SFBG Blogs

Water bottle industry lauds law helping public water systems

Sasha Cuttler
-
3
Water bottle industry lauds law helping public water systems

The International Water Bottle Association (IBWA) sent out a press release this week [Tues/10] “applauding” a new federal law aimed at improving public drinking water. Although some might consider this unusual, the bottled water industry sources almost half of its water from municipal supplies.

“We don’t oppose tap water,” IBWA spokesperson Chris Hogan told us. “From an industry standpoint, we, in general, want people to drink water, whether it’s bottled or tap.” 

In recent years, however, both consumers and anti-disposable water bottle activists have chided the industry as wateful and unnecessary bottling and shipping what is basically tap water. “It is really just ‘public water sources’ that they take and sell back to the public,” Tomás Bosque, a member of anti-water bottle advocacy group Ban the Bottle, told us. 

According to the IBWA, 49 percent of bottled water is drawn from public sources. But Hogan said that public water goes through a numerous treatments — reverse osmosis, distillation, micro-filtration, carbon filtration, ozonation, and/or ultraviolet (UV) light — before it’s bottled and sold. “FDA standards for the bottled water are so strict it’s irrelevant where it’s sourced,” Hogan said.

But Bosque is skeptical of the IBWA’s praise of the newly signed federal legislation, which is called the Water Resources Reform and Development Act.  “We would imagine that this act will help streamline the bottled water manufacturer’s ‘purifying’ process thereby providing them with more revenue opportunities,” Bosque wrote in an email. 

The legislation, which was signed by President Barrack Obama on Tuesday [6/10], will increase federal funding to improve public water systems infrastructure.  “Overall, we are eager to see how this act will benefit the tap water infrastructure,” Bosque wrote. “We hope that providing some level of update to the more than 70,000 water systems will increase public awareness of this awesome, free resource and thereby help change behaviors.”

In San Francisco, however, a change in behaviors is inevitable. In March, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to ban the sale of non-reusable water bottles on city property. The ban will take effect in October of this year. Hogan said the IBWA is “not pleased” with the ban. “It’s a false argument to make municipal water stronger by banning bottled water,” he said. “They’re really two different things.”

Hogan explained that Sup. David Chiu, the author of the water bottle ban, should have banned other, more sugary packaged beverages — an industry Hogan cited as the bottled water industry’s main competitors — instead of water. Chiu didn’t immediately return our calls, but we’ll update this post if and when we hear back.   

Shaw’s “housing civil war” is really about influence peddling

Sasha Cuttler
-
158
Shaw’s “housing civil war” is really about influence peddling

I’m always wary of the BeyondChron stories by Tenderloin power broker Randy Shaw, who uses the website as a propaganda tool for his interests and those of the politicians who he helped get into office, including Mayor Ed Lee and Sup. Jane Kim, as I wrote in last week’s paper.

Sure, they can be a great way to understand what the Mayor Lee and his business community allies are up to, as Shaw floats his little trial balloons that try to frame the city’s political dynamics in the interests of his allies. And now, he’s got San Francisco (aka Modern Luxury) Magazine amplifying those efforts.

For example, did you know that we’re in the midst of a “housing civil war” in San Francisco? No, me neither. But that’s what Shaw declared this week, a declaration that the folks at downtown-friendly Modern Luxury amplified today by reprinting that story.

The tone of the story is a little more even-handed than usual, given that Shaw is being careful not to hurt his close relationship with Kim. But it’s also clearly a shot across her bow on behalf of Lee and the pro-development crowd that Shaw has cozied up to in recent years.

Kim already engages in a delicate balancing act between the progressive community that helped her get elected (which is increasingly restive about the gentrification and displacement that have been fed by economic policies she supported after winning the race in 2010) and the political establishment surrounding Mayor Lee, whom she regularly lavishes praises upon.

Apparently, it’s a dance that she’s performed pretty well, given her lack of serious challengers as she runs for reelection this year. But Shaw’s piece seems to be a subtle public warning to remember where her political bread is buttered, and to not go too far with her proposal to limit luxury condo development when it exceeds 70 percent of the total housing construction.

As with any legislation, the devil is in the details on this one, and Shaw seems to be trying to have a big say in influencing those details by declaring a “war” without identifying any of its combatants or battlefields. Then again, this piece doesn’t seem intended for a general audience, but for those in the back rooms where Shaw truly exercises his power.   

Kevin Epps’ new film targets outsize black and latino student suspensions

Erica Hanna
-
9
Kevin Epps’ new film targets outsize black and latino student suspensions

A second grader recounts his school calling in the police to stop his tantrum. A young girl repeatedly suspended by her school lowers her head in sorrow. A community confronts a seemingly-violent teen who lost his way.

Kevin Epps’ 2002 film Straight Outta Hunters Point pulled viewers through the painful churn of poverty in a historically black San Francisco neighborhood. In his newest film, Solutions not Suspensions, Epps shows viewers one systemic cause of poverty: kids who are suspended and sent out onto the streets, instead of embraced by their communities when they falter.

These students aren’t only held back by each other, they’re held back by their schools. Studies show African American and Latino students are disproportionately suspended compared to other ethnic groups, a topic we wrote about in our cover story “Suspending Judgement, [12/13].”

That’s now changing, and Epps’ film chronicles the efforts of Coleman Advocates and other youth groups to push the San Francisco Unified School District to implement Restorative Practices, a new form of discipline focusing on community-building as opposed to punishment.

The stakes are high. Though some argue students need punishment, the film (and Coleman Advocates) argue this is counter-intuitive. Suspensions don’t heal wounds, don’t address behavior, and exacerbate the school to prisons pipeline.

“I’m a troublemaker, I have a police record,” one girl in the film says, talking about how her teachers and counselors no longer trust her. “They don’t care about me now.”

Restorative Practices are a new set of rules for handling conflict in SFUSD schools, calling for students and teachers in disagreements to enter into restorative circles to discuss their differences. One of the most powerful moments in Solutions not Suspensions puts you right in the middle of one teen’s restorative circle.

A teenager sits in a room surrounded by teachers and his community. To his left is his crying mother, to his right is a man leading the restorative circle.

“I need for you to fall back a little bit from that man role in taking the lead,” the man tells the teen. “Just be a young man. Enjoy this journey to being a man. One thing I know is you love that woman right there so much.”

He points to the teens’ crying mom. 

“I know you carry a heavy load sometimes,” he says. “You worry about her, you worry about your family, and worrying about your family may be behind the decisions in life you made. But you’ve got a network of people. You’ve got to let us know about that load.”

“You’ve got to tell us. You’ve got to tell us.”

Epps told the Guardian that the teen had gotten into fights at school. He came from a broken home and his mother had troubles with substance abuse. The fight, Epps said, “was his cry for help.” 

And that’s the power of restorative practices, he said, it gives students help instead of sending them to the streets.

“Instead of suspending him they took him to the side,” Epps said. “They said ‘let’s talk about this.'”

Epps said Solutions not Suspensions has direct ties to his seminal film, Straight Outta Hunters Point, and its sequel. The kids suspended from schools, he said, were the same kids living in poverty and getting caught up in “mischievious things” in his other films.

“It’s a direct connection,” he said.

Solutions not Suspensions premieres tonight at th San Francisco Public Library Main Branch, in the Latino room, at 6pm. Coleman Advocates will then host the film on their website for viewing, and announce a number of subsequent showings.

coleman

The World Cup is almost here! Where are you gonna watch?

Sue Vaughan
-
5
The World Cup is almost here! Where are you gonna watch?

The World Cup runs June 12-July 13. Will the US make it out of its group? Will Cristiano Ronaldo get past the (alleged) curse upon his injured knee? Will Neymar Jr. debut a new hairstyle in front of the Brazilian home crowd? And where will you go to watch all this happen? Some suggestions below.

1) SoMa StrEat Food Park: international array of food trucks, beer garden (with Brazilian beer specials), “lots of big-screen HDTVs.” www.somastreatfoodpark.com

2) For those who prefer to party indoors, with a full bar, club Monarch is going to be broadcasting all the games. (OK, “all the big matches” — so if your chosen side is too far down in the FIFA rankings you might be out of luck). www.monarchsf.com

3) North Beach’s Cigar Bar hosts a screening of Sat/14’s key clashes (i.e., you’re on your own for the early-AM Greece vs. Colombia game) with DJs spinning special World Cup jams. This weekend also happens to be the North Beach Festival, so you can get your street fair on before the games. www.aykuteevents.com

4) Once again, there’ll be a giant screen outside of SF City Hall broadcasting most of the games. Also: food trucks, soccer skills clinics, mini-games, and other kid-friendly activities. www.worldcupsf.com

5) In the Metreon, Jillian‘s will be screening all the games, with full bar and special menus. www.jillianssf.com

Celebrate the whole shebang with an opening party (samba dancers!) Sat/14 at Supperclub (www.supperclub.com). Also in SF, don’t forget futbol standbys Mad Dog in the Fog, Danny Coyle’s, Ireland’s 32, Kate O’Brien’s, and Balompie Café.

