Posts Tagged ‘non-profit’

Surprise: A $3.2 Million(!) Renovation Will SHUT DOWN the Panhandle Playground for about Two(!) Years

Thursday, August 31st, 2017

Whoo boy:

Capturedfsdgghghdd

This process started in late 2014. San Francisco Board of Supervisors President called a $2 million earmarking an “early Christmas present” for her District Five. That means that this is going to end up taking a full half-decade.

But that’s not the problem.

The problem is that RPD should just take care of the stuff it has instead of building all-new stuff.

So, some generally well-meaning non-profit people came around with clipboards telling people that the current Panhandle Playground, paid for by a $100,000 grant from (old) General Motors, gets a grade of “C” or “D” and the first thing people did is ask why. About half of them would give an “A” grade, and then say that Rec and Park should do a better job of maintenance.

And actually PEOPLE LIKE ALL THE SAND.

But one of the points of this project is getting rid of the sand. It’s a citywide goal. So it’s kind of sad that the people who want the city to simply keep this playground the way it is butjust take better care of it always ask about the sand issue. The answer I hear from the generally well-meaning nonprofit types is that sand has parasites, from cats. Well, that might be true in general but it’s not true at this location, which has more rats than cats, as you can see:

7J7C8993-copy

Another point is getting rid of the Chromated Copper Arsenate (CCA) in the wood. Well, again, this is a citywide goal that some have. Check out the Wiki link. Avoid studies by/from the CCA / timber industry. IRL, if there’s arsenic in your kid, it’s not from CCA. Sry.

So what else – oh, what’s also sad is that people don’t understand that the existing playground would have to shut down for more than a year as the new playground has to go in at the same place.

And questions about all these issues are addressed to those who are getting paid to put in a new playground. The question about whether a playground should be put in was never asked.

So, CLOSING THIS PLAYGROUND FOR TWO YEARS FOR BASICALLY NO REASON WILL BE UNPOPULAR (TO SAY THE LEAST) WITH EXISTING USERS. Go over there and ask them – say, yeah, they’re going shut this place down for two years to get rid of all the sand. The most popular reply you’ll get is, “Oh no, that’s terrible, I like the sand.”

And, THERE’S NO GUARANTEE THAT THE NEW PLAYGROUND WILL BE BETTER THAN THE EXISTING ONE. This issue could go either way. The new playground will implement Theories Of Playing, but, guess what, so did the old one. Has Play changed so much the past two decades?

Also, ISN’T $3.2 MILLION A LOT OF MONEY TO PUT INTO A SMALL PLAYGROUND AREA? This isn’t the big beef, but it’s a a factor.

The BEST CHOICE would be to fix up the existing playground with just a small fraction of 3.2 freaking million dollars. And take another fraction and use it to pay the RPD workers who come by to rake the sand. And then do something else with the remaining millions.

The SECOND BEST CHOICE would be to site the playground in a different place. That would address the primary problem of the two year shutdown.

The THIRD BEST CHOICE would be to delay this project for another three years, or for another couple decades.

I realize that people at the Parks Alliance want to do things for the children, but what they’re ending up doing is shutting down their playground for a couple of years for basically no reason.

SFGov Invites YOU to a FREE DINNER at the Park Branch Library Tonight – New Panhandle Playground – Bring the Kids!

Wednesday, May 31st, 2017

Here’s the news from a few years back and here’s what’s going to happen tonight at our SFPL’s Park Branch Library at 1833 Page near Clayton at 5:30 PM:

“Panhandle Playground Project – Planning Workshop – May 31 @ 5:30 pm – 7:30 pm

A workshop to discuss future improvements to the Panhandle Playground as part of the Let’s Play SF! Initiative – a partnership with the San Francisco Parks Alliance.

Food provided! Children and youth welcome as we will have planning activities geared towards them!

