Bilal Mahmood

• Office: Assembly District 17
• Election Date: Early 2022
• Candidate: Bilal Mahmood
• Due Date: Monday, October 18, 2021
• Printable Version

Thank you for seeking Grow SF's endorsement for the 2022 Assembly District 17 election! Grow SF believes in a growing, healthy, beautiful, and safe city via common sense solutions and effective government.

Grow SF volunteers run an open and participatory endorsement process. The endorsement committee will review all completed questionnaires and seek consensus on which candidates best align with our vision for San Francisco and have the expertise to enact meaningful policy changes.

We ask that you please complete this questionnaire by Monday, October 18 so our volunteers have enough time to adequately review and discuss your answers.

Table of Contents

• Vision
• Public health
• Education
• Urbanism
• Taxes
• Small Business & Entrepreneurship
• Housing & Homelessness
• Policy

Vision

Grow SF believes in a growing, vibrant, healthy, safe, and prosperous San Francisco. We believe in enacting laws that align incentives of private businesses and individuals to promote shared prosperity for every San Franciscan.

This section of our questionnaire seeks to help us gain an understanding of your alignment with our vision for San Francisco. Some of the questions may be outside the scope of the office you're running for.

Do you think, in general, San Francisco has too little, too much, or just enough control over…	Too little	Just enough	Too much
New businesses opening			X
Businesses operating in the city			X
Housing production			X

If you want to explain any positions above, please feel free:

San Francisco has a lot of control over the opening and operations of businesses and the production of housing, which it uses poorly, miring businesses and potential housing developments in bureaucratic red tape that often doesn't even serve the public interest in the ways intended by the regulations. We've seen this with the shutdown of Matcha n' More to the inability of local franchises like El Farolito to expand their businesses. Government has an important role to play in protecting and advancing the public interest, but the current system is broken. We must reform these outdated systems.

Do you think San Francisco spends too little, too much, or just enough on…	Too little	Just enough	Too much
Police and public safety		X
Street cleanliness		X
Homeless services	X
Affordable housing	X
Parks		X
Roads			X
Bus, bike, and train infrastructure	X
Schools	X
Medical facilities		X
Drug prevention and treatment	X

If you want to explain any positions above, please feel free:

To make progress on entrenched challenges such as homelessness, substance abuse, and crimes motivated by financial insecurity, we must address their root causes. Often this is not necessarily a money problem. It's an ideas problem. Addressing these issues with new ideas at their root will decrease costs needed for downstream band-aids, such as street cleaning and policing.

For example, to have world-class public education, we must spend more on schools. We currently have a structural deficit in our school system and our Muni system. We must close those deficits. We must increase teacher salaries to attract and retain qualified teachers. We must increase money for the Muni to ensure services are restored, and even expanded.

Expanded bike, Muni, and BART transit would lead to less reliance on cars. This will in turn reduce our need to spend on roads or car infrastructure.

To end chronic homelessness, we need to expand immediate services like transitional beds that are sorely lacking. But we also need to try new ideas as our current solutions are simply not working in SF. We need a new public-private task force model titled the Built for Zero system that has already worked in 17 cities - providing a dedicated counselor for every unhoused, coupled with real time data monitoring to personalize care and treatment to the individual.

What are the top three issues facing San Francisco, and what would you like to see change?

Our campaign is about returning SF to be a beacon of hope for the middle class. There are three issues that are stifling that dream - housing, schools, and safety.

To address housing affordability, we need to focus on the laws that make it impossible to build. We must make it legal to build multi-family housing by banning exclusionary zoning; make it cheaper to build through streamlined permitting and modularized housing; and reduce gentrification through expanded rent control and tenant protections. At the same time, we must protect renters and keep people in their homes by extending the eviction moratorium and place a 5 year holding period on the Ellis Act. We must also increase access to temporary housing for people experiencing homelessness by doubling transitional housing beds.

