More dudes, relative to gals, this year:
It’s a knockout.
Kubb Fever – Catch It!
More dudes, relative to gals, this year:
It’s a knockout.
Kubb Fever – Catch It!
All right, I promised a history of the giant Christmas trees of San Francisco Civic Center in front of City Hall (aka the highest classical dome in the Western Hemisphere, believe it or not.*)
Here we go, from the mid to late Aughts, complete with a Star of Bethlehem atop. A shot from my office:
You know, keeping with Christian Tradition, as they say.
Well that didn’t go down good. So, in part due to some of my photos on SFist, back when Blogging Was King, and due to complaints of City Hall / SFGov workers objecting to having Christmas sort of imposed upon where there work – look it up on SFGate, Matier and Ross were on it – bye-bye Bethlehem star and bye-bye other overt displays of Christianity in and around City Hall.
But the tree stayed, and each and every year it came back, starless of course. And it was labeled a “Holiday Tree” in case there was any worry about it being a Christmas tree. Fine
Via Steve Rhodes, who, like Visa, is Everywhere You Want To Be.
And then, oh no, the garish lights on the tree! All those colors! Well, some rich white ladies about town thought they looked tacky, so away they went.
So that left us with this:
O.K. fine. Matier & Ross also had this story, about how the new, classier, white lights for white people cost RPD five figures, but that was OK, they said, because the colored Christmas tree lights would be able to be used in Golden Gate Park on Stanyan and perhaps they’re still in use, IDK.
Except this lack of color just wasn’t jazzy enough for other certain people.
So then came this:
So, the colors came out of the tree in front of City Hall and they went into City Hall itself.
Were these changes “improvements?”
No. But that’s what they were called at the time.
Anyway, that takes up to 2014, when we didn’t get any giant tree at all? NEWS TO ME! Did I not notice it wasn’t there? I forget. I tend to notice new things, I don’t tend to notice things what should be there and aren’t.
Here’s her beef:
“Hello. I was online trying to find info on why there was no Christmas tree outside of SF’s city hall in 2014, and I came across your post about the lights’ history during recent years. Regardless of any decor inside of city hall, i just don’t see why the tree was not part of last Xmas. I looked around online for info about the tree going up again this December, but any info on SF lighting ceremonies did not include a city hall plaza tree. I suppose the mayor’s argument for no tree is cost cutting and that people can go inside city hall to see some festive decor or head down to Union Square to join the tourists, but I find it pretty stunning that a major city has nixed its plaza tree. If you have an answer on this subject, I’d greatly appreciate hearing it.
It’s a Christmas Mystery!
*No no, the dome you’re thinking about (US Capitol Building) aint actually higher, OR it (San Jose City Hall or SuperDome) aint classical, OR it (St. Peter’s Basilica or Dome des Invalides) aint in the Western Hemisphere. Sorry. Look it up!
Here it is, looking pretty normal, or about as normal as you can expect for a quarry pond in human-created Golden Gate Park:
Now here’s your background:
Lily Pond in Golden Gate Park overrun by Vivian Ho
And here are the troublesome critters themselves – never seen one myself:
Poor little feller. Michael Linnenbach (commons.wikimedia.org)
And this was the proposal, from a half-decade back:
Let’s just drain the Lily Pond and kill the frogs by Matt Smith
Clearly, it was time to call in the Frog Doctors:
Or, in the words of Rec and Park, “adjusting the PH level” was called for.
“Another example of biological controls to manage pests is the collaboration between the Department and the California Department Fish and Wildlife, in this case, the partnership has eradicated the invasive African Clawed Frogs by adjusting the PH level in the water in Golden Gate Park’s Lily Pond”
By that, they meant this – going to the sto’ and then pouring in some motherfucking bleach, man:
Chemicals were everywhere:
Parks Chief Phil Ginsberg et. al. cooked up a batch of white powdery stuff…
…and they went to town:
It was a powdery wonderland, filled with all kinds of urban flotsam and jetsam…
Check this one-minute video of the place at that time:
PETA, well PETA was NOT happy about any of this:
“According to media reports, the California Department of Fish and Game and the city of San Francisco are considering draining Lily Pond at Golden Gate Park in order to kill thousands of African clawed frogs who reside there. Reportedly, the frogs were released from research laboratories only to be deemed “invasive” through no fault of their own. Once the pond’s water levels drop, these animals will slowly suffocate to death. PETA apprised officials of our concerns, and while they stated that other methods were on the table, they did not guarantee that this cruel initiative would be stopped. Now it’s your turn to weigh in! Please urge the California Department of Fish and Game and city officials to halt all plans to drain the pond while aquatic animals remain at the location. Also, ask them to mercifully euthanize the frogs rather than subjecting them to agonizing deaths if alternative methods of control are impossible.”
I don’t know how all that worked out, but this was the scene a couple months back, via Tony T – ‘dozer and digger:
And that brings up up to present day, what you can see from the first photo up above.
You can’t visit just yet, as RPD is behind sked, oh well:
And there you have it.
Nous salouns le retour, Lily Pond!
May you remain frog-free forever…
First, it was all like this, like for a looooong time:
But now it’s all like this, all fixed (except for the tagging, which might qualify for Landmark status at this point, but oh well):
So that’s good.
