Ouch, this one hurts.
If only this sign had Oracle Arena heading the other way…
What’s that, you’re not a foreigner? Well fine, you certainly should know what you’re doing, so move on in, with my blessings.
But I’m assuming that you’re a foreigner, you know, if you’re thinking about buying at Summit 800.
1. And you know what? The people who are selling to you are assuming you’re a foreigner as well. Look at the name, look at the marketing. You’re rich and naive, that’s what they’re telling you.
2. This is a giant warning sign:
3. Yes, you’re living in San Francisco but only just inside the county line. So really, you’re sort of living in San Mateo County. This is their slogan: “City Living. No City Limits.” It took me a while to figure things out, because I didn’t see the two sentences together. What they’re saying is that you have the best of both worlds – you’re living in San Francisco, but your apartment/condo/townhouse/townhome/whatever you call it as long as you don’t call it a “house” has a lot of space and is brand-new construction and you have room for two cars and you have a lot of things that are hard to find in SF. BUT YOU’RE NOT REALLY LIVING IN SF, not really. They’re showing you images of Shanghai, but you’d be living in Chengdu.
4. Schools. Ask about schools. OMFG.
5. Weather / Climate. Hey, how’s the weather down there? Oh, foggy again today? Oh.
6. Traffic. OMFG. What they call State Highway 1, I call the 19th Avenue Parking Lot. Things are a bit better if you head south, but then why live in the far south / far west of SF? Oh, just so you can say you have a place in SF? OK, if that’s what you want.
What if you gave one of these places to your kids and told them they’d only have to pay the monthly homeowner’s fees and annual property taxes, something like $2000 a month? Would your kids even want to move in? IDK. So what happened to your million-plus dollars?
Let’s see here, San Francisco’s rich homeowners have a right-side-of-the-aisle group to represent them called SF Moderates and it’s giving
five four figures ($5000 as it turns out) for some East Bay apartment-dwelling woman to lobby SF for new right-of-center public comment rules?
Another group/person what funds her is so unpopular she dare not speak its name. It could be the American Nazi Party, who knows. Prolly not, but maybe it’s Sean Parker, or Con Ronway, or sf.citi or some other entity that wants to keep its sock puppetry on the DL.
Pro-development activist group SFBARF agitates for more housing
By Jonah Owen Lamb
How a prep school math teacher has exploded the debate over affordable housing in San Francisco – Rents in cities like San Francisco are soaring. Is it just a matter of building more housing?
By Lydia DePillis
Read it and weep, San Francisco. We’re getting sued:
“For Immediate Release, January 29, 2014:
San Francisco Housing Associations File Lawsuit to Block Anti-Family Legislation
San Francisco – On Tuesday January 28, 2014, the San Francisco Apartment Association, Coalition for Better Housing and the San Francisco Association of REALTORS® filed a lawsuit challenging the legality of legislation known as the Avalos Ellis Act and Merger Prohibition Legislation.
The legislation was passed by the Board of Supervisors and signed into law by Mayor Ed Lee in violation of building owners’ rights under the state law known as the Ellis Act.
The legislation prohibits owners of multi-unit buildings from combining units in a building for ten years following an Ellis Act eviction or for five years following an owner-move in eviction.
On a practical level, the legislation prevents families who own a building from creating a home that meets their needs. For example, the legislation prevents a family from combining two small units into a larger one to provide a home for a growing family. Couples with young children often find themselves in need of additional space they did not anticipate when they purchased a rental building, yet the legislation punishes them.
Only 2 percent of new housing built in San Francisco since 2001 are single-family homes that provide adequate space for families, often with multiple generations living together. Lack of adequate housing to meet the needs of families has contributed San Francisco losing 5,278 people younger than 18 between 2000 and 2010, according to the census.
“The San Francisco Association of REALTORS® supports the rights of private property owners for the free use of their property as their needs suit them. This legislation only exacerbates the problems families face in finding adequate housing and drives out the families that have created the diversity we want and celebrate in our city,” said Walt Baczkowski, CEO of the San Francisco Association of Realtors.
Because so few single family homes are being constructed, families rely on improving buildings they own, including tenancies in common to add living space. This legislation prohibits them from creating the home they need in a building they own.
