Posts Tagged ‘twitter’

If You Think BROWN IS THE NEW GREEN During Our Great Drought, Get This Free Sign from Our SFPUC

Friday, April 17th, 2015

If you want to do something about the North American Drought of 2012 – 20xx, you can always drop by at our expensive SFPUC building in the western Twitterloin:

“Signage is available for pick-up at the SFPUC Customer Service Center, 525 Golden Gate Avenue, 1st Floor. Request larger quantities by email landscape@sfwater.org”

Captureyg copy

 

When an MSM Reporter “Stalks” You at Your Favorite Corporate Bus Stop, Feel Free to Photograph Him Right Back

Monday, April 13th, 2015

Here you go, it’s a photo from area reporter/producer Sam Harnett, as he was laboring for KQED en la Mision:

Wary Employers, Stigma Have Some Tech Workers Keeping Low Profile

RS8537_IMG_9782-scr-e1405355033607 copy

A techie is recording right back, to even the odds, one supposes.

Now, which corporate PR team is behind this?

One company pressured an employee to recant an interview we had already done. The PR team told me that story could be “weaponized” against the company, which was “under a microscope.” 

I can guess.

Can you?

Top Three Reasons Why It’s Improper for Writer CW Nevius to Take Such Umbrage Over Larry Ellison Flying the Bermuda Flag in SF

Tuesday, March 24th, 2015

All aboard:

“#rubbingitin Can’t confirm this is Larry Ellison’s boat but if so kinda rude to fly Bermuda flag. Site of next Am Cup”

dfss copy

So I can confirm – yes, this is Larry Ellison’s big yacht, the Musashi.*

CW Nevius should know that as she was the only real “superyacht”** that showed up for the America’s Cup race that CW Nevius, a recent East Bay transplant who arrived here in 2010, started promoting in 2010. Let’s remember who was the number one cheerleader for our Failed America’s Cup:

Holding the America’s Cup race in San Francisco is a wonderful opportunity without a downside. It is a win-win that will bring cargo bags of cash to the Bay Area and revitalize the southern waterfront.”

So let’s see here, a sailor died, right? Could that be considered a possible downside? And it turned out to be a win-lose, right? San Francisco certainly lost. And the “cargo bags of cash” were taken from us, right – we lost eight figures, right? And mind you, this was Larry Ellison’s first offer, the one with 99 year leases for waterfront land simply given to … Larry Ellison.

So that’s your background.

And here are a few reasons why CWNevius shouldn’t have taken umbrage.

1. IT”S OK IF PEOPLE WANT TO LEAVE TOWN, RIGHT? 

If George Lucas doesn’t want to deal with SF, it’s OK if he builds his museum in Chicago or Oakland, right? You know, for example. But CW Nevius took umbrage. And if horrible romance novel writer Danielle Steel wants to spend most of her time in France these days, that’s OK too, right? But CW Nevius seemed to feel spurned by her. So yeah, Larry Ellison is taking his little boat race to Bermuda, but that’s OK, right? It won’t cost us any tax and fee payer money at all right? Isn’t that a good thing?

2. WE CAN’T REALLY EXPECT LARRY ELLISON TO CHANGE THE REGISTRATION OF HIS YACHT SO AS TO NOT OFFEND ELEMENTS OF THE MSM, RIGHT? 

One supposes he could have an American flag on the back, but that would cost him bank, right? The “use tax” could cost him far more than what we lost hosting the 34th America’s Cup, right? So it’s not like he’s flying the flag of Bermuda to “rub it in,” not at all.

3. THAT YACHT WASN’T FLYING THE MARITIME FLAG OF BERMUDA ANYWAY, RIGHT?

Larry’s big actually flies the ensign, the maritime flag of the Cayman Islands. So he’s not rubbing anything in anyway, right? It’s just your imagination/ running away with you, CW Nevius.

So, for all those reasons, it was improper for Chuck to so umbrage-take.

Perhaps he feels emotional due to guilt over his responsibility.

I’ll tell you, for whatever reason, it seems about half of the mistakes coming from Chron writers come from just one writer.

Oh well.

ODE TO #CWNEVIUS, THE 62*** YEAR OLD CUB REPORTER, THE 62*** YEAR OLD ROOKIE:

It’s alright, just wait and see
Your string of lights is still bright to me
Oh, who you are is not what you’ve been
You’re still an innocent
It’s okay, life is a tough crowd
62, and still growin’ up now
Who you are is not what you did.
You’re still an innocent.

