Posts Tagged ‘vote’

Marquee of Historic BRIDGE THEATRE on Geary Repurposed to Promote Area Supervisor Mark Farrell – Meet Your New Baseball Academy

Friday, November 7th, 2014

This is the scene days after our most recent election – one hopes this promotional effort for the incumbent Supervisor won’t stick around* for too much longer.

In any event, you can never be too careful when your Conditional Use authorization is under such scrutiny.

Hey, guess how many NIMBY’s complained about the Bridge being turned into the brand-new San Francisco Baseball Academy? Zero.**

So, PLAY BALL, somehow, inside of an old 1930′s-style movie house:

20141106_115628 copy

On It Goes…

*It was part of my job to change the marquee at this Landmark-owned theatre, back in the day. That was no picnic. (Another part was to console the owners of cars that had been stolen from our parking lot. Back then, criminals wouldn’t  smash and grab – they’d steal the whole car. Ah mem’ries…)

**It’s the West Side, nobody cares. Target? Bring it. Chipotle? Coming soon, just up the street near Masonic. Combination Pizza Hut And Taco Bell? Maybe someday…

Campaign 2014: Here’s What 3.3 Pounds of Mail in a Mailbox Looks Like – Plus, David Chiu is Very Very Evil

Monday, November 3rd, 2014

(Yes, there is white powder on the LCD screen of this digital scale - why do you ask?*)

(And no, I don’t think David Chiu is evil, but man, you ought to see some of these fliers I’m getting…)

Anyway, here’s what I pulled out of the old mailbox yesterday – 52 ounces of garbage, plus, somewhere in there, a small check from State Farm, a diamond in the rough:

P1160921 copy

Now, granted, there was a B&H catalog in there, plus a Costco Connect magazine, but the bulk of the bulk was campaign 2014 flyers what cost more to mail than they cost to produce.

My poor letter carrier!

*It’s flour, fool, purchased in bespoke fashion [25 pounds at a time] from my local purveyor of comestibles [Amazon, Fuckin’ A, bubba, back when it was only $27 a bag - now it’s like $40 for some reason?] 

World Series Update: “FUCK SFMTA” – “Only in SF Do People Hate the Transit Agency More Than the Cops”

Thursday, October 30th, 2014

Word on the Street, via @SFNick, @robertol, and @kevinmonty:

 RT : Only in SF do people hate the transit agency more than the cops. (photo via )”

Capturedsddfff copy

Hey, how’s Prop A doing? The last polling I saw it wasn’t doing so hot, but that was a while ago.

Oh look, media coverage:

The Ides of “May”: The Language of the Mayor’s Pet $500 Million Bond “May” Alarm You

Meanwhile, the people at the SFMTA claim to be offering, “Excellent Transportation Choices.” And they ask the public for advice about MUNI can become “more perfect.”

Something’s gotta give here – I suppose we’ll find out next week…

Will This Fall’s Half-Billion Transit Bond Allow Your Landlord to Raise Your Rent, Costing You Thousands? – “Pass-Throughs”

Friday, August 1st, 2014

I don’t know.

But check this out:

“Ordinance calling and providing for a special election to be held in the City and County of San Francisco on Tuesday, November 4, 2014, for the purpose of submitting to San Francisco voters a proposition to incur the following bonded debt of the City and County: $500,000,000 to finance the construction, acquisition, and improvement of certain transportation and transit related improvements, and related costs necessary or convenient for the foregoing purposes; authorizing landlords to pass-through 50% of  the resulting property tax increase to residential tenants under Administrative Code Chapter 37…”

All right kids – you do the math. Start with $850,000,000 and divide that up among the denizens of the 415 / 628.

I don’t know how to do that but when I tried, I came up with a $30 a month rent increase for you, Gentle Reader, for the next 7-10 years.

Would the average landlord take the trouble to do a pass-through? IDK. I’m thinking the typical rent-controlled renter in SF doesn’t have to deal with pass-throughs currently. But maybe this big old honking bond would be the trigger for a wave of passthroughs?

Here’s what former SFGov employee Howard Wong has to say:

Arguments against MUNI infrastructure improvement bond

What does the ballot measure do:

Raises property taxes and rents (50% pass-through) to pay for General Obligation Bonds of $500 million, with $350 million in interest payments, for a total debt load of $850 million.

Funds “may be allocated” for transit and roads—carte blanche authority for unspecific projects.

