Listen Back Reflections

What follows is a summary of what we’ve heard from conversations, gatherings, and interviews we’ve experienced around SoMa. Take a read and let us know—did we hear you?

Where Does This Information Come From?

We’ve had the privilege of talking to 600+ of you in a few ways. This includes:

Community mixers with SoMa organizations, businesses, and residents - Community art interventions - Thirty one-on-one interviews - Four listening sessions - Days of canvassing - Surveys -Attending community events

What We’re Hearing So Far: Big Takeaways

  • Narrative work is important outside and inside SoMa, especially as people move into the area. Increased development has left some longtime residents and businesses feeling “othered” under narratives that posit there is no space for them. Campaigns reiterating there is a place for everyone are key. SoMa is a place that resists binaries, and this is something its communities can embrace. It’s not just a business district. It’s not just a residential area. It’s not just a nightlife district. It’s all of these things that make it robust, resilient, and special. 

    “​​We need more communications on the diversity of SoMa. What all is there? Most people don’t know.” 

    “One thing doesn’t make a neighborhood.”

    “Although SoMa may not look or seem like the safest, the hood is where community members feel the safest. It is our home and where we belong.”

  • The Fund may be inclined to focus on “what” it funds in SoMa. However, our conversations with respondents lean more towards curiousity around “why.” People want to hear and see clear ties, intentionality, and strategy between funds and the mission of stabilizing. With a strong focus on foundational elements that are key to stabilization; for example perception. This might look like targeted storytelling work that shifts current narratives about SoMa–sharing its history, its diversity, all that continues to thrive there, and the work that’s being done by organizations on the ground. While narrative work or storytelling may not seem directly tied to grantmaking, we hear how important people believe SoMa’s operating environment is for the Fund’s success. If sentiments toward SoMa are negative, no matter investment(s) MOHCD makes, stabilization will be marginal because change happens to the extent people feel invested.

    “SoMA is deteriorating in accessibility and perception in media and looks. [Nothing gives] people a reason to go into the city. Want to make it beautiful? Have to invest and spend time in it.” 

    “[Support] narrative work [is key] . People say I heard the area is bad and there are zombies. The media doesn’t help.”

  • One recurring word in conversations with small businesses and residents is “activation.” There is a desire to see more activation in SoMa– specifically, more intentional investment in the experience or “vibe” of walking around SoMa. However, conversations differentiate between a one-off event, periodic events, and activations. Activation has been described as designing, decorating, and/or animating space(s) within SoMa regularly and consistently over time.  For example, creating small vignettes of play or rest that “activate” an alley. Or “activating” a square with emergent market spaces that allow small businesses to sell lunch every day over months or years. These activations don’t necessarily have to be permanent, but they are something consistent that those working and living in SoMa can come to expect over time.

  • The “how” of investment is just as important for folks as “where” investments go. Conversations about investment often move from “what” the investment is to process. People want to know the processes for administering the Fund, awarding funds, and how grantees implement funded projects.  For example, does funding encourage grantees to try new things? Does investment require grantees to work across different communities? Etc. Process recommendations we’ve heard from communities are for the Fund to be holistic–work with other initiatives happening throughout SoMa.  And, require more cross-community meetings and convenings to talk, fellowship, and engage in activities.

    “We're too separate and individualized...focusing on our own agendas rather than community agendas. There are a lot of organizations here, but we need to come together and support each other more.” 

    “In order for a community to be real, the community must invest and create a community. If there are silos and no connecting, then it’s not activated.”

    “Most orgs don’t gather outside of their programs.”

  • Pulling at the thread of experience and vibe, when asked what areas they want to see the Fund invest in, most respondents share how they want to feel and what they want to see instead of or in addition to specific investment categories. This nuance is important. As MOHCD continues working alongside communities to ensure the Fund is responsive, presenting specific investment areas to initiate conversation may not be as important as building a collective vision. Then, co-designing and test ways of translating those visions into reality through investment.

    “It’s so hard focusing on the things that are happening that it’s hard to lift our horizon in terms of seeing the bigger picture–the horizon of working with others as well as the horizon of what could be.”

  • Folks living and/or working in SoMa report little awareness of events and initiatives happening around SoMa. SoMa businesses and business associations voice frustration with the small number of events on SoMa-specific calendars–and the number of calendars that exist for SoMa. One business intermediary observes a big barrier for businesses in their part of SoMa is awareness—having the bandwidth and expertise to market and promote events, programs, and activities such as live mic nights. Similarly, as to the Fund, most individuals and businesses we spoke with were not familiar. More importantly, most were unfamiliar with the community programs and initiatives occurring across SoMa under the Fund. Individuals familiar with initiatives happening across SoMa were often doing community work themselves and cited organizations known for canvassing such as SOMCAN.