*Oddly named after a sunken battleship made to keep the US Navy in check – it was discovered by Paul Allen just a few weeks back.

**A “fleet of superyachts” was supposed to arrive in SF, you know, after motoring through the Panama Canal and we were supposed to make bank selling fuel to the owners, and polishing the decks for minimum wage, that kind of thing. The Eurotrash stayed home

***Just a guess – it rhymes with “32,” sort of.

How Mayor Ed Lee “Destroyed” Jobs at Sixth and Market – How Pearl’s Deluxe Burgers Didn’t Really Belong at 6th and Market

Tuesday, March 17th, 2015

See this place at 6th and Market? It catches the overflow from Dotties, the shop around the corner:

7J7C3846 copy

It used to be Pearl’s Deluxe Burgers.

PDB was funded by and “Central Market Cultural District Loan Fund” and [cough] the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency*[R.I.P.]

Here’s the story of PDB:

2010: Pearl’s Burgers signs on to Mid-Market rejuvenation

2011: Pearl’s Burgers opens on Market

2014: Pearl’s Deluxe Burgers closes its location at Sixth and Market

PDB at 1001 Market Street wasn’t a good idea.

Whose idea was it?

Was it Mayor Ed Lee’s? Did he “create” jobs here? Well, take a look at the no-longer-operational pres release below.

Oh but look, Homeskillet arrives to save the day.

Shouldn’t it too get corporate welfare from tax and fee payers? Why not?

Why on Gaia’s Green Earth should we have the gov’mint picking winners and losers?

I don’t get it.

Shouldn’t the gov’mint focus on its core functions? Say, how’s SFGov functioning these days down at 6th and Market?

Anyway, bon courage, La Maison Skillet.

*Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.

Mayor Lee Celebrates Central Market Milestone – 56 Jobs Created in Central Market by Companies Taking Advantage of New Payroll Expense Tax Policy

1/26/12—Mayor Edwin M. Lee today announced that businesses are beginning to take advantage of the City’s Central Market/Tenderloin Payroll Expense Tax Exclusion. Zendesk and Pearl’s Deluxe Burgers are the first of what is anticipated to be many companies choosing to locate in the Central Market and Tenderloin neighborhoods and take advantage of the six-year payroll expense tax exclusion for new jobs created.

Creating 56 new jobs in the Central Market area last year, both companies have now been issued conditional letters of eligibility, which allows them to continue to create new jobs, generate revenue for the City and transform Central Market.

“With the success of Pearl’s and Zendesk in Central Market and with the opening of Twitter this summer, I continue to be encouraged by the successes we are seeing. While we have more work to do, we can still celebrate milestones like this and the many small businesses and arts groups arriving in the area, generating new foot traffic and increasing positive activity in the area,” said Mayor Lee. “This is a historic opportunity to leverage the energy and momentum that is creating an eclectic cultural arts, small business, entertainment and innovation economy hub.”

The Central Market/Tenderloin Payroll Expense Tax Exclusion was created to help to stabilize and revitalize an area that has been burdened by decades of high vacancy rates and disinvestment. The policy was designed to attract businesses to Central Market and the Tenderloin in order to create jobs and stimulate small business development. By providing tax relief for new jobs the Tax Exclusion encourages San Francisco companies, particularly those that are fast-growing, to move to Central Market as their employee base expands.

Zendesk, a San Francisco-based technology company that provides cloud-based help desk software, announced they had signed a lease in the Central Market in June of 2011 and that they would be doubling their footprint in September of 2011, shortly after they moved in. Since that time, Zendesk has added 40 jobs and plans to add another 96 jobs in 2012, totaling 200 staff.

“Our move to 6th and Market streets in August has been a meaningful one, and we are honored to be one of what will hopefully be many companies to bring positive change and innovation to this neighborhood,” said Zendesk CEO Mikkel Svane. “We’re excited about being the first tech company to draft and now implement a Community Benefits Agreement, which will help us build and foster long-lasting and meaningful relationships with the residents, businesses, community leaders, and other neighborhood stakeholders in Central Market and the Tenderloin.”

As part of qualifying for the Central Market / Tenderloin Payroll Expense Tax Exclusion, Zendesk entered into a Community Benefits Agreement with the City earlier this week. The company has committed to implementing a number of programs that will benefit the neighborhood and its residents, including support for community gardens, job training programs, access to technology, and a commitment to engage local restaurants and business for event catering and other services.