For more information about the Panhandle Playground Project, please visit tinyurl.com/PanhandlePlayground or contact Project Manager Melinda Stockmann at Melinda.Stockmann@sfgov.org or at 415-581-2548.”

But oh, there are a few issues.

1 So who’s paying the millions of dollars SFGov is proposing to spend? Well, they don’t get into that. I assume it’s local tax- and fee-payers. So that’s one of the costs of this project, right?

2. I mention that because destroying the current setup, the popular Kid’s Kingdom playground what’s the current Panhandle Playground, and then putting in a replacement will take, what, months, years? I mean, delays are baked into the cake, right?

Oh, here it is. “WELCOME TO KID’S KINGDOM – DONATED BY YOUR LOCAL SATURN DEALER.” Or at least it used to say that. But area residents didn’t cotton to this kind of marketing, so chop chop:

7J7C1455-copy

3. One way to take care of this lengthy shut down issue would be to build the new playground someplace else nearby. THIS IS ONE OF THE CHOICES THAT YOU MIGHT POSSIBLY HAVE INPUT ON TONIGHT. Frankly, I don’t think Rec and Park would really be into moving the site JMO. The current location has a bunch of exotic trees around it, which many find appealing, but given the half-assed way RPD conducts its bidness, there’s a heightened risk of a big old branch coming down and killing somebody someday. Anyway, our RPD seems to think nothing of shutting down playgrounds for basically no reason for like a year, so I don’t think it cares oh well.

Getting rid of the rats should be high on the agenda regardless:

7J7C8993-copy

RPD’s hands are tied about getting rid of rats. They can cull the herd, but getting rid of them altogether, well that’s a gonna be hard. They have some helpers though, to swoop down and carry away the poor little rattus rattus:

7J7C2468-copy

4. But here’s the thing: Once you wrap your head around building the new playground while keeping the current one open, then who’s to say that people would prefer the new one? In fact, the current Kid’s Kingdom Panhandle Playground is remarkably popular, drawing in kids from all over the city. Why? Well mostly it has to do with all the tons of sand. People love the sand. And these days it’s a rare thing in Frisco. You know who hates sand, or at least hates taking care of sand? That’s right, your RPD. Speaking of which, RPD isn’t all that popular and yet the current playground is. So why not get a new RPD and leave the current playground alone?

5. Or better yet, take the money set aside and use it to take care of the Panhandle Playground better – is that so crazy? Ask people who are there and they are shocked that RPD and associated non-profits run by millionaires consider this place a “failing” playground. What makes it a “failure?” Its popularity? The current playground is a beat up Toyota Land Cruiser with 100,000 miles, which means that if you take care of it, maybe spruce it up a bit, then it will last for decades more, right?

6. But, RPD is already set upon getting rid of Kid’s Kingdom, without asking anybody. (Our SFMTA once made the mistake of actually asking if people wanted the crazy, I mean just crazy traffic circles they randomly put on Page, among other places. And the answer was no, we want our stop signs back, by a three to one margin. So this kind of thing is on RPD’s mind when it considers asking people what they want.) And they’re already paying a project manager and they’ve selected the main contractor, so RPD would think it “sad” if they had to give back the millions of dollars set aside.

7. Oh well.

8. And let’s see, is all that sand what’s there bad because of parasites? Well that could be true but it’s not because we don’t have no cats around, at least the way the ‘burbs do.

9. And is there arsenic in the wood at the playground now? Oh, yes there is. But it’s not all that big a deal. Typically, if there’s arsenic in your kid, then it’s going to be from something other than CCA wood. And you’re supposed to wash your hands after leaving, at least that’s what an RPD sign says what’s posted near the eastern entrance.

10. Oh, what’s that, playgrounds have changed so so much in the two decades since (Old) General Motors simply gifted us $100k to put in Kid’s Kingdom? Noooooope! You’re wrong, RPD.

