Posts Tagged ‘Nevius’

The Last America’s Cup Column Ever from CW Nevius: Larry Ellison’s Former #1 Booster Becomes a Critic

Thursday, December 18th, 2014

I don’t see how CW Nevius could possibly write another America’s Cup column after this one, so enjoy:

Remember the America’s Cup?”

Sure, it was the event you cheerleaded for when you moved to town about four years ago. It cost us a lot of money and you, CW Nevius, never apologized.

Monumental hype, epic races and crashes on San Francisco Bay, and controversy on top of controversy.

Well, let’s see here, wasn’t it you, CW Nevius, who was Grand Marshall of the America’s Cup “hype” team? Yes, it was. And speaking of remembering, what about this quote: “Holding the America’s Cup race in San Francisco is a wonderful opportunity without a downside. It is a win-win that will bring cargo bags of cash to the Bay Area.” Again, it was you, CW Nevius. Except this fiasco wasn’t a wonderful opportunity, and it wasn’t a win-win, and actually, we lost money on the deal. And actually, somebody was killed in one of those “epic” crashes on San Francisco Bay, you remember? It was just last year, actually, that this occurred.

In San Francisco, he changed the boats from stodgy, slow monohulls to 72-foot catamarans that could jet over the waves at nearly 60 mph.

The prior Cup didn’t use stodgy, slow monohulls, as you seem to imply. The change away from monohulls didn’t happen in SF. You want to make some point, so you change the facts to fit?

Ellison apparently wanted to be praised and admired. We were more like, “Uh, Larry, you promised us a fleet of eight to 12 boats and you only delivered three. And by the way, the 72-footers are so big and unwieldy that they are scary and dangerous.”

The problem with this is that CW Nevius was a great proponent of “NASCAR on the water. But then when he actually gets NASCAR on the water, he claims he doesn’t like it. OK fine.

Ellison is on the case this time. The boats will be smaller, 60 feet, will “only” reach speeds of 50 mph, and there will be a lot more of them. Five challengers have already committed, with five more “expressing interest.”

Oh, so CW Nevius now “knows” that everything will be fine with the boats next time, the same way he thought everything was going to be fine with the boats last time. Also, he now “knows” there’ll be more competitors?

San Francisco spent, and after sponsorships were included the city’s contribution was just $24 million. (The final event shortfall was $5 million after sales and endorsement money came in.)

“Just” $24 million, huh? Well, that number is understated, and I wouldn’t put a “just” in front of it. And the loss for SFGov  was far greater than $5 million.

So maybe we misunderstood Ellison. Maybe instead of bringing sailing to the masses, what he really meant was he was bringing masses of money to sailing. But the press coverage in Bermuda is expected to be very flattering.

So why does CW Nevius expect press coverage in Bermuda to be “very flattering?” What’s the connection between the stinger and all that came before it?

(CW Nevius sometimes seems to think that he himself is the San Francisco Chronicle, but I strongly disagree with that concept. Hey, what if the Chron were a catamaran, then what The Nevius be? A bunch of barnacles on the hulls? Something like that.)

Writer C.W. Nevius Makes Amends for “This Isn’t Oakland” with His Gay Games Bit? – SFAA v. USOC IRL

Friday, December 12th, 2014

Poor CW Nevius is still smarting over the drubbing he took over “This isn’t Oakland.” Check it:

 Dec 9  Hey Jessica. If you are going to write something like that, you might want to check in with me. I’m pretty reasonable.
Here’s what he’s so mad about:

SF CHRONICLE COLUMNIST BASHES OAKLAND

See how that works? You all need to check in with CW himself before you criticize him – that’s the rule. It’s a kind of YOU DON’T KNOW ME! defense, one supposes.

So that’s the context.

Now look! San Francisco Chronicle’s right-of-center Everyman has lurched across the aisle with this recent effort about the local history of the Gay Olympics / Gay Games:

S.F. backstory to Olympics’ new policy on gays, by C.W. Nevius

Now here’s your real back story. First, bone up on this:

Amateur Sports Act of 1978

And then see the court case that explains why the term Gay Games is kosher but Gay Olympics isn’t. A 7-2 decision, more or less:

San Francisco Arts & Athletics, Inc. v. United States Olympic Committee

Here’s my point – what Nevius is saying is that the USOC’s effort to defend its “brand” back in the 1970′s was “pointless.” Except the USOC won and now the Gay Olympics is known as the Gay Games and life goes on.

