As SFist has been trying to tell anyone who'll listen, despite the fact that we aren't even reelecting Nancy Pelosi in this one and the mayor pretty much has it in the bag, this election tomorrow is a tense one, and pretty important when it comes to affordable housing. The New York Times now has their own take, saying that the "dizzying number of Election Day propositions" essentially amount to "a referendum on the city’s booming technology industry and a vehicle for voters to vent as they seethe over the sky-high housing prices that have come with it."
The Times highlight the fights over Prop F and Prop I in particular, discussing both sides but declaring Prop F, "the Airbnb thing" against which the company has spent at least $8 million in order to avoid the precedent for other cities, all but dead.
They quote a Yes of F campaigner, community organizer Calvin Welch, as promising to bring the issue back to the ballot in an election that will have a big voter turnout, in 2016. "“No one on our side really believes we are going to prevail," he says, "but I think we have moved the argument in a significant way."
There is also a choice quote, echoing SFist last month, about the fact of SF being expensive being one of degrees, and not necessarily anything new.
San Francisco is an expensive place to live. This was true before the recent technology boom, and the tech boom before that. But the city gets more unaffordable with each up cycle, and it is now nearly as expensive as Manhattan.
Longtime San Franciscans love to debate with the newly arrived as to when, exactly, the city became a playground for the rich. The enduring story of San Francisco is that each new generation of migrants feels as if they are the first people to discover the city’s beauty and its quirks, as well as the first people to discover that lots of other people want to live there, too.
But however and whenever the transformation happened, the days when a regular family could raise children here are probably over.