11. But you have a new Theory of Playgrounds that you’re happy to share and discuss? Well, that’s fine, but the people who made Kid’s Kingdom also had theories and I’ll bet if you put them together, cut them up and then presented them to RPD employees, they wouldn’t be able to distinguish betwixt the bad old theories and the great new theories.

12. Oh well.

13. So the current playground is “failing” but the current users don’t have the foggiest idea of what that means, so why doesn’t RPD face up to this?

14. Anyway, you’ve paid for this project, so you deserve some free food at the library. They’ll ask you about your feelings about this and that, like what color should this be kind of thing. One supposes.

15. If the food’s not to your liking, Mickey D’s on Haight has 2 for 1 Happy Meals today, via their app.

16. Adieu Kid’s Kingdom. Many people will miss your ocean of sand, especially the Little Ones. Expect a playground geared more for Big Kids. For Better or Worse. Eventually.

17. OIOW:

“long-suffering playground” [IRL, it’s an extremely popular playground. Its current Yelp rating is 4.5 stars, which is the very definition of almost perfect, right? And hey look, what about the San Francisco Recreation and Parks Yelp rating – it’s much lower, it’s actually just 2.5 stars, right? Is RPD “failing?” Should we simply fire everybody and start over? Hey, why don’t we start using objective measurements, like asking the playground’s existing customers what they think? Is that too radical a notion?]

“finally” [This “framing” assumes 100% of what the millionaire-run Parks Alliance nonprofit says is accurate]

“Victim to time” [Well sure, you could replace this or that at this location, but what’s so wrong with it? What makes it a useless tear-down?]

“frequent wear and tear” [Because it’s popular? We’re going to change it because it’s popular and it gets used?]

“grown-up play” [Turns out it was sixth-graders who busted the slide, per the word on the street]

“the playground pales in comparison to other high-tech kids’ play areas in the city.” [What on Earth could  make a playground “high tech?” Like, “sure this playground is great, but I feel it doesn’t employ the most recent application of science?” Like, who says that? IRL, it’s perfectly fine.]

“failing playgrounds” [But the Panhandle Playground isn’t “failing,” right? Ask all the people who use it and try to find one person who would give it a letter grade of “F“]

“low household income” [Is this area a low household income area? WTF to that. In fact, the 94117 is an extremely high household income place, right? It’s off the charts, actually, nationally speaking. And even locally, it’s anything but a low household income area.]

“low Parks Alliance Report Card grades and rankings.” [Oh, here we go, here’s the problem. What’s the PARC and why does it matter?]

“an early holiday gift to District 5.” [London Breed is thinking “CHRISTMAS” but she says holidays – good for her. But who’s paying for this gift? Oh, we are? So it’s not really a gift, is it, London Claus?]

“high-tech play matting” [I have no fucking idea what this means. Currently, the joint is basically a giant sand box. Is this a bad thing? One supposes that some think so, but one doesn’t know.]

“What would you like to see improved upon in our small neighborhood playground?” [Keeping it the same, except for maintenance, which, if it’s lacking, then whose fault is that? Cough RPD, cough]

Wouldn’t it be ironic, dontcha think, if the Yelp ratings of the Panhandle Playground go down after we spend all those millions of dollars on this simple, functional playground?

We’ll see.

 

Objecting to the Following Dozen Words and Phrases Used to Announce the Seven-Figure Renovation of the Panhandle Playground

Tuesday, December 23rd, 2014

Here it is, on the Hoodline:

“long-suffering playground” [IRL, it’s an extremely popular playground. Its current Yelp rating is 4.5 stars, which is the very definition of almost perfect, right? And hey look, what about the San Francisco Recreation and Parks Yelp rating – it’s much lower, it’s actually just 2.5 stars, right? Is RPD “failing?” Should we simply fire everybody and start over? Hey, why don’t we start using objective measurements, like asking the playground’s existing customers what they think? Is that too radical a notion?]