City College’s accreditors bow to pressure, amend rules to save CCSF

Erica Hanna
-
18
City College’s accreditors bow to pressure, amend rules to save CCSF

Keep City College of San Francisco open, or else.

That’s the message local and federal officials have drilled into City College’s accreditors in recent weeks. Representatives Nancy Pelosi and Jackie Speier; Assemblymembers Tom Ammiano and Phil Ting; and the state’s community college government have all publicly pressured the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges to give City College an extension to prove its worth.

Finally bowing to pressure, the ACCJC may soon chang their own rules to save City College.

Today the ACCJC announced changes in its policy exclusively for colleges with terminated accreditation, granting a chance for such colleges to request a new “accreditation restoration status.”

“This is new for the ACCJC, but I don’t know if its new for other institutions,” Dave Hyams, a spokesperson for the ACCJC told us. But this new policy may offer new hope for City College.

In 2012 the ACCJC told City College its accreditation would be terminated, putting the school in the fight of its life. A loss of accreditation would mean its degrees are worthless, and the school would lose government funding. Notably, the school has not lost its accreditation yet.

The ACCJC’s policy change is not yet final, as the agency is allowing two weeks for the public to weigh in. The changes will be finalized on June 25, the commission said.

If the policy is adopted though, it means City College would be able to apply for a lifeline.

“If this policy is adopted as expected,” the ACCJC wrote in their statement to the press, “CCSF would have the opportunity to take steps to be designated as being in restoration status.”

Hyams denied the decision has anything to do with the very recent, and very public, emails from Nancy Pelosi and other politicians to demanding the ACCJC give City College more time.

“The ACCJC was looking for a way to balance the impact of termination on students,” he said, “with the needs for the college to meet basic standards.”

The college would need to file its application for restoration status by July 2014, City College’s originally announced accreditation termination date. This may all be moot, however, as City Attorney Dennis Herrera filed for an injunction to stall the college’s closure until the conclusion of the city’s lawsuit against the ACCJC. Legal proceedings are expected to begin in October.

Sara Eisenberg, the deputy city attorney leading the case against the ACCJC, told us this doesn’t affect the case at all.

“Our lawsuit is about the ACCJC’s bad acts, which go to the heart of the fairness and accuracy of the accreditation evaluation process,” she told the Guardian. “These violations of law, policy and fundamental fairness require that the ACCJC’s past decisions concerning City College be vacated and that City College be reevaluated on a clean slate using a fair process.”

Interestingly, the announcement of restoration status by the ACCJC contains a caveat: they will not extend CCSF’s appeal unless the US Department of Education gives them the go-ahead. Hyams said the ACCJC developed this plan while consulting the USDOE, so it may be a slam dunk.

Need some context on the City College fight? Check out the video above for a basic overview.

“The commission and the department had very recent meetings that have been constructive and productive, they’re fully aware of this proposal,” he told us.

One of those meetings was not so peaceful, however, as over 200 City College supporters rallied outside the ACCJC’s semi-annual meeting in Sacramento, demanding the organization rescind its decision to revoke the college’s accreditation. The protest was led by the California Federation of Teachers, the local AFT 2121 and attended by teachers and students alike.

Tim Killikelly, the president of the AFT 2121 had questions about the new policy.

“I’m not sure how this restoration status is different than what appeals already existed,” he said. “The students need to be sure about their academic future, and this doesn’t do that. The students need to breathe a sigh of relief.”

He’s referring to the college’s recent drop in enrollment. At its height City College had over 100,000 students enrolled. But, due in part to its accreditation struggles and (some have said) the economy’s mild upswing, the enrollment has recently dropped to under 80,000 students. 

Killikelly laid much of the blame for that enrollment drop at the feet of the ACCJC. “They should’ve sent a team to verify we’re in compliance,” he said. Instead of this middling compromise, if the ACCJC had instead granted full accreditation Killikelly thinks confidence in the college could be restored.

City College Trustee Rafael Mandelman was also cautious about the decision.

“Its good news,”  he said, but, “the powers that be have rallied and persuaded the ACCJC that they cannot shut City College down now. The ACCJC are not pulling their claws out of the college. We will continue this terrible dance unless the City Attorney wins his lawsuit.”

The college may already have bounced back. California Community College Chancellor Brice Harris and City College Chancellor Arthur Tyler have publicly stated the school is 95 percent done addressing all of the concerns the ACCJC wanted to see fixed.

Mandelman contends the ACCJC’s move to terminate City College’s accreditation did more harm than good. “This whole process has been incredibly and unnecessarily disruptive on City College,” he said. “It’s a horrendous way to reform an institution.”

It should be noted that City College is still open, and remains accredited. For a look at the new policy from the ACCJC, click here.

Shrimp Boy denied bail

Sasha Cuttler And Mary Magee
-
11
Shrimp Boy denied bail

Raymond “Shrimp Boy” Chow, who has a criminal history in Chinese gangs and was indicted along with Sen. Leland Yee and a slew of others in a high-profile FBI operation, was denied bail June 11.

U.S. Magistrate Nathanael Cousins struck down his defense attorneys’ motion for pretrial release on the grounds that Chow might pose a danger to the community due to his position as leader of the Chee Kung Tong (CKT), characterized as a Chinese crime syndicate by the FBI. Chow’s charges include seven counts of money laundering, one count of conspiracy to sell stolen cigarettes, and two counts of conspiracy to sell stolen liquor.

“The government’s advancing this conspiracy theory that my client is in charge of this organized crime syndicate. On that basis the judge is deciding to hold him,” said defense attorney Curtis Briggs. “It’s the Chinese Freemasons, it’s not a crime syndicate,” Briggs added. “It’s a fraternal organization. They’re going to be muddied up and dirtied up because the govermnent is pursing a racketeering case against them.”

Another wrinkle: “Now the government’s issued a deportation warrant againt him,” Briggs noted. “Even if we got him out, he’d be in immigration custody.”

A 23-page motion for release on bail for Chow, filed by Briggs and attorneys Gregory Bentley and Tony Serra, paints a very different picture of the targeted Chinatown figure than the all-powerful gangster portrayed by federal authorities.

The FBI complaint, unveiled in March, paints Chow as an international crime boss holding “supreme authority” as Dragonhead of the CKT.

In this role, the FBI charged, Chow was “the supervisor” of criminal relationships between Yee, political consultant Keith Jackson, and Chow’s associates, who had knowledge of and approved all criminal operations of the CKT and received payment for the various criminal dealings he facilitated. The complaint even noted that Chow had once told an undercover FBI agent that he served as a judge within the CKT; “if one member kills another member, Chow decides if the killing was justified.”

The mob boss who had returned yet again to a life of crime, all while swearing he’d given it all up, couldn’t be more different from the humble ex-convict described in his defense attorneys’ motion for release. Yee and Jackson, who faced charges on firearms trafficking, among other counts, were released on bail totaling $500,000 and $250,000, respectively. Prior to being taken into custody, Chow had already been wearing an ankle monitoring bracelet due to his pending case with immigration authorities.

In letters of support written on his behalf referenced in the motion, Chow was described as a community leader whose actions in recent years stemmed from nothing less than “a spiritual commitment … to make the San Francisco community a better place for all people even if it came at a great personal sacrifice to him.” A letter of support was even written by Wendy MacNaughton, an illustrator, journalist and author of Meanwhile in San Francisco.

Chow had apparently been working on his autobiography prior to being taken down by the FBI.

The motion recounts how Chow, born into “devastating financial conditions” in China, was taken in by the Chinese Triad at the age of seven “and for the next ten years scraped by and supported himself and his family through Triad related activities.” At 16, he was arrested and beaten by Chinese police in custody. Soon after, his family fled to the United States for a better life.

“Chow was recruited by local Chinatown so-called ‘gangs,’” the motion states. “As with many immigrant children with no resources, Chow was exploited by these groups for his desperate need for protection, acceptance, and recognition.” He served multiple prison sentences for various gang-related criminal activities.