Do you want to get into why the IOC / USOC and all the other OC’s of the world tolerate people using a term like “Redneck Olympics,” at least until it grows into a big event? Be my guest.

(Oh, but wait, the official name of that event in Georgia is now the Redneck Games. Is the USOC against rednecks? IDK.)

Speaking of points, here’s one:

Mess with the Olympic brand long enough and you just might end up with a lien on your house.

Which is fair enough, I suppose.

(And actually, the USOC lifted the lien anyway.)

Hey remember what CW Nevius had to say before the disastrous 34th America’s Cup came to town? He called it:

a wonderful opportunity without a downside.”

Except we ended up with a lot of downsides.

And now he’s cheerleading for the 2024 Olympics to come to town. And while he’s doing that, he criticizes the USOC for stuff from a third of a decade ago.

Of course, he could criticize the current USOC, but no, Nevius doesn’t want to do that.

Hey look, it’s gay rights champion Vladimir Putin chilling with CW Nevius hero Larry “The Good” Probst:

chi-20141209-001 copy

 

And when was this shot taken, was it a third of a century ago?

Oh no, it was this year.

Oh well.

CW Nevius Roundup: An Apology to Oakland! – Plus Nevius the Union Activist – Plus Errors re: Golden Gate Park

Friday, December 5th, 2014

1. The Apology. Normally I’d just do a retweet but I’ve been blocked from doing just that, so here’s a back-and-forth on the recent “This isn’t Oakland” bit:

Capturehdh copy

Now actually, in defense of The Nevius, I think he was merely channeling what the SFPD brass had to say, as Nevius is wont to do, about comparing the SFPD response to a protest situation vs. how the OPD handled things in the recent past. So the stood aside and let the looting and window shattering play out” comment just might have been a reference to comments made a few years back by the Oakland Mayor or by the OPD. So the “this isn’t Oakland” stinger could have been referring to that.

In any event, even the Nevius Wife didn’t like the Oakland Comment, so Nevius apologized on Twitter (and maybe ten people read it). It’s a real apology, but it was made to just a handful of people. 

2. Nevius the Union Activist. Check out this recent bit about San Francisco taxi drivers and then ponder this:

In his own personal life, CW Nevius is a union activist. Like, he goes to meetings ‘n stuff

That means he’s not just a union member, oh no. I’ve been a union member, but I wasn’t no shop steward, I wasn’t no agitator the way CW Nevius is in some kind of media guild thing.

So, isn’t it ironic, dontcha think, that union activist CW Nevius takes such an anti Labor tone?

3. Nevius the right of center megaphone for the San Francisco’s dominant right of center political faction. I’m specifically referring to this bit about Stow Lake Boat House.

He goes on and on about how great the Stow Lake Boat House is now:

And now it looks terrific, and I haven’t heard a word of complaint.

IRL, not a whole bunch has changed there. Tourists come, pay their money, get a boat for an hour, and then do a lap around Strawberry Hill on Stow Artificial Pond.

(Of course, CW Nevius is a newcomer to San Francisco, so he missed out on most of the action at Stow Lake.)

In any event, yes, the opposition to the new vendor was absurd, but that doesn’t prove his point that all opposition to the corrupt right of center political Establishment is absurd. Let’s take a look:

At yet, at the end of the day, not only do we end up doing the right thing, everyone seems to move on and forget and forgive.

So what, did “we” do “the right thing” voting down 8 Washington – did we “forget and forgive” “at the end of the day?” Mmm… Moving on.

Now here’s a load of BS:

To Park Commission President Mark Buell, that’s not just a theory. He’s lived it. “When I became president, I was given some advice,” he said. “I was told there were four things I would never get accomplished: getting a new vendor at Stow Lake, closing the recycling center at Golden Gate Park, charging a visitors fee at the arboretum, and putting artificial turf at the Beach Chalet soccer fields.”