“Families are fleeing San Francisco due to a multitude of reasons that include a lack of adequate space for growing families that often include multiple generations. This legislation exacerbates that problem by punishing and limiting options for families who simply seek to create a home that meets the needs of their family,” stated Janan New, Executive Director of the San Francisco Apartment Association. “This legislation punishes hard working families, while doing little to protect renters.”
The lawsuit states that the legislation is pre-empted by state law known as the Ellis Act, which allows building owners to take a building off the rental market and convert those units to condominiums or single -family homes. Under the law, building owners are already required to give occupants up to one year advance notice and provide relocation fees of $5,210 per tenant, up to a maximum of $15,632, plus $3,473 additional for tenants who are senior or disabled.
“My clients are seeking relief from this just-passed legislation which unfairly takes away the right of individuals and families who simply want to create a home for themselves and their family in a building they own,” stated Jim Parrinello, attorney for the plaintiffs.
Hey look, Kaiser Permanente is coming to Potrero Hill.
But some people are highly upset:
YEP. Pretty much.
YEP. I’d be surprised if they weren’t.
YEP. Obsessed with real estate they are, my precious.
YEP. “Oh yes, Kommandant we totally support your mission of expanding your concentration and extermination camps, but couldn’t you select a more “appropriate” site, perhaps in East Auschwitz, or maybe even Auschwitz Annex? As the saying goes, property values uber alles.”
YEP. “Well, I’M not a millionaire, ” they lie.
Sorry, little nursey, your kind just isn’t welcome on “The Hill.”
And hey, where’s our helipad, you know, that other thing what was supposed to have “destroyed” property values in PH.
Let’s bring the pain, bring the sanctimony, let’s write canned letters to all these people, why not:
The CEO and Board of Directors of Kaiser Permanente
Kaiser Permanente (George C. Halvorson)
LNK Partners (Phil Marineau)
Kaiser Permanente (Christine Robisch)
Kaiser Permanente (Robert Pearl)
Kaiser Permanente (Gregory A. Adams)
Kaiser Permanente (Bernard J. Tyson)
Kaiser Permanente (Randy Wittorp)
Kaiser Permanente (Jay Murphy)
Kaiser Permanente (Cameron White)
SF Planning Department (Wade Wietgrefe)
SF Planning Department (Susan Mickelsen)
SF Planning Department (John Rahaim)
Kaiser Permanente Board Member (J. Eugene Grigsby)
Kaiser Permanente Board Member (Edward Pei)
SF Planning Department (Sarah Jones)
SF Planning Department (Ben Fu)
*I’m srsly. Do these people sincerely care about “historic” corrugated steel buildings? No, not at all. So how stupid do they think we are?
So what do you think, Federales? You think you could see your way clear to coming to the 415 for the next week or so to investigate electoral corruption in San Francisco? Come on down to work a week in town. I just know that you’ll find something.
But that’s only from nine to five, you dig? After hours, you can visit whichever new or existing Michelin-starred restaurant that you want. And then, just expense it, baby. Easy peasy.
San Francisco wins, you win.
This will be your 11th course at The French Laundry (yes, Pixar used it as a model for the kitchen in Ratatouille) up in Napa: Feuillentine au Caramel. “Intense oozing,” baby. Serving the Commonweal never tasted so good:
All right, here’s a cheat sheet to get you started:
“More Ed Lee Money Laundering and Voter Fraud Uncovered – Leland Yee Says Enough Is Enough – State & Federal Election Monitors Needed
SAN FRANCISCO – The well documented scene in Chinatown of Ed Lee IE campaign workers filling out ballots for voters and the Go Lorries money laundering scheme may seem tame in comparison to what two local newspapers documented in today’s paper.
The San Francisco Chronicle is reporting that a person known for “strong-arming tenants out of rent-controlled apartments” emailed associates of Archway Property Services directing them to attend a Lee fundraiser and telling them they would be reimbursed for their $500 contribution. Campaign finance laws prohibit money laundering.
Andrew Hawkins, the managing director of Archway Property Services, emailed 16 associates the following: “I expect each and every one of you to be at this event tonight. Bring your check books and write a check for $500.00 for Ed Lee donation. You will be reimbursed right away for you coming.”