But in 2003, when he was serving out a ten-year prison term, Chow “became thoroughly disenchanted with the criminal lifestyle,” his defense attorneys wrote. “His revelation occurred when the façade of the gangster life disintegrated as each and every one of his criminal associates, people who he thought of as ‘brothers,’ turned their back on him and participated in activities which blatantly harmed the community.”

Chow’s girlfriend, Alicia Lo, had volunteered to act as a third-party custodian and post property bonds on her two San Francisco properties in order to facilitate his pretrial release.

In written testimony, she described him as caring and generous, saying she would buy him “second-hand clothes so he looked sharp in public,” only to later discover that he “would at times give these clothes away to addicts on the street so they could look presentable at job interviews.”

Yet in making his determination, the federal magistrate noted that there is “more than clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Chow would pose a danger to the community” if released.

New minimum wage proposal less ambitious, has broader support

Sasha Cuttler And Mary Magee
-
94
New minimum wage proposal less ambitious, has broader support

San Francisco bears the unfortunate distinction of having the fastest-growing income inequality nationwide. At the same time, the city may retain its more progressive status as having the highest nationwide minimum wage — if voters approve a November ballot measure unveiled today by Mayor Ed Lee and 10 members of the Board of Supervisors.

The consensus measure would increase the minimum wage for all San Francisco employees to $15 an hour by 2018. Currently, the city’s lowest-paid workers earn $10.74 per hour under the existing minimum wage ordinance.

The proposed increase, announced at a June 10 press conference held in Mayor Lee’s office, calls for minimum wage workers to earn $12.25 per hour by May Day of next year, followed by paycheck increases amounting to $13 an hour in 2016, $14 an hour in 2017, and $15 an hour in 2018.

Crafted by representatives from labor, business, and the nonprofit sector in conjunction with Mayor Lee and Sup. Jane Kim, this November ballot measure proposal is less ambitious than an earlier minimum wage increase floated by the Campaign for a Fair Economy, although both guarantee workers an eventual $15 an hour.

The earlier proposal, backed by a coalition that included city employee union SEIU Local 1021, the Progressive Worker’s Alliance, San Francisco Rising, and other progressive organizations, sought to increase the minimum wage to $13 an hour by 2015, $14 by 2016, and $15 by 2017.

So at the end of the day, the newly unveiled consensus proposal would leave minimum wage earners with $0.75 less per hour in 2015 and $1 less in 2017 than what the Campaign for a Fair Economy originally called for, but the broader support for this measure might mean brighter prospects for lowest-paid workers in the long run. The consensus proposal also eliminates the idea of an enforcement committee tasked with holding employers to the mandatory wage increases, yet continues to allocate resources for this purpose.

Shaw San Liu of the Campaign for a Fair Economy, who was part of the negotiations for the consensus measure, noted that this piece was especially important: “It is meaningless to raise the minimum wage if they’re not going to enforce it,” she said. The Office of Labor Standards and Enforcement, tasked with upholding the minimum wage, is currently experiencing a backlog due to case volume.

Shaw San Liu speaks about the importance of the proposed wage increase.

Moderates’ strong opposition to the more ambitious wage increase posed the threat of having two competing measures going to voters in November. Now that a single unified measure is headed to the ballot, there may be less of a risk that workers will end up with an inadequate increase or none at all.

The across-the-board increase to $15 an hour makes this a stronger proposal than a similar wage increase moving forward in Seattle, although that city has a lower cost of living than San Francisco, so the wage will stretch a lot farther. San Francisco has a notoriously high cost of living; former Mayor Willie Brown once famously quipped that anyone earning less than $50,000 simply shouldn’t try to live in the city, and rents were much lower then. Under this proposal, minimum wage workers can hope to earn $31,200 before taxes by 2018, with wages continuing up from there in correlation with Consumer Price Index adjustments.

The San Francisco Chamber of Commerce was adamantly opposed to the earlier ballot measure proposal, but is now on board. “We think that with consensus built up around this measure, which residents will be voting on, we’ve reached that compromise,” Wade Rose, co-chair of the Public Policy Committee of the SFCOC, said at the press event.

However, the SFCOC played a minimum role in the negotiations, with the key players being labor leader Mike Casey, Liu of the Progressive Workers Alliance, Sup. Kim and her staff, and Mayor Lee and his staff, with input from a variety of minimum wage earners, employers, and other stakeholders.

Kim called the measure “the most progressive and strongest minimum wage proposal in the country,” and later clarified that unlike a similar proposal in Seattle, this measure guarantees a $15 wage across the board regardless of business size or additional benefits. “There will be no tip credit or health care credit – this will be pure wages that San Francisco workers will be bringing home to their families,” Kim said. “Despite setting a successful precedent in 2003, which set the highest minimum wage in the country then, in the last years in particular we’ve been seeing a widening income gap between our lowest paid workers and our highest paid workers. In times of economic prosperity, no one should be left behind.”

“We’ve heard input from all of the different affected sectors of our community – earners, and people who pay the minimum wage, we’ve heard from nonprofits as well as small businesses and large businesses,” Mayor Lee said at a June 10 press conference. “And today, with the current minimum wage at $10.74, there’s been an across the board agreement that that just doesn’t cut it; that’s not enough.”

Lee emphasized that with the unveiling of the consensus proposal, “there are no two measures. There is one measure,” destined for the November ballot. He added that in the course of negotiations between opposing sides, “there was reality that needed to be checked in on all sides.”

SFMTA launches “Google Bus” pilot program map, promises increased enforcement

Erica Hanna
-
11
SFMTA launches “Google Bus” pilot program map, promises increased enforcement

The Google Bus plan is now rolling forward. Last night [Mon/9] the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency released a map of shuttle stops to be studied in the contentious commuter shuttle pilot program, and proposed new means of cracking down on shuttle scofflaws.

The released map shows a peppering of dots representing what the SFMTA is calling “pilot network zones,” essentialy bus stops to be shared by Muni and commuter shuttles alike. The SFMTA will study those pilot network zones, measure impacts to Muni shuttles, and the zones will soon be marked up with signage denoting them as a commuter shuttle stops. 

The site of the first and many subsequent Google Bus protests, Valencia and 24th street, is included among the proposed stops. Many of those protesters highlighted the lack of enforcement around the shuttle stops highlighted by a glaring set of numbers: Since January, San Francisco issued over 13,000 citations against double-parkers in red zones, but only 45 went to commuter shuttles. The shuttles use of those stops were, at the time (and even now) illegal, protesters said. 

Carli Paine, the head of the commuter shuttle pilot program at SFMTA, told us now there’ll be increased enforcement.

“Implementation will include placards on the vehicles, signage at the zones that are in the pilot network, and additional enforcement,” she confirmed for us, in an email. The SFMTA also launched a special web form for lodging complaints about the commuter shuttles.

SFMTA surveyed tech companies, citizens, and government to decide which stops to study. Per SFMTA:

In February, the SFMTA collected requests from shuttle service providers and resident suggestions on what stops should be included in the pilot through an interactive website and open houses.  We reviewed requests from shuttle service providers and suggestions from residents to develop a pilot network of zones that is a combination of:

Zones requested by shuttle service providers

Zones requested by residents

Alternative zones within a few blocks of requested zone locations

New white zones in locations where demand is high but sharing with Muni would likely disrupt Muni service for inclusion in the pilot network

Zones with Muni service every 10 minutes or less, most zones along Muni’s busiest routes and lines, and flag stops (stops that are in the street, away from the curb) on the bicycle network were not included in the proposed pilot network of shared bus zones.

The website that SFMTA referred to crowdsourced feedback from San Franciscans, an interactive map where anyone could place pinpoints proposing shuttle stops. Some jokers pinned proposed shuttle stops in the San Francisco Bay and the ocean. Some had reasoned arguments against corporate shuttles. “There should be a designed [sic] bus stop for the big corporate buses and not public bus stops,” read one post. Others were more flip, like the push-pin on Alcatraz, reading “Make ’em swim!” 

 

SFMTA’s Proposed Commuter Shuttle Network 140609 by Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez

 

 

Above we’ve embedded the commuter shuttle map. 

Interestingly, the hotly contested tax that the SFMTA planned to levy against commuter shuttle companies of $1 per stop, per day may be revised. 

“The permit and use fee will be updated based on actual project costs and actual stop events proposed as part of the permitting process,” the SFMTA stated in an email announcement of the new commuter shuttle project map. “The SFMTA Board will hold a public hearing to adopt the adjusted fee, if different from earlier calculations.”

