Posts Tagged ‘Nevius’

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.

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…