In the race to replace Rep. Nancy Pelosi, San Francisco’s District 1 Supervisor Connie Chan, progressive organizer Saikat Chakrabarti and State Senator Scott Wiener each offered a distinct formula for tackling the city’s chronic housing shortage. While all three agree that massive public investment is essential, their views diverge on the role of market‑rate construction and the mechanisms for financing affordable units.

Connie Chan’s claim that almost any new home must be subsidized

Supervisor Chan told a recent Q&A that “almost any housing that we now build in San Francisco, if we want it to be affordable to working people, it will have to be subsidized.” She argues that without direct subsidies, market‑rate projects will remain out of reach for most residents. Chan backs her stance with a push for discretionary review, which she frames as “empowerment” for neighborhoods to shape development, even while acknowledging the risk of abuse.

Saikat Chakrabarti’s Vienna‑inspired non‑profit housing model

Chakrabarti, a centimillionaire activist, advocates a “both‑and” approach: add market‑rate units while simultaneously expanding non‑profit, mixed‑income construction modeled after Vienna’s system. He proposes federal funding through progressive taxation to seed non‑profit developers, with any surplus reinvested into further projects.. As the source notes, Chakrabarti wants the United States to emulate Vienna’s success in delivering affordable housing without sacrificing quality.

Scott Wiener’s $1.2 trillion tax‑cut rollback plan

State Senator Wiener aligns with Chakrabarti on the need for diverse housing types, but he emphasizes a fiscal strategy: roll back Bush and Trump‑era tax cuts to free up $1.2 trillion for mixed‑income social housing, rental subsidies, and a $10,000 incentive per new unit for citties. According to the report, Wiener also supports loosening environmental regulations that have been used to block infill housing, arguing that such rules should not impede climate‑friendly development.

The shared call for massive federal housing investment

All three candidates converge on the belief that the federal government must dramatically increase funding for housing production. Whether through Chan’s discretionary review, Chakrabarti’s non‑profit model, or Wiener’s tax‑cut reversal , each sees a substantial public purse as the linchpin for solving San Francisco’s affordability crisis.

Which funding mechanism will win voter support?

The race leaves open three specific questions: Will voters favor Chan’s neighborhood‑focused subsidy approach, Chakrabarti’s non‑profit, progressive‑tax model, or Wiener’s large‑scale tax‑cut rollback? The source provides no polling data, and each candidate’s plan hinges on federal legislative action that remains uncertain.