All right, note the passive voice here in the quote from an area right of center apparatchik. Who said these words? Oh, you don’t want to say? Oh, your quote only discusses your victories and leaves out your losses? So, how did the unnamed person making this quote know back then what you would “get accomplished?” I don’t know, you could put Mark Buell through a polygraph session to prove that he believes all this stuff, but it doesn’t mean his memory is correct.

And actually, it was a piece of cake to get a new vendor at Stow Lake. Somebody paid a lobbyist $10k a month for months and months to lobby the Board of Supervisors. That’s the source of this “accomplishment.”

And is closing a recycling center at the request of millionaire NIMBY homeowners an “accomplishment?” IDK.

And is clearing out out-of-towners at Strybing Arboretum an “accomplishment? Not really. RPD wanted to pay more than a million dollars to build two kiosks to pay workers minimum wage to collect seven dollars a head? Yes. And how have things worked out? Well, the number of visitors has fallen dramatically. Is that a good thing? Well, in the eyes of millionaires who like plants more than people, the answer is yes.

I disagree.

IMO, is it short-sighted to fuck over Helene Strybing by renaming the joint and throwing up a paywall in a fruitless pursuit to make the place “world-class,” to impress all the arboretum societies Back East? Yes.

And while I don’t personally object to the new soccer fields at the Beach Chalet, that doesn’t mean that all is well with the political faction that runs Rec and Park. Hey, how about putting parking meters in all over GGP? Wasn’t that an “accomplishment” that the right of center faction wanted? Hell yes. But we don’t have no meters, huh? And the whole issue is forgotten now? How convenient!

Moving on, to San Mateo County:

He might have added saving the Sharp Park Golf Course in Pacifica.

I know why SF runs a jail complex and an international airport in San Mateo County, but I don’t know why on Earth it runs a golf course. Perhaps SF should get rid of it? Is that on the table? No? All right.

His point, of course, was that while each of those initiatives proved to be controversial and difficult, they’ve all been accomplished…

My point is, of course, is that this a highly biased view of the recent history of the RPD.

Moving on to another falsehood:

“Think about the (AT&T) ballpark,” Buell said. “How many people fought the idea of a downtown ballpark? And once it is built, everybody takes credit for it.”

This sounds like the way people talk when they’re drunk, boasting at a bar. It’s not based on reality.

And here’s the stinger, from the newcomer who just moved here, who wanted to move here:

Don’t look for logic. It’s just how we do things.

Is simple-minded CW Nevius, the Fallacy Spewing Machine, on the side of “logic,” really?

OK fine.

FIN

What San Francisco Chronicle Writer CW Nevius Gets Wrong About Our Bid for the Corrupt 2024 Olympics

Tuesday, November 25th, 2014

Here’s the latest from The Nevius – once more unto the breach, my friends, once more:

Olympic insiders dish on S.F.’s bid for 2024 Games - We’ve been talking to some Olympic insiders — nobody likes to gossip like Olympic insiders — and they’ve been sizing up the chances.”

Who’s “we,” Nevius?  Is this nosism, the Royal we? Why do you do that, Neve? (Oh, I’m sorry, why do you guys do that, Neve?) You all should stop doing that, all of you, Neviuses.

The good: There is definitely a strong interest in bringing the Games to the United States. 

I don’t exactly know how juicy this “gossip” is – I think it’s more like common knowledge, right? And considering what the IOC has done to a bunch of cities over the years and decades, I don’t see how this non-gossip could be categorized as “the good.”

The bad: San Francisco’s quirky politics may make organizers nervous. “San Francisco could put something on the ballot,” the staffer said, “and you’ve got Denver all over again.”

OK, so what are you saying here Neve? The short-sighted politicians of Denver and the rest of Colorado made a mistake back in 1970 and that mistake got corrected by the Voters, the sacred Voters, right? Check it: “The IOC had long asserted that it wouldn’t hold the games in Denver unless public money was available to help foot the bill, so unless the people of Colorado would change their minds, the Olympics were going elsewhere.” So isn’t Denver 1976 an example of The Good? I cry foul.

Joke if you will about the proposed pop-up stadium on what is now a landfill in Brisbane, but there is a case to be made that a temporary facility is a sensible option.

