This is the same attack on environmental regulation that Republicans all of the country have been mounting. Mitt Romney talked about it, and used the same language that the proponents are using in San Francisco.

There was a lot of money from Republican billionaires in the last few San Francisco elections. They're pushing the same deregulation mantra here that they push everywhere else.

Watch out, San Francisco.

I've met the guy and like him. I also voted for him. The point with Scott is that he actually listens to his constituents and then acts acccordingly. this is surprisongly rare in most Supes, who have their own ideological agenda and pursue it.

So Scott listens to us on Ross, on nudies, on housing and development, and then acts on our behalf. The SFBG will hate him for that but it's actually what politicians are supposed to do i.e. do what we want not what they want.

And one thing many of us are tired of is these petty, NIMBY attempts to stop almost every new development that isn't public. Scott hears us and wants to act - he's doing his job. Welch and Hestor are obstructionist and petty-minded minded NIMBY'ists.

Scott Wiener works tirelessly to push poor people out of the city, to push people out he feels are odd. He is a cold, heartless man who judges a person only by how much money they make. He doesn't care about the environment, art, the development of the creative economy or civil rights. He and his rich friends got theirs, to hell with everyone else.
His stances on most issues mirror Republican's policies. It's impossible to defend him as anything other than a pet of the money interests in the city who are interested only in rich residents. He needs to be voted out in 2014.

I didn't vote for Scott and I have known him for years. Indeed, I count him as friend though our politics are by San Francisco standards miles apart. He wasn't the most progressive candidate in that race and if you're complaining about that now well pay attention. He was the best financed candidate along with Rebecca Prozan who was the worthless Bevan Dufty's (also an acquaintance) choice to succeed him. Where do you think that money came from?

I will also concur with another commenter, yes, Scott listens to his constituents. The nudity ban was demanded by those of us who have had to put up with wanton exhibitionism in Jane Warner Plaza for over two years. But Scott also failed to forge a compromise that should have found a way to accommodate nudism in some remote corner of Golden Gate Park and in Baker Beach. Instead, we now have a far-ranging ban that affects all of us who enjoy occasional discrete nudism. Scott is a good guy, a friend but he is a horrible leader, too amenable to shifting winds.

Aaron, his wife and the Telegraph Hill Dwellers Association are the poster-child for all that is wrong with the city planning and approval process. The current process puts too much power into the hands of small groups such as this. The THDA stood in the way of a library makeover in North Beach for years dragging out the process through appeal after appeal.

Since the SFBG has not yet met a construction project they like (name a major development project the SFBG has supported in the past 10 years), I am also not surprised that they are against this reform.

Should we have a review and appeals process- certainly but the current process is broken and needs to be fixed.