City Hall Archives — Page 4 of 63 — San Francisco Bay Guardian Archive 1966

The politics behind today’s dueling Airbnb rallies

Sasha Cuttler

-

April 29, 2014

The politics behind today’s dueling Airbnb rallies

Today’s dueling rallies at City Hall on whether to fully ban or fully allow the short-term rentals facilitated by Airbnb and other companies — representing extreme positions on either side of the compromise legislation proposed by Sup. David Chiu — seem to have as much to do with politics as policy.

With thousands of San Francisco apartments converted to rooms for tourists by a company that has flagrantly flouted city laws and a ruling that it should have been collecting and paying the city’s transient occupany tax, Airbnb and its ilk create problems the city must finally address. And after being the only local journalist regularly highlighting this issue for the last two years, it’s good to see people finally paying attention.

But this challenging policy and political issue — how does San Francisco put the Airbnb genie back in the bottle with effective and enforceable limits? — has quickly turned into a circus driven by self-serving stances, big egos, unrealistic grandstanding, half-baked solutions, and hidden political agendas, as we’ve learned by talking to some of the players involved.

So let me walk you through this story from the beginning, including new revelations on the behind-the-scenes machinations in recent weeks, which may have as much to do with Chiu’s race against David Campos for the Assembly District 17 as it does with Airbnb, even though Campos doesn’t appear to have had anything to do with it.

Two years, when I wrote a Guardian cover story entitled “The problem with the sharing economy,” which included information about how most Airbnb hosts were violating city laws against short-term rentals, most of the concerns about Airbnb focused on how it wasn’t paying the city’s transient occupany tax, although Ted Gullicksen and the San Francisco Tenants Union also raised the issue of landlords using the service to remove apartments from the market.

After the Tax Collectors Office ruled that Airbnb and its ilk must collect and pay the TOT, the issue died down until a year later when I discovered Airbnb was simply ignoring the ruling and an annual tax obligation of about $2 million. Around that same time, Chiu started working on legislation to legalize and regulate short-term rentals, but it dragged on and on for more than a year — during which time complaints to the city increased.

But the Mayor’s Office continued to ignore the issue, at least partially because Mayor Ed Lee shared a political benefactor with the company in venture capitalist Ron Conway, and city departments under Lee’s control issued few notices of violation against short-term rentals.

“The enforcement has been lax because there are political forces in Room 200 that do not want that law enforced,” Chiu predecessor Aaron Peskin said at this morning’s rally against the legislation and for stronger city enforcement.

Meanwhile, the City Attorney’s Office was preparing to file lawsuits against a couple of the most egregious short-term landlords and Airbnb began to clean up some of it intransigence, included finally agreeing to pay its taxes starting this summer, so Chiu decided to move quickly to introduce the regulatory legislation to capture the media moment.

“He dusted off a half-finished draft from the last meeting,” was how Gullicksen, who had been involved with crafting the legislation from the beginning, put it to us today.

But Gullicksen is even more critical of this week’s response to legislation that he largely supports, calling for just some minor cleanups. Two weeks ago, during a meeting of the San Francisco Anti-Displacement Coalition, longtime progressive housing activist Calvin Welch suddenly announced that he had crafted competing legislation aimed for the November ballot.

“Calvin said he’d be doing this ballot measure, which is the first that any of us had heard about it,” Gullicksen told us, noting that Welch has resisted working with tenant advocates to cure what Gullicksen said are some extremely problematic aspects of his proposed ballot measure.

Among its problems is it would create a publicly available list of tenants who register to do short-term rentals, which landlords would use to evict such tenants (“He doesn’t really want to protect tenants, he just wants to ban short-term rentals,” Gullicksen said); and with encouraging would-be hosts to rezone their properties commercial or seek a conditional use permit, which could end up diminishing the affordable housing supply.

“The problem with that is even if Planning [Department] gives conditional use approval, its still violates the apartment conversion law,” Gullicksen told us, noting how they violate both housing and planning codes. “The conversion is already illegal twice, and we don’t need to make it illegal again, we just need enforcement.”

Welch hasn’t returned a Guardian call seeking a response to such points, but at this morning’s rally, he issued a full-throated condemnation of short-term rentals and what he says is Chiu’s broad attempt to legalize them.

“It is a backdoor rezoning of every residential neighborhood in San Francisco, and it undermines years of housing advocacy work in San Francisco,” Welch said, accusing Chiu of an “arrogant disregard of established land use procedure in San Francisco.”

But Chiu aide Judson True disputes the characterization that this is a blanket rezoning on residential properties, noting how it limits rentals to just 90 days per year, creates a vehicle for enforcing a law that has been ignored, and that it reins in a practice that has become widespead.

“The idea that the people here don’t want to participate in the legislative process is disturbing,” True told us at this morning’s rally, where he noted a significant part of the crowd were landlords, including one woman who vocally called for means testing for rent control, which tenant groups have long resisted.

Indeed, the unlikely coalition opposing the Chiu legislation includes Janan New of the San Francisco Apartment Association, who said the short-term rentals “will only exacerbate our housing crisis. The practice is detrimental to our existing rent control law.”