“finally” [This “framing” assumes 100% of what the millionaire-run Parks Alliance nonprofit says is accurate]

“Victim to time” [Well sure, you could replace this or that at this location, but what’s so wrong with it? What makes it a useless tear-down?]

“frequent wear and tear” [Because it’s popular? We’re going to change it because it’s popular and it gets used?]

“grown-up play” [Turns out it was sixth-graders who busted the slide, per the word on the street]

“the playground pales in comparison to other high-tech kids’ play areas in the city.” [What on Earth could  make a playground “high tech?” Like, “sure this playground is great, but I feel it doesn’t employ the most recent application of science?” Like, who says that? IRL, it’s perfectly fine.]

“failing playgrounds” [But the Panhandle Playground isn’t “failing,” right? Ask all the people who use it and try to find one person who would give it a letter grade of “F“]

“low household income” [Is this area a low household income area? WTF to that. In fact, the 94117 is an extremely high household income place, right? It’s off the charts, actually, nationally speaking. And even locally, it’s anything but a low household income area.]

“low Parks Alliance Report Card grades and rankings.” [Oh, here we go, here’s the problem. What’s the PARC and why does it matter?]

“an early holiday gift to District 5.” [London Breed is thinking “CHRISTMAS” but she says holidays – good for her. But who’s paying for this gift? Oh, we are? So it’s not really a gift, is it, London Claus?]

“high-tech play matting” [I have no fucking idea what this means. Currently, the joint is basically a giant sand box. Is this a bad thing? One supposes that some think so, but one doesn’t know.]

“What would you like to see improved upon in our small neighborhood playground?” [Keeping it the same, except for maintenance, which, if it’s lacking, then whose fault is that? Cough RPD, cough]

Wouldn’t it be ironic, dontcha think, if the Yelp ratings of the Panhandle Playground go down after we spend all those millions of dollars on this simple, functional playground?

We’ll see.

ASSIGNMENT DESK: Ask People Who Use the Golden Gate Park Panhandle Playground to See If It’s Really “Failing”

Tuesday, December 16th, 2014

Per this bit on SocketSite, SFGov thinks it has 50 “failing” playgrounds. Does that means that all of them get an “F” grade, that they’re all basically worthless?

For instance, let’s take a look at the Panhandle Playground. It has 4.5 Yelp stars. Isn’t that a pretty high rating for a “failing” anything?

If you polled people who actually use the place, the grade you’d come up with is “A,” or possibly “A-,” something in that area.

I think what SFGov / RPD / all those people with clipboards from that big non-profit what’s run by the wealthy, white and wizened actually mean is that the Panhandle Playground isn’t brand-new. What they mean is that it hasn’t kept up with the latest trends in playgroundom the past decade or so due to the fact that it hasn’t been replaced the past decade.

In other words, what they’re saying is that the Panhandle Playground isn’t “world-class.”

Oh, what’s that, Parks Alliance, there were more than 2.5 pieces of litter per square meter or whatever on the day that you dropped by with your clipboards? OK, so don’t you mean that the RPD is failing then?

Oh, what’s that, Parks Alliance, you’re concerned about the health effects of “x.” You know, I don’t think you want to go there, Parks Alliance. Cause then you’d have to look at the other stuff RPD is doing lately, like, say, the Beach Chalet soccer fields. Now I’ll tell you, I’m 90%+ sure that all the things people are worried about with the new artificial turf aren’t going to turn out to be a problem, but that’s not an absolutely assurance. You could say the same for whatever it is that makes you say that four dozen playgrounds in SF are “failing.”

You know, I could take my clipboard and go up to somebody’s 2004 Honda Accord with low miles and I could say, “Oh, no sat nav – minus five points. And oh, dirty windshield – minus three points. And oh…” And then I could put the car on my list of “failing” commuter vehicles, even though the person who drives it every day M-F thinks it’s a great ride and even though it passes its smog test every year or two and even though it starts up every time without fail. Who, oh who will appoint me chairman of the “Failing Hondas Task Force?”