The only person in the world to have joked about Brisbane as a stadium location is you yourselves, CW Nevius. FYI. IRL, the venue of this venue is the least of our concerns. IRL, with billions and billions of OUR MONEY, it would be a LEAD PIPE CINCH to make Brisbane work as an olympic stadium. For ex, they could put a roof on it, right?

Beijing’s iconic Bird’s Nest stadium is now called the Empty Nest because it isn’t being used.

As the saying goes, if you start disassembling your “pop-up stadium” four weeks after the Opening Ceremony, all you’re doing is shooting a white elephant. How is that an improvement?

Our insider says, “San Francisco is the most European city,” which plays well with IOC delegates.

“Our insider?” Your (the Plural Your, of course, Emperor Nortonevius) headline promised insiders. And SF is “the most European city” EXCEPT for fucking Berlin, Paris, Hamburg. Rome, St. Pete and all the other European cities what are in the running for 2024.

If San Francisco has one, I couldn’t find it.

Well, here it is – it’s SF2024.Org. Can you find it now, Neviuses?

The Central Subway will be ready by then…

Oh, is that the very same subway what “makes you wince,” Neviuses? What’s that, you know it’s the largest pork barrel project in ‘Merica currently, but you want to maintain your access with the current political Establishment so you say nice things about it now? OK fine. I can’t imagine how the Central Subway would make any kind of difference to the 2024 Olympics, but anyway.

Hey Nevius, weren’t you a big big fan of the America’s Cup coming to town? Weren’t you all:

Holding the America’s Cup race in San Francisco is a wonderful opportunity without a downside.”

Yes you were. But there was a downside, huh? And then you started rooting for the other side and you wished a good riddance to the Cup and now it’s off to Bermuda in 2017. Don’t you see how wrong you were about the America’s Cup? Yes? No? Oh, you’ve already picked up your pom-poms and moved on to the Olympics?

OK fine.

Why is the Threat of Getting Stuck with the 2024 Olympics a Big Deal in Boston, But a Nothingburger in SF? Plus, a Female CW Nevius!

Tuesday, November 18th, 2014

The possibility of America hosting the 2024 Summer Olympics is the talk of the town in Boston these days.

And there’s a lot of activity coming out of Los Angeles as well.

And look, Washington DC too.

But in San Francisco, there’s nothing like any of that.

Why?

I don’t know why the conversation in SF is so far behind.

I mean we made it past a bunch of other cities to get to the Final Four, but has there been anything discussed regarding a cost estimate? Like how many tens of billions of dollars it will cost us?

Nope.

This is a mystery to me.

There are all sorts of possibilities…

The danger is San Francisco getting the nod from the USOC and then the USOC beating out all the other OC’s of the world and then bam, the Bay Area will be hosting the 2024 Games.

What are the odds of that? IDK. Some Boston boosters appear to be very confident, but others say that the choice will end up being either LA or SF.

So it could be that San Francisco JUST ISN”T THAT INTO IT?  But then why have we made it this far along the process already and why is a/the web guy for the San Francisco Giants spending so much time on the clock building out the inchoate official 2024SF bid website? Would it be for the sake of the next effort, for 2028?

Mmmm…

All right, now I promised you a Female CW Nevius and here she is, poms poms in hand. Of course, she is supporting the Boston bid and CW Nevius is supporting the San Francisco bid, but they’re completing their assigned roles in exactly the same way. (BTW, am I a “naysayer,” a hater who wants to hate on people’s fun? Well then, how do the boosters look to me? A bunch of vapid cheerleaders who are unafraid to get mixed up in all the Olympic corruption, the bribery, the pay-offs, the reduction in tourism and who are unafraid to spend tens of billions of Other People’s Money on the off chance, perhaps five or ten percent, that things will all work out, don’t you believe in THE DREAM?)

Anyway, I know/ there’s something going on/ there’s something going on/ there’s something going on, but I just don’t know what it is…

Sympathy for the Landlord Who Inherited the Apartment You Rent: Writer CW Nevius Cries a River over Rent Control

Thursday, October 30th, 2014

HERE ARE JUST TEN OR SO THINGS WRONG WITH THE LATEST EFFORT FROM CW NEVIUS:

“Real estate attorney Elizabeth Erhardt has an incredibly unpopular outlook. She’s sympathetic to San Francisco landlords. And before being drowned out by a chorus of boos and hisses…”

THIS MIGHT COME AS A SURPRISE TO THE NEVIUS, BUT THIS “OUTLOOK” IS NOT “INCREDIBLY UNPOPULAR.” HOW ABOUT SOMEWHAT UNPOPULAR, YOU KNOW, INSTEAD?  STRIKE ONE

“They inherited a…. It’s her sole source of income.”