In November 2011 Pearl’s Deluxe Burgers opened their fourth location in Central Market. The award-winning restaurant was able to locate in Central Market with help from the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency, a loan from the City’s Central Market Cultural District Loan Fund and the Payroll Expense Tax Exclusion. They have created 16 new jobs as a result of their new location.

“It is an exciting and historic time to do business in Central Market,” said Pearl’s Deluxe Burgers Owner Sylvia Yi. “Sixth Street is fast becoming a comfort food corridor, and we are lucky to be a part of it. Innovative incentives like the payroll expense tax exemption will continue to entice other businesses to our area and keep the entrepreneurial momentum going in burgeoning Central Market. Kudos to Mayor Lee and his office for their commitment to revitalize this neighborhood. It is happening with great speed and much success thus far!”

The attraction and expansion of large employers and small businesses to Central Market is a cornerstone of the Mayor’s recently-launched Central Market Economic Strategy, the result of a 10-month public process that has resulted in a comprehensive roadmap to stabilize, revitalize and transform Central Market. Enhanced safety services are one of the primary components of the Economic Strategy, which includes the City’s Central Market Community Safety Ambassadors Program. To read the Central Market Economic Strategy, go to: www.centralmarketpartnership.org.

The Simple Joy of Playing Your First Round of Street Tetherball in the Western Addition Northeast of the Panhandle

Monday, March 16th, 2015

Look for San Francisco Chronicle writer and long-time east bay resident CW Get Off My Lawn Nevius* to decry this type of vandalism, you know, after getting contacted, once again, by Yet Another SFGov Department Head.

Oh, our youth, won’t somebody please decry our youth, won’t somebody please harp against the externalizes they generate while consistently ignoring the externalizes generated by older people, such as our Favorite Writer From The East Bay. Oh well, more street clean-up work for DPW:

7J7C3800 copy

Ah, memories:

“[Appointed Mayor Ed] Lee has placed Nuru in charge of a city department with a $129 million city budget and 1,200 employees, despite Nuru’s proven history of directing his subordinates to illegally campaign for his mayoral benefactors. You couldn’t even make this stuff up, and even Examiner columnist Melissa Griffin flatly calls the move “stupid.”

Moving on…

Oh, here’s a graphic for Chuck:

Capturekjhkhk

Perhaps CWNevius is overcompensating for his and his generation’s crimes of the past?

Mmmm…

*And that’s just the past month!

National Media Embraces the Term Twitterloin – First the New York Times and Now Fortune: “Welcome to the Twitterloin”

Monday, March 9th, 2015

Here’s the latest from Fortune:

Welcome to the Twitterloin, where tech-savvy cool meets gritty hood by Michal Lev-Ram

And that comes on the heels of this recent bit in the NYT:

As Wealth Changes the Tenderloin, a Move to Preserve Artistic ‘Gems’” by PATRICIA LEIGH BROWN

So what are the borders of the Twitterloin? Well, it depends.

For some, this portmanteau dating from 2009 means the Tenderloin itself, and others think it refers to a place at the southern* “edge of the city’s Tenderloin neighborhood.”

And then there’s this map of the “Twitter Tax Break” zone – it’s sort of shaped like the number 7:

Twitter-Tax-Break-Map copy

(Oddly, an unelected mansion-dwelling white man from the east bay played a signif role in creating the borders of this map. Isn’t that strange?)

And here’s a little more on the history of the Twitterloin:

Prospective Twitter Landlord Gave Newsom Rent Deal by Gerry Shih

Oh, does this information challenge your notions? Sorry.

And, Heaven forfend, this Forbes bit is coming after “we” agreed to put the term Twitterloin “to bed once and for all” just a few months back.

Sorry.

(Oh hai! You’ve worked in SF media for “years and years” and yet you’ve never even heard of the term “Twitterloin” until you saw it in The Grey Lady in 2015? Whoo boy, you don’t get out into the field all that much, huh?)

Oh what’s that, you’re from SFGov or a taxpayer-funded org and you don’t like seeing auslanders use the T-word because EVERYTHING IS AWESOME under the regime of WillieBrownGavinNewsomEdLee? Well here’s your map then:

Now there’s a T-word you can get behind, huh?