(Oh hey, you know what RPD is disappointed about? It’s bummed out that the Maude Flanderses and the Reverend Lovejoy’s Wifes of the 94117 haven’t formed something like the Friends of the Panhandle Playground to raise $800k or so to give to RPD, you know, the way things worked with Presidio Heights and Mountain Lake. Oh well. Sorry RPD.)

In any event, a big bag of money fell from the sky and SFGov is going to spend it the way it wants. IMO, SFGov spends too much time focusing on the aesthetic concerns of millionaires who appoint themselves to the boards of the non-profits they create.

IMO.

So, go for it, send a reporter over to the Panhandle to check things out, to see why SFGov wants to spend months and months tearing out a perfectly good playground, to see why SFGov wants to scrap a Honda Accord with low miles, and a dirty windshield…

Free Kool-Aid, after the jump, drink up, it’s free, well, not really, but you’re going to end up paying for it anyway, so might as well.

(more…)

Mid-Market Update: Marinello School of Beauty Declares WORLD’S SMALLEST DRUG-FREE ZONE – Just a Five Foot Radius

Monday, October 20th, 2014

This photo came from longtime SoMA resident Bluoz:

“New sign in the doorway of Marinello’s School of Beauty in Mid Market, San Francisco, where all this takes place

Captureljlj copy

He continues:

“Help us have four more years of this. Vote for Randy Shaw Jane Kim for District 6 Supervisor in San Francisco.”

The Problem with Ed Lee Releasing Money to Fight Illegal Ellis Act Evictions is That They Never Happen – Suffer the Lee Family

Thursday, October 24th, 2013

Here are the first words of a recent press release:

Mayor Edwin M. Lee announced San Francisco will triple the amount of funding to prevent illegal Ellis Act evictions…”

Also:

“San Francisco must remain a viable place to live and work for people at all levels of the economic spectrum,” said Mayor Lee. “That’s why I am providing additional resources to stop unlawful evictions and provide tenant counseling for our residents, so that San Francisco remains a City for the 100 percent.”

The problem is that there’s no such thing as an illegal Ellis Act eviction in San Francisco.

Can Ed Lee cite a case? No he cannot.

(Go ahead, take a look.)

Ergo, the appointed Mayor of San Francisco “releasing” a small amount of money to fight something that never happens will have no effect on illegal Ellis Act evictions, except to, presumably, help Ed Lee.

So the question fro Question Time is this:

Is Ed Lee, the former housing rights attorney, in favor of legal Ellis Act evictions?

Apparently he is.

So that’s it for the ironically-named Lee family.

So we have one Lee family in town what calls horrible Chinatown power broker Rose Pak “Auntie Rose.”

And we have another what’s getting evicted right now, wondering who decided that Rose Pak was the most deserving person to get Rose Pak’s government-subsidized condo.

Mayor Lee Announces Additional Resources For Eviction Prevention In San Francisco
Posted Date: 9/30/2013

Mayor Edwin M. Lee announced San Francisco will triple the amount of funding to prevent illegal Ellis Act evictions and that the City will release $700,000 in funding for other eviction prevention services from the Housing Trust Fund.

“San Francisco must remain a viable place to live and work for people at all levels of the economic spectrum,” said Mayor Lee. “That’s why I am providing additional resources to stop unlawful evictions and provide tenant counseling for our residents, so that San Francisco remains a City for the 100 percent.”

The Human Services Agency (HSA) currently provides nearly $8 million in homeless prevention and eviction defense services, an increase of $1.3 million from last year’s budget. In this year’s budget, the City was providing nearly $125,000 to fund free legal advice and represent 55 San Francisco families who have been affected by illegal Ellis Act eviction threats. Today, Mayor Lee tripled the amount of funding with an additional $250,000, which will immediately be available to eligible organizations that provide Ellis Act prevention legal work and will help more families and people at all levels of the economic spectrum remain in San Francisco.