To address our public school crises, we need to start raising the bar instead of lowering it. We must expand funding to close the structural deficit facing SFUSD; increase teacher pay to retain and attract quality teachers. We must ensure our schools remain open and are possible to be taught in person by boosting infrastructure for rapid COVID testing, air filtration systems, and expanding access to 5G infrastructure to bridge the digital divide. And we must accelerate our STEM education and bring back Algebra to middle school to ensure our students remain competitive internationally.

To address public safety, we need to start supporting victims rights and holding perpetrators accountable; expand funding for victims of anti-Asian violence through the California Victim Compensation Board; subsidize funding for community-based violence prevention programs and compensation for small businesses experiencing vandalism or graffiti; institute a statewide hate crimes hotline. We should also ensure prosecution and increase penalties for fentanyl dealers through expanded drug market intervention (DMI) strategies, and increase the focus on disposition rates to ensure violent crime is charged as violent crime. Finally, we must reduce recidivism with increased funding for job training and counseling, and disincentivize second time offenses with a guaranteed income to increase financial stability.

Tell us one thing you think needs to change in SF that the average voter wouldn't know about.

We are less prepared for a pandemic now than we were in early 2020 - essential non-COVID-19 public health responsibilities have been deferred, public health and healthcare staff is burned out and the workforce hollowed out, and trust has been eroded. In the meantime, signs of potential new pandemics loom, including multiple spillover events of 8 different avian flus that can infect and kill humans. We must establish a new state department to identify and solve new pandemic threats, achieve a 7-1-7 standard of identifying outbreaks in 7 days, investigating root causes in 1 day, and responding in 7 days.

Public health

How do you feel about labor unions lobbying against vaccine mandates for Covid-19?

Labor unions have the right to lobby and voice the concerns of their members. But it is our responsibility in public office to balance the concerns of groups of constituents against the interests of other groups and the public at large. In this case, I believe the public health needs of our community far outweigh the burden on individuals to get vaccinated, and we must enforce a vaccine mandate on all. Vaccination has been proven to be very safe and effective at dramatically reducing death and illness from COVID-19. Even for individuals at low risk of serious COVID-19 complications, vaccination drives down the spread of COVID-19 and protects the vulnerable members of our community who cannot get vaccinated or for whom vaccines are not very effective, such as immunocompromised people.

Do you support the creation of safe consumption sites in San Francisco?

Yes. Safe consumption sites are an important part of a comprehensive harm reduction approach to addressing substance use disorders, but they are only one piece of the puzzle. Safe consumption sites and other harm reduction interventions can be an effective gateway for individuals to enter substance use disorder treatment, but we must increase access to treatment programs and effectively connect them to harm reduction programs.

Do you support our current laissez-faire approach to open-air drug usage? What would you change?

The current laissez-faire approach is broken and not working; we are in the midst of an opioid epidemic as fentanyl deaths continue to skyrocket. We must ensure prosecution and increase penalties for fentanyl dealers through expanded drug market intervention (DMI) strategies.

Education

Do you support the recall of Board of Education members Alison Collins, Gabriela Lopez, and Faauuga Moliga? Why?

Yes. I am the only AD-17 Assembly candidate to support the recall of all 3 commissioners, and I'm proud to have supported it since Day 1. It takes courage, not performative politics, to hold elected leaders accountable.

How should the Board of Education be reformed to bring more accountability and better performance to the Board?

Historically, the School Board has served as a stepping stone to higher office. As a result, we've seen them focus on performative politics rather than outcomes - focusing on the job they want next, rather than the job they have today. Accountability here is paramount to ensuring we don't have a repeat of the school renaming process, and I support exploring alternative models to electing our school board.

Should the ban on middle school algebra be reversed?

Absolutely. When I worked in the Obama Administration, the goal was to accelerate STEM education. The removal of algebra from middle school in SFUSD is the epitome of performative politics. We need to raise the bar for our kids - not lower it. I will advocate in the State Assembly for a requirement all school districts allow for the option to take Algebra in middle school.

Should charter schools be allowed to operate in San Francisco?

Having been brought up in a public school system, the focus of my campaign is on improving our public school system.

Urbanism

Do you support raising the price of parking and driving in San Francisco?

See answers below

Do you support banning cars from central downtown areas and certain retail or residential corridors?

