If there’s something weird and it don’t look good
Who you gonna call? Hostbusters!
Answer The Call
Here you go, the News of the Day:
3 SF supervisors move to put tech tax on November ballot By Emily Green
And here’s the reaction:
I am appalled at the political vindictiveness of this proposed measure,” said Alex Tourk, a spokesman for San Francisco Citizens Initiative for Technology and Innovation, a coalition of tech companies.
Supervisor Mark Farrell called it “the worst idea I’ve heard in months.”
Deirdre Hussey, spokeswoman for Mayor Ed Lee, called it a “job-killing measure.” She added that the measure “upends the grand bargain” made between business and labor that ultimately led voters to eliminate the payroll tax in 2012.
And let’s note that:
[District One Supervisor Eric] Mar’s proposal would deem stock option compensation when a company goes public as taxable payroll.
All right, all I’ve done so far is simply read the news to you. But now let’s travel back to a time when former Mayor Gavin Newsom, another Right-Of-Center Willie Brown Appointee Who Somehow Ended Up Mayor, signed into law the very same 1.5% stock options tax. So put on your white shoes and dance the blues – it’s Pillsbury, bitches:
On February 19, 2004, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom approved recent changes to San Francisco’s Business Tax ordinance adopted by the Board of Supervisors on February 19, 2004. These changes become effective March 20, 2004, 30 days after signing by the Mayor.
…the amendments also contain significant changes such as … including stock options in the definition of payroll expense.“
So, was Gavin Newsom’s stock options tax a “job-killing measure” back in 2004 the way the same tax is being portrayed here in 2016?
That’s my question – I don’t know how ppl would answer.
But I’m thinking that if this 2016 proposal gets enacted and you’re a “tech* company,” whatever that is, going IPO in Frisco will cost you millions, just as Gavin Newsom wanted back in aught-four.
So that means that Gav was a job killer, right?
*What’s a tech company? IDK. What’s a pit bull?
Here you go:
And then came the blowback. First, from the long-time, SFG0v-connected, right-of-center SPUR:
So what does that mean? The hed’s sensationalistic – well why’s that? I don’t get it, man. Katy Tang’s certainly not jamming the pedal to the metal, right?
And what “betrays the truth?” Hey, you know what the phrase could mean IRL? It could mean that somebody’s unintentionally revealing something, like, hey man I didn’t steal a _red_ car and then park it in a barn down near the big cafe in La Honda. Anyway, that’s what that phrase could mean.
And hey, here comes the appointed Supervisor herself:
Also, “news” in quotes? OUCH. The ‘Xam isn’t news?
And here’s your stinger:
Oh, so all this is Twitter’s fault? I think that’s what I’m hearing.
Of course, our local transit activists won’t ever be happy, but I don’t see what’s wrong with the SFMTA changing Taraval. If I were Traffic Czar, I’d put in a mess of traffic lights west of 19th, to like 25th or so, but that’s just me. And if I were Traffic Czar, I wouldn’t care what local small business owners think – that’s what would make me a czar, the lack of pressure from the Taraval Historic District Business Owners Association, or whatever these people might call themselves.
Anyway, this is what you get with appointed Supervisors, IMO.
“Board of Supervisors President London Breed Introduces Toughest Styrofoam Ban Law in the Country
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
APRIL 19, 2016
SAN FRANCISCO— Board of Supervisors President London Breed today introduced legislation to create the most expansive Styrofoam prohibitions in the country including a ban on the sale of Styrofoam: 1) cups, plates, clamshells, meat trays, egg cartons, and other food ware; 2) packing materials, including packing peanuts; 3) coolers; 4) pool and beach toys; and 5) dock floats, buoys, and other marine products, as well as a ban on the use of Styrofoam packing material for items packaged in San Francisco.
“Three days before we celebrate the 47th Earth Day, I am excited to introduce some of the strongest environmental protection legislation in the country,” said President Breed. “We are a city prized for our natural beauty, surrounded by water on three sides. We have a moral, a public health, and frankly a financial responsibility to protect ourselves from pollutants like polystyrene foam.*”
Polystyrene cannot be recycled through San Francisco’s blue bin recycling collection program and essentially never decomposes. It is a significant source of litter on land and one of the most egregious elements of rising plastic pollution in the Bay and ocean.
