Posts Tagged ‘Nevius’

Saving Private Nevius: The Good and the Bad of the Latest CW Nevius Effort Regarding the Mid-Market Area

Thursday, July 3rd, 2014

Here you go, writer CW Nevius becomes a guide for your ride through the gritty 6th and Market area – he’s been in Pentonville and he’s been in Battersea, he’s your Sightsee M.C:

The toughest corner for Mid-Market to turn

1. If this is about the good, the not bad and the ugly of CW Nevius, let’s start with the Good. Check out these quotes:

“In the sunshine and rainbows world of Mayor Ed Lee…”

“…much-promised revitalization of Mid-Market.”

These are very un-Nevius. Could you imaging mayoral spokesmodel Christine Falvey ever taking this kind of tone when discussing our Dear Leader? I can’t. So this column is the rare instance of the Nevius holding a perspective from outside our reigning political establishment. These lines are in no way beat sweeteners / source greasers and that’s refreshing.

2. Instead of Nevius getting quotes from people in the Mid-Market and then holding those statements out as facts, here he  generally lets the quotes speak for themselves. This is what reporters should be doing, so let’s classify that as Not Bad.

3. Now, it’s time for a little Ugly. Here comes the dogmatic Nevius with completely unsupported statements:

“It’s a fascinating moment in Mid-Market. We’re either reaching a critical tipping point, with new construction and businesses driving the revival, or smacking futilely into the familiar dynamic of poverty, drugs and scary sidewalk theater.”

“Because Mid-Market won’t change until the corner of Jones and Market changes.”

So, what makes 2014 different from 2013 or 2011 or 2007 or 1999 or any other year in the history of Mid-Market? That’s not stated. And where’s the support for the purported Malcolm Gladwell-esque “tipping point?” It’s like Chuck is sitting in a bar pontificating about how if the Giants hire some new pitcher they’ll either win the World Series or they’ll have the worst record in the Division. Doesn’t really make sense, huh? Perhaps, just perhaps, Mid-Market might just muddle through with some changes here and there and later on 2014 wont be seen as some watershed moment? Well, that probability simply isn’t allowed for in Nevius-land.

And what makes Market and Jones the supposed linchpin intersection out of all the others in the area? Again, the Neve doesn’t even offer a theory.

That’s the good, the not bad, and the ugly of CW Nevius on the topic of the Mid-Market of 2014.

CW Nevius Just Moved Here a Few Years Ago, But He’s Already Telling Us San Franciscans How to Vote – Prop B Redux Redux

Friday, May 23rd, 2014

CW Nevius, “a sportswriter from the United States” “known for his breezy writing style” has gone bonkers over Prop B, which will require Mayor Ed Lee and his appointees to disallow building height violations on the waterfront, you know, without voter approval.

I don’t know why he cares so much about this issue. Mayor Ed Lee, who embarrassingly campaigned for 8 Washington with Gavin Newsom, has learned his lesson and, in fact, isn’t even opposing Prop B, you know, officially. But Neve, well, I’m guessing he might do one or two more Prop B columns afore the election, and then he’ll do more about the forthcoming lawsuit against Prop B, oh well. You’d think Neve would come out and support simply having no height limits at all, if he’s so concerned about this issue.

Once more:

Richard and Barbara Stewart, the wealthy neighborhood NIMBYs who donated over $440,000 to stop the 8 Washington condominiums, are at it again. Official election contribution filings from this week show that the Stewarts have chipped in $143,750 in support of Proposition B, the ballot measure that would require a public vote on any potential structure on port land that exceeds current height limits.

OR, IN OTBER WORDS, THE BALLOT MEASURE THAT WOULD REQUIRE POLITICIANS AND THEIR APPOINTEES TO BE MORE RESPECTFUL OF THE ALREADY-EXPRESSED WISHES OF THE VOTERS OF SAN FRANCISCO.

With the Stewarts’ help, the Yes on Prop. B alliance has raised nearly $230,000. Compare that to Prop. B opponents, whose total is a $47,633, according to documents filed at the San Francisco Ethics Commission on Thursday. So much for the lofty talk from Prop. B supporters about listening to the voice of the people.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN, CW NEVIUS? ED LEE DIDN’T “LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE” ABOUT 8 WASHINGTON AND NOW HE’S GETTING SPANKED BY THE VOTERS.