“Providing resources to stop unlawful evictions has proven to be one of the most effective strategies to prevent displacement and homelessness in our City,” said Trent Rhorer, Director of the San Francisco Human Services Agency. “This additional $250,000 will help keep San Francisco families in their homes.”

The Mayor’s Office of Housing will also provide $700,000, from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, to fund tenant counseling services. This is a 63 percent increase in funding and brings the total amount to more than $2.3 million in eviction prevention services from the Mayor’s Office of Housing. These additional resources will be distributed to community based organizations specifically expanding legal representation for individuals facing eviction; rental assistance to individuals and families who are currently homeless or are struggling to keep their current rental housing; and to provide outreach to San Franciscans to better inform them about their legal rights.

The Mayor’s Office of Housing has prioritized eviction prevention services and funds activities including legal services, tenant counseling, rental assistance, move-in assistance, know your rights trainings, and other types of tenant support. Services are offered through a diverse group of community based organizations that reach San Francisco’s many communities including seniors, people with disabilities, immigrants, the homeless and families.

The HSA will issue an ‘Invitation to Bid’ this week so eligible organizations can apply and use the HSA funding to expand their legal services in order for them to be available to vulnerable tenants within 30 days. It is anticipated that the additional HSA funds will help at least 150 households receive legal advice and representation.

The Fantasies of Randy Shaw – Why Does His Non-Profit Have a $90 Million Budget? Is the Twitterloin Now Affordable?

Tuesday, June 11th, 2013

Here’s the promise, from Randy Shaw‘s “Uptown Tenderloin” initiative:

The neighborhood is now being transformed into an exciting and desirable area where restaurants, theaters and other small businesses prosper, and low-income people of diverse ethnicities can still afford to live.”

And here’s the reality:

Mind you, these are studios in the high-crime Tenderloin area.

Does anyone think that “low-income people” of any ethnicity can “still afford to live” in the Tenderloin?

Uh, Is Newly-Installed Supervisor London Breed Starting Race War 2013? Blacks vs. Asians – Competing for Govt. Housing

Tuesday, January 8th, 2013

Yeah, uh, here’s the highlight of District Five Supervisor London Breed’s stream-of consciousness interview with Andrew Dudley of Haighteration.

“What everyone talks about, as a gimmick, is “affordable housing.” I served on the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency Commission. We build tons of units of affordable housing, only to watch as people who live across the street from these units, who deserve to have access to these units, because of the lottery system and an organization — I’m not going to call any names, but they’re very organized, and they monopolize a lot of the affordable housing developments. So what happens to the person suffering through six roommates who wants to go to the next level? What happens to the people who want to come out of public housing and go to the next level? What happens to the people who suffered through, listening to the hammers and the construction and the lack of parking and everything else, why do they not have the ability to access this affordable housing? It’s because there’s one small group of people who control it, and they could care less who actually gets it.

That’s number one. Number two, you have some people being pushed out of affordable housing, and then you have others that are moving into that housing. And sometimes, the people who are in these different public housing developments — and I’m not discriminating against anyone, but sometimes they’re not even U.S. citizens — we are not doing enough to look at the people who are here now, and how we can help protect the folks who are here now and give them access to affordable housing. We’re so concerned about people coming from another state, or people coming from another country, making San Francisco attractive for everybody — except people who live here!

And I don’t mind people coming and moving here. I love diversity. I love meeting new people with new experiences. I love the different cultures — I think it’s great and makes San Francisco what it is — but we’re also continuing down a really dangerous path of wealthy and poor, and no in between. No place to go for the middle class. No place to go for the people who have stepped right out of poverty. No place. And the fact that I’m holding on for dear life, and I’m now the Supervisor — it’s really scary to me. We’ve got to look at all this affordable housing that we build, and how do we really give people opportunities. We get money from the federal government for housing, and they require a lottery system. But is it really diversity if one ethnic group monopolizes the lottery and gets all of the affordable units?”