The Guardian obtained a cost breakdown of the shuttle program from the SFMTA, and the numbers do seem to be fairly rough.

 

Cost Breakdown of SFMTA “Google Bus” commuter shuttle pilot program by Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez

 

 

Above we’ve embedded the cost estimate of the commuter shuttle program, obtained through a public records request under the Sunshine Ordinance.

The shuttle pilot program proposed to fund 312 hours of work for transit planners and engineers each, annually. Notably, 4,000 hours are slated for a parking control officer, and 520 for a senior parking control officer annually. The two officers together are estimated to cost $300,000 annually. Double that estimate, as the project is slated to run two years. 

The SFMTA board will meet to approve any new fees for the program during its July 15 meeting. There will also be a public SFMTA engineering meeting on June 20 (10am, City Hall, Room 416) to discuss changes to the commuter shuttle pilot program.

The map also denotes sidewalk white zones for shuttle use for commuter hours, between 6-10am and 4-8pm. 

The shuttle pilot program will officially begin August 1. It’s still an open question what effect, if any, the current lawsuit concerning environmental review of the shuttle stops will have on the program.

Campos wins veto-proof support for closing the city healthcare coverage loophole UPDATED

Sasha Cuttler
-
20
Campos wins veto-proof support for closing the city healthcare coverage loophole UPDATED

Sup. David Campos appears to have finally succeeded in his years-long quest to prevent San Francisco employers from pocketing money the city requires them to use for employee health care costs after winning over two key supervisors to secure a veto-proof majority at today’s [Tues/10] Board of Supervisors meeting.

His reform legislation on today’s agenda will be amended by Campos, he told us, to win the support of Sups. Mark Farrell and London Breed. The changes phase out the loophole over three years, making 60 percent of the money in employee health savings accounts off limits to employers next year, 80 percent the following year, and not letting employers reclaim any of these funds by 2017.

“Even if we don’t get to 100 percent right away, once you get past 50 percent it’s a done deal, so I feel good about it,” Campos told us, explaining that even the phased-in legislation will immediately discourage employers from using health savings accounts and to instead put that money toward private insurance or city-run programs such as Healthy San Francisco.

The veto-proof majority is key given that Mayor Ed Lee vetoed similar legislation in 2011, later signing a watered down compromise measure by Board of Supervisors President David Chiu that required employers to maintain the funds for two years before taking them back.

Campos said that reform clearly didn’t work, with that total funding left over in the health savings accounts rising from about $60 million two years ago to about $90 million now. That outcome was predicted by Campos at the time, noting that employers had a disincentive to encourage employees to tap the funds.

“It didn’t work. The numbers showed the money still wasn’t being spent, which is what we said would happen,” Campos told us.

Exacerbating the problem was the fact that the federal Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) placed new restrictions on how health savings accounts may be used, fro example banning their use on insurance premiums. Health savings accounts are widely considered far inferior to private insurance at providing quality healthcare, but federal law (ERISA) precluded the city from banning their use by employers to satisfy the city’s health coverage requirement.

Supervisors who haven’t yet committed to supporting Campos’ legislation are Chiu, Scott Wiener, and Katy Tang, but Campos predicted they may sign on now that the measure has a veto-proof majority: “We’re hopeful that with a veto-proof majority, it may be a unanimous vote at the board.”  

UPDATE 6/10: The board unanimously passed the measure on first reading, prompting a sustained standing ovation from the workers and labor advocates who filled the board chambers for the hearing. 

The under-celebrated influence of Guided By Voices

Steven T. Jones
-
0
The under-celebrated influence of Guided By Voices

In a conversation about ’90s rock staples the other day, a friend casually mentioned that he’d never really listened to Guided By Voices, a statement that provoked in me a somewhat surprising level of panic, alongside a strange sense of injustice.

“Here!” I cried, throwing on the starter-friendly greatest hits compilation Human Amusements at Hourly Rates. “Listen!” He listened politely for a few songs.

“They sound like every other lo-fi indie band from the mid-’90s onward,” he said.

“NO,” I said. “Every other lo-fi indie band from the mid-’90s onward sounds like them.”

If people know one thing about GBV, it’s generally that frontman Robert Pollard is one of the most prolific songwriters of his time: Try 23 full-length albums inside 22 years, figuring in a six-year hiatus in the aughts, and not counting the hundreds of songs Pollard has released not under the GBV moniker. If people know a second thing, it’s that the band’s live show is legendary, known for sometimes stretching over three hours (even more impressive considering their propensity for two-minute songs) and for continuous, gleeful onstage drinking.

Other things you should know: Equal parts psych, prog, punk, and British Invasion garage rock, Guided By Voices have influenced a shit-ton of other artists. Their songs are deceptively simple and sing-songy in places and straight-up dark and noisy and uncompromisingly weird in others; often incomprehensible lyrics give way to depths of feeling and wonderfully dreamlike moods that somehow leave you feeling nourished. Pollard’s a bit of a nut, but in a heartfelt way; he’s not putting it on. I love the Pixies and Sonic Youth as much as anyone, but goddamn, now that I’m thinking about it, there is no good reason that GBV doesn’t quite enjoy the same universally accepted recognition as a rock elder from today’s lo-fi younguns. Even White House Press Secretary Jay Carney agrees.

To trace the band’s evolution from early ’80s Dayton bar band up to the present — which finds them about to play The Regency Ballroom tomorrow, Wed/11, in the middle of the fourth year of what was expected to be a one-off reunion that began in 2010, and after releasing their sixth reunion record, Cool Planet, last month (after Pollard announced that the fourth, 2013’s English Little League, was the last) — would take a rather long time. So we won’t do that.

Suffice it to say: Here. Listen.

 

 

Transportation funding faces key test after Mayor Lee flips on VLF increase UPDATED

Sasha Cuttler
-
31
Transportation funding faces key test after Mayor Lee flips on VLF increase UPDATED

Facing a deadline of tomorrow’s [Tues/10] San Francisco Board of Supervisors meeting to introduce measures for the November ballot, advocates for addressing the city’s massive long-term transportation funding gap still hope to introduce an increase in the local vehicle license fee, even though the once-supportive Mayor Ed Lee has gotten cold feet.

While Lee and all 11 of the supervisors support a $500 million general obligation bond that would mostly go toward capital improvements for Muni — a measure almost certain to be approved by its July 22 deadline — the local VLF was originally presented by Lee as a companion measure to fund Muni, street resurfacing, and bike and pedestrian safety improvements.

But when Lee got spooked by a poll in December showing 44 percent voter approval for increasing the VLF and the need to actually do some campaigning for the measure, he withdrew his support and left cycling, streets, and safety all severely underfunded. A report last year by the Mayor’s Transportation Task Force pegged the city’s transportation infrastructure needs at $10.1 billion over 15 years, recommending just $3 billion in new funding to meet that need, including the embattled VLF measure.

“It’s important for us to move forward with the local VLF,” Sup. Scott Wiener, who has taken the lead on ensuring local term transportation funding, told the Guardian. “If this is not the right election, then we have to say which election we will move this forward.”

But so far, Wiener hasn’t gotten a commitment from the Mayor’s Office, with which he says he’s still in active talks. The Mayor’s Office also hasn’t returned Guardian calls on the issue. If Wiener doesn’t get an assurance that the VLF will go before voters, then he says that he’ll push another fall ballot measure that he introduced May 20, which would increase the city General Fund contribution to Muni as the population increases, retroactive to 10 years ago (thus creating an initial increase of more than $20 million annually).

“It would be in lieu of the VLF, not in addition to it,” Wiener said the rival measure, noting that he prefers the local VLF, a stable and equitable funding source that wouldn’t cut into other city priorities. [UPDATE 6/10: Wiener said he received a commitment from Lee to place the VLF increase on the 2016 ballot, so he is dropping his measure to increase Muni funding as the population increases].

Sen. Mark Leno spent about 10 years winning approval for the authorizing state legislation that authorizes San Franciscans to increase the VLF, enduring two governors’ vetoes along the way before getting Gov. Jerry Brown to sign it into law last year.

Wiener notes that the measure would increase the VLF in San Francisco to 2 percent, restoring it its longtime level before Arnold Schwarzenegger used a VLF reduction as a campaign issue to get elected governor, slashing it to 0.65 percent in 2003.

“That action by Gov. Schwarzenegger has deprived California of about $8 billion per year,” Wiener told us. “This is not some newly minted fee, it restores the VLF to what it was going back to the ‘50s.”