It sounds more like the voice of two people who live on the waterfront and want to protect their turf.

WELL, THAT’S THE SYSTEM, RIGHT NEVIUS?

So forget city government, the Port, the Planning Commission and elected officials.

WELL, WHAT DO YOU THINK THE VOTERS MEANT WHEN THEY VOTED FOR HEIGHT LIMITS, NEVIUS?

If you want to build something along the San Francisco waterfront, it seems you’d better pay a visit to the Stewarts.

OR, WHY NOT BE RESPECTFUL OF THE WISHES OF THE VOTERS?

And here’s the kicker. A recent poll shows that Prop. B is in trouble.

WHAT’S THAT, IS THAT THE SOUND OF ANOTHER FLIP FROM THE EAST BAY’S #1 FLIP-FLOPPER? LEAVE US REVIEW: “Prop. B will win easily, and that’s a shame.” DIDN’T YOU WRITE THAT JUST LAST MONTH, NEVE?

Still, a case can be made that this is either going to be a lot closer than a many deep thinkers expected or – and this would be a wonderful and surprising turn of events – it might actually lose.

ARE YOU CALLING YOURSELF A “DEEP THINKER,” NEVE? SURE SEEMS THAT WAY. LEAVE US REVIEW: “Prop. B will win easily, and that’s a shame.” 

Begin with the structure that started the whole controversy – the Warriors new arena.

MAYBE, JUST MAYBE OUR MAYOR AND FORMER MAYORS STARTED THIS “CONTROVERSY” BY GOING AROUND THE EXPRESSED WILL OF THE VOTERS ONE TIME TOO MANY – IS THAT A POSSIBILITY, NEVE?

“At first blush, if you say, “Should we vote on everything?’ people are in favor,” said Eric Jaye, an adviser to the No on B group. “Then they think about it and say, How’s that going to work?’”

WELL MAYBE THE MAYOR SHOULDN’T HAVE THE BACKERS OF 8 WASHINGTON FUND HIS PET PROJECTS. TO REPEAT, THE HEIGHT LIMITS ARE ALREADY THERE, RIGHT? WHY NOT HAVE THE BUILDERS RESPECT THE WISHES OF THE VOTERS, WHY IS THAT SUCH A HARD THING TO DO? RESPECT THE LIMITS AND THEN THERE’S NO NEED FOR ANY VOTE, RIGHT?

Well, I can give you the worst case scenario. If Prop. B wins it will be the second huge victory for the Art Agnos-Aaron Peskin-Golinger crowd. Developers aren’t stupid. If they really want to build something on the waterfront, they will have to recognize that that waterfront alliance has the political juice. Rather than put a potential development up for election and hope for the best, they will want to get the blessing of that faction, particularly the Stewarts. The result could be a series of backroom meetings where Agnos and others meet with the builders, work out an arrangement – with concessions to the alliance of course – and then put the brokered deal on the ballot with the group’s endorsement.

SO NEVIUS IS NOW AGAINST “BACKROOM MEETINGS?” REALLY? DOES THIS ALSO APPLY TO ALL THE POLS ON THE RIGHT-SIDE-OF-THE-AISLE POLITICAL FACTION CW NEVIUS IS ALWAYS CHEERLEADING FOR?

Which sounds like you’re setting up a little back room protection racket to me. And yet there is a feeling that Prop. B is taking on water.

LEAVE US REVIEW: “Prop. B will win easily, and that’s a shame.” 

If Prop. B loses it will be a bombshell – especially for Richard and Barbara Stewart.

ALL RIGHT, NEVIUS, WHATEVER YOU SAY…

CW Nevius, Unpaid Spokesperson for SFGov, Weighs In, Once Again, on Twitter Not Paying Its Taxes – “The Twitter Miracle”

Wednesday, February 26th, 2014

Chuck is at it once again. At first I thought he was doing a kind of “Day Without  a Mexican” thought exercise, but now I don’t think so. Does he think Twitter will break its lease? The mind boggles.

So here’s a question for the people who keep shouting that tech workers and their money are ruining San Francisco.