Shifts You Want To See To The Fund Post Lockdown

Post-pandemic lockdown we hear a desire for the Fund to take a holistic approach as a unifier, storyteller, amplifier, and connector that leverages its proximity to the City’s resources and relationships with other City departments within SoMa. There is a general understanding that the real estate market in SoMa is outpacing revenues that come into the Fund each year. Still, instead of limiting activities to grantmaking alone, and limiting the number of areas the Fund invests in, there is a desire to see the Fund take more creative approaches that leverage relationships with other city departments and initiatives to strengthen how far Fund dollars go within SoMa and SoMa related initiatives. 

Businesses and individuals want to hear more about who is engaging with the Fund, what grantees are doing, and see accessible avenues offered for ways to plug into the Fund. They also want the work happening under the Fund to be communicated out to larger audiences as a way of countering the “Doom Loop” narrative. Panning out, both organizations and businesses want to see the Fund address the increasingly complex challenges brought on by the pandemic lockdown by expanding the Fund’s overall accessibility. Accessibility areas to look to are: (i) the RFP process, (ii) the grantmaking process, (iii) grant eligibility requirements, and (iv) service offerings. How this might look is more widely communicated RFP announcements, office hours to ask questions about the Fund, allowing more variety in the types of grantees, treating the Fund as more of an ecosystem and network, or resourcing support for grantees implementing projects funded by the Fund with services such as technical assistance.  

At the same time, respondents ask that we not only think about “what” the Fund invests in, but “how” the Fund and its funded projects operate. On the programming side, there is a desire to see more experimental approaches that help rebuild SoMa’s brand and narrative while including more people on the ground and working across more communities.  At the same time, desires to see the Fund take a holistic investment approach that centers quality of life in SoMa have only grown as people continue to transition out from the pandemic lockdown. How this might look is supporting initiatives focused on third spaces for rest, meetings, and convenings as well as activations (physical and intangible) that alter the vibe people experience walking SoMa. Both safety and cleanliness continue to be top concerns that respondents want to see more investment in, as well as continuing to invest in arts, culture, green spaces, youth, and ensuring people can stay in their homes. There is also a unifying desire to see more focus on small businesses–who have been hit hardest by the COVID-19 lockdown and the work-from-home policies that ensued from it. While this can include education and training on starting a business, there is a larger desire to see resources focus on creating places and spaces for businesses to consistently sell as well as support businesses around issues essential to sustainability such as marketing, building relationships, procurement, and learning how to navigate hostile economic environments.

In all, the biggest shift we perceive following the COVID-19 lockdown is for the Fund to reimagine its role and opportunities to facilitate transformative outcomes that continue to shift with the ever-changing and ever-evolving definition of “stabilization.” You all have been unequivocally clear that you believe the Fund must prioritize a way of looking at the whole to stabilize and that means revisiting possibilities around foundational elements of planning, infrastructure, and services given the Fund’s limited resources, reach, and scope. This means there must be strategic and intentional focus areas–if the narratives people hear are only negative, if the space is unclean, if there are no affordable grocery or drug stores, or if people don’t feel safe then current grantmaking will make SoMa more livable–but it will not stabilize. The breadth and complexity of the challenges in SoMa require that there be a focus on creating an environment that is amenable to holding, supporting, and amplifying the work that happens by the Fund’s grantees requires there be trust, pride a feeling of safety, and community that encourage people to invest, further, and carry forward the community work that’s happening.  

How, and to what extent these insights and desires will be translated and rolled into the initiative will continue to be a conversation. Still, it is incredibly helpful to have this synthesis of what the communities we’ve talked to want to see moving forward.

The Breakdown

We’ll take a moment to provide a little more detail on the “Big Takeaways” by looking more closely at what SoMa communities have said. We hope what you read helps inform your organizations, projects, or initiatives and might inspire the businesses, projects, programs, or initiatives you start. 

  • These are comments, thoughts, and ideas that we overwhelmingly encounter in our conversations and interactions.

    • Safety and cleanliness come up in every interaction–from conversations to surveys and listening sessions. 

    • People who live or work in SoMa find it difficult to keep up with what is happening there. There isn’t a central calendar in SoMa that makes it easy to stay engaged. 

    • Similarly, there is a desire to see more investment into SoMa’s physical infrastructure–building more greenspaces, dog parks, third spaces, and places to hang out, convene, or rest. A lack of accessible, free third spaces is a challenge that discourages people from hanging out in the area or lingering at any particular business.