If the Bond is rejected by voters, property taxes and rents would be reduced for everyone—not just for rich companies and the wealthy.

To read the Ordinance’s legal language is to oppose the Bond Measure.

http://www.sfgov2.org/ftp/uploadedfiles/elections/ElectionsArchives/Meeting_Information/BSC/agendas/2014/November/1-B%20Transportation%20Road%20Improvement%20GO.pdf

The SFMTA wants more money, certainly. But the question is what will the SFMTA do for us in order to get the money, right? Otherwise, we’re just shoveling more coal into a broken-down machine. Why not use the bond as a carrot to get the SFMTA to reform?

Perhaps our SFMTA doesn’t deserve this bond?

Anyway, if I were promoting this bond, I’d figure out what the odds are that landlords would pass through 50% of the burden and also how much rents would be increased, on average, and for how long. And then I’d say, well this is what the SFMTA is going to do with your money and this is how much it will cost you, the renter, or you, the owner.

Is this massive transit bond a good idea?

I don’t know.

8 Washington and the Infinite Sadness – These People Against the “Wall on the Waterfront” Were on the Cusp of Victory in 2012

Wednesday, June 25th, 2014

But they sure didn’t look it back in 2012.

They looked so, so sad.

Click to expand

I hadn’t realized the intensity of their movement until this night at the  San Francisco Public Library on Page Street in the Upper Haight area.

And then, in 2013, they won, big-time.

So what’s next for 8 Washington – what’ll happen with the parcel?

I know not.

Oh, so here’s what the national media doesn’t know about the sainted San Francisco Planning Commission:

It’s a political organization run by the Mayor of San Francisco.

So, is it  really”thoughtful,” “considered,” and “professional?”

Perhaps not.

Here’s an example for you, national MSM.

The SFMTA is similar to Planning Commission except the SFMTA takes care of transit in SF.

The SFMTA recently had a big push to turn on parking meters on Sundays instead of having them flash “FREE PARKING” from Saturday night to Monday morning every week. (They had studies and everything.) So then people had to pay for parking meters on Sundays. Fine.

But then the Mayor of San Francisco said he didn’t like having meters charge for parking on Sundays. And then the SFMTA voted, unanimously, to make Sunday parking free again less than a year after deciding to charge for Sunday parking.

So similar things happen with the Planning Commish? Yes – it;s the same dynamic.

So, IRL, the SFMTA and the Planning Commission are captives of the Mayor of San Francisco. So that’s why builders donate money to and say nice things about the Mayor of San Francisco.

If you aren’t aware of this, national MSM, then you don’t understand what happened with the 8 Washington proposal, just saying.

A $23 Cap on Parking Tickets? Could San Francisco Survive Something Like the “Los Angeles Parking Freedom Initiative”

Monday, June 16th, 2014

Read the news and turn the pages, from the LA TImes:

“The Los Angeles Parking Freedom Initiative wants to cap fines at $23 for violations that don’t affect public safety.”

Mmmm…

[CALL:] Hey, could an initiative like this pass in San Francisco County?

[RESPONSE:] Hell to the yes.

Could the SFMTA handle the loss of revenue?

I suppose. But it would turn a solid money-maker – paying well-compensated PCO’s to run around all over the city – into a decided money-loser.

Mmmmm…

San Francisco’s Appointed Mayor Ed Lee Talks About Raising the Minimum Wage, But Election Day Poll Workers Make Less Than That – Why?

Wednesday, May 14th, 2014

All right, c’mon, “Apply to be a Poll Worker!

Attend one training class that will clearly explain Poll Worker duties.”

“All Poll Workers must arrive at the polling place no later than 6:00 a.m. on Election Day. Although the polls officially close at 8:00 p.m., Election Day does not end until all materials have been picked up (usually around 9:00 p.m. or 9:30 p.m.). There will be meal breaks during the day. 

So let’s do the math:

Training in Civic Center before the election: 3 hours or so.

Game Day: 15.5 hours, less breaks = 8 hours straight time and let’s say 6.5 hours of OT at time-and-a-half

So what’s that, 3+8+6.5+3.25 = 20.75 effective hours of work?

Multiplying by the official City and County minimum wage of $10.74 yields $222.86 total pay.

And using the vaunted $15 per hour minimum promised by quasi-governmental spokesperson and noted Berkeleyite Randy Shaw, we arrive at $311.25.

