San Francisco Supervisor Jeff Sheehy took to Reddit to defend his vote this week overturning the sale of Presidio Terrace, a private street in a posh Richmond District neighborhood.

For his efforts, Sheehy was thoroughly roasted, with several commenters accusing the supervisor of cozying up to wealthy constituents. A few did back the decision, which passed on a 7-4 vote Tuesday.

The looping street, including common areas and green spaces, was sold at auction because residents failed to pay $994 in back taxes. The Presidio Terrace Homeowner Association's $14-a-year tax bill was being mailed to an accountant who hadn't worked for the association in years.

South Bay real estate investor Michael Cheng and his wife, Tina Lam, snatched up the property, and the supervisors approved the $90,000 sale on Feb. 11, 2015.

2 1 of 2 Paul Kuroda/Special to The Chronicle Show More Show Less 2 of 2 Nicole Boliaux/The Chronicle Show More Show Less



Sheehy cited the following reasons in his lengthy post:

The city treasurer did not make enough of an effort to contact the the Presidio Terrace HOA about the impending sale and seizure of the street.

The property wrongly designated as "vacant" because residents live on the street. Had it been designated "occupied" instead, more of an effort would have been made to notify the owner.

Proceeds of the tax sale — $90,000 minus the $994 tax bill — by law should have been returned to the Presidio HOA. It wasn't.

The British Consulate, located in Presidio Terrace, was not notified of the sale.

HOA has been helpful "ensuring the security" of Congregation Emanu-El, which "abuts the property."

The new owners have done nothing to maintain the property, effectively sticking the HOA and residents with the costs for upkeep of the roadway and landscaping.

Sheehy signed the post, "Jeff Sheehy Supervisor, District 8 San Francisco Board of Supervisors (pronouns: he, him, his)."

A user named hoxieX did not pull punches. "Your entire argument is a farce," he wrote.

"In pretty much every flavor of the theory of private property, there is an incumbent responsibility upon the owner of a property to ensure its maintenance. The Presidio Terrace needed to pay taxes on the property and neglected to do so. They needed to keep an up to date address with the city and neglected to do so. Once their property had been seized, they needed to have bought it back and neglected to do so."

Sheehy's sign-off irked Y_BOT_REBOOT:

"Progressive enough to sign email with preferred pronoun. Regressive enough to selectively apply law to rich and well-connected," the commenter wrote.

One commenter wondered if the supervisors would be as helpful in police seizure cases.

"So when personal property is seized by police we can expect the BoS to help citizens get their property returned?" wandering_uterus asked.

timmyst put the blame squarely on the city.

"Because this lot had no property, the city did nothing before selling it," he wrote. "All the city needed to do was stick a sign/notice in the dirt and this could've been avoided."

tubedownhill asked Sheehy rhetorically:

"HAHAHAHA So are you going to fund the taxpayers office so they can reach out to every delinquent real estate? At least you're proven you side with the super rich constituents only. I can't wait till election time rolls around."

But Sneakerwaves stood with the supervisor, although with a caveat:

"I tend to think this was the right decision, although perhaps not for the same reasons. I do wonder, though, whether Sup. Sheehy considered that this appears to be the SECOND TIME the presidio terrace HOA has defaulted on tax payment and thus lost their title to the property (at least temporarily). The "innocent mistake" rationale has a lot less bite when HOA made the same mistake once before.

ispeakdatruf found Sheehy's reference to Temple Emanu-el to be specious:

"LOL... I like how he throws in the Temple Emanu-el and "terrorism" (that's what he's hinting at with the reference to "a grave concern in these time"). That, ladies and gentlemen, is called "reaching for the straws". People do that when they don't have a legit argument.

One commenter characterized the vote as borderline racist.

"It's a classic example of SF xenophobia, including a nasty streak against East Asians, (Chinese nationals!), push button sloganeering totally divorced from reality (real estate speculators!) and the way that being a current resident of SF that's 'got yours' trumps everything else, particularly if you connected and affluent," nnniccc wrote.