      • For existing parks, there is a desire to see them activated with consistent long-term programming so that they feel safer to visit. However, safety is not necessarily associated with more policing but, instead, more people. Some of you noted greenspaces privately owned by businesses or developers tend to remain empty because they are heavily monitored by security and people don’t feel comfortable or welcome sitting for long periods. Community organizers also found coordinating to host events or activities in privately owned spaces difficult–because of perception or cost inaccessibility.

    • Improving facades from abandoned buildings and adapting vacant space for reuse is also another top priority. There is a desire to see more people in the spaces that are sitting empty, at the same time activating those streets with more traffic to support more safety. 

    • As development slows, and less funding goes into the Fund, respondents were told the Fund may not focus on capital improvement projects as much. Still, there is a desire to see more affordable housing for the “middle”, housing for unhoused neighbors, and the development of more community centers. Organizations who do not currently have a building want to see the Fund support them in some way to purchase a building for their communities. 

    • Supporting small businesses through grants, subsidies, and space is a priority across communities and demographics. More specifically, resourcing businesses to occupy space (permanent, temporary, or emergent), navigate changes from COVID-19, support businesses in experimentation, help activate establishments with programming or decor, or rent support.   Supporting small business is seen as key to creating the environments and experiences in SoMa that encourage people to invest and stay in the area.

    • Supporting small businesses also means creating more consistent opportunities for them to engage and sell. One example given was a mercado space that allows small businesses to set up around lunchtime for workers in the area. Small business owners we spoke with know there are gaps in service offerings in SoMa–gaps in their open hours, staffing, availability, etc. But, they also note that expanding any of these things is expensive and could mean financial ruin. The demand isn’t there for the change, while others cite a lack of demand for changes not being made. 

    • Many living and/or working in SoMa believe there are few opportunities to participate in community work or building around the area. We note that, as of this writing, a number of organizations do not have regular gatherings or convenings of their communities. Some have never hosted a large community gathering. A few reasons for this were bandwidth, staffing, space, or the stress of navigating chronic crises across their communities. 

      • Additionally, it can be difficult to find a consistent communications infrastructure across SoMa that makes it easy for people to get involved. We struggled to find community bulletin boards, newsletters, or zines. Most opportunities are communicated through community-specific papers, Reddit, or community benefit district newsletters. While there are public access stations, a private library open to the public, and other forms of infrastructure within SoMa most were not aware.  

    • There is a hunger to gather people for collective creative activities that ask SoMa stakeholders to share their thoughts, meet others, and hear what’s happening in the neighborhood. Most successful for us have been gatherings that bring people together and have some dimension of reciprocity.

  • Throughout conversations, you all shared opportunities you see in SoMa and for the Fund.

    • Funded projects can lean more into working across all parts of SoMa–sharing lessons, knowledge, and learning. For example, “East Cut” has emergent green space for residents and housing and is “creating spaces where there is interaction” which we heard a strong desire for across residents in West SoMa. 

    • There are a number of initiatives that the City is funding within SoMa through different departments. While each of these alone may not be enough, there is an opportunity to braid resources across these programs so that the Fund, and the initiatives funded under it, aren’t operating in isolation. City departments coordinating and pooling resources from their SoMa initiatives could create more visibility around what’s happening in SoMa, and relieve much of the friction and tension organizations bear juggling multiple city RFP’s and initiatives.

      • Instead of seeing this approach as a duplication, people all note that each department can take its own approach but coordinate them together so that the impact becomes more exponential.

    • The Fund’s projects touch on such a large cross-section of SoMa that many of you see it as an opportunity to serve as a unifying factor that brings those working in or throughout SoMa together. This could be at the City’s behest, but could also be organized by those working with the Fund. Similarly, those funded could share out what they’re learning in larger community.

    • Fund grantees, organizations familiar with the Fund, and organizations that are not familiar with the Fund see it as an opportunity to center a more participatory and grassroots approach from the City–starting with more transparency around the Fund. More easily accessible information on who is being funded, the projects being funded, and the outcomes of those projects are specific requests. Additionally, there is a desire to see more transparency and visibility around Fund announcements, meetings, and opportunities. 

    • In the same vein, Fund grantees, CAC members, and members across communities want to see more storytelling about the work that is being done by grantees. This would create more visibility that could amplify the Fund’s efficacy by bringing more resources to the projects it funds. However, hearing more about the work would also help with perceptions around SoMa that not much is being done about challenges with housing, cleanliness, and safety. 

    • There isn’t a consistent discussion or conversation around “stabilization” and what it means across communities. The Fund is an opportunity to catalyze these conversations more consistently to support community organizations as they build consensus and vision. 