SO NEVIUS, YOU COULDN’T FIND ANY RICH SAN FRANCISCO LANDOWNER WHO DIDN’T INHERIT PROPERTY? EVERYBODY YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT HERE GOT THEIR LAND FOR FREE WITH A STEPPED-UP BASIS, AND AT LEAST ONE IS LANDED GENTRY WITHOUT A J-O-B? WHAT IS THIS, ANOTHER EPISODE OF DOWNTON ABBEY? IT’S HARD OUT HERE FOR A PIMP (LAND)LORD? DON’T YOU SEE THIS AS A PROBLEM FOR YOUR HARD-LUCK LANDLORD STORIES HERE? STRIKE TWO

“Oh come on, you say. Subletting without the landlord’s permission is illegal. Just toss them out.”

FIRST OF ALL NEVIUS, SUBLETTING WITHOUT THE LANDLORD’S PERMISSION ISN’T “ILLEGAL.” STRIKE THREE. AND SECOND OF ALL, WITHOUT REALIZING IT, YOU’RE CALLING INTO QUESTION THE MANAGEMENT SKILLZ OF THE OWNERS. OF COURSE MOST OF THESE ISSUES ARE WORKED OUT AT THE SF RENT BOARD, BUT YOU DON’T WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT, OK FINE. BUT, FOR THAT, STRIKE FOUR.

“Erhardt says she had a case where the original tenant was paying $19 a month for his apartment because he’d installed sub-leasers to pay most of the way.”

SO FINE, TAKE IT TO THE RENT BOARD – WHAT’S THE PROBLEM HERE? PROVE UP YOUR CASE AND YOU’LL WIN, EASY-PEASY. AWWWW, THAT’S TOO HARD FOR YOU, YOU DON’T HAVE STOMACH TO MAKE MONEY OFF OF LANDLORDING IN SF? WELL, WHO PROMISED YOU, THE INHERITOR, THAT IT WOULD BE EASY, WHO PROMISED YOU A ROSE GARDEN? WHY NOT INSTEAD JUST SELL THE PROPERTY AND ENJOY YOUR UNEARNED INCOME? FOR NOT STATING THE OBVIOUS, THAT’S STRIKE FIVE FOR THE NEVIUS.

Critics say these are just a few anecdotal examples. 

WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT, NEVIUS? WHO ACTUALLY SAID THIS? AND HOW MANY THOUSANDS OF  STRAW DOGS HAVE YOU BIRTHED OVER THE YEARS, YOU LAZY WRITER, CW NEVIUS? STRIKE SIX. (LET’S BRING OUT THE “T”)

“…poperty owners.”

HEY NEVIUS, YOU DON’T HAVE AN EDITOR, HUH? I KNOW THAT BECAUSE OF TEH TYPOS. AND THAT’S NOT A PROBLEM IN ITSELF, BUT AN EDITOR WOULD PREVENT YOU FROM SAYING STUFF LIKE HOW NOT GETTING A LANDLORD’S PERMISSION TO DO SOMETHING IS “ILLEGAL.” WHAT YOU NEED IS SOMEBODY TO GO THROUGH ALL YOUR SENTENCES AND THEN SAY, “NOW IS THIS ACTUALLY TRUE?” SO YEAH, SURE, YOU CAN FIX THE TYPOS, BUT WHAT ABOUT EVERYTHING ELSE, WHAT ABOUT ALL THE ERRORS WHAT _AREN’T_ TYPOS? STRIKE SEVEN

A simple concept, rent-controlled apartments for those who need a financial break, has become as Byzantine as the tax code.