In addition, the Epoch Times Chinese newspaper went undercover to find Chinatown Community Development Center (CCDC) and Community Tenant Association (CTA) staff also working on the Ed Lee campaign and even having keys to his office on Clay Street. In addition, the paper found various instances of CCDC, CTA, or Ed Lee campaign staff filling out and mailing voters ballots, in clear violation of law. Many of the ballots from these documented locations arrived at the Election’s Office at the same time.
“This is yet further evidence that we need state and federal election monitors now,” said Senator Leland Yee. “San Franciscans cannot afford to just wait out the clock until November 8. There appears to be massive voter fraud that should be immediately investigated to protect the integrity of this election. Either Ed Lee is condoning these illegal tactics or the wool is being pulled over his eyes – not what we need of our Mayor.”
Filling out their ballots
After describing themselves as prospective voters, two Epoch Times reporters were met by a Lee campaign worker who explained that her role with CTA included working on the Lee campaign.
The worker explained that “helping” voters in fact meant to simply have an elderly person sign and date their ballot, and then she or another campaign worker would take it away to fill it out and mail it in.
Using a nonprofit for campaign purposes
At 777 Broadway – a CCDC building – CTA is apparently running an office out of the community room in which they also distribute Ed Lee campaign literature and make announcements for meetings in support of Lee’s mayoral bid. CCDC says that political advertising is not allowed at their buildings.
According to CCDC website, the 777 Broadway building includes 31 studio apartments. According to voter records, there are 33 registered voters of which 31 are vote by mail voters. This equates to nearly 94 percent of the voters being vote by mail. By comparison, the city at large is only 46 percent. And even as early as October 24, 60 percent of the 777 Broadway voters had already cast their ballots, versus only 6 percent for the rest of the city.
Equally troubling is the fact that 19 of the ballots from the building arrived at the Elections Office within a day of each other. In essence, the public is expected to believe that 1/3 of the ballots arrived at virtually the same time in complete coincidence.
A similar phenomenon exists with another CCDC building – 1590 Broadway – in which 20 absentee ballots arrived at the Election’s department on the exact same day, October 24.
More voter and election fraud
Epoch Times spoke to one elderly woman who sad that she was visited by a CTA worker and signed her ballot without filling it out and was told that it would be filled out for her and mailed in. Filling out and mailing in other people’s ballots is a clear violation of elections law.
A number of CTA and CCDC workers were observed “popping in and working alongside other staff” at Lee’s 943 Clay Street campaign office. In fact, one CCDC worker even had keys to the office and was observed opening the door for the undercover reporters.”
See you soon, Feds!
[UPDATE: Senator Leland Yee is on the case this AM – he’s doing a presser involving this latest allegation. (I guess it’s too late to call this an October Surprise, and frankly, it’s not all that surprising neither. Let’s call it a November Expectation. Brace yourself for more.) Oh, and Leland is onto some Chinatown voting sting operation as well.
And there’s this: “Statement from Chiu Campaign on Money Laundering Allegations – SAN FRANCISCO (November 2, 2011): Addisu Demissie, spokesman for the David Chiu for Mayor campaign, released the following statement about a San Francisco Chronicle report of potential money laundering by supporters of Mayor Ed Lee:
“This is now the fourth allegation of illegal conduct by Mayor Lee’s supporters, and it should be investigated fully by the District Attorney and appropriate authorities,” Demissie said. “With six days to go before Election Day, it will be up to the voters to decide whether this kind of bullying, pay-to-play politics is what they want to see at City Hall for the next 4 years. David is going to spend the last 6 days of this race talking about why he represents a new generation of leadership for San Francisco that will stand tough against the special interests and shake things up at City Hall.“
Paid for by David Chiu for Mayor 2011, P.O. Box 641541, San Francisco, CA 94164, FPPC##1337108]
Well, it looks like early-rising City Attorney Dennis Jose Herrera is the first one out of the gates to follow up on today’s piece from San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writers John Coté and Heather Knight.
“Too many of Ed Lee’s supporters act as though they’re above the law — on money laundering, on ballot tampering, and more – and Ed Lee isn’t strong enough to stop it.
Earlier this year, Ed Lee was picked unanimously to be an Interim Mayor. He wasn’t picked to be a Reformer. He’ll never be a Reformer.
In Ed Lee’s world, the notorious Willie Brown Administration deserves an A+, Rose Pak is not a cancer on Chinatown, and corner-cutting PG&E (“KABOOM!“) is simply “a great local corporation” and a “great company that gets it.”