And what is appointed Mayor Ed Lee offering these poor souls? Well apparently no pay at all for the mandatory training, and then:

“Depending on your assignment, Poll Workers are paid between $142 and $195  for working on Election Day.”

Is this a joke, you ask?

No, Gentle Reader, it’s not. They’re srsly.

I cry foul.

In any event, if you’re an inspector you can make  a bit more, but then you gotta deal with high school seniors with their Katy Perry and cell phones and whathaveyou. They’re intelligent, you know, but lazy. And if their work doesn’t add up the way it should shortly after 8 PM, well that’s tough cookies – you’ll hear the beep beeps from the waiting cars and then the kids are gone and you, the vaunted elections inspector, will be left to fix things up.

Anyway, you get something like this for your troubles …

…but you won’t get minimum wage.

Now why is that?

San Francisco Chronicle Writer CW Nevius, Who Claimed to Want “Closure” on the Ross Mirkarimi Case, Brings It Up Yet Again

Wednesday, April 30th, 2014

ONCE MORE UNTO THE BREACH, DEAR READERS, ONCE MORE:

Assembly race between Chiu, Campos finally picks up steam. The showdown between Supervisors David Chiu and David Campos in the race to represent San Francisco in the state Assembly may be just about to get a lot more interesting.

WELL, YES THE RACE IS MORE BORING-ER THAN AVERAGE, SURE. BUT NEVIUS, NOTHING’S REALLY CHANGED LATELY AND YOU KNOW THAT, NEVE. NOW, WHY WOULD NEVE WANT TO ANNOUNCE NEWS WHEN THERE REALLY ISN’T ANY NEWS?

1. HE MORE OR LESS NEEDS TO HAVE NEWS ELSE HE DOESN’T HAVE MUCH OF A REASON TO WRITE ON THIS TOPIC.

2. HE STRONGLY SUPPORTS ONE CANDIDATE OVER ANOTHER, SO HE WANTS TO DRAW ATTENTION TO AN ISSUE HE THINKS IS HELPFUL TO HIS CANDIDATE.

3. AND, MOST IMPORTANTLY, CW NEVIUS IS STILL UPSET, VERY UPSET OVER ROSS MIRKARIMI STILL BEING THE ELECTED SHERIFF OF SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY AND HE WANTS TO METE OUT PUNISHMENT TO THOSE WHO DEFIED CW NEVIUS AND THE POLITICAL FACTION OF CW NEVIUS

OH, BUT I INTERRUPTED, PLEASE CARRY ON, NEVE

Chiu, the current president of the Board of Supervisors, had a double-digit lead in polls as recently as February. But lately the margin has been closing, indicating that Campos’ aggressive attacks are having some effect. In response, Chiu may go on the offensive.

BOY, WITH WHOM HAVE YOU BEEN TALKING, NEVE? SOMETIMES IT WOULD HELP IF YOU JUST CAME OUT WITH THINGS INSTEAD OF IMPLYING THAT YOU’RE ALL-KNOWING AND ALL-SEEING, JUST SAYING.

The problem is that Chiu, with an early lead in the polls, has preferred to sit back and talk policy while Campos has gone on the attack.From the start, Campos has painted Chiu as the pawn of big developers and an untrustworthy politician who was elected as a progressive but then moved to the business-friendly middle of the road. Chiu has responded with … well, not very much.

MAN, NEVE, YOU SEEM TO THINK ALL THE ELECTEDS IN YOUR NEW HOME OF SAN FRANCISCO ARE A BUNCH OF PANSIES, HUH? LIKE THEY TELL _YOU_ HOW MUCH PROP B SUCKS , BUT YOU CAN’T QUOTE THEM ON IT BECAUSE THEY, UNLIKE YOU, ARE BIG PUSSIES, RIGHT? AND YOU’RE THE JUNKYARD DOG WHO WON’T BACK DOWN FROM A FIGHT, RIGHT? SO, WHY DON’T YOU RUN FOR OFFICE, NEVE? IT’S NOT SO CRAZY AN IDEA IS IT? YOUR FORMER FELLOW ESTABLISHMENT SPOKESPERSON KEN GARCIA WAS BEING RECRUITED TO RUN FOR SUPERVISOR AND IT STILL MIGHT HAPPEN, SO WHY NOT YOU, NEVIUS? THEN EVERYTHING WOULD BE PERFECT!

He even announced early in the campaign that he wouldn’t be bringing up one of the real wedge issues between the two – the reinstatement of Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi after domestic abuse allegations.