And, more seriously, if you’re new in town, then this semi-recent (and perfectly legal!) pizza delivery no-go map is your lodestar:

Basically if you’re looking for trouble, start at 6th and Folsom, you know, on foot, and then head northwest and then take Eddy west all the way to Divisadero in the North of NoPA area. I’ll add, Gentle Visitor, that you’re not going to get killed or anything if you wander throughout the aspirationally-named “Uptown Tenderloin*” but it might go a little something like this.

Or here’s a safer way to get about the Twitterloin.

In closing, here’s the latest from Italy:

“Da Tenderloin a Twitterloin: con i “techie” cambia lo storico quartiere

È storicamente il quartiere più malfamato di San Francisco, dove convivono homeless e gira droga, ma che è vissuto anche da graffitari, gallerie che propongono i lavori di artisti indipendenti, ‘food trucks’ (i camioncini che vendono cibo di strada), teatri leggendari e case di riposo che il comune destina alle persone con il reddito più basso, disoccupati e agli invalidi. Da quando sono arrivate le compagnie del “tech boom” che hanno scelto di stanziarsi dentro la città e lontane dalla Silicon Valley, il Tenderloin è stato però ribattezzato il “Twitterloin”: qui hanno sede le compagnie di Jack Dorsey, Twitter e Square, il quartier generale di Uber, e anche Yahoo! sta a poca distanza. L’arrivo delle grandi società sta cambiando rapidamente il volto del quartiere, spazzando via l’arte di strada e anche il carattere vibrante che per anni ha animato la zona. E, naturalmente, facendo aumentare in brevissimo tempo il prezzo degli affitti (testi e foto di Viviana Devoto e Kegan Marling).”

There’s your Twitterloin Update 2015.

*Cf. Tendernob, at the northern edge close to Nob Hill. 

Here’s What San Francisco Chronicle Writer CW Nevius Gets Wrong About Our Failed Bid for the 2024 Summer Olympics

Friday, January 16th, 2015

I guess this will close out SF’s attempt to host the 2024 Olympics.

The weird thing about San Francisco’s bid for the 2024 Summer Olympics was that the local committee was this close to pulling off a terrific plan.

The vote was Boston 15 and San Francisco (and the other two) 0, was it not? That’s not all that close, huh? Or does he mean that the bay area’s bid was sub-terrific, like it was just one unit below being terrific? One can’t tell what the Nevius is trying to say here. San Francisco always was a long shot, right? And if SF got picked by the USOC, then it would have been a long shot to get picked by the IOC. And if the corrupt IOC had selected SF, then there was always the chance of things not working out anyway, ala the inchoate Denver 1976 Olympics. So, was this thing “close” or actually far far away? I’ll tell you, if I were the USOC, I’d tell all the boosters from all the cities how close things were and if I were the spokesmodel for SF2024, I’d tell Larry Baer how close he almost came. (“We were this close Lare-Bear!) But I’m not so I won’t. OTOH, CW Nevius got paid by the Chronicle to publish, more or less, what Nate Ballard wanted published, so here we are. “So close!”

Let’s see a show of hands. How many of you thought a temporary, pop-up $350 million Olympic stadium in the Brisbane wind tunnel was a good idea? 

The IOC doesn’t want any more images of white elephants haunting them through the decades. So, in their opinion, which is the only one that matters, pop-ups might be a good thing. As far as Brisbane vs. Oakland is concerned, how could it matter? Our hosting would have ended up costing 5, 10, 15 billion dollars more than the “official” bid, right? Isn’t that the real issue?

More on Oakland:

It would not only have been a terrific solution for the Games — better weather, easy access, waterfront views — it would have penciled out financially.

This is the same Nevius who moved to town and then a few months later determined that the failed America’s Cup would come “without a downside.” But it did come with a downside, or two or three or four, right? Moving on.

And, by the way, don’t think the United States Olympic Committee wasn’t hoping to make San Francisco work. Conventional wisdom was that Los Angeles had the facilities, Boston and Washington had the East Coast bias, but San Francisco was “the sexiest.”

Why does the Nevius use the term “conventional wisdom” here? What does he mean? Is he suggesting that this view wasn’t accurate? I don’t think so.  And what’s “East Coast bias?” Have the Summer Olympics ever been held on the East Coast of the United States ever in history? Nope. So there doesn’t seem to be too much bias there. Our Summer Olympicses have been held in the West (twice), the South and the Midwest. So WTF. Now, time zone-wise I can certainly see how advertisers worldwide would strongly prefer the EDT for live events, and that certainly was a factor favoring Boston. And I’ll say, that DC had no chance at all, as the IOC hates DC and all it stands for. And then the Nevius puts quote marks around “the sexiest?” Is this a an actual quote or is it merely the conventional wisdom? Hmmm

So what happened? Well, San Francisco happened. Or more specifically, the Bay Area, and particularly the fractious shenanigans in Oakland, made everyone nervous.