Yowzer.

(So when Asians and Asian-Americans complain of being bullied by African Americans in San Francisco public housing, this is the nativist attitude* that they are referencing)

Does one ethnic group in get _all_ the affordable units in San Francisco? Really?

And I’ll have to say that somebody sure still sounds pissed over stuff like this: 

On it goes.

*The last time I’ve heard this issue discussed in the media was when former Mayor Willie Brown (apparently improperly) intervened in an individual case to get the only Asian / Asian-American family out of one particular PJ and into another PJ that already had Asian / Asian-Americans. They might have been the relatives of the woman who did his nails, something like that. This was in the 1990’s.

OMG, It’s the FREE FARM at Eddy and Gough – Urban Gardening – Tons of Produce – Why Not Volunteer?

Wednesday, August 24th, 2011

Get all the deets of the FREE FARM right here.

“The Free Farm is an urban farm founded in January 2010, by a constellation of non-profit organizations in San Francisco. We are located on a 1/3 acre lot on the corner of Gough and Eddy Streets on a parcel loaned to us by St. Paulus Lutheran Church. In our first year we have built a farm, grown and given away over 2,500 pounds of fresh organic produce, convened gardening and urban homesteading workshops, and hosted community, school, and religious groups. Come by on Wednesdays and Saturdays from 10am-2pm or the first Sunday of the month from 10am – noon, to visit the farm or lend a hand.”

Why don’t you check things out the next time you’re in the Western Addition?

Click to expand

All the deets:

“Since its creation in January 2010, the Free Farm, as become many things to many different people. 

These are some of our intentions:

-to cultivate the earth by growing fresh organic vegetables 
-to cultivate ourselves by tending to the well-being of body and mind, soul, and spirit
-to cultivate society by creating a microcosm of mutuality, simplicity, generosity, and love

How we live out our intentions:

-grow and give away food, seedlings, and garden supplies to those who are in need

-offer garden, environmental, wellness education
-facilitate diverse spiritual practices
-advocate for environmental, climate, and food justice
-practice hospitality and host community events”

See you there!

Our 102-Year-Old Roxie Theatre Explains Why It Applied for Permission to Start Serving Smooth, Refreshing Beer

Wednesday, July 27th, 2011

I don’t know, do you think the Roxie should be able to serve beer?

(I don’t care. Sure, why not?)

Things didn’t work out a half-decade back, back in aught-six:

Soon to be offering BEER!  You heard it here first. Always interesting programming of flicks not found in the ubiquitous multiplex.  Even if I’ve never visited without wishing I could power wash the interior, who wouldn’t love a good movie and a BEER?”

The NIMBYs put the kibosh on that effort.

Here’s an update this AM, straight from the Roxie Theatre itself:

Cold Beer At The Roxie Theater!

At a spry 102-years young, the Roxie Theatre has applied for a permanent beer license. Over the past year, the Roxie has used its non-profit status to obtain day use permits for on-site alcohol, and the response was so overwhelmingly positive that we’re trying to make it permanent. Our application is in!

The Roxie hopes to add beer sales as part of its mission statement to make the theater a place of gathering and celebration, as well as a business model for the survival of neighborhood theatres. In 2008, the Roxie became a non-profit. With the litany of struggles independent theaters have faced recently (illustrated by the closing of the Red Vic), beer sales will help increase our revenue by offering a more complete night out, as well as drawing new folks into our one-of-a-kind mixture of programs unparalleled in the Bay Area.

Have no fear- The Roxie is dedicated to its mission of reaching the widest and most diverse audiences and our programming will continue to reflect this cause. You will still find a smattering of family friendly events throughout our calendar, and all of our programs will clearly indicate when it’s for only those 21 and over. It has not yet been decided if beer will be offered every day, just weekends or just special events. We care the most about building a community, so we invite you to join us at this exciting new chapter so that we can develop this model together.”