San Francisco Bicycle Coalition Director Leah Shahum said she was disappointed that Lee didn’t follow through on his commitment to fund bike and pedestrian safety improvements through the local VLF, but she said there is wide support on the board for the measure.

“Tomorrow is the big day, but we’re hearing real strong support for the measure,” Shahum told us. “I feel strongly there will be eight supervisors committed to introducing the measure.”

That two-thirds vote threshold is part of the legislation that enabled San Francisco to increase its VLF, but Shahum said she believes there is that level of support on the board for doing the VLF increase this year, which the SFBC would actively campaign for.

“The whole idea was these things would go as a package,” Shahum told us. “This is a huge deal for us. Give the voters a chance to vote for safe and smooth streets.”   

Lee’s abandonment of the VLF comes in the wake of his SFMTA appointees’ repeal of Sunday parking meters, which Lee said was driven by a desire to win over car-driving voters for his transportation measures. Last month on Bike to Work Day, Lee and other city officials also touted the measures as important for bike project, although Shahum said the general obligation bond does little for cyclists, except for an allocation for renovating Market Street. 

“There is not a desigination for bike safety and infrastructure, that was goign to be all in the VLF measure,” Shahum said. 

Wiener cited the long road that Leno traveled to give San Franciscans that opportunity as a reason to move forward with increasing the VLF, a progressive tax that charges more for luxury cars than old beaters used by the working class, but Leno was a bit more circumspect about the situation.

“If it taught me anything, it’s patience,” Leno told us about the long road to let San Francisco authorize a higher VLF. “As with anything in the world, timing is everything.”

Leno said support from labor, the business community, and all of City Hall’s top leaders are all necessary to win voter support for increasing the VLF, so it’s crucial that everyone is enthusiastically on board. “I think we may only have one shot, so when we go to the ballot, we need to have our coalition intact.”

Without commenting on the wisdom of delaying the vote this year, Leno said that if that happens, it’s crucial to get everyone to commit to passing it in 2016, a position Wiener also supports.

“There are times when we need to have a long view,” Leno told us. “But one way or the other, we have to get serious about identifying dedicated revenue to invest in Muni or we will all pay a serious price.”

 

To participate in a public forum on this and related matters, please join us this Thursday evening for “Bikes, Buses, & Budgets: How to create the transportation system San Franciscans needs.” This Bay Guardian community forum, from 6-8pm at the LGBT Center (1800 Market), will feature Wiener; SFBC community organizer Chema Hernandez Gil; Jason Henderson, an urban geography professor at SFSU who writes the Guardian’s monthly Street Fight column; and others, moderated by yours truly. It’ll be fun, informative, and one lucky attendee will leave with a A2B electric bike as part of a free raffle at this free event.    

The Pogues’ James Fearnley on Shane MacGowan, the difference time can make, and the diary that became his new memoir

Steven T. Jones
-
0
The Pogues’ James Fearnley on Shane MacGowan, the difference time can make, and the diary that became his new memoir

Mixing a high proof distillation from the sounds of traditional Irish folk music with the piss and vinegar attitude and energy of punk rock, The Pogues burst upon the music scene in London in 1984 with Red Roses For Me, and further established themselves with the albums that followed, such as Rum, Sodomy and the Lash (1985), and what many consider to be their masterpiece, If I Should Fall From Grace With God (1988).

The band’s output showcased their stellar musicianship and the masterful songwriting talents of singer Shane MacGowan, whose reputation for wild antics and marathon bouts of drinking took on mythic proportions, and eventually lead to a decade-long estrangement within the band.

The epic rise and fall of the “Boys From The County Hell” has finally been properly chronicled, and by perhaps the best person to do so — Pogues accordion player James Fearnley himself.

Drawing on years’ worth of personal diaries, Fearnley’s book, Here Comes Everybody: The Story of The Pogues (Chicago Review Press) was released last month in the United States, and paints a thorough and deeply rich picture of what life was like as a member of one of most raucous — and supremely talented — bands in rock history.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrBLqp-s__o

“I kept a diary because I really enjoyed looking at things and experiencing things and knowing that later on I was going to put it down in words, so it made me pay attention — I like to pay attention,” says Fearnley.

“Years and years ago somebody said, ‘If somebody is going to write a book about the Pogues, it’s going to be you, James.’ And I heard that a few times, I was always the guy down in the breakfast room in the hotel scribbling away in my notebook, and in tour buses as well.”

The book came about after Fearnley had taken some writing workshops when he moved to Los Angeles, and Shane MacGowan kept appearing as a subject in his work.

“I think there is a sense of understanding that you come to, about the people that you write about and my reactions to them and my feelings with them, particularly about Shane, who is an extremely inspiring person to write about.”

Fearnley says that the many years that had passed since the original break-up of the band provided some helpful distance from the situations, and a new outlook on what took place in their lives.

“It’s useful to approach one’s experiences back then without so much luggage of self-worth, or lack of self-worth, that one had back then, and to have a look at what was actually going on. I think it’s one’s curiosity about things that helps you kind of move through, rather than get stuck in self-judgement or beating yourself up.”

After producing a large amount of material from the writing workshops, a friend had read some of it, and offered to pass it along to an agent; from that point on, the book came along fairly quickly — but as Fearnley points out, it took a long time to get to that place.

“It’s been in the air for quite a while, it came out of this slow, simmering, cooking process, I suppose — it wasn’t like I just said, ‘Oh, this is what I’m going to do now.’”

pogues

Steeped in detail, the different chapters transport readers to varying times in the life of the Pogues; it starts at the end of the story, where the group had to decide that it had come to the point where they had to fire MacGowan.

Fearnley’s descriptions of the moments leading up to the sacking should make fans feel as they were there in the room with them, in this case a tense situation punctuated with minute elements of information that one might not expect, but that provoke an immediate reaction — after building the scene, he adds a simple sentence, “The room smelled like toothpaste.” A detail that might night seem very important, but that lends the reader a sensory experience jumping off from the page.

“If you are going to write something, use all the sense. I scanned around to remember, what my senses were in that room, and that was the one that came up first,” says Fearnley.

Based on just some of the stories included in the book, the fact that the band members all survived the tumultuous 1980s and 90s is nothing short of a miracle — though guitarist Philip Chevron, to whom the memoir is dedicated, passed away last year from cancer.

“We did a couple of shows before Christmas in England last year without Philip there, and knowing that he would never come back, they were very emotional. I’m going to miss him.”

Fans can be assured that The Pogues’ story will live on forever now though, meticulously archived in Fearnley’s fascinating chronicle.

“I always liked Philip Larkin, he said about his writing was that it was an act of preservation — writing to preserve an event or emotion that he had had,” says Fearnley. “I suppose in writing a memoir, that’s an act of preservation in itself, so I felt that was my job, to bring everything to bear on making it sort of live again in a way.”

James Fearnley
June 9, 7:30pm
Moe’s Books
2476 Telegraph, Berk.
(510) 849-2087
www.moesbooks.com

Party Radar: Daybreaker gets you moving – on a Tuesday morning

-
0

Back in 1988, I hung out for a summer in West Berlin. Yep, this was before the wall fell, when West Berlin was a roiling, hyperactive, neon-crazy island in a sea of Communist repression — kind of like the most exclusive nightclub in the world.

One of the things that took my breath away: high school kids and college students went to clubs before school. At least the few I knew would met their friends around 5-6am at the all-night club du jour and dance it out for a while before heading to class. “This is the best place in the world!” I thought at the time.

Also: “Why can’t we have this?” Well, now we kinda do. Welcome to San Francisco, Daybreaker.

OK, OK, it has no alcohol, and you still have to be 21 to get in. (And it’s $15-$20, so you may have to save up that pocket change.)

HOWEVER, this 8am-10am Tue/10 morning dance party at the beautiful Audio Discotech — hello, morning skylight! — looks incredibly promising for what organizers Radha, Brimer, Steph, and Mustafa call “a little mischief.” You get music from cutie pie DJ Bradley P. Plus it sounds like a damn fun morning workout! So much better than a gym.

See you there, bright and bleary. Press release:

Over a late-night falafel in Williamsburg a few months back, we mused over an idea. An idea about dancing before the day broke with people we love. About cultivating a community that values camaraderie, self-expression, wellness, immediacy… and mischief. About going to work with our brows slightly dewed from moving our bodies with reckless abandon, sans alcohol but with so much spirit, surrounded by the most amazing people we know.