Is Ed Lee Breaking Bad? Has the City Family corrupted him? Or has he corrupted the City Family? A little of both?
Click to expand
All the deets:
“Herrera calls on FPPC to join D.A. in investigating new Ed Lee campaign money laundering charge – CitiApartments’ former eviction goon led reimbursement-for-donation scheme, suggesting political payback for City Attorney’s 2006 tenant-protection lawsuit
SAN FRANCISCO (Nov. 2, 2011) — City Attorney Dennis Herrera this morning called on the state Fair Political Practices Commission to join District Attorney George Gascón in reviewing new allegations reported in today’s San Francisco Chronicle that Ed Lee’s mayoral campaign received donations that appear to have been illegally laundered to skirt San Francisco $500 per donor contribution maximum. Andrew Hawkins, a property services manager whose harrowing tenant intimidation tactics were central to Herrera’s lawsuit five years ago against the Lembi Group landlords’ once high-rolling CitiApartments empire, promised reimbursements to at least sixteen employees in exchange for maximum contributions to Ed Lee’s mayoral campaign at an Oct. 18, 2011 fundraiser, according to the Chronicle.
It is the second major allegation of campaign money laundering to benefit Ed Lee’s campaign. The first, involving GO Lorrie’s airport shuttle, is the subject of separate investigations by Gascón’s office and the FPPC, the state commission responsible to investigate and impose penalties for violations of the California Political Reform Act. Such schemes have been prosecuted as felonies in California for conspiring to evade campaign contribution limits, and for making campaign contributions under false names.
“I think San Franciscans have now seen enough,” said City Attorney Dennis Herrera. “Too many of Ed Lee’s supporters act as though they’re above the law — on money laundering, on ballot tampering, and more — and Ed Lee isn’t strong enough to stop it. If this is how they behave before an election, just imagine how they’ll behave after the election, if Ed Lee wins. This scheme is clearly a bid for political payback by CitiApartments henchmen for my litigation to protect tenants five years ago. It is patently illegal, and I call on the FPPC to join the District Attorney in investigating.”
Hawkins is listed in Ed Lee’s campaign disclosures as the owner of Archway Property Services. As the one-time head of CitiApartments’ “tenant relocation program,” the gun-carrying Hawkins is reported to have coerced more than 2,500 tenants out of their rent-controlled units, and once boasted in civil court testimony, “I run people out of their apartments for a living. It’s what I do.“
Several recipients of Hawkins’ email invitation to an Oct. 18 event on Russian Hill made contributions to Ed Lee’s campaign on the same date. All contributed the maximum $500.
Herrera sued the CitiApartments residential rental property behemoth in Aug. 2006 for an array of unlawful business and tenant harassment practices, which sought to dispossess long-term residents of their rent-controlled apartments. The coerced vacancies freed the company to make often-unpermitted renovations to units, and then re-rent them to new tenants at dramatically increased market rates. The illegal business model enabled CitiApartments, Skyline Realty and other entities under the sway of real estate family patriarch Frank Lembi to aggressively outbid competitors for residential properties throughout San Francisco for several years — before lawsuits and a sharp economic downturn forced the aspiring empire into bankruptcies, foreclosures and receiverships.
A 2009 San Francisco Magazine feature story on the Lembi real estate empire described Andrew Hawkins as “a burly former nightclub bouncer who headed up CitiApartments’ relocation program.” Hawkins reportedly led teams as large as 14 full-time employees, according to the report, and the company estimated that “Hawkins relocated more than 2,500 tenants.” An earlier exposé in 2006 by the San Francisco Bay Guardian cited civil court testimony in which Hawkins boasted to one tenant’s family member, “I run people out of their apartments for a living. It’s what I do.”
# # #
The SFPD has just fleshed out this story of a trip to Japantown gone wrong.
Turns out the guy trying to fence(?) the booty is less than 18 years old.
Anyway, all the deets:
“SFPD Arrest Suspect by way of Smartphone GPS Technology
Posted Date: 9/30/2011
San Francisco Police Officers at Northern Station arrested a suspect in connection with a robbery by way of GPS technology.
The suspect who cannot be identified due to the fact he is a juvenile, was taken into custody on September 29, 2011 and charged for possession of stolen property.