I strongly believe cities should be designed around the needs of people, not cars. The emergence of Shared Spaces and Slow Streets over the last year have been a fantastic development. It increases density, supports foot traffic to small businesses, and increases the diversity of our community. We should absolutely expand these initiatives to downtown SF and more residential/retail corridors.

While these changes are more in the control of the city rather than the State, the State does control speeding and traffic enforcement laws, where I would focus my efforts on applying pressure to prioritize safe streets.

Do you support charging a toll to drivers who drive into our most congested downtown areas (i.e. congestion pricing)?

I think congestion pricing should be explored as an option to reduce traffic in our cities, but we need to take strong consideration of the impact this would have on people of color and lower income communities. In cities where congestion pricing has worked best, there was a commensurate public transit infrastructure for people to access as an alternative. I would support exploring congestion pricing, but only in complement to - or after - funding for Muni and BART has been increased, service lines restored and expanded, and guarantees that lower income communities would not be financially disadvantaged.

Should San Francisco expand its protected bike lane network?

Absolutely.

Should San Francisco prioritize buses over car traffic by creating more bus-only lanes and directing traffic enforcement to ticket drivers who ignore the restrictions?

Absolutely. Rapid bus transit is an incredible way to increase access to the far corners of our city and accessibility of basic services. My goal in the state assembly will be to expand funding for development of rapid bus transit projects.

We also need to automate traffic enforcement, via bills like AB-550 that were championed by Assm David Chiu - ones that would ticket drivers who speed, but also reduce our reliance on law enforcement in these areas.

Should Uber, Lyft, and other ride-share services be banned?

No.

Should San Francisco permit more Baywheels bikeshare bikes and docks in every part of the city (including Golden Gate Park)?

Yes. We need to expand as many alternative riding sources to cars as possible, and ensure every San Franciscan has a safe, efficient, and equitable access to bikes as possible.

Part of our Climate Change platform is to expand access to both bikes and ebikes - through loans and subsidies - so every individual can afford them.

Should San Francisco permit more scooter-share providers, and allow them to operate with fewer restrictions on the number and locations of vehicles they offer for rent?

We should be expanding as many alternatives to cars as possible in our city, and also ensure we structure our streets to be more accessible and safe for alternative modes of transportation.

Do you support keeping JFK Drive and the Great Highway car-free permanently?

100%. Parks are for people, not cars.

Should Muni be free for everyone? If so, what other programs would you take money from in order to fund this change?

Longterm, I believe we should strive to have a society where the most basic of services are free, to ensure equitable access to all facets of our city. When I led companies in the private sector, we would give free Muni access to all employees - and noted a significant increase in adoption of public transit. However, in the short term, Muni does face a structural deficit, and significant concerns of safety and accessibility. Despite offering free Muni in our company, half of the employees did not use the service for these reasons. So our focus must first be on improving access and reliability to Muni and closing the structural deficit, and later we can explore ways to reduce fares. In the short term, I support existing programs like the Free Muni for Youth initiative, and existing Free Muni programs for seniors, people with disabilities, and people experiencing homelessness.

Taxes

Would you repeal Prop 13, if you had the authority to do so? Or, if not repeal it, how would you change it?

Given the authority to do so, I would repeal Prop 13.

Are taxes and fees on small businesses too low, just right, or too high?

They are too high. The permits, fees, and bureaucracy facing our small businesses have led to increased closures for years, and made it extremely difficult to start a livelihood in our city. This is especially difficult for immigrants who often come to this country and start businesses as their first venture.

An obscene example of this is when a small business is tagged with graffiti, our antiquated city laws charge the business up to $1000 in fees if they do not clean it themselves. These laws must change.

Should San Francisco pursue any and all avenues to impose parcel taxes that could bypass Prop 13, which keeps property taxes on multi-million dollar property artificially low?

Are sales taxes too low, just right, or too high?

The historical focus of our city on taxing small businesses as a revenue stream has reached a tipping point, especially amidst a pandemic, and we must explore ways to help reduce the financial burden on our small businesses in light of last year's hardship.