OH HERE WE GO, THIS IS THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS NEW BIT FROM NEVE. NOW LET’S TRAVEL BACK IN TIME TO 2012 FOR THIS HAM-FISTED, BONE-HEADED EFFORT FROM THE NEVIUS:

“The Board of Supervisors finally hearing the official misconduct charges for suspended Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi sounds like a cause for celebration. Finally, everyone gets some closure on this long, strange soap opera. Don’t bet on it. It’s not that Mirkarimi is expected to have much of a shot to win reinstatement. All the smart money at City Hall is predicting an 11-0 vote against his case. That way everyone has some political cover. An ideological vote - John Avalos or David Campos voting for Mirkarimi to confirm far left credentials – isn’t likely. This is a vote that people will remember, and if someone like Campos has designs on the state Assembly, it could come back to bite him.

SEE HOW THAT WORKS? 2012 NEVIUS PINED FOR “CLOSURE.” WHY? BECAUSE HE GENUINELY THOUGHT HIS POLITICAL FACTION WOULD WIN AND ROSS MIRKARIMI WOULD HAVE TO LOSE HIS JOB. BUT ACTUALLY, THE “SMART MONEY” WAS WRONG AND THIS 11-0 SLAM DUNK OF A VOTE WENT THE OTHER WAY. IT’S HARD TO TELL HOW HARD NEVIUS WAS SPUN ON THIS ONE. HE BECAME SO INVESTED IN THIS POLITICAL ISSUE HE BELIEVED WHAT HE WANTED TO BELIEVE. HE ENDED UP MISLEADING HIS READERS, ON PURPOSE OR NOT. NEVIUS DOES THIS KIND OF THING ALL THE TIME AND HE NEVER ACKNOWLEDGES HIS ERRORS, HE JUST MOVES ON TO THE NEXT ISSUE. ANYWAY, NOTE THE THREAT HE MADE AGAINST CAMPOS BACK IN  2012. WELL NOW, NEVIUS IS WORRIED THAT HIS THREAT MEANS NOTHING. SO HE NOW REALLY, REALLY WANTS TO MAKE GOOD ON HIS THREAT. YOU SEE, REPORTER NEVIUS ISN’T SERVING HIS READERS, HE SERVING HISSELF. BUT I DIGRESS, PLEASE CONTINUE NEVE.

Chiu voted against reinstatement, and Campos – despite avowed support for domestic violence prevention organizations – voted in favor.

SO THE QUESTION WAS WHAT TO DO ABOUT MIRKARIMI’S CONVICTION, IT WASN’T ACTUALLY ABOUT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IRL, OF COURSE

There was a school of thought that said the Mirkarimi hearings at the Board of Supervisors was old news, but it has continued to come up in public forums. Chiu’s camp has gotten the message, and he is beginning to press that issue in debates. To which his supporters say: “Finally.” Chiu is a cautious and deliberative politician, but some of his backers have told him he needs to take the gloves off. Mirkarimi, who was reinstated in October 2012, could be a winner for him.

OF COURSE, NEVIUS HIMSELF IS  A “CHIU SUPPORTER,” AND A STRONG SUPPORTER AT THAT.

Campos has an explanation for his vote, but it is complicated. He says he felt Mirkarimi’s behavior – grabbing his wife’s arm hard enough to leave a bruise – did not fall within the legal definition of “official misconduct.”

IT’S NOT COMPLICATED AT ALL, NEVIUS. THAT’S WHY THE PRESIDENT OF THE ETHICS COMMISSION, WHO’S WAAAAAY SMARTER THAN YOU, NEVIUS, AND WHO HAS BACKBONE, RECOMMENDED THAT MIRKARIMI SHOULD KEEP HIS JOB.

So, to the dismay of women’s groups, he supported reinstatement.

GEE NEVE, IF YOU DON’T AGREE WITH A POLITICIAN, WHAT YOU DO IS SUPPORT AN OPPONENT OR SUPPORT A RECALL, RIGHT?

Look for Chiu to maintain his professorial demeanor while his campaign hits Campos on opposing new housing and bashing the tech industry.

HOW WOULD YOU WRITE THIS IF YOU WERE A NEUTRAL AND DETACHED JOURNALIST, NEVE? HOW WOULD YOU WRITE THIS IF YOU WERE A MEMBER OF THE SAME POLITICAL FACTION AS DAVID CAMPOS?