Polystyrene breaks down into smaller, non-biodegradable pieces that seabirds often mistake for fish eggs. And unlike harder plastics, polystyrene contains a chemical used in its production called “styrene” that is metabolized after ingestion and threatens the entire food chain, including humans who eat contaminated marine wildlife. Styrene is linked to cancer and developmental disorders, and according to the US FDA, it leaches into food and drink from polystyrene food ware.
“The science is clear: this stuff is an environmental and public health pollutant, and we have to reduce its use,” said President Breed. “There are ample cost effective alternatives to Styrofoam on the market.”
More than 100 US cities have ordinances restricting polystyrene food service ware and/or packaging materials. San Francisco itself has prohibited serving food in polystyrene since 2007. President Breed’s legislation is the next step, covering new uses that have never been regulated in other cities.
“San Francisco will once again be at the forefront,” said President Breed. “We will replace hazardous products with compostable, recyclable ones. We will continue our work toward Zero Waste. And we will protect the public health and the natural beauty of our waterways and wildlife.”
President Breed worked closely with the San Francisco Department of the Environment, the nonprofit Sustainable San Francisco, the California Grocers Association, San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, as well as many local and international businesses. The legislation is designed to help businesses comply and accommodate those who cannot yet.
*Styrofoam is actually a brand name for polystyrene foam.
I was in the nabe, so I dropped by at the campaign kickoff the other day:
Left early, but it ended up looking like this:
I’ve heard nothing from these people…
Sherman D’Silva, Richie Greenberg, Brian Larkin, Jonathan Lyens, Marjan Philhour, Andy Thornley
…so it looks like SLF is going to win come November.
(Wake me up if anything changes)
Let’s start with Future Senator and Current Urbanist Supervisor Scott Wiener, you know, if this from KevMo is accurate.
Moving on, to this. Some deets on the PCO here and now onto the Uber driver. Uh, what’s he doing? Is he holding a phone up high so his eyes can easily switch back and forth from his device and The Road Ahead? IDK. And hey, what would be a nicer gift for an Uber Lyft driver than a handicapped placard? I’ve never seen this. Gee, I bet that really cuts down on the parking hassles one might have Ubering about Frisco.
Anyway, this is How We Live Now in 2016
Today from the SFDA:
“MAN CHARGED WITH REGISTERING TO VOTE USING FALSE ADDRESSES
SAN FRANCISCO— Today, San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón announced that Donald Dewsnup, age 49, of San Francisco, was arraigned on charges of registering to vote using a false address. Dewsnup’s fraudulent voter registration enabled him to vote in a supervisorial district in which he did not reside.
“San Francisco’s supervisorial races can be decided by a small number of voters,” said District Attorney George Gascón. “A healthy democracy benefits from zealous debate, but can be undermined by fraud and deceit.”
To ensure the integrity of the electoral process, California law requires voters to put their true residential addresses on their voter registration forms. Dewsnup, a licensed realtor, is also accused of providing a false address to the California Bureau of Real Estate. He is charged with three felony counts of filing a false document with a government agency, two felony counts of perjury, and two felony counts of false voter registration. According to court documents, Dewsnup used these false addresses in order to infiltrate a neighborhood association on Telegraph Hill, where he did not reside, with the purpose of advancing his personal political agenda.
Dewsnup was arrested by San Francisco District Attorney Investigators yesterday. He was arraigned on the felony charges today, and was released on his own recognizance. He will appear in court again on April 19th for a prehearing conference.”
Leave us begin:
“Pro-Development Activist Suffers Politically Motivated Arrest in SF
1. CAREFUL NOW – GETTING CLOSE TO DEFAMATION.
He registered at an address he thought approximated a location where he was sleeping at the time.
This arrest is without question politically motivated. There’s no other explanation for why the District Attorney of a major city would investigate and charge one person for registering at an inaccurate address.
I am looking forward to discovering who made the complaint to the DA, and how the DA was convinced to spend precious public resources on this issue.
