Rival Lawsuits Clash Over Mayor Lurie’s Family Zoning Plan in San Francisco

Romalyn Schmaltz, a 20-year North Beach resident and renter, is among plaintiffs who filed a January lawsuit arguing Mayor Daniel Lurie’s Family Zoning plan was rushed and “haphazard” as it moved through committee hearings before a Dec. 9 final vote. Schmaltz, photographed at Caffe Trieste with Paul “Apollo” Erickson, told reporters the public process “felt like whack-a-mole,” and her coalition is asking a court to pause implementation and force more environmental and infrastructure study.

Neighborhoods United SF and Small Business Forward lead the opposition suit, which KQED reported plaintiffs filed on a Friday morning seeking a halt to a plan their lawyers say overrides neighborhood protections and threatens renters and small businesses. The complaint aims to compel additional impact studies and stronger safeguards for infrastructure, according to the plaintiffs’ stated remedies.

On the other side, pro-housing groups including YIMBY Law, the California Housing Defense Fund, and Californians for Homeownership filed a separate complaint this month arguing the Family Zoning plan does not live up to San Francisco’s 2023 housing element. YIMBY Law executive director Sonja Trauss said, “The Family Zoning plan is not good enough. It doesn’t implement what was promised in the housing element. Maybe it’s better than what we had before, but it’s not going to produce the 82,000 units the city needs.” The Real Deal cites an exact statutory planning obligation of 82,069 units the city must plan for by 2031.

The two suits hinge on sharply different readings of the plan’s yield. Plaintiffs from the pro-housing coalition point to Planning Department projections that Family Zoning could produce between 8,500 to 14,600 units by 2045, a figure they say falls far short of the state target. Yahoo reported the rezoning “stands to rezone 60% of the city,” and KQED described the blueprint as allowing taller, denser housing in large swaths with better access to transit, parks, retail, and community facilities.

Mayor Lurie has defended the package as his housing agenda centerpiece; in his State of the City he accused opponents of putting private interests ahead of families, saying “some people are still putting their own interests ahead of what’s good for San Francisco families by trying to shut down this plan.” Charles Lutvak, the mayor’s spokesperson, said the plan will “help ensure that the next generation of San Franciscans can afford to raise their kids here” while the administration balances neighborhood character and state requirements.

City Attorney spokesperson Jen Kwart told reporters the City Attorney’s Office “would review any lawsuits once served and respond in court.” Supervisor Myrna Melgar, who helped shepherd the plan through committee, described both suits as “weak.” The SF Standard reported that California’s Department of Housing and Community Development conducted a preliminary review and found Family Zoning met state requirements in part based on the Planning Department’s projections; pro-housing plaintiffs dispute that conclusion.

With one coalition seeking to pause implementation and the other pressing for expansion and higher height limits, San Francisco faces competing court fights that could determine whether the city moves forward, retools, or is ordered to conduct further environmental review before development follows the Dec. 9 ordinance.