Small Business & Entrepreneurship

What would you change about the process of new business formation?

Some of the biggest blockers to new business formation are the number of permits required to start a new business, and antiquated health code regulations that make it difficult to set up food trucks. Small businesses have been closing for years at an accelerated rate in our city due to these issues.

While many of these changes would not be in the purview of the State of Assembly, I do believe the State has a role to play in improving access to funding for new business development.

Should San Francisco welcome all businesses, regardless of size?

The size of a business should not necessarily preclude its ability to open at least one location in our city.

Do you think the government should decide which businesses can and cannot open in San Francisco?

While at times we should take into consideration whether a national franchise is pushing out local franchises, San Francisco's government has taken this to the extreme that protective policies are pushing out even local franchises. This should be reformed.

Should all businesses be permitted by-right? If not, which business categories do you think should not be by-right?

Housing & Homelessness

Do you believe that San Francisco has a shortage of homes?

Yes. There aren't nearly enough homes for the number of residents, which drives housing prices up and makes it unaffordable to live in San Francisco for working and middle class families. We need more housing for all income levels.

Do you believe that housing prices are set by supply and demand constraints?

Yes. We have too little supply, and a lot of unmet demand - pushing housing prices up and forcing families out of San Francisco.

Should San Francisco upzone? If so, where and how?

Yes. We should eliminate exclusionary zoning, across the entire city.

Should homeless shelters be exempt from CEQA, Discretionary Review, and zoning?

CEQA currently prioritizes short-term environmental impact instead of considering longterm benefits. This has led to blocking new housing developments, because longterm benefits of more housing - like less emissions and less car travel - are not accounted for - be them shelters, affordable housing, or market rate housing.

We must reform CEQA, discretionary review, and zoning practices to permit housing of all types.

Should subsidized Affordable housing be exempt from CEQA, Discretionary Review, and zoning?

Yes. See above.

Should market rate housing be exempt from CEQA, Discretionary Review, and zoning? Yes. See above.

Policy

Now that we know where you align and differ from our vision for San Francisco, we'd like to get some details about how you intend to use your elected office to achieve your goals.

Why are you running for Assembly?

I'm running for Assembly because San Francisco is headed in the wrong direction, and the status quo is unacceptable. The American dream of upward mobility is out of reach for most San Franciscans. We see and feel the realities of this every day: a housing shortage that has led to rampant homelessness, and an oppressive cost of living, pushing families and workers out of San Francisco; a lingering pandemic and public schools that were closed for too long, leading to permanent learning loss; a spike in hate crimes against the Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI) community; and consequences of climate change that threaten our city's shoreline neighborhoods with flooding and our air quality with toxic smoke.

Despite these harsh realities, I believe in San Francisco. Our city is resilient – we weather great difficulties and bounce back stronger each time. But we need a new champion in the State Assembly to shift our current trajectory. We need to deliver real results to solve our city's most intractable problems. I understand how the public and private sectors can work together to deliver the greatest benefit to everyone. I'm a policy wonk who has worked on national policy solutions in the Obama administration. And as the son of immigrants who grew up seeing my parents help refugees and workers, I've paid it forward throughout my own life by investing directly in people and organizations to empower communities.

My goal is to bring bold new ideas to Sacramento. We'll do this by securing a guaranteed income for all, stopping anti-Asian violence and reforming our public schools. We'll build new systems to stop future pandemics and actually eliminate chronic homelessness. And we'll create a greener and more sustainable economy by fundamentally reforming our housing policy and subsidizing complete electrification of all vehicles and buildings. Together, we can ensure San Francisco remains a beacon of hope for equity and justice across all intersections.

What is your #1 policy goal?

My #1 policy goal is to address the existential threat of climate change. We have years left to stave off permanent climate change, and we need bold leadership.

We must act now to slow down the impacts of climate change we're already facing – wildfires causing toxic smoke and rising sea levels that threaten our shorefronts. The causes are continued reliance on big oil and gas, a high cost to electrify emission sources (houses, vehicles, agriculture), and antiquated regulatory systems that don't accommodate new technologies.

