So when Mayor Daniel Lurie moved to modernize the system by awarding a contract to OpenGov, you'd think the reaction would be something like, "Finally." Instead, the contract is now on hold, thanks to union concerns about potential job losses.

Let's unpack this. First, the contract was awarded without the typical competitive bidding process, which is a legitimate concern. Taxpayers deserve to know their money is being spent wisely, and no-bid contracts should always raise eyebrows — regardless of who's in the mayor's office. That's Government Accountability 101.

But the union's objection isn't really about procurement process. It's about protecting positions that may become redundant once the city stops running its permit system like it's 1997. And this is where we have to be honest: the purpose of city government is not to serve as a jobs program. It's to serve residents. If new technology can process permits faster, reduce errors, and save taxpayer dollars, that should be the priority — full stop.

San Francisco's housing crisis, its struggling small businesses, its glacial construction timelines — all of these are made worse by bureaucratic dysfunction. Every month this overhaul sits on hold is another month of entrepreneurs drowning in paperwork and housing projects stalled in permitting purgatory.

The city should absolutely ensure the bidding process is fair and transparent. But blocking modernization to protect bureaucratic headcount? That's not progressive — it's protectionism at the public's expense.

Fix the process. Award the contract properly. And for the love of all that is efficient, upgrade the permit system before it qualifies for its own historic preservation status.