ALL RIGHT, WHAT”S THE SIZE OF THE AUDIENCE YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT, NEVIUS? HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE EVER SHOUTED ABOUT THIS TOPIC? IDK, A COUPLE HUNDRED? AND THEN HOW MANY PEOPLE “KEEP” DOING IT? THAT NUMBER’S GOT TO BE LESS, RIGHT? THAT’S A PRETTY SMALL GROUP OF PEOPLE TO QUERY, ISN’T IT, NEVIUS?  

What if it all works out just as you’d like? The tech companies decide it isn’t worth the trouble to try to run a business in San Francisco. The workers say they are tired of being hassled and mocked in the neighborhoods where they live.

DO PEOPLE REALLY MOVE FROM ONE PLACE TO ANOTHER BECAUSE THEY’VE BEEN “MOCKED?” NO, SIMPLY. THE ONLY PERSON I CAN THINK OF WHO’S DONE SO IS YOU YOURSELF, NEVIUS. AND ACTUALLY, YOU MOVED _TO_ SF AFTER GETTING MOCKED FOR NOT KNOWING A WHOLE BUNCH ABOUT SF, FOR NOT LIVING IN THE TOWN YOU COVER. AND THEN YOU MOVED HERE A COUPLE YEARS AGO AND NOW, EFFORTLESSLY, YOU KNOW MORE ABOUT YOUR BEAT. JUST BY LIVING HERE. I’M SURE YOU’LL AGREE WITH THAT, NEVE. ANYWAY, IF ANY INDIVIDUAL TECH WORKER MOVED OUT, NOBODY WOULD CARE.

But there’s also Berkeley. And Oakland.

BUT WOULDN’T TECH WORKERS GET MOCKED IN BERKELEY AND OAKLAND TOO? I THINK THEY WOULD.

Suppose the “Twitter Miracle” on Mid-Market dries up.

IS THIS A PHRASE NOW, THE “TWITTER MIRACLE?” I DON’T THINK SO. THE ONLY REFERENCE I CAN FIND IS A SARCASTIC ONE ON MISSION LOCAL. SO OF COURSE I’M QUOTING YOU, BUT WHO ARE YOU QUOTING, NEVE? YOURSELF? OK FINE. BUT WHY IS TWITTER MOVING FROM 4TH AND FOLSOM TO 10TH AND MARKET A MIRACLE, WHICH OF COURSE IS “an event not ascribable to human power or the laws of nature and consequently attributed to a supernatural, especially divine, agency.” BUT IRL, TWITTER MOVED TO THAT LOCATION DUE TO POLITICS, DUE TO GAVIN NEWSOM WANTING TO BECOME US PRESIDENT, CA GOVERNOR, CA LT GOVERNOR. THAT WAS NOT DIVINE INTERVENTION, NEVE.

Of course, part of the reason they came in the first place was that the city offered them a nice tax break for six years.

THAT’S THE STORY, BUT IT’S NOT REALLY PROVABLE. WE SIMPLY DON’T KNOW WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED WITHOUT THE SUBSIDY. BEFORE TWITTER, WE HAD CORPORATE WELFARE FOR BIG PHARMA. THIS WAS A BIT BEFORE YOUR TIME HERE IN SF, NEVE. IT WAS THE “GENENTECH MIRACLE.” IT DIDN’T WORK OUT.

But now, entering the third full year, the companies are likely to take a hard look at how things are working out.

THINGS WORKED OUT GREAT FOR TWITTER, RIGHT? THEY HAD THEIR IPO AND THEY DIDN’T HAVE TO PAY THE PAYROLL TAX SIGNED INTO LAW BY GAVIN NEWSOM(!) BACK IN 2004; BUT IF TWITTER LEAVES TOWN, WHAT’S THE HARM IN THAT?

What if the companies say: You know, part of the reason we located here was because we thought our employees would love the city and quality of life. But now we’ve been turned into ideological punching bags.

CAN YOU CITE AN EXAMPLE OF SOME FRAGILE SOUL MOVING OUT OF SF FOR THIS REASON? I DON’T THINK YOU CAN.

Our firms are criticized for not doing enough in the community, despite hefty donations. (Twitter, to pick an example, has pledged $388,000 to Tenderloin schools and charities.)

