Sean McGarry
Commissioner, Seat 4, San Francisco Planning CommissionWe identified McGarry’s voice at 25 meetings. Named Bayview Hunters Point most often: two times.
Next Planning Commission meeting: Thu, Nov 5, 12:00 pm · Clerk’s calendar
Two clips, newest first
“I just have to go on record again. SB 79 is not an option for San Francisco.”
“I’ve worked in this building on and off since ‘97. It used to be a very vibrant building, but San Francisco was just generally vibrant all the time anyway. To see Hills Plaza go from what it was to— it’s still a beautiful, beautiful building, but it doesn’t have the activation it once had.”
Issues McGarry raised, by number of meetings
- Family zoning and upzoning2 meetings
Every roll call, and McGarry’s other bodies
Present at 22 of 22 roll calls at the Planning Commission, roll call through Jul 30, 2026
- Planning Commission: talk time not compared. On a random sample of meeting time, between 36% and 66% of members' speech here carries a name; we rank when the low end reaches 60%.
Development and land use took the largest share of McGarry’s speech with a checked topic: 73%
7 places McGarry named in meetings
- Bayview Hunters Point 2 times
- Castro/Upper Market 1 time
- Inner Richmond 1 time
- Mission Bay 1 time
- North Beach 1 time
- Richmond District 1 time
- Tenderloin 1 time
Every meeting where we identified McGarry’s voice
- Oct 8, 2026Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use2.5 min33:43
- Oct 1, 2026Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use5.8 min38:49
- Sep 24, 2026Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use7.3 min6:31
- Sep 17, 2026Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use6.4 min56:45
- Sep 10, 2026Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use1.1 min37:22
- Sep 3, 2026Planning CommissionHistoric preservation · Development and land use9.8 min46:58
- Jul 30, 2026Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use3.3 min13:02
- Jul 23, 2026Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use15.4 min1:04:38
- Jun 18, 2026Planning CommissionHousing and tenants · Development and land use5.1 min2:19:28
- May 28, 2026Planning CommissionHousing and tenants2.9 min1:01:44
Show all 25Show fewer
- May 21, 2026Planning CommissionAlcohol, cannabis and business permits · Development and land use4.3 min44:12
- May 7, 2026Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use1.4 min11:34
- Apr 16, 2026Planning CommissionHousing and tenants · Development and land use9.2 min1:03:02
- Mar 26, 2026Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use3.1 min54:42
- Mar 12, 2026Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use6.2 min37:57
- Feb 26, 2026Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use2.4 min1:04:31
- Feb 12, 2026Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use8.7 min2:38
- Jan 29, 2026Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use1.5 min1:01:20
- Jan 22, 2026Planning CommissionBudget and spending1.3 min54:47
- Jan 15, 2026Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use · Alcohol, cannabis and business permits6.0 min1:21:54
- Dec 18, 2025Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use8.8 min34:26
- Dec 4, 2025Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use9.2 min1:10:12
- Nov 20, 2025Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use2.5 min41:10
- Nov 13, 2025Planning CommissionDevelopment and land use2.7 min39:56
- Nov 6, 2025Planning Commission1.9 min2:46:37
How we identify who is speaking · blind check, pooled across five cities: of 340 commission lines drawn, 260 right, 4 wrong, 1 unclear, 75 couldn’t be judged
A meeting missing here means we couldn’t attribute the voice, not that McGarry was absent. Claude and Gemini each read every transcript with that day’s roster. A voice gets Sean McGarry’s name only when both agree and a code check finds the name said on, or just before, their turn. Voices our transcripts merge with someone else’s are never attributed, so every count here undercounts what McGarry said. For commissions, of 340 lines drawn, 260 were right, 4 wrong and 1 unclear, and the checkers couldn’t judge 75. We have since removed the voices behind 64 of those lines (3 wrong, 0 unclear, the rest we had already held for other reasons). Of the 276 lines we still publish, the checkers could judge 228: 226 right, 1 wrong and 1 unclear (90% lower bound 0.97). They couldn’t judge the other 48. The check is one sample pooled across the five cities, not of McGarry or of San Francisco alone.