Mehta, who has been quietly assembling a portfolio of Fillmore Street properties, is reportedly moving to evict more legacy businesses now that those protections have expired. It's the kind of move that's technically legal and strategically patient — and exactly why temporary moratoriums are Band-Aids on bullet wounds.

Let's be clear: we're not reflexively anti-landlord here. Property owners should be able to make decisions about their investments. But there's a difference between developing a neighborhood and strip-mining it. Mehta's track record on the Fillmore raises serious questions about whether his grand plans amount to anything more than displacement.

As one SF resident pointed out, Mehta's team has already evicted Starbucks, Ten-Ichi, a boutique, and others — promising replacements like a Thai noodle spot and an all-day diner. "Despite the promises, those businesses still sit empty," they noted. That's not revitalization. That's creating vacancies with extra steps.

And here's a fun detail: the property manager handling these evictions is reportedly John J. Dito — the same guy who once sued a tenant over an Instagram post. Really inspires confidence in the good-faith stewardship of a beloved neighborhood corridor.

The Fillmore has already endured decades of displacement, from postwar redevelopment gutting its once-thriving Black community to the slow creep of commercial homogenization. If a billionaire is going to buy up the street, the bare minimum should be actually doing something with it — not just warehousing empty storefronts while waiting out protections designed to keep the neighborhood alive.

Temporary moratoriums don't work when the people on the other side of the table have infinite patience and infinite capital. City Hall needs to ask itself: what's the plan when the next protection expires?