THIS IS ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE LESS THAN WHAT THEY SHOULD HAVE PAID IN TAXES TO THE GENERAL FUND. DO YOU GET THIS NEVE? MOST BIG COMPANIES PAY THEIR TAXES _AND_ DO CHARITY

And our employees are being mocked, hassled and trash-talked. It’s unpleasant. They don’t like it.

CITATION? EXAMPLE? HEY NEVIUS! DIDN’T YOU JUST GET THROUGH MOCKING DANIELLE STEEL? WHAT IF SHE MOVES TO FRANCE FULL-TIME?

Efforts are being made to find ways to keep families and blue-collar workers here. 

NICE USE OF PASSIVE VOICE THERE, NEVE. LET’S LET YOUR BUDDIES IN SFGOV KEEP ON KEEPING ON. ALL IS CALM, ALL IS BRIGHT.

Driver and Writer CW Nevius Goes on a “Rant” Against the “Militant” Pedestrians of SF – Do They Have the Right to Jaywalk?

Friday, January 31st, 2014

Here’s the latest effort from CW Nevius, who’s taking a break from being spokesman for San Francisco’s right-side-of-the-aisle  political faction to go on a “bit of a rant” against local pedestrians. But what’s up with this?  

“Even when they are in the right, I worry about them. When the traffic light countdown gets to five or six, they step confidently into the crosswalk — which is their right…”

But pedestrians don’t have “the right” to do so. It’s agin CA law – check out V C Section 21456,* which is dealt with by Rule #3 of the Five Rules for Pedestrians.

Don’t you have an editor, Nevius? Oh, that’s right, you’re too old and experienced to have an editor, and plus, editors cost money, that’s right.

But don’t you have a fact checker, Nevius? Oh, that’s right, you’re too old and experienced to have a fact checker, and plus, fact checkers cost money, that’s right.

But don’t you have a photographer, Nevius? Oh, that’s right, photographers cost money. So all your observations, we’ll just have to take your word about them. OK fine. BTW, [sarcasmmode ON] nice stock photo you’ve got there, Neve. “Cause a stock photo taken in the People’s Republic of China, you know, from more than a thousand li away, well, that really illustrates how “militant” and “freaking nuts” San Francisco peds are, huh? [sarcasmmode OFF]

And oh, BTW Neve, the peds of SF aren’t militant, not at all. Try to find a different word for what you mean.

Of course you’re new in town, I get that. Sure, welcome to San Francisco, Neve.

But you’re doing a half-assed job doing your half-time gig.

You need to try harder.

*”Walk, Wait, or Don t Walk

21456. Whenever a pedestrian control signal showing the words “WALK” or “WAIT” or “DON’T WALK” or other approved symbol is in place, the signal shall indicate as follows:

(a) “WALK” or approved “Walking Person” symbol. A pedestrian facing the signal may proceed across the roadway in the direction of the signal, but shall yield the right-of-way to vehicles lawfully within the intersection at the time that signal is first shown.

(b) Flashing or steady “DON’T WALK” or “WAIT” or approved “Upraised Hand” symbol. No pedestrian shall start to cross the roadway in the direction of the signal, but any pedestrian who has partially completed crossing shall proceed to a sidewalk or safety zone or otherwise leave the roadway while the “WAIT” or “DON’T WALK” or approved “Upraised Hand” symbol is showing.

Amended Ch. 413, Stats. 1981. Effective January 1, 1982.”

Longtime East Bay Resident and SFGate Advocacy Journalist CW Nevius ID’s Cable Car as a “Hyde Street Trolly”

Monday, January 6th, 2014

(You can take the boy out of the East Bay (and plop him in a SoMA condo), but you can’t take the East Bay out of the boy.)

Gentle Reader, consider CW Nevius and his most recent bit advocating for the oppressed white millionaire homeowners of Russian Hill – this time he’s acting at the behest of Supervisor Mark Farrell (R., District 2)

See that*? 

Click to expand

Now I think the word you’re looking for, CW Nevius, is trolley with an “e,” as in potatoe.

Except it aint a trolley, it’s a cable car.  To wit:

“…electric tram (streetcar), sometimes confused with a cable car.”