WELL, LET’S SEE HERE. NUMBER ONE, SF RENT CONTROL IS NOT “AS BYZANTINE AS OUR TAX CODE,” NOT BY A LONG SHOT. FOUL TIP. NUMBER TWO, RENT CONTROL WAS MEANT FOR EVERYONE, NOT JUST “THOSE WHO NEED A FINANCIAL BREAK.” RIGHT? ‘CAUSE OTHERWISE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MEANS-TESTED, RIGHT? IN THAT WAY, IT’S SIMILAR TO PROP 13, RIGHT? HEY NEVIUS, DO YOU PROPOSE MEANS-TESTING PROP  13? OH YOU DON’T? MMMM… AND HEY, AREN’T YOU A SAN FRANCISCO NEWCOMER WHOSE SOMA CONDO IS UP IN VALUE BIG-TIME SINCE YOU BOUGHT JUST A FEW YEARS AGO? HEY, DON’T YOU BENEFIT FROM PROP 13? DO YOU REALLY NEED IT, NEVIUS? HEY, WHY DON’T WE MEANS-TEST YOUR PROP 13 BENEFITS, NEVIUS? STRIKE EIGHT

“Rent control was enacted in 1979,” said New. “The law has been changed, like, 72 times since then.”

AND SOME OF THOSE CHANGES WERE, LIKE, AT THE BEHEST OF … THE SFAA, RIGHT? IS JANAN NEW COMPLAINING ABOUT THE NUMBER OF CHANGES HER ORG INSTIGATED? WHY DIDN’T YOU ASK HER THAT, MR. EVERYMAN? STRIKE NINE 

“It’s the haves against the have-nots,” Erhardt said, “and every tenant attorney thinks they are Robin Hood.”

AND DOES EVERY TENANT ATTORNEY THINK THEY ARE ROBIN HOOD, IRL? NOPE. STRIKE TEN, AND YOU, CW NEVIUS, THE MIGHTY CASEY, ARE OUT.

AUDI 5000…

San Francisco Chronicle Writer CW Nevius is So Wrong on So Many Things: Consider this Felony Graffiti Case in the Tenderloin

Thursday, August 14th, 2014

HERE IT IS: Court* may not paint tagging as a petty crime this time

“If there was ever a case that deeply annoyed Tenderloin residents, it was the graffiti bombing of the old Hibernia Bank last year.”

WELL, LET’S SEE. I THINK THIS CASE MIGHT HAVE ANNOYED:

THE NEVIUS HIMSELF;

SOME COPS;

THE OWNER(S) OF THE BANK, AND POSSIBLY;

TWITTERLOIN-AREA POVERTY PIMP RANDY SHAW

BUT NONE OF THESE PEOPLE ARE “TENDERLOIN RESIDENTS.” SO WHO WAS/IS SO “ANNOYED?” AND IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT A HIBERNIA BANK-RELATED “CASE” THAT BOTHERED TWITTERLOIN RESIDENTS, HOW ABOUT THE CASE OF THE FALLING BRICKS? (SEE PHOTO BELOW.) OH WHAT’S THAT, NEVIUS? THAT HAPPENED FIVE YEARS BACK SO IT WAS BEFORE THE TIME YOU MOVED TO TOWN? OK FINE. 

After all, the defense says, he is just a kid, never had any trouble before, and it was just a little spray paint. The charges routinely get knocked down to a misdemeanor and the perp ends up doing a little community service and is back on the street.

DID THE DEFENSE ATTORNEY IN THIS CASE SAY THESE THINGS? I DON’T KNOW. AND I DON’T KNOW HOW THINGS WORK IN THE EAST BAY, WHERE NEVIUS IS FROM, MORE OR LESS, WHERE HIS MENTALITY IS FROM, BUT COMPARE THIS TAGGER”S OFFENSE WITH THAT OF FORMER TENDERLOIN RESIDENT GURBAKSH CHAHAL, WHO STRUCK / KICKED A WOMAN 117 TIMES. ON VIDEO. “G” CHAHAL WAS “BACK ON THE STREET” IN NO TIME AT ALL – THAT”S YOUR BASELINE, RIGHT?

Part of the reason the anti-graffiti crowd is hopeful is that the district attorney’s office is now into its second year of “neighborhood prosecutors.” These are five attorneys in the office who each have responsibility for two neighborhood police districts. In theory, they know the players and bad actors and can make a strong case that the defendant has a history and pattern of bad behavior in the neighborhood.