      • Many of you also believe that the Fund could be more agile in adapting and adjusting to what “stabilization” means in a given moment. While there is recognition that the work it funds is important and meaningful, there are questions as to whether it is actually stabilizing residents or small businesses. 

    • The Fund presents an opportunity to have more complex and nuanced discussions around what it means to be a neighbor, be in a community, share space, etc. 

      • Some of you note that community conversations on a city level can be “disneyed”  and resist touching, engaging, or talking about those people and topics that have less mainstream appeal. This means more public discussions not only on mental health but harm reduction, and sex positivity. 

    • Even after stating frustrations, many long-time residents can’t imagine living anywhere else and plan to stay in SoMa until they can’t. 

  • Throughout conversations, you all also shared challenges you see in SoMa and across the Fund that you want the Fund to pay particular attention to. These are: 

    • A number of you spoke to a “nativism” you experienced in San Francisco, and more specifically, in SoMa. In other words, there are expectations and value judgments attached to whether or not someone is “native” to SoMa, and consequently how involved, respected, resourced, or heard they are–even if there is a desire to work in and support SoMa. Some SoMa residents mention too many from outside of SoMa come in to work in SoMa without context. While others say this experience discourages those outside of SoMa from wanting to do work in SoMa that can support its needs and desires. 

      • There is also the reality that many organizations in SoMa find they can no longer financially afford to stay in SoMa. In less than a year, we personally know of three important organizations that had to move out of SoMa and two more that are considering a move outside of SoMa. 

    • SoMa serves as a haven for many communities who find themselves pushed out as real-estate development continues. However, many members of these communities believe the narratives surrounding development and new neighbors create a binary. 

      • For example, the false belief that creating a supportive and loving environment for a thriving Kink or Leather community is inapposite to families. When in reality Kink and Leather communities have their own families, as well as a desire to support all of their neighbors. However, also ask for that support, belonging, and acceptance be reciprocated so that their long-standing spaces, businesses, and traditions are not infringed upon. Another false narrative is that SoMa’s longstanding tradition of nightlife can’t exist as residential development grows.

    • In an effort for organizations and institutions to support many of the different communities that exist in SoMa, there are concerns that there aren’t enough funded initiatives that reach across SoMa communities writ large. 

    • SoMa streets and physical infrastructure are perceived as more invested in than pedestrians. However, most survey respondents believe SoMa is severely underinvested in overall. 

    • There is a general belief that SoMa is the area least invested in across the city. 

    • SoMa not being developed as a business corridor is seen as a disadvantage. There is a desire to see an intentional branding campaign around SoMa that prioritizes strategic investment and creates corridors and hotspots where organizations and businesses can build their initiatives, programs, activations, or spaces. 

    • Some of you are experiencing a growing frustration navigating the different city departments and city initiatives occurring in SoMa–more specifically some of you are experiencing overwhelm in trying to stay updated, have a voice, participate, and understand how to navigate when you have concerns or challenges. Or, some of you are navigating the disparity of being heard and heavily involved with one city department and/or initiative and not being as heard by another city department or initiative. 

    • The low visibility and interaction of the Fund so far makes some of you believe it is not a resource for you to use in the work you’re doing within SoMa. 

      • “[They] don’t understand that they [the gov’t] have more to offer than money.”

    • A common concern is a perception that organizations and initiatives in SoMa stay in silos with hyper-specific focuses that don’t carry across to or aren’t inclusive of, other communities. 

What Happens Next And Get Involved

We continue to send what we’re hearing to the Community Advisory Committee and the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development. They will review what we’ve recorded, continue discussions internally as well as with you all, and continue building or shifting strategy based on a number of factors (resources, legal charters, etc.). However, what we’re hearing from you has already informed the process and resulted in updates to funding priority areas in the most recent Request for Proposals (RFP) just issued. For example, the addition of “Community Safety” as a funding priority area. We encourage you to continue staying active with the Fund in one or more of the ways we list below. 

There is still time to engage in the project! You can:

  • Take five minutes to answer a few questions here. 

  • Send a message to info@sustainingsoma.com if you want to host a listening session for your community, friends, work, or building. 

  • Attend CAC meetings on the Fund. They’re open to the public and posted here. The next meeting will be in March.

  • Share a 10-15 story about your experiences or time in SoMa. 

  • Reach out to sign up for a time to talk one-on-one with a team member. 

Or please feel free to email Cultural Districts + SOMA Community Stabilization Fund Manager Grace Lee at grace.j.lee@sfgov.org

Community Ideas