And the vehicle code section cited here is wrong:

“The problem, says Deputy City Attorney Buck Delventhal, is California Vehicle Code 21106.1…”

CW Nevius, if you’re going to take the trouble to cite a law, why not take the time to do it the right way? Do you feel overworked, CW? You shouldn’t. Moving on…

And there’s this:

“Stefani says Farrell’s office was unaware of the 1987 law…”

Uh, former law? Or former bill? Did the “law” sunset automatically? And was it ever signed by The Duke in the first place? I don’t think so actually.

You see, CW Nevius, what you should look at are the reasons why the millionaires’ efforts always fail. Try this on for size:

The streets of a city belong to the people of the state, and the use thereof is an inalienable right of every citizen, subject to legislative control or such reasonable regulations as to the traffic thereon or the manner of using them as the legislature may deem wise or proper to adopt and impose.’ … ‘Streets and highways are established and maintained primarily for purposes of travel and transportation by the public, and uses incidental thereto. Such travel may be for either business or pleasure…”

Nevius, why don’t you retire or go back to sports, srsly? Then you’d get replaced by somebody who would do your job better than you, right? Wouldn’t that be a win-win?

But before you do that, why don’t you fix this**`?

“Jose had been struck by a late-’90s, silver, four-door sedan as he stepped off the curb at Oak and Scott.”

“And the intersection of Fell and Scott, where Jose was hit, has consistently been described as one of the city’s most dangerous.”

Fin. 

*Looks like somebody is striking a pose on the crosswalk:

I’m a model you know what I mean
And I do my little turn on the  
Yeah on the catwalk on the crosswalk, yeah
I do my little turn on the crosswalk

**I actually believed The Neve on the Fell and Scott thing, so I was going to go out there a week or two later on a Tuesday night at around the same time on the theory that this was somebody coming home during the evening drive. But then I saw that the actual location was on Oak so now I think the driver isn’t on a commuting schedule. You know, I’ve got a Canon 5D, crank the ISO up to 25,600, use a simple 200mm 2.8 prime to see if I could see some damage and get a plate. I mean it might have been worth the effort.

Suffer the Nevius: San Francisco Chronicle Writer CW Nevius Gets Harshed by the Subject of Recent Feel-Good Bit

Wednesday, October 16th, 2013

Here’s the recent effort from CW Nevius, who famously has The Easiest Job In Town:

Mark Ellinger’s photos find the light in the Tenderloin

And here’s the rejoinder, from one Mark Ellinger:

Untwisting the Truth

Enjoy.

An America’s Cup Media Mystery: Who is the “Columnist” That Larry Ellison and His Lackeys are So Angry At? Is It CW Nevius?

Tuesday, September 24th, 2013

Here’s Larry Ellison do-boy Stephen Barclay from a few days back:

This sentiment is a far cry from the cynicism several columnists and reporters displayed only a few short weeks ago. Nothing is 100% perfect and everything is open to fair comment. But while the critics were quick to pounce earlier, where are the same columnists and reporters’ opinions now?”

And here’s San Francisco columnist and former #1 America’s Cup cheerleader CW Nevius from earlier on:

The Oracle racing team may have finally done the impossible – not win the America’s Cup in a competition designed to attract a new generation of enthusiasts, but turn people off to sailboat racing.

This week the team was caught cheating.

It’s been well documented that Oracle, the team that can’t sail straight, has turned the America’s Cup into a poorly attended bluegrass festival. We’ve already talked about how the promise of the Cup, majestic boats racing each other over the green waters of the bay, devolved to a single sailboat, “competing” alone, and then holding a press conference to discuss the “victory.”

We’ve supported the races in the Bay Area. The city of San Francisco has poured money and facilities into the extravaganza, and we were promised a global showcase, an international event.

Instead we got Alex Rodriguez - using illegal substances to gain an unfair advantage.”

“The entire Oracle operation is tightly controlled. The idea that a rogue worker sneaked on the boat and placed the performance-enhancing weights in exactly the right place (and on three different boats) without the higher-ups knowing is ridiculous.”

So Im thinking that CW Nevius is among the group of offending journalists what the Larry Ellison worker was complaining about.