THIS IS THE STANDARD BEAT-SWEETENER / SOURCE GREASER GRAF THAT OFTENTIMES APPEARS IN THE WRITINGS OF THE NEVIUS, WHO OWES HIS ALLEGIANCE TO THE RIGHT-OF-CENTER FACTION RUNNING SFGOV THE PAST COUPLE DECADES, YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF TO HIS READERS. AND I’LL NOTE THAT THIS VIEW OF HISTORY IS A BIT INSULTING TO THE SFDA PROSECUTORS WHO WORKED ON SIMILAR CASES BEFORE THIS “NEIGHBORHOOD PROSECUTORS” PET PROJECT KICKED OFF. THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM NOW AND IN THE PAST IS THE WORLD-FAMOUS SAN FRANCISCO JURY POOL, WHICH FACTORS IN TO ANY PROSECUTION / PLEA BARGAIN CONSIDERATION, RIGHT?

Neighborhood prosecutor Karen Catalona is handing this case and will be attempting to keep the felony charges in place against Nelson, the alleged tagger.

IT’S HARD FOR ME TO USE THE FEEL-GOOD TERM “NEIGHBORHOOD PROSECUTOR” EVEN IN QUOTE MARKS, BUT I’LL TELL YOU, NEIGHBORHOOD PROSECUTOR KAREN CATALONA WOULD TOTALLY WANT ME TO BE A MEMBER OF THE JURY IN ABOUT 95% OF HER CASES,** BUT I DON’T KNOW IF SHE’D GET A FELONY CONVICTION TO STICK IN THIS CASE IF I HAD ANY SAY-SO IN THESE MATTERS.

For instance, most of us tend to think of graffiti taggers as bored teenage kids, out on a lark.

THIS IS ABSOLUTELY FALSE IF NEVIUS IS CONSIDERING “US” TO BE SAN FRANCISCO RESIDENTS, MOST OF WHOM HAVE LIVED HERE LONGER THAN CW NEVIUS HISSELF. SPEAK FOR YOURSELF, NEVIUS, NOT “US.”

First, Ferreira says, you can learn to recognize what gang tags look like.

WHY SHOULD WE CONCERN OURSELVES WITH THIS? AND AREN’T THE GANGS THEMSELVES “SCARY,” YOU KNOW, AS OPPOSED TO THEIR GRAFFITI?

However, Ferreira says before you freak out, you should understand that “the overwhelming majority of graffiti in San Francisco is tagger graffiti.”

OH OK, WELL, TOO LATE, I’M TYPING THIS FROM MY PANIC ROOM, BUT NOW YOU’RE TELLING ME TO _NOT_ FREAK OUT, SO WHEW!

SUFFER THE NEVIUS, HANGING OUT AT BARS WAITING FOR THE NEXT SAN FRANCISCO LIEUTENANT OR CAPTAIN OR COMMANDER OR CHIEF  OR PROSECUTOR OR ASSISTANT PROSECUTOR OR PROPERTY OWNER TO SPOON-FEED HIM HIS NEXT STORY…

*I’D SAY “JURY” INSTEAD OF COURT, BUT ANYWAY.

**IF I WERE PART OF A JURY IN A CASE LIKE THAT DEVELOPMENTALLY-DISABLED DUDE WHO TURNED IN A HANDGUN BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT THE SFPD TOLD PEOPLE TO DO AND THEN WAS PUT UP ON CHARGES OF ILLEGAL FIREARMS POSSESSION, I WOULD PERSONALLY LEAD A JURY REVOLT THAT WOULD HANG THE JURY OR, MORE LIKELY, HAVE IT COMING BACK WITH A NOT GUILTY ON ALL CHARGES. AND THAT WOULD GO FOR RECENT CASES FROM SAN FRANCISCO PROSECUTORS INVOLVING STOLEN “BAIT” CARS THAT WERE LEFT IDLING UNLOCKED ON DIVISADERO (IN PART FOR THE BENEFIT OF A FUCKING REALITY TV SHOW) AND “BAIT” BIKES LEFT UNLOCKED NEAR SAFEWAYS FOR HOMELESS PEOPLE TO TAKE. BUT OTHERWISE, PROSECUTORS WOULD GENERALLY REALLY REALLY WANT ME ON THEIR JURIES.

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.