Other speakers at the morning rally included UNITE-HERE head Mike Casey, who said competition from Airbnb is hurting hotels and hotel workers, who are being displaced from the city; AIDS Housing Alliance head Brian Basinger, who noted that vulnerable people are being forced from their homes and “the main driver of that is evictions and a lot of those evictions are being done to facilitate illegal hotel conversions;” and Peskin, who said, “The city has to step up enforcement action.”

A couple hours later, Airbnb hosts and other advocates of short-term rentals held a City Hall rally to call for changes in city law to allow short-term rentals with few restrictions. The event was organized partly by Airbnb itself, which sent a message to its customers saying, “At this time, it’s essential that lawmakers hear from not only San Francisco residents, but also from people all over the world who want safe and affordable options when they visit our great city. I hope you’ll make your voice heard now.”

With strong positions on both sides of the question about how to regulate Airbnb and other short-term rentals, it might seem like an issue tailor-made for Chiu and his propensity for getting compromises approved. But it’s also possible that this issue will end up on the fall ballot no matter what, partly because the Campos-Chiu contest will also be on that ballot and it could highlight any missteps that Chiu makes on the issue.

“I do think the Campos-Chiu race may be playing into this,” Gullicksen said.

In fact, he said that the SFTU has tentatively decided to withhold its endorsement in that race and wait until the fall runoff election to endorse, after this legislative fight plays out, which he said Welch and other Campos supporters may be unhappy about. In the meantime, Gullicksen said he’s focused on creating the strongest legislation possible by strengthening the enforcement provisions in Chiu’s legislation and borrowing parts of Welch’s

“What we really want to do is merge the two, so to speak,” Gullicksen said, although he was more critical of Welch’s version, saying “has been kind of rushed, which is problematic” and the “he doesn’t really want to protect tenants, he just wants to ban short-term rentals.”

Peskin told us he had nothing to do with Welch’s plan to introduce a fall ballot measure. Welch told us that he will pursue getting it placed on the ballot by the supervisors, or that he’ll do it by initiative if necessary, but that he does intend to pursue it if Chiu doesn’t drop his legislation, which True says he won’t do.

“It’s a very real possibility, one might even say a probability,” Welch said when asked whether he intends to take him complaints all the way to the ballot. Asked to characterize the main thrust of what it does, he said, “All the measure does is reinstate existing law.”

Then we end up back where we started a year ago, but with some high-profile elections behind us, with a few lonely voices urging the city to enforce the law and put the Airbnb genie back into the bottle.

[UPDATE: Welch got back to us and took issue with Gullicksen’s characterization that he only learned about the legislation a couple weeks ago and wasn’t given a chance to help shape it: “I have no idea why Ted wants to pretend I’m playing hide the ball on this measure.” Welch also said that other tenants advocates support his effort but that “people do not want to break unity with Ted, it’s that simple.”

Welch also said that he directly asked Chiu whether he would reconsider changing the law to allow short-term rentals on residential properties, which Welch considers the starting point for any possible legislative compromise, and Chiu refused. “Everything else is just window dressing. That is the 900-pound gorilla,” Welch said, emphasizing that any relaxing of short-term rentals restrictions on residential property hurts the city.

As for what he hopes to gain with a measure that would reinforce the ban on short-term rentals, rather than trying to legalize and regulate them, Welch told us, “I want to force Airbnb and the other platforms to come forward with a proposal.”]

Supervisors propose increased funding for youth services

Sasha Cuttler And Mary Magee

-

April 29, 2014

12

Supervisors propose increased funding for youth services

José-Luis Mejia says he’s seen a little bit of everything in his work with transitional-age youth.

A few have died suddenly; others wound up incarcerated. Then there are those who beat the odds by attending top-level universities, opening up their own businesses, or dedicating themselves to public service.

When a mentor interacts with youth aging out of foster care, Mejia said, “you don’t know what that young person is going through.” He himself had the experience of turning his life around as a young person after growing up in a violent household; he credits publically funded programs for at-risk youth with supporting his transformation.

As associate director of Transitional Age Youth San Francisco, Mejia was part of a grassroots coalition that has been working for about two years on crafting a measure that aims to increase funding for youth programs, seeking to give a boost to transitional-age youth services in particular.

The culmination of that effort was today’s introduction at the Board of Supervisors of a suite of new proposals to support youth programs, including a pair of charter amendments that will appear on the November ballot.

The first, sponsored by Sup. John Avalos with Sups. David Campos, Malia Cohen, Jane Kim, Norman Yee, and London Breed as cosponsors, would renew the existing Children’s Fund, renaming it the Children and Youth Fund, and increasing the property-tax set-aside that supports it from three cents per $100 of assessed valuation to five cents.

Throughout the room at a press conference held in City Hall today with members of the Board and a coalition of youth advocates, attendees sported hats with neon stickers that read: “Our kids are worth two cents.”

As part of this measure, funding would be designated for programs set up to aid “disconnected transitional-aged youth,” including homeless or disabled youth, unmarried parents, those who identify as LGBTQ or are aging out of foster care, and other specified categories. The amendment would also create a Commission on Children, Youth, and Their Families, to oversee the