YIMBY Lawsuit Over SF Supervisor Dean Preston’s Housing Record Is Thrown Out

A lawsuit brought by the leader of a prominent pro-development group against San Francisco Supervisor Dean Preston, accusing him of lying about his housing record in his reelection paperwork, has been thrown out by a judge who called it “linguistic fencing.”

The June lawsuit from Corey Smith, executive director of the Housing Action Coalition, sought a writ of mandate that would have ordered the San Francisco Department of Elections to remove a line from Preston’s candidate statement saying that he has voted to approve 30,000 units of housing during his tenure. Smith argued the number was closer to 14,000, a claim that Preston had dismissed as a publicity stunt that was “splitting hairs” over his housing record.

On Monday, San Francisco Superior Court Judge Richard Ulmer sided with Preston, denying Smith’s accusation that Preston’s statement was “false and misleading.” He said Smith had to cite “clear and convincing proof” that Preston’s statements were false, and “he does not.”

Preston’s housing record has long been the subject of debate and NIMBY speculation, most notably in a 2021 report titled “Dean Preston’s Housing Graveyard” from SF YIMBY volunteer David Broockman, who is cited in the suit.

The report accuses Preston of opposing market-rate housing development projects, including 128 homes at 650 Divisadero St. and 321 more on the site of an abandoned gas station at 400 Divisadero St. An opposing report written in 2023 by volunteers supporting Preston said that he led the charge to change the 650 Divisadero project to a 100% affordable housing development that is “being acquired by the city” and is trying to do the same at 400 Divisadero.

“The fact is that my housing record — available in public records — includes stopping thousands of evictions in our city, taxing billionaires to the tune of over $300 million since I took office, and approving 30,000 new homes, 86% affordable,” Preston said in a statement.

In his lawsuit, Smith argued that Preston was inflating the number of new homes he’d voted to approve by including hotel rooms that were converted to housing during the COVID-19 pandemic and units that were approved through Proposition K, which voters passed in 2020. Preston noted that he had authored the proposition and voted to put it on the ballot.

Ulmer ruled that Preston’s votes to approve both the motel room acquisitions and Proposition K were undisputed and not misleading, and neither was writing that he had approved 30,000 homes in total.

Smith’s suit alleged that more than 8,000 hotel rooms used to house formerly unhoused people during the pandemic, which Preston includes in the 30,000, are “not real homes.” Ulmer wrote that by Smith’s own definition of home — “one’s place of residence” — they are, since “many thousand San Franciscans reside in hotel rooms for months.”

Ulmer also disagreed with Smith’s claim that Preston didn’t approve the 10,000 units of housing approved by Proposition K, as they also needed approval from voters and housing regulators.

“Approval of Prop. K by Preston and his board colleagues was step one to the other approvals,” Ulmer wrote in his ruling.

Smith said he would not be contesting the ruling.

“I’m disappointed in the decision and think Preston’s votes opposing housing speaks for itself,” he said via email.