In this incident, the victim was walking home from work on the 1600 block of Post St. at 11:00 p.m. when she was suddenly shocked in the neck by a stun gun. The suspect then stole her belongings, which included a Smartphone. Shortly after, a group of good Samaritans came to the victim’s aid and she was able to call the police.
Responding officers arrived on scene and asked the victim if she subscribed to a GPS tracking device on her Smartphone. The victim stated, “Yes”.
A tracking device is a service that allows subscribers to track their Smartphone when their device is either stolen or lost. Using GPS technology, the officers were able to track the Victim’s stolen Smartphone to the area of 7th St and Market.
Officers responded to the area and were able to track down the Smartphone through its tracking device software.
The officers were able to detain the suspect who had the Smartphone in his possession. The suspect was placed under arrest for possession of stolen property.”
Well, I guess this is a happy ending…
The intersection of 7th and Market Street in San Francisco is the world capitol of black market iPhone sales:
Via JonathanPercy – click to expand
Or maybe the invite is just for area NIMBY’s, don’t know for sure.
(Scott Wiener is Kryptonian of course – that’s why he’s so tall and that’s why he only sleeps three hours a night. He’s an Übermensch or something. An Overman, Overhuman, Above-Human, something in that territory.)
So bring your hankies for a good cry tonight, but please remember:
All Neighbors are Equal, but some Neighbors (the millionaire propertah owners, the small-time bidness owners, especially) are More Equal Than Others.
“Yes, we know you may have a dinner date on February 14, so why don’t you join us first for chocolates and wine as we talk about Trader Joe’s?
“Trader Joe’s proposes to establish a store at the Market and Noe Center, where Tower Records and Video used to be. Their representatives will publicly present TJ’s plans during our General Meeting, and our neighborhood association will discuss the impacts of this development according to the data we have and how we understand the issue. This proposed business is going to impact not only the residents, but also those who work and own a piece of property in the neighborhood.
“Come early at 7 p.m. to meet and greet neighbors and to enjoy refreshments. The meeting agenda will be discussed at 7:30. The Board and President of Duboce Triangle Neighborhood Association are going to be there, so if you have other concerns you may want to take up with them, this is the most opportune time to come. The meeting will be held at CPMC Davies Hospital, at the Castro St. & Duboce Avenue, in the Auditorium, which is on Level “B.” Meeting is expected to last until 9 p.m. Plenty of time for your own Valentine engagements afterwards.”
And also remember:
Trader Joe’s > Whole Foods
It all has to do with the mark-up.
Click to expand.
That’s the way San Francisco property owners do things using Municipal Police Code Section 25. A sign like this tells the cops that the person hanging out on private property hasn’t been given permission.
Distribution of “No Trespassing” Signs July 2008: The Community Guides distributed the “No Trespassing” signs to merchants,building security/concierge, and street-level businesses. The signs request enforcementof the Municipal Police Code Section 25 to all the street level businesses.After signing the forms, the merchants, street-level tenants and property representatives displayed the notices on the windows of their business and other visible places, they do not give anyone permission to sleep, lie, or in any way remain in their doorway. These notices help SFPD and Community Guides address issues of sleepers and campers inside ofdoorways. The notice expires every six months
See? This one is similar:
NO TRESPASSING REQUEST FOR ENFORCEMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICE CODE SECTION 25 San Francisco Municipal Police Code Section 25 provides that no person shall willfully rema.in upon any private property or business premises after being notified to leave by the owner, lessee, or other person in charge . Notice may be oral or in the form of a written notice posted in a conspicuous place. A violation of Section 25 is an infraction. A second violation within 24 hours (Section 26) is a misdemeanor. To the San Francisco Police Department: I hereby request that the San Francisco Police Department enforce the above Municipal Police Code Sections on my beha-If and in my absence. I have given no person(s) permission to sleep, lie, or in any way remain within my doorway located at (private property) while my business is closed. _- I further state that I will notify the San Francisco Police Department in writing within 24 hours if I do give a person(s) permission to sleep, lie, or in any way remain within said doorway, providing the Police Department with the person(s) name. I agree to post a copy of this notice in a location where it will be visible to all persons within said area. I understand that this letter of request expires six months after the below-signed date. Signature of owner or agent Date: Address 2 copies: Owner AGENT TO POST JULY THRU DECEMBER YEAR.