
Mehta said San Francisco is 'a really important city' and 'important for America' because 'it's ground zero for a lot of the most interesting people all over the world to come and build their version of the future.' But he said 'we've tried really hard to kill it' through anti-business policies and 'a lot of things are going in the wrong direction' in the city.
'Losing San Francisco to some of the progressive causes that have plagued the city would be pretty bad,' he said. 'This was one part of my little corner of the world, starting to invest and make it better. It came from a place of wanting to make that street beautiful.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
4 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
How's Lurie doing as mayor? Our new poll on the state of S.F. had stunning results
Six months into Mayor Daniel Lurie's tenure, San Franciscans are far happier with his performance than they were with former Mayor London Breed's one year ago, according to a new poll commissioned by the Chronicle. The poll also revealed a turnaround in voters' attitudes about the city overall: A majority now rate the quality of life to be good or excellent, and half of respondents believe that conditions will continue to improve. The poll, which surveyed 961 registered voters between July 9 and 13, found that almost three quarters of San Franciscans approved of the job Lurie had done so far. His sky-high approval rating is almost the exact inverse of how likely voters rated Breed's performance last July: At that time, just over one quarter of respondents said they approved of the mayor's performance. The poll reflects a sampling of San Francisco residents, and was not perfectly representative of the city's demographic breakdown. Notably, even after weighting the results to better reflect the city's demographics, respondents were 53% non-Hispanic white, while the city on the whole is just 37% white. Still, the poll found no major difference between white and non-white respondents in their support of the mayor — although Asian respondents were more supportive than Black and Latino respondents. The positive results for Lurie come just six months into his term. Last July's poll on Breed, on the other hand, came six years into Breed's tenure — and months before the election. The political landscape in which the two polls were conducted has notably shifted as well. Last July, San Francisco was still struggling out of its pandemic-induced slump and grappling with a bruised national reputation. Campaigns for the mayoralty, swirling controversies around the state of the city and the presidential election were in full swing. Now, even as much of the nation's attention has shifted to President Donald Trump, his sweeping cuts to the government, his harsh immigration policies and even his feud with California Gov. Gavin Newsom, San Franciscans seem to prefer that Mayor Lurie stay out of the fray. Half of voters said the mayor should remain focused on local issues, while just 29% said Lurie should help lead the opposition. Not everyone is bullish on the mayor. Men were slightly more supportive than women, and more recent arrivals to San Francisco were more supportive than longtime residents. But the sharpest divide was political: People who identified themselves as progressives were far less likely to approve of Lurie's performance, and to be bearish on the city's future in general. Strikingly, Lurie was less popular on specific issues than he was overall. While most respondents agreed that he was keeping the city clean, keeping residents and businesses safe from crime and revitalizing downtown, he scored less favorably when it came to providing shelter for the homeless, handling the overdose crisis and addressing the cost of housing. The poll also found that San Franciscans still have mixed reviews of the Board of Supervisors: 38% of respondents said they approved of the supervisors' performance, and 46% said they disapproved. Though that's far from the ringing endorsement that Lurie enjoyed, it's much better than a year ago, when just 20% of respondents approved of the board's job, while 70% disapproved. Overall, San Franciscans are more likely now than last year to say that the city is headed in the right direction. Almost 50% of people in the new poll said they believed the quality of life in San Francisco would get better, while 23% said they believed it would get worse. Last July, 40% believed it would get better, while 32% believed it would get worse. In both years, a little over a quarter of people believed that the quality of life would stay the same. Even as a majority agree that things are looking up in the city, it's clear that a certain nostalgia for the past persists. The Chronicle asked whether respondents found the city to be more fun today than it was 10 years ago. Nearly 60% said it was more fun a decade ago. Just 13% found it more fun today.
San Francisco Chronicle
a day ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
The surprising way San Francisco has become more affordable in the last 20 years
Just 1 in 5 San Francisco households can afford to buy a mid-priced home in their city, where the typical price tag is about $1.29 million. But back in 2005, only 1 in 10 households could afford a mid-priced home. That's according to an analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau and real estate company Zillow. The Chronicle calculated how many households could buy a mid-priced home — including co-ops and condominiums — while keeping their housing payments below 30% of their income. The value of a typical San Francisco home grew by a whopping 66%, from $780,000 to $1.29 million, over the past two decades. But incomes have more than doubled over the same period, from about $58,000 to $127,000 in 2023 (roughly $136,000 in 2025 dollars). While the data indicates more San Franciscans can afford to own a home, the rapid increase in incomes since 2005 is due in part to many of the city's lower-income residents leaving, often pushed out by the city's high housing costs. And homeownership is still out of reach for the vast majority of San Francisco households, as measured by income levels. The Chronicle's analysis was based on Zillow's typical home value for each neighborhood in June 2005 and June 2025, assuming a 20% down payment, the San Francisco property tax rate for those years and the average 30-year mortgage rate for those months. The income estimates for 2025 were based on the Census Bureau's 2023 estimates, adjusted for inflation to 2025. The analysis did not include insurance costs or homeowners association fees, which have climbed rapidly in recent years. The most affordable neighborhoods in 2025 are generally located in and around downtown San Francisco, with more than 40% of households able to afford the typical home in the Tenderloin, Lower Nob Hill and Civic Center. Those neighborhoods, where the bulk of the city's new housing over the past two decades has been concentrated, have also become affordable to many more households since 2005. Only one neighborhood is affordable to a smaller share of San Francisco households than it was in 2005 — Hunters Point, where housing costs have grown at a faster rate than any other neighborhood, though the neighborhood has relatively low home values. The fact that more households can afford a home doesn't help the families that have already left San Francisco. Several economic changes to the region — the tech boom, the 2008 financial crisis, the pandemic — resulted in lower-income households moving out and, in some cases, higher-income households moving in. Of course, not everyone who can buy a home wants to. Renting a home in the Bay Area is often much more affordable than purchasing one, and not everyone wants to live in downtown San Francisco, where most of the for-sale homes are condominiums. And then there's the issue of affording a $300,000 down payment, which is much harder for a first-time homebuyer than someone coming with cash from a previous sale. On the other hand, many San Francisco households have decided that owning a home in the city is worth exceeding the 'affordability' threshold. About a third of San Francisco households with a mortgage pay at least 30% of their income toward housing costs, Census Bureau data shows.
San Francisco Chronicle
3 days ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Wells Fargo employee barred from leaving China, prompting travel freeze
Wells Fargo has suspended all employee travel to China after one of its senior bankers was barred from leaving the country, according to a report from the Wall Street Journal. The employee, Chenyue Mao, a U.S. citizen and managing director at Wells Fargo, was prohibited from leaving after traveling to China on business in recent weeks, the report said. Wells Fargo confirmed the travel suspension and said it is working to secure Mao's return. 'We are closely tracking this situation and working through the appropriate channels so our employee can return to the United States as soon as possible,' the bank, which is headquartered in San Francisco, said in a statement to the Chronicle. Mao, who was born in Shanghai and is based in Atlanta, leads Wells Fargo's international factoring business and frequently works with Chinese firms in the trade finance sector, according to the WSJ report. A spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy told the New York Post that it was unaware of Mao's case. 'As principle, China always welcomes foreign citizens, including those of the United States, to come to China and guarantees their safety and legitimate rights and interests in China in accordance with the law, including freedom of entry and exit,' Liu Pengyu said. 'Meanwhile, foreign citizens in China should also respect and abide by Chinese laws.' In 2023, Charles Wang Zhonghe, a senior executive at Japanese-based financial services firm Nomura, was similarly barred from leaving China for nearly a year for an unspecified reason.