The solutions will require reforming our housing policy, our transportation policy, and economic systems to supercharge a new green economy.

We will start by implementing 0% interest loans to every individual to subsidize retrofitting their house, vehicle, or business to be 100% carbon neutral; administered through a new WWII-style planning commission in California Climate Investments advising on investment strategies through state public bank

We'll Implement a carbon tax to fund the climate loans; reform cap and trade systems to subsidize new carbon capturing technologies especially in agriculture and factories.

And we'll funnel climate loans and subsidies to fuel a revitalization of the manufacturing sector for green energy production; provide job training and placement for all workers in legacy industries to the green economy.

How will you build the coalition and political capital to enact your #1 goal?

I would follow the same model that Scott Wiener has used to turn the tide on housing policy: 1) Boldly position new legislation to set the objective, 2) build a grassroots movement to build awareness, 3) and work with the private sector to apply pressure on the political system.

We will work with existing YIMBY and climate advocacy orgs to build grassroots movements. And we will work with climate tech orgs to apply pressure on our government. Having been a supporter of YIMBY orgs for years, and given my experience as a scientist and executive and many relationships with climate technology companies, experience working in the Obama Administration where we coalesced public and private partnerships to eventually pass the JOBS Act, I know how to pass policies that require input from all parties to achieve this goal.

Will the power of the office of State Assembly be enough to achieve this goal?

Yes. All of the proposals in our climate policy platform are in the jurisdiction of the state legislature.

Assemblymember Chiu has vowed to continue working on some bills of his like AB550 (automated speed enforcement) which did not get through the Legislature this year. What will you continue, and what will you change from the previous office holder?

I would look to honor Assm Chiu's legacy on traffic, climate, and housing in the Assembly. I was a strong supporter of automated traffic enforcement and the hate crime hotline that Assm Chiu tried to pass last year, and will ensure it proceeds to a vote again next year.

What are your #2 and #3 policy goals?

My #2 goal is to reform our housing policy. The housing crisis is central to San Francisco's most pervasive issues – homelessness, gentrification, and cost of living. The causes are a lack of personalized care, significant lack of transitional housing, racist zoning practices that make it impossible to build new housing, and extreme permitting requirements that make it expensive to build.

I will work to make it legal to build multi-family housing by banning exclusionary zoning; make it cheaper to build through streamlined permitting and modularized housing; and reduce gentrification through expanded rent control and tenant protections. I will also work to extend the eviction moratorium and place a 5 year holding period on the Ellis Act so new building owners must own the building for that period of time before they can invoke the Ellis Act; increase access to temporary housing for people experiencing homelessness by doubling transitional housing beds.

My #3 goal is to ensure a guaranteed income for all. Income inequality is one of the most existential threats to our city and our democracy – the top 10% have received increased wages by 50% while the bottom 50% have seen reduced wages by 10%. The causes impact our working class the most – high costs of living, small business closures, and poorly functioning unemployment benefit systems like EDD.

I will ensure $500 per month for every family in need earning less than $75,000 a year. We will do this first by expanding the California Earned Income Tax Credit (CAlEITC) ceiling to $75,000 regardless of family type. Longterm, we will proceed to direct monthly cash infusion of guaranteed income checks in collaboration with statewide public banks; and reform our EDD system to be modernized and functional.

For a full list of priorities and platforms - on everything from universal healthcare to civil rights, see https://www.bilalforassembly.com/platform

Will the power of the office of State Assembly be enough to achieve these goals?

Yes. All of these proposals in our policy platform are in the jurisdiction of the state legislature.

What is an existing policy you would like to reform?

Prop 64 was a great start to ensure we do not prosecute individuals for marijuana possession. But the law did not go far enough - there are still close to 100,000 people (predominantly people of color) who still have marijuana convictions. This is because the law was implemented incompletely, and often puts the onus on the individual to apply for expungement.

I would reform Prop 64 to set a deadline for expungement of Jan 2023 on every county, after which any existing marijuana convictions still pending are automatically expunged. This will enable thousands of individuals to immediately qualify for public benefits and free them from employment and housing prejudice as a result of past convictions.