DAYBREAKER is a morning dance party and community of good-hearted people, and on Tues, June 10th, DAYBREAKER SF will commence.
No more dreary treadmills. No more lackluster mornings. No more dancing only when the sun is down.
With your ticket, you get:
+ good beats by DJ Bradley P
+ fresh Philz coffee
+ delicious smoothies
+ live musicians & performers
+ occasional costumes
+ (no booze)
Be a part of something new and different. Daybreaker will set the tone for your day unlike anything has before 🙂
// Tuesday, June 10th @ Audio — 316 11th St. (btw Folsom and Harrison)
// Dance Party: 8 am – 10 am

Norman Solomon: Obama escalates his war on journalism

-
2

By Norman Solomon

 (Norman Solomon is executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy and co-founder of RootsAction.org. His books include “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death.” Information about the documentary based on the book is at www.WarMadeEasyTheMovie.org.)

In a memoir published this year, the CIA’s former top legal officer John Rizzo says that on the last day of 2005 a panicky White House tried to figure out how to prevent the distribution of a book by New York Times reporter James Risen. Officials were upset because Risen’s book, State of War, exposed what — in his words — “may have been one of the most reckless operations in the modern history of the CIA.”

The book told of a bungled CIA attempt to set back Iran’s nuclear program in 2000 by supplying the Iranian government with flawed blueprints for nuclear-bomb design. The CIA’s tactic might have actually aided Iranian nuclear development.

When a bootlegged copy of State of War reached the National Security Council, a frantic meeting convened in the Situation Room, according to Rizzo. “As best anyone could tell, the books were printed in bulk and stacked somewhere in warehouses.” The aspiring censors hit a wall. “We arrived at a rueful consensus: game over as far as any realistic possibility to keep the book, and the classified information in it, from getting out.”

But more than eight years later, the Obama White House is seeking a different form of retribution. The people running the current administration don’t want to pulp the book — they want to put its author in jail.

The Obama administration is insisting that Risen name his confidential source — or face imprisonment. Risen says he won’t capitulate.

The Freedom of the Press Foundation calls the government’s effort to force Risen to reveal a source “one of the most significant press freedom cases in decades.”

Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg says: “The pursuit of Risen is a warning to potential sources that journalists cannot promise them confidentiality for disclosing Executive Branch criminality, recklessness, deception, unconstitutional policies or lying us into war. Without protecting confidentiality, investigative journalism required for accountability and democracy will wither and disappear.”

A recent brief from the Obama administration to the nation’s top court “is unflinchingly hostile to the idea of the Supreme Court creating or finding protections for journalists,” Politico reported. The newspaper added that Risen “might be sent to jail or fined if he refuses to identify his sources or testify about other details of his reporting.”

This threat is truly ominous. As Ellsberg puts it, “We would know less than we do now about government abuses, less than we need to know to hold officials accountable and to influence policy democratically.”

So much is at stake: for whistleblowers, freedom of the press and the public’s right to know. For democracy.

That’s why five organizations — RootsAction.org, The Nation, the Center for Media and Democracy / The Progressive, Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) and the Freedom of the Press Foundation — have joined together to start a campaign for protecting the confidentiality of journalists’ sources. So far, in May, about 50,000 people have signed a petition telling President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder to end legal moves against Risen.

Charging that the administration has launched “an assault on freedom of the press,” the petition tells Obama and Holder: “We urge you in the strongest terms to halt all legal action against Mr. Risen and to safeguard the freedom of journalists to maintain the confidentiality of their sources.”

The online petition — “We Support James Risen Because We Support a Free Press” — includes thousands of personal comments from signers. Here’s a sampling of what they had to say:

“Freedom of the press and freedom of speech are the cornerstones of our democracy. Stop trying to restrict them.”  Jim T., Colorado Springs, Colorado

“Protected sources are essential to a real democracy. Without whistleblowers, there is no truth.”  Jo Ellen K., San Francisco, California

“Enough of the government assault on freedom of the press! Whistleblowers are heroes to the American people.”  Paul D., Keaau, Hawaii

“It seems our government is out of control. The premise of deriving power from the people would appear to be a quaint notion to most within the three branches. Instead they now view us as subjects that must bend to their will rather than the other way around.”  Gary J., Liberty Township, Ohio

“‘Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations.’ — George Orwell”  Todd J., Oxford, Michigan

“As a writer, I support freedom of the press around the world as a vital first step toward regaining control of our compromised democracies.”  Patricia R., Whitehorse, YT, Canada

“You promised an open and transparent administration. Please keep that promise.”  Willard S., Cary, North Carolina

“Without a free press, we really have nothing.”  Robin H., Weehawken, New Jersey

“The Obama administration’s attack on press freedom is an issue of grave concern. Why are we spending billions of dollars going after supposed ‘terrorists’ when the greatest threat to democracy resides right here in Washington, DC.”  Karen D., Detroit, Michigan

“Damn you, Obama! You become more like Nixon daily!”  Leonard H., Manchester, Michigan

“Congratulations, Mr. Risen!”  Marian C., Hollister, California

“The U.S. is becoming an increasingly frightening place to live, more than a little like a police state. President Obama, you have been a huge disappointment. I expected better from you.”  Barbara R., Newport, Rhode Island

“Come on, President Obama… you’re a Constitutional scholar. You know better than this. Knock it off.”  James S., Burbank, California

“There can be no true freedom of the press unless the confidentiality of sources is protected. Without this, no leads, informants or whistleblowers will be motivated to come forward. Reporters should not be imprisoned for doing their job.”  Chris R., North Canton, Ohio

“You took an oath to ‘preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,’ freedom of the press!”  Diane S., San Jose, California

“Whatever became of the progressive Obama and the change you promised? Evidently it was a load of campaign bull puckey, making you just another politician who says whatever it takes to get elected. In other words, you and your administration are a complete sham. As for your constitutional scholarship, it would appear to be in the service of undermining the Constitution a la Bush and Cheney.”  Barry E., Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvani

“Without a free press, our republic is paper-mache. Remember John Peter Zenger! We must not shoot the messenger — we must raise the bar for conduct and probity!”  Lance K., Chelsea, Massachusetts

“A free press is the only counterbalance to crony capitalism, corrupt legislators, and a pitifully partisan Supreme Court, that continues to destroy our Constitutional protections.”  Dion B., Cathedral City, California

“I implore you to RESPECT THE FIRST AMENDMENT.”  Glen A., Lacey, Washington

“Did you not learn in grade school that freedom of the press is essential to a free country?”  Joanne D., Colorado Springs, Colorado

“We’ve been down this road before. What amazes me is that we condemn other countries for stifling freedom of the press, then turn around and do the same thing to advance our own purposes. Are we proponents of democracy and a free press or not?”  William M., Whittier, California

“Journalism is a vital component of a democracy, and it is a core function protected by the freedom of expression enshrined in both international and domestic law. You must stop harassing and persecuting journalists and their sources who are providing a vital public service in prying open the activities of governments that are illegitimately concealed from the public. If the public is not informed of state actions executed in their name, they cannot evaluate and render consent to those actions through the vote. This secrecy therefore subverts democracy, and you must stop using police powers to destroy the whistleblowers who enable government accountability to the public.”  Jim S., Gatlinburg, Tennessee

“I support freedom of the press, not the attorney general’s vicious abuse of his position!”  Bettemae J., Albuquerque, New Mexico

“Compelling reporters to reveal their sources just means that sources will stop talking to reporters. That will cripple the free press. If you think that’s not important, please resign immediately.”  Stephen P., Gresham, Oregon

“As an old woman who remembers the lies of Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush (especially) and the current administration, I do not trust my own government to tell me the truth anymore.  Freedom of the press is my only chance [to] find out what the truth is. Protect reporters’ sources!”  Monica O., Lomita, California

“Without freedom of the press, we might as well kiss democracy goodbye!”  Melvin M., Vashon, Washington

“I am ashamed of this administration, its policies and its Department of Justice — what a travesty of criminal turpitude and mass media complicity. ‘Transparency’ — hah! Cheap campaign rhetoric.”  Mitch L., Los Altos Hills, California

“Walk the walk or stop talking about democracy. Free press is the basis of our constitution.”  Carl D., Manassas, Virginia

“No free press, no democracy!”  James F., Moab, Utah

“If you force the media to reveal its sources, no one will ever come forth with a news story or lead again. I’m sure this is precisely what the politicians and big business want. Then there’d be absolutely no accountability. We need an effective shield law rather than persecuting journalists and news organizations for reporting the news.”  Jim S., Ladera Ranch, California