And Mirkarimi will be coming up at every opportunity.

HEY NEVIUS, WHAT HAPPENED TO “CLOSURE?” AHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Campos will come back with accusations of backroom deals and complaints that Chiu isn’t a friend to rent control interests.

“RENT CONTROL INTERESTS?” WHAT DOES THAT MEAN, NEVIUS? ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE WITH RENT CONTROL?

And by the way, he will ask Chiu, why are you endorsing Kim?

OH, SO YOUR VENDETTA IS AGAINST JANE KIM AS WELL? OH MY. AGAIN, WHAT HAPPENED TO CLOSURE, DUDE?

And we’re off. A race. Finally.

UH, NEWSFLASH, NEVIUS. DAVID CHIU WILL WIN BOTH RACES WITH OR WITHOUT YOUR EFFORTS.


OH WHAT’S THIS, CW NEVIUS HAS A STINGER! FOLLOW HIS LINK IF YOU WANT TO READ IT, BUT IT WAS ACTUALLY A “QUOTE OF THE WEEK” FROM HEATHER KNIGHT FROM LAST YEAR. CHECK IT:

“I am not running for mayor, and I will not run for mayor unless Willie Brown and Rose Pak form a ‘Run, Art, Run’ committee.”

DOES THE NEVIUS THINK HE HAS A FRESH QUOTE? I CAN’T TELL, OH WELL.

The People Behind the Big Project at Pier 70 are DESPERATE for Your Approval – Here are the Sweeteners They’re Offering!

Wednesday, March 19th, 2014

Or you know, what they’re planning on offering. That’s my conclusion after editing the below, which is what “FM3″ Polling is asking San Francisco voters about these days. Or rather, what you can see below is about 85% of what FM3 is asking people, more or less.

So they’re like, what will it take to get you to support our scheme for Pier 70? You want more below market rate units, you want lower height limits, you want more space for parks, you want an artist colony, JUST TELL US WHAT YOU WANT BEFORE YOU GO ALL 8 WASHINGTON ON US,  OH OH AAAAAAAAURGH!!!! You know, more or less.

Oh, and apparently, there’s a new evil meanie ID’ed as the Great Enemy of the Willie Newsom/ Gavin Lee/ Ed Brown administration. It used to be “six-foot white boy” Supervisor Chris Daly, and then it was Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin, but now it’s Mayor Art Agnos. (The Establishment thinks he’s too old to be working the city fighting over height limitations. The Establishment wonders why he’s not out playing golf these days.)

Here it is:

“From FM3:
1. Would you say that say that SF is heading in the right direction or not?
2. Pier 70 is taking existing 40 foot maximum up to 90 feet, support or not?
3. Would adding these following things to the description help?
7 acres of new space for arts,
new units at potrero,
jobs,
more BMR units
5. The limit now is 40 feet. What would you say to 120, or 90, or 65 feet?
6. How many BMR units do you think P70 should have? 100, 200, 400, 750?
7. What if the Builders made more BMR units than required? What about double, triple?
8. Inclined to trust the following or not?
Art Agnos
Potrero Hill Boosters
Tony Kelly
No Wall on the Waterfront
Democratic Party
Pier 70 Artists
Malia Cohen
Dogpatch Neighborhood Assoc.
9. How long have you lived in SF?
10. How much do you make?
11. Race?
12. Sexual orientation?”

Well Sure, Malia Cohen and the Supes Just “Banned” Assault Weapons in SF, But They Also Banned Run-of-the-Mill Handguns

Thursday, October 31st, 2013

The news of the day:

Banning assault rifles only scratches the surface.”

Fair enough, except:

1. There are reasons why federal, state, and local authorities haven’t already done the same thing.

Which is also fair enough, as I’m sure Malia Cohen et al are aware of all that. Except:

2. A handgun connected to a 10-round magazine isn’t an assault rifle (of course) and it’s not even an “assault weapon.”

And here’s a test. Would you, gentle reader, call the guns that most of the SFPD strap on every day assault weapons? I don’t think so. So like for instance, “the sergeant drew her assault weapon and pointed it at the suspect.” If you said something like that, I wouldn’t know what you were talking about. Most likely, you’d use the term pistol or handgun or revolver or something like that, right?

So that’s why calling an everyday, run-of-the-mill handgun an “assault weapon”   isn’t the right thing to do.

You’ve gone beyond George Lakoff-style “framing” all the way to Orwellian.

Just saying.