So, nothing happened, right? The USOC did its own polling and figured out that we don’t really want the Olympics here. That’s what happened. I wouldn’t describe that as San Francisco happened since this was and is a known known, right?

Every time someone touted the Bay Area as a location, someone else cued up the video of the Oakland protesters trashing a Christmas tree.

Whoa, Nelly! Is this literally true? Like “every time?” No, so who was actually doing this at all? Like, even once? Is the Nevius aware of the non-disparagement agreements that all the bid cities signed on to? Is he suggesting that somebody from the Boston bid “cued up” some video literally or is this a Nevius tone poem? I can’t tell. Not at all.

As one local Olympic insider suggested: “We are like the hot, crazy girl that everyone wants to sleep with. You never know what you’re going to get when you wake up in the morning.”

This quote is from Nate Ballard but he doesn’t want to own up to it? Weak. I’ll note that Nate Ballard isn’t quoted anywhere else in the Nevius bit. And did Larry Baer’s money go to somebody getting paid to talk about hot, crazy “girls” everybody wants to sleep with? That’s amazing. Anyway, this came from Nate Ballard – prove me wrong! I won’t disagree with the sentiment though. Yes, SF was the most “appealing” bid city, the city that the corrupt IOC would have the warmest feelings for, most likely.

Now make no mistake. It wasn’t just Oakland. Accounts of the years of debate and acrimony over the harmless Beach Chalet soccer fields in Golden Gate Park made the national news.

OK, so what are you saying here, Nevius? That spending money and effort trying to get the Olympics to come here is/was a bad idea, you know, considering? Is that what you mean to say, Nevius?

Nor was it helpful to hear that collecting enough signatures to get an initiative on the San Francisco ballot is incredibly easy.

So, CW Nevius from Walnut Creek doesn’t want the people of SF to be able to weigh in on spending 10, 15, 20 billion on an Olympic-sized boondoggle? Mmmm…

Suppose, for example, an initiative was passed that said no public money could be used for the Games.

Yep, that was what was coming, no doubt.

Would that mean no increase in funding for public transportation, which would be stressed for the Games? Or police and emergency services.

The answer to this question is that it doesn’t matter as such a vote would be more than enough to scare away the corrupt IOC and why would you continue along the boondoggle path after the People voted thumbs down? I mean, what kind of monster would do that? Here’s the thing – this is the IOC:

Capturesfffs

That’s in terms that CW Nevius, that white, wizened, wine-drinking, Walnut Creekian Downton Abbey fan can appreciate. In fact, the IOC is like 10-15% royal blooded, like literally. The IOC has lots of ideas about how best to spend Other People’s Money on projects to glorify the IOC. But the IOC itself can’t afford to put on the show. That’s why it forces cities to guarantee the games with taxpayer money. There’s no way ’round this. So the IOC will not grant the Games to any city that doesn’t have a guarantee that the bill for the inevitable overruns will get sent to taxpayers. This is the Denver 1976 situation. It doesn’t take all that much to scare away the IOC.

Would we ever be able to get this together? Sure. It’s possible. The timing couldn’t have been much worse this year to put something together.

So, our bid was All About Oakland? I don’t think so. Perhaps this notion is comforting to Larry Baer, but I don’t think so. Perhaps SF bidding on the Olympics is fun, but it’s a bad idea? Perhaps?

But don’t think Boston is a slam dunk to win the international bid.

Who thinks Boston is a “slam dunk?” Where does this come from?

If anything, the anti-Olympics political forces in Boston — there’s a “No Boston Olympics” coalition — are more organized and more vociferous than the little band of naysayers here. 

Well, Nevius, the USOC did its own polling and it concluded that the political environment was worse here in SF. The reason why Boston’s citizen effort had a higher profile is that the bid in Boston had a higher profile, for whatever reason. And if a “little band” of naysayers would have had a very easy time winning its no-taxpayer-funds-for-the-Olympics vote, then they aren’t such a little band, right? Maybe SF doesn’t want to pay for the Olympics to come here – is that a possibility?