“Freedom of the Press is the hallmark of a free society. Your administration has done everything in its power to subvert Freedom of the Press by jailing whistleblowers and reporters who uncover wrong doing. This must stop!”  Ed A., Queens, New York

“We have very few real journalists left. Let’s not jail them!”  Karen H., West Grove, Pennsylvania

“As the press goes, so goes citizens’ rights.”  Kathy F., West Bend, Wisconsin

“I have been shocked at how this administration has treated the American people’s right to know, prosecuting reporters, whistleblowers, and others who have had the temerity to cast light into the dark corners of our government. You bring the whole concept of democracy into disrepute and set a bad example for the rest of the world.”  Marjorie P., Montpelier, Vermont

“We need our investigative reporters more now than ever in history. Keep our press free.”  Joan R., Novato, California

“Investigative reporting is becoming too rare in the U.S., and compelling J. Risen to reveal his sources will only make such reporting even rarer. Is this your deliberate intent?”  Elaine L., Elk Grove, California

“I am responding in support of James Risen. Freedom of the press is one of the cornerstones of our democracy and should never be trampled on by government.”  Lois D., San Jacinto, California

“Freedom of the press is more important than some stinking government attempt to find out how bad shenanigans made it into the press. Quit this crap about trying to make a reporter reveal his or her sources. We need good reporting a lot more than lousy stinking politicians trying to shut up the truth.”  Ralph M., Bakerstown, Pennsylvania

“Without a free press tyranny will ensue.”  Bob P., Holland, Pennsylvania

“I thought Mr. Obama was supposed to be a Constitutional lawyer and swore to uphold it. I thought the Attorney General was supposed to also protect the Constitution. It seems you both have abandoned those duties. Prove you hold the Constitution as the authority from which you derive your own and cease this persecution of a reporter who epitomizes one of the crucial things the Constitution stands for — a truly free press.”  Michael S., Tukwila, Washington

“I’ve seen mud more transparent than the Obama admin.”  Paul H., Carlton, Oregon

“Wow, this coming from the Obama administration who supposedly is for open govt. Isn’t it a police state when the govt cracks down on reporters for telling the truth? James Risen is a hero who will go to jail before revealing his source and the fact that you want to throw him in jail is the real crime here.”  Gayle J., Seattle, Washington

“Shocking.”  Peggy K., Soldiers Grove, Wisconsin

“You have way overstepped your authority. I consider myself a moderate, but your aggressive pursuit of journalists and whistleblowers strikes fear in my heart. Your use of intimidation to weaken the press is contributing to the dismantling of our democracy.”  Marcia B., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

“Quit trying to silence journalists! This is a Vladimir Putin approach to government. Hope and Change? Get Real!”  Rich W., Grass Valley, California

“Stop destroying our heroes, the courageous whistleblowers and journalists, including Risen and others who should be thanked, not prosecuted! You know damn well that the People want these people honored!”  Nancy G., Palm Desert, California

“Please recognize the need for a journalist to be free of coercion to reveal confidential sources. Bravo to James Risen for having the courage to resist this onerous government intimidation.”  Thomas S., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

“We are already seeing freedom of the press undermined by consolidation of media ownership. The founding fathers believed that we could only keep this republic if we have free press and an informed public. Stop the suppression of information. Free access to information is not an optional ingredient.”  Janelle J., Buffalo, Missouri

“Stop persecuting journalists and whistleblowers. Information is the lifeblood of a democracy.”  William C., Sherman Oaks, California

“Our government has become big brother. Journalists must not be forced to name their sources if we are to know the truth.”  Carolyn S., Los Angeles, California

“A free press is gone if confidential sources are revealed.”  Vincent H., Rutledge, Tennessee

“Frankly, Mr. President, I’m surprised at you, and I have to say, disappointed. This seems like something that happens in totalitarian countries.”  Karen B., Felton, California

“Freedom of the press is already under siege because big business controls so much of the message. The Obama administration must respect James Risen’s right to withhold his source.”  Patricia B., Marco Island, Florida

“Whistleblowers are vital to keeping our democracy from turning into a police state. And a free press is vital to keeping us informed. Drop this case, and uphold the principles of our Constitution.”  Cynthia D., E. Boston, MA

“The press should be free to do its job! How about some of that ‘most transparent administration’ stuff. If an administration has nothing to hide it has nothing to fear.”  Mike H., Terre Haute, Indiana

“James Risen is an investigative reporter of high repute who should not be subjected to state harassment and punishment for upholding his pledge of confidentiality to his sources. These encroachments on our Fourth Estate’s watchdog function as a check on the abuse of power must not stand.”  Barbara K., Santa Fe, New Mexico

“You both have to stop talking out of both sides of your mouth, i.e. lying. We are fighting for freedom of the press. Stop being enemies to us people.”  Judith N., North Bonneville, Washington

“Please don’t trash the Bill of Rights. Protect the freedom and independence of the press. Drop the case against James Risen.”  Andrew M., Lower Gwynedd, Pennsylvania

“Daniel Ellsberg was right. James Risen is right.”  Leonore J., Toledo, Ohio

“When the light of free press is no more, darkness prevails and evildoers flourish. I know this is what this corrupt government wants but over our dead bodies.”  Felix C., San Antonio, Texas

“What Mr. Risen did in this instance, was not criminal. Rather it was EXACTLY what a free press should do, without fear of reprisal. Stop the strong arm tactics.”  John S., Trumbull, Connecticut

“The investigative work of journalists sheds light on the world and what is happening. The increasing punishment of journalists is pushing our world and news into a scary age of non-information. Safeguard the confidentiality of journalists and their sources.”  Christin B., Barnegat Light, New Jersey

“Stop persecuting journalists and truth tellers.”  Phyllis B., Desert Hot Springs, California

Norman Solomon is executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy and co-founder of RootsAction.org. His books include “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death.” Information about the documentary based on the book is at www.WarMadeEasyTheMovie.org.

(The Bruce blog is written and edited by Bruce B. Brugmann, editor at large of the San Francisco Bay Guardian. He is the former co-founder and co-publisher with his wife Jean Dibble, 1966-2012.)

James Risen is printing the news and raising hell for a damn good cause in the best jounalistic tradition. He needs our support. B3

Tune in to SFBG’s Alternative Ink, sickout edition! LISTEN NOW

Erica Hanna
-
0
Tune in to SFBG’s Alternative Ink, sickout edition! LISTEN NOW

Spend your Sunday night with the dedicated staff here at the Bay Guardian, for two hours of local music and lively, information talk during our bi-weekly Alternative Ink radio show from 6-8pm Sunday, June 8, on BFF.fm. UPDATE: Listen to the show here. 

This week will be our sickout labor edition, where we talk Muni and the Bay Area labor movement. We’ll probably toast a few brews to Harry Bridges while we’re at it. 

Music Editor Emma Silvers will be laying down the tracks and checking our levels, so to speak, while News Editor Rebecca Bowe and Staff Writer Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez provide the inside scoops.

We’ll also be talking about the newest developments with Ryan Chamberlain, who allegedly posessed explosives, the brewing battle between Uber and SFO, as well as the big fight over City College of San Francisco. And whatever else springs to mind. So tune in or check back later to this post to listen to the audio link. 

Middle fingers to the sky, Lady Gaga takes San Jose for an artRAVEy ride

Steven T. Jones
-
18
Middle fingers to the sky, Lady Gaga takes San Jose for an artRAVEy ride

There are a lot of critiques that I can make about Lady Gaga’s Tuesday night performance in San Jose — the sports arena acoustics, the horrifically boring opening acts, the focus on her new and less popular album Artpop, $80 sweatshirts, the fact that she performed some of her most popular tunes in truncated versions and neglected to play “LoveGame” altogether — but the fact is, none of these shortcomings made a dent in the incredible energy and impassioned performance that Gaga dished out. The show was fucking incredible.

Lady Gaga doesn’t do concerts. She does productions. With a full band, an elaborate set, a dozen or so backup dancers and as many costume changes, her artRAVE tour is a feast for the eyes and ears alike. The set, bulbous, white, and otherworldly, looked straight out of Tattooine and the dancers’ eye-catching array of outfits reflected this extra-terrestrial theme. Part of artRAVE’s spectacle is simply witnessing Gaga’s amazing ability to dance in five-inch pumps and a leotard with shiny black tentacles sticking out in all directions. These theatrics, however, are in no way a crutch or a form of compensation. Lady Gaga’s talent is stunning.

