SACRAMENTO, Calif. — San Francisco has long been a whipping post for conservatives who like to portray it as the case study for progressive zaniness, an ever-present example of the kind of public policies that other cities ought to avoid. The city has often deserved the rap, as its politicians and voters can fixate on performative progressive politics over the nuts-and-bolts of civic governance. Its bureaucracy is so impenetrable that even state Democrats express frustration. I still remember when the city in 2010 banned Happy Meals for some inexplicable nutrition-related rationale. In 2019, voters elected District Attorney Chesa Boudin, who seemed reluctant to prosecute “quality-of-life crimes.” He blamed poverty and other social ills for the city’s crime and drug problems, of course. The city’s school board spent its time renaming schools, complaining about white supremacy, and undermining merit-based education. But a lot has changed in the last few years, It’s not an exaggeration to conclude the city has self-corrected to a noticeable degree. San Francisco will be San Francisco, so there’s always plenty to criticize and lots of sideshows. I recently wrote about its interminably long and excessively costly process for replacing old trash bins, which I found indicative of the city’s sense of grandiosity and lack of spending controls. To be fair, that is a flaw that can be found in any government — local, state, or federal. But San Francisco always dials it up a notch. My main beef with the city’s conservative critics is they fail to distinguish the various political factions, namely between the mainstream liberals/progressives and the loony lefties. The city’s GOP registration hovers around 8 percent — and modern Republicans aren’t exactly immune to counterproductive, performative nonsense. But it’s crucial to side with those who want positive change even if one disagrees with their overall political perspective. That group is far different than the progressive zanies who like to play out their utopian fantasies. It also irks me that some of these critics seem to delight in the city’s travails, whereas I love the place and wish it the best. But now even some conservatives are recognizing the progress. National Review’s Rich Lowry recently explained that the city, “long associated with exotic ideas, has been experimenting with a radical notion — cracking down on car thieves.” As a result, “car break-ins are down 85 percent from 2023, and are down 50 percent the first three months of 2026.” I’m a frequent visitor to the City by the Bay. Anecdotally, the improvement is evident. The streets seem much cleaner. I notice fewer homeless encampments and far less public disorder. I no longer feel the inclination to leave my car’s trunk open when parked. That was common practice a few years ago as people figured that it beats having the windows smashed if vagrants decided to look for stuff to pilfer from the car. My family recently attended a party in a public park and it was clean, safe, and even the restrooms were tidy. Will wonders never cease? Anyway, San Francisco residents are noticing, too. A recent San Francisco Chronicle poll showed that Mayor Daniel Lurie, the private-sector/philanthropist outsider and reform-oriented Democrat who beat London Breed in 2024, has 74 percent approval ratings — an astounding figure for a mayor in any city. He’s had some foibles, but overall has governed in a practical, centrist manner that has focused on the basics. And it appears to be working practically and politically. Lurie gets overwhelmingly high marks for revitalizing downtown, protecting businesses from crime, and keeping neighborhoods clean. He gets lesser (but still decent) marks for handling the overdose crisis and providing shelter to the homeless, per the poll. He fares poorly when it comes to housing affordability — but that’s an issue that is impossible to turn around in such a short time. Now back to those important distinctions. His strongest support comes from moderates (86 percent), liberals (80 percent), and conservatives (77 percent). His weakest support is from progressives, but at 53 percent he’s convinced enough of them to continue down his current path. The Los Angeles Times last November reported that “he has won over his city,” and the Chronicle polling suggests his numbers have only improved in the following six months. There are national lessons here. What has the mayor done? Per a 100-day analysis last April in the San Francisco Standard, Lurie has moved beyond the counterproductive “Housing First” homeless strategy (just building them apartments) and focused instead on a “Breaking the Cycle” approach that creates wraparound services to deal with addiction and mental health issues. San Francisco’s violent crime rates always have been relatively low, but the mayor has cracked down on visible street, drug, and property crimes. Per the Standard, his downtown business initiative has included expanding “public-drinking ‘entertainment zones,’ slashed red tape on development, and an order to bring city workers back to the office.” He has “leaned on his connections to bring private funds to bear on the downtown problem.” Based on my experience, the downtown financial district looks pretty lively, after having given ghost-town vibes not long ago. Although a bit more nebulous, Lurie has promised to improve the public schools and make the city more family-friendly, the article added. San Francisco is known for being a (relatively) childless city, so that’s a good pursuit. Recently, he’s been willing to endure the wrath of labor unions as he — get this — has proposed budget cuts to tackle the city’s deficit. It’s unclear how to deal with the city’s outrageously high cost structure, but a little fiscal conservatism can’t hurt. The mayor will release his complete budget plan next month, so we’ll see. Lurie isn’t the only good-news story. Voters recalled Boudin in 2022 and replaced him with a more traditional district attorney. That same election, voters overwhelmingly recalled three school board members. In 2024, voters approved three conservative-oriented ballot initiatives relating to crime, homelessness, and drugs. A new state law, Senate Bill 423, puts additional oversight on the city’s notoriously slow permitting department. No one will ever mistake San Francisco’s voters for those in, say, Oklahoma City, but who cares? For those of us interested in positive urban outcomes, it’s the policies — not partisan preferences — that matter. The big question is whether Democrats, whose politicians control most of the biggest U.S. cities, will learn the requisite lessons. Steven Greenhut is Western region director for the R Street Institute. Write to him at sgreenhut@rstreet.org. READ MORE by Steven Greenhut: Newsom Backtracks on AI Rules Robotaxis: Lawmakers Make Perfect the Enemy of the Good FDA Vaping Rules: Much Ado About Very Little