So now Nevius is rooting for Boston to lose the 2024 Olympics so that we can get the 2028 Olympics – that’s what Larry Baer and Nate Ballard are thinking?

OK fine, but I don’t think that’s going to work either.

CW Nevius should be able to do a better job than this.

Point Counterpoint on the 2024 Olympics, Since San Francisco’s Bid Will End Tomorrow, Probably

Wednesday, January 7th, 2015

Let’s start here:

“I truly believe this will advance our long-term interests,” San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee said. “We believe that San Francisco’s 2024 vision of the Olympics is 100 percent aligned with our priorities as we see them today, both as a city and as a region.”

Yeah, sure, hook Ed Lee up to a lie detector and you’d see that he actually believes this statement. Except that it’s not true. Unless he thinks that the 2024 Olympics are worth $10 billion or so of cost overruns. Some would benefit from those overruns but most would not. This process of exaggerating benefits and minimizing costs is what got us in trouble with the disastrous, expensive, deadly, scandal-marred America’s Cup, which, of course, San Francisco declined to repeat.

And I can’t help but think that “2024 vision” sounds a lot like Vision Zero 2024*, another promise that hasn’t a chance in the world of coming true.

“Our mantra really is, ‘Can we host an Olympics and leave the Bay Area better off for having done that?’ ” Strandberg said. “If we can’t, you should hold us to the standard. That’s what we think about every day as we lay out our plans.”

How on Earth would we be able to hold Mr. Strandberg “accountable” post 2024, when we’ll be billions and billions over $4.5 billion? How much skin does he have in the Game? Not much, not much at all.

“It’s not relevant to include Games that were put on by sovereign states like Russia or China and compare them to how you would do something in the United States,” he said. “We’d never look at the Chinese economic system or the Russian political system and say, ‘That’s how we do it here.’ So, why would we assume that is how we would do an Olympic Games here?”

(Sovereign states? Is that some kind of insult? Not really. I wonder what phrase he’s thinking about when he says sovereign state.) In any event, the better comparisons are with London 2012, which overran by about $10 billion and Chicago 2016, which would had overrun by a similar amount. Or Greece? Can we talk about Greece? No, all right. And the reason to include Russia and China has more to do with the IOC, which has a real problem dealing with democracies.

So that’s the SJMN bit. It’s well-written, by Elliott Almond and Mark Emmons

Moving on, to SF Moderates, which used to be called Plan C, which used to be a right side of the aisle political group for gay property owners. It’s expanded its membership lately, but it’s still decidedly on the right side of SF’s political aisle. Begin:

But what if we could defy the naysayers and make it happen? Mayor Ed Lee has initiated the effort, emphasizing that the $4.5 billion price tag will come from private donors. I learned from the Miracle on Ice and from the 2010 Giants and Ashkon that you don’t stop believing just because someone says you can’t win.

So why didn’t we sign up for another America’s Cup? Perhaps the naysayers were absolutely correct? Yep.

The issue for anti-Olympics lobbyists appears to be possible cost overruns, which have averaged over 200 percent per Olympics according to a recent study. The assumption is that taxpayers will be on the hook for the extra $9 billion in average cost overruns. That’s a fair concern.

Oh OK, well, yes, that’s the “concern.”

The requirement is a guarantee of public money to cover cost overruns. There are ways to deal with that if the final bill is the sole concern.

Uh, no there’s not. Are you talking about cost overrun insurance from that Aon company? That’s never going to work. If everybody thinks the taxpayers will be on the hook for $10 billion, then the premium for such a policy would be about $10 billion, right? And if it’s not, then it has a host of exceptions and deductibles and caps and then let’s have future taxpayers pay off the bill.

But, let’s consider another view. There are private donors ready to pump in $4.5 billion into our local economy. How often does that happen? If we say no to this money, are we in a better position to reduce poverty or curb homelessness?

Yes, without the 2024 Olympics, we’ll be in a better position. Were you born yesterday?

While the anti-Olympics lobby eagerly points to the America’s Cup as proof that the Olympics will be bad for San Francisco, what about the San Francisco Giants?

But that stadium was privately financed, right? The IOC would never allow a privately-financed 2024 Olympics.

I hope it doesn’t get derailed by another just say no campaign.

No no no no no. This deal will never work out in the long run. Let’s hope San Francisco loses tomorrow.

*With an admirable goal, but it’s never going to happen. Transportation deaths are a people problem, not an infrastructure problem. Fundamentally.