From the moment that she rose out of the stage floor in angel wings and a rhinestone bodice, it was impossible to tear your eyes from Lady Gaga. Amagnetic presence, impressive dancer, and truly powerful singer, it’s easy to see why she’s made such a lasting impression on pop culture. Mixing her set with dance anthems and ballads, Gaga was able to show off her versatility as a singer; her voice is unbelievable — its clarity and power are not adequately represented by her highly-processed recorded material. Live, it soars between roaring rock growls and deep, rich vibrato, all in perfect pitch.

Though the surface of Gaga’s persona is all rhinestones and superstardom, the show was peppered with heartfelt moments and breaks from the highly organized and choreographed show. Some of her fortune cookie-wisdom lines (“Welcome to a place where we judge no one tonight. We criticize no one. We hate no one.”) are clearly rehearsed, but also clearly strike a chord with her fans, who roared appreciatively with every mic break. In the best moment of the show, Gaga pulled two fans out of the audience to sit on the piano bench with her as she sang an impassioned ballad version of “Born this Way,” as each of the girls she pulled up sang along, weeping openly.

Lady Gaga embraces and uses her status as a queer icon to spread a gospel of love and acceptance that actuallly feels incredibly urgent and genuine, and clearly impacts her fans deeply. At one point between songs, she paused to read aloud a letter that a fan had thrown on stage. In a deeply emotional note, the fan credited “Born This Way” for getting him through high school and allowing him to survive being bullied for his sexuality.

In one of her most impassioned moments, pointing out how many people had come out for her show despite warnings early in her career that she was too queer or warnings from her label that Artpop (which was indeed a flop compared with her previous albums) was too artsy, Gaga roared, “just because we’re gay or like art doesn’t mean we’re fucking invisible, ok?” with both middle fingers to the sky.

In addition to her dedication to supporting her LGBT fans, I found myself extremely inspired by Lady Gaga’s unapologetic sex-positivity and her disregard for gender roles. Her dancers wore unisex outfits that drew heavily from the gender-bending Club Kids of the early ‘90s, and Gaga herself sang openly about masturbating and even deconstructed her own typically flawless image by doing her last costume change onstage, topless and wigless, with a crew of people to help her undress and redress into a truly awesome Derelicte-Harijuku-raver oufit. Before she dirobed, Gaga joked, “Just in case we didn’t make any of you uncomfortable tonight, we’re about to.”

While the production of artRAVE is an airtight spectacle of choreography and stunning visuals, it’s the candid moments that make Lady Gaga’s stage show something special. Underneath the glitter, tentacles, and rainbow dreadlocks, there is something very real and emotionally raw.

Her messages of equality and universality are both genuine and revolutionary in an artist as mainstream and financially successful as she is. Artpop may not have been a huge success, and the Haus of Gaga certainly doesn’t hold the same untouchable status as it did in 2010, but Lady Gaga’s refusal to compromise and willingness to stay strange are truly inspirational.

New historical hipster photos showcase big-wheeled bikes from San Francisco to Oakland circa 1880

Erica Hanna
-
0

Hipsters and bikes are as close as Instagram posts of five dollar cups of organic, free trade, Japanese drip coffee. Historical photos recently posted to the California Historical Society’s Flickr page show cycling clubs of the late 19th-century riding around the Bay Area. Yes this includes Oakland, more than a century before Oakland was cool (just kidding, Oakland was always cool).

The photos show the famous (and very dangerous) bikes known as “High Wheelers,” “Penny Farthings,” and “Bone Shakers,” at the height of early bike craze. These are the bikes with the tall leading wheel and a tiny rear wheel. Since these bikes were limited to direct-drives, the bigger leading wheels meant the rider could fly faster.

But falling off an old-timey five foot bike led to quite the kerfuffle (especially since it wasn’t customary to wear helmets). “Safety bicycles” became the norm, the missing link between Penny Farthings and modern bicycles. Safety bicycles had gears, a technological innovation replacing the need of the five foot wheel to achieve respectable speeds.

Also included in the gallery are scans of pages of cycling catalogs, showcasing attire every respectable cyclist from the 1880s could need — include a four dollar “extra-heavy jacket” and a “extra heavy stockings.” (Because riding atop a five foot bike with no brakes isn’t quite dangerous enough, you should also wear trendy, movement restricting, heavy wool apparel while doing it!)

If anything, these beautiful and historic pictures show that everything old is new and ironic today. That silly and incoherent trends have their time in the limelight but ultimately die off. Except for mustaches. Mustaches are awesome.

Thanks to Slate for the original find.

bikes 1

Undated photograph showing a high wheel bicyclist at Lake Merritt, Oakland, California.

bikes 2

Tights and men on bikes are a historical match. Undated.

bikes 3

O.G. Mission cyclists. Photo shot by George R. Butler on June 1, 1890. Taken at 21st and Capp streets, looking toward Mission Street.

bike 4

A group of gentleman after a long ride from Oakland to Mission San Jose.

bike 5

The gentlemen of the San Francisco Bicycle club on San Leandro Road near Milpitas. Note the abundant mustaches (and lack of helmets).

bike 6

Page 55 from the J. J. Pfister Knitting Co., San Francisco. Dated 1882.

bike pamphlet

Find the full photo gallery here.

Chevron refinery expansion permitted before environmental review, lawsuit charges

Sasha Cuttler And Mary Magee
-
14
Chevron refinery expansion permitted before environmental review, lawsuit charges

Communities for a Better Environment, known for its watchdog efforts around Chevron’s Richmond oil refinery, has filed a lawsuit against the Bay Area Air Quality Management District for authorizing a permit to Chevron for a refinery construction project that’s still undergoing environmental review.

The project, known as a “modernization” in Chevron lingo, would essentially make it easier for the oil giant to process lower-quality crude, an industrial practice that CBE contends could significantly increase greenhouse-gas emissions.

CBE’s lawsuit charges that the Air District granted an “authority to construct” permit, which also authorizes operation, despite the fact that a state-mandated environmental review process is far from complete, with a draft review being released just this past March. “The authority to construct should be issued after the [environmental impact review],” CBE attorney explained Roger Lin explained in an interview.

The permit was originally granted in 2008, Lin explained, but it was based on an earlier environmental review that was later thrown out in court, because it failed to properly calculate the resulting air quality impacts. Since then, stricter greenhouse-gas regulations were passed, and Chevron was discovered to be emitting more harmful particulate matter into the air than it claimed to be. Meanwhile, a new environmental review process got underway.

Nevertheless, the “authority to construct” permit was renewed in 2012. “This permit was approved the same month that the Chevron Refinery blew up,” igniting a fire that could be seen for miles, noted CBE spokesperson Steven Low.

What’s more is that the draft environmental review proposes to mitigate new greenhouse gas emissions that would be released by the refining process “through cap-and-trade,” noted Lin. “For us, it’s not true mitigation.”

When the Bay Guardian phoned the Air District for comment, Public Information Officer Ralph Borrman told us there wasn’t much he could say on the matter. “Since it’s a lawsuit,” he said, “We’re just not able to comment on current or existing information.”

 

Get some: ‘This Is What I Want’ fest continues through June 21

Sue Vaughan
-
0
Get some: ‘This Is What I Want’ fest continues through June 21

This Is What I Want — the Bay Area’s fifth annual performance festival devoted to performing and investigating desire — seems to want it all this year, with no less than three weeks of far-flung programming. It all started last Sunday with TIWIW’s first-ever film festival, Left Eye/Right Eye, an evening of short subjects curated by San Francisco and Kansas artist Peter Max Lawrence. It continues this weekend with a performance installation and party at the Dollhouse (CounterPULSE’s new space at 80 Turk) for female-identified audience members (a category TIWIW organizers say they’re prepared to interpret liberally), followed by performances through the weekend for the all and sundry.

The impressive Dollhouse lineup of artists includes Mara Poliak and Maryanna Lachman (of the SALTA collective), Elizabeth Cooper, Minna Harri, Ronja Ver, Pearl Marill, Kat Yoas, Montreal’s VK Preston, and SF-based arts collective the Lost Season.

There are also workshops, symposia, and fringe events throughout the festival — including (for anyone in Bristol, England, this month) My Favorite Auntie by Bristol-based performance artist Tom Marshman. A bit closer to home is a community discussion and video-share investigating the relation between feminism and dance, hosted by Oakland’s SALTA collective at the Underground Yoga Parlour for Self Knowledge & Social Justice.

Find information on all TIWIW events here!

1...131415...597Page 14 of 597

48hills.org is the official publication of the non-profit San Francisco Progressive Media Center.
Contact us: info@48hills.org