4. SOMEBODY MADE A COMPLAINT, REALLY? DO WE KNOW THIS? DIDN’T DONALD DEWSNUP POST A PHOTO OF PART OF HIS BALLOT (ARGUABLY ILLEGAL IN ITSELF, IN CA, BUT NEVER PROSECUTED AFAIK) WHAT SHOWED HIM VOTING FOR PRO-DEVELOPMENT, APPOINTED SUPERVISOR JULIE CHRISTENSEN?
In doing this activism, Donald apparently antagonized anti-growth incumbents.
5. IS SUPPORTING LONGTIME REPUBLICAN RON CONWAY’S CHOICE CONSIDERED “ACTIVISM” THESE DAYS? IDK. IDTS
I knew that a policy change as radical as the one we’re calling for would not be won easily, however I am shocked the DA would harass a housing advocate, who happens to be homeless, for trying to vote.
6. OF COURSE, THE HOUSING STATUS WHAT MATTERS HAS TO DO WITH RESIDENCY TO QUALIFY FOR VOTING FOR JULIE CHRISTENSEN LAST YEAR, RIGHT?
“Voter fraud is serious…”
7. WELL, NOW YOU’RE ON THE TROLLEY. (WHAT YOU DO IS SAY, OH, I GOT CARRIED AWAY AND THEN I DID SOMETHING I SHOULDN’T HAVE. YOU SHOW CONTRITION. YOU SAY YOU’LL NEVER EVER DO ANYTHING LIKE THIS EVER AGAIN. THEN YOU CAN JOIN THE LIST OF PEOPLE IN TOWN WHO DO BAD THINGS BUT DON’T GET JAIL TIME.) ALL RIGHT, IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU ALL WERE GETTING A LITTLE CRAZY THERE, BUT, OH WHAT’S THAT, THERE’S MORE?
“…but more serious still is living in a city where a vindictive Supervisor can order people arrested at will.”
8. OH. OK. ENTERING LIBELTOWN, POPULATION: YOU
Founder, SF Bay Area Renters’ Federation
(215) 900 1457″
9. NOW THAT’S A NICE LOCAL PHONE NUMBER! TORTURE ME AND I WOULDN’T KNOW WHERE TO BEGIN. I’D BE YELLING OUT SASKATCHEWAN! SASKATCHEWAN?
END OF LINE
Something tells me you want to go home
Custom clothes you own
Calling up from special area codes
Just released, below.
And here’s two cents from CWNevius, to compare.
(He seems much less demanding of the SFPD.)
“*** STATEMENT ***
SUPERVISOR MALIA COHEN AND BOARD PRESIDENT LONDON BREED’S STATEMENT REGARDING RECENTLY REVEALED TEXT MESSAGES BY SFPD OFFICERS
SAN FRANCISCO – At the full Board of Supervisors meeting today, Supervisor Malia Cohen and Board President London Breed issued the following joint statement regarding the recently revealed racist and homophobic text messages sent by a new group of San Francisco police officers.
“It has barely been a year since the last time we issued a joint statement about racist and homophobic text messages exchanged by SFPD officers. In that time, we’ve witnessed the tragic shooting of Mario Woods; the launch of multiple investigations; our community gripped by protests and pain; and—in a maddening twist—officers from the last texting scandal back on duty in SFPD uniforms.
When is enough, enough? We talk about implicit bias training, yet time and again are confronted with explicit bias by those who are sworn to protect the community. This behavior cannot be tolerated without consequence; the City must rededicate itself to police reform.
As Supervisors, we have written June’s ballot measure to require independent investigations of all officer involved shootings. We pushed for and helped fund body cameras for every officer. We called for the federal investigation into Mario Woods’ shooting. And we led the effort to stop the proposed $300 million jail.
But there is clearly more work to do. We need more diversity and bias training, culturally competent community relations, data collection, independent investigations, accountability, and transparency. And as we recruit more officers, it’s imperative we continue to fight for increased diversity on the force.
We urge the Police Commission and Chief to seek the fullest possible disciplinary action for the officers involved in this recent action, and we will work with the Mayor, the Department, and community stakeholders to create an action plan to prevent these incidents from ever happening again.”