Oh, and when the Oracle Team”USA” people (and also “Son of a Legend” Christopher Caen) talk about how “shocked” they were about Oracle getting punished for cheating, it was kind of obvious what was going to happen, so it wasn’t shocking at all. Also from CW:

“Now surely, the international jury isn’t going to throw the defending champion out of the finals. It is much more likely that it will make Oracle forfeit some races.”

And, as expected by Nevius and all others, that’s what happened.

Ah what else, oh, The Nevius has blocked me from his Twitter I’ve discovered, but, just saying, the dude’s name is spelled Barclay, not “Barkley.”

Maybe that’s another reason why he hates your guts, CW.

Now, on with the show…

CW Nevius Gets It Done! A Few Words From His Now-Paywalled Column Stirs Government Workers Into Action – Or Not

Friday, June 21st, 2013

You know, San Francisco columnist CW Nevius used to complain about all the people commenting underneath his writings. In fact, he would dedicate some of his bits to rip on all the uncouths who dared contradict his conclusions.

(I’ll bet he misses those days now, he misses the time when he had hundreds and hundreds of commenters on SFGate instead of just a handful on the Chronicle website.)

Anyway, here’s the latest, about a BART / SFMTA / MUNI entrance near the intersection of Sutter and Sansome:

A sign on the barrier said the portal would be closed until June 4. When that date passed, a commuter added a sign that said: “Or whenever we get around to it.” The date was then changed to June 21.”

But Nevius got BART to change the sign to say that the opening date was pushed up to June 20th. See? Here’s how it looked the morning of 6/20:

And here’s the same location on the afternoon of 6/20:

Oh Nevius, when will all your incessant source greasing and beat sweetening pay off?

Nevius Nightmare! – MORE Coyotes in Golden Gate Park – Meet One of the Adorable New Pups of 2013

Monday, June 17th, 2013

OMG, they’re breeding again. It’s just like Jurassic Park.

All the deets:

David Cruz is a San Francisco wildlife film maker and founder of Natures Lantern. He is currently working on a SF Bay Area Black Bear documentary and a local awareness media campaign for Bay Area Mountain Lion street crossing safety.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/alchemicalnature/9045514097/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/alchemicalnature/9047748672/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/alchemicalnature/9045514647/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/alchemicalnature/9045479247/in/photostream/

Cruz has followed this group of coyotes for 3 years. This is the second year he provides breaking unique news photographs that prove these coyotes have reproduced in San Francisco, Golden Gate Park. Historic photographs and  background of pups and park coyotes of past years also available.

Taken today Friday June 14,

Natures Lantern

Click to expand

I’ll tell you, San Francisco Chronicle writer CW Nevius has been fretting about these critters for a while now. And yet it’s always dogs that be biting and killing people, not no coyotes.

PR Misstep from the America’s Cup People: Comparing Andrew Simpson Death to Famous Manslaughter Case

Tuesday, May 28th, 2013

IMO, this recent statement from Larry Ellison Person Stephan Barclay* is a misstep, but you make the call.

Check it:

“For example, following the death of Ayrton Senna in 1994, a number of measures were introduced, such as better cockpit protection for the drivers. Grooved tires were introduced in 1998 instead of racing slick tires to reduce cornering speed. Safety measures continued to be introduced into the 21st century, with a number of circuits having their configuration changed to improve driver safety.”

All right, I can understand why the Larry Ellison PR people want to compare America’s Cup 2013 to a popular sport like F1 car racing. Right? Because broadcasters actually pay money for the rights to broadcast F1, you dig. (Compare this with Larry Ellison’s America’s Cup, which needed mucho begging of NBC to agree to broadcast some of the matches for free.)

But mentioning Ayrton Senna is not a good move IMO because, from the beginning, it was investigated as a manslaughter case and, in the end, was determined to be a case of manslaughter.

Read all about it.

And, you know, people said the same things about Senna’s sport and Simpson’s sport, about how they are  inherently dangerous and whatnot. But that didn’t stop a manslaughter investigation in Senna’s case, now did it?

So where’s our manslaughter investigation?

Oh, just a “review” and let’s carry on? OK fine…

*Or, as CW Nevius spells it, repeatedly, in the pages of the San Francisco Chronicle, Stephen “Barkley.” Hey Neve! How’s that  new paywall doing for you? Oh, that badly, huh? Miss all those commenters already? Sure you do!