(Hey, how’s the seismic safety for all what you can see in the background there, on Geary and Post from Fillmore to Laguna and including the big ugly Peace Pagoda [L]andmark? Oh, not good? Uh oh.)
Now what’s the next step? Hopping lanterns, Miyazaki-style, natch:
Hadn’t noticed this one before:
“A City of San Francisco Transfer Tax on Residential Property Re-Sold in Five Years, Proposition G ballot question was on the November 4, 2014 election ballot for voters in the city of San Francisco, California. It was defeated.
Proposition G imposed an additional tax on the sale or transfer of multi-unit property that has been owned for less than five years. Details about the tax are in the San Francisco Ballot Simplification digest.
|City of San Francisco, Proposition G|
Election results via: City and County of San Francisco Registrar of Voters
The San Francisco Ballot Simplification Committee provided the following digest for Proposition G:
|“||THE WAY IT IS NOW:The City collects a transfer tax on sales of most real property in San Francisco. The tax rate depends on the sale price of the property. The lowest tax rate is 0.5%, for property sold for $250,000 or less. The highest tax rate is 2.5%, for property sold for $10,000,000 or more. The tax rate is not affected by how long a property is owned.THE PROPOSAL:
Proposition G would impose an additional tax on the total sale price of certain multi-unit residential properties that are sold within five years of purchase or transfer. The following table shows the tax rates that would apply:
Length of Time Seller Has Owned Property – Tax Rate:
This additional tax would apply to sales occurring on or after January 1, 2015.
This additional tax would not apply in the following circumstances:
This measure would also authorize the Board of Supervisors to create additional exemptions from both the existing transfer tax and this proposed additional tax for properties that are subject to affordability-based restrictions.
A “YES” VOTE MEANS: If you vote “yes,” you want the City to impose an additional tax of between 14% and 24% on the total sale price of certain multi-unit residential properties that are sold within five years of purchase or transfer, subject to certain exceptions.
A “NO” VOTE MEANS: If you vote “no,” you do not want the City to impose this additional tax.
And here’s the caboose of this jaywalking / jay-running train:
I’ve been tilting at this windmill for a while now. At first on SFist back about 2007 or so and then on this tiny blog. The first TJ’s shopper death came a few years back. The next will come tomorrow or next year or in another five years, something like that.
What’s that, the speed limit here is 25 MPH and cars come through “speeding” all the time? Well, not really. Average speed for southbound traffic is fairly low. And for northbound, it’s not all that fast either. And oh, the limit on this stretch of Masonic is 30 MPH.
What’s that, Planning and DPW and the all-knowing, all-seeing SFMTA have a plan for Masonic and it’s coming soon? Well, not really. The project wasn’t as “shovel-ready as promised so they’ve loaned the Masonic-designated pork for other stuff. A “new” Masonic will eventually come, but not above Geary and TJ’s and all the photos you can see are all from north of Geary.
That’s the update for 2015.
Yes, over $200,000 in his Total Cost of Employment (TCOE). (You want to get into this, well, we can get into this.)
Here’s the new stuff:
“It does not appear the bicyclist was traveling in a bike lane,” said Paul Rose…
I’d expect this kind of sophistry from a MUNI operators attorney, but not a spokesmodel from the SFMTA.
Hey, is this the same Paul Rose who committed this? Yep. Oh what’s that, Paul, you acknowledged your mistake and you didn’t want to get into why you committed such a boner? But that’s how you learn, right?
Let’s move on, to the SFPD:
This statement is 100% non-operational, and I don’t know how many words you’d need to add to fix it.
Do I expect better from SFMTA / SFPD?
Yes I do.
BTW, I’ve “gone around” MUNI vehicles thousands of times, both inbound and outbound, on Market Street since the 1980’s. It’s not illegal, is it? Tell me how I’m wrong here.
Show me the police report and I’ll tell you who was at fault here, except 1) it doesn’t exist yet and 2) the SFPD holds onto its PRs really really tight so I’ll never see it even after it comes out.
Hey, is the SFPD part of the SFGov “City Family” known to favor SFMTA operators when it comes time to assess fault when SFMTA operators get into accidents, or, in the words of the SFMTA, when SFMTA operator commit “traffic violence?” Yes. Yes it is.
Here’s the question, from the new NEw MArket Building on Market in our Twitterloin / Mid-Market /South of Market / Tenderloin Adjacent area, you know, The City Part of Town:
And here’s the answer – like this, via The Lofts at SoDoSoPa:
And here’s your catchphrase:
NeMa: 24 months old and still no rent control.**
* NEW YORK TIMES: The prospective changes to the Tenderloin — a noirish haunt of Dashiell Hammett’s Sam Spade and arguably the central city’s last working-class neighborhood — have given rise to a new nickname: the Twitterloin.
* FORTUNE: Welcome to the Twitterloin, where tech-savvy cool meets gritty hood
**After 10 months of living in the NeMa, you just might ask yourself why you’re getting hit with a rent increase what’s 25 times more than most of your coworkers are facing, just saying…
Is there anything wrong with leaving the Golden State Warriors in Oakland?
Anyway, here’s the scene in Golden Gate Park – I can’t imagine this arboreal/sports clothing line program “makes money” for our City Family, but rich like having fun too, and this is one way for them to do it:
What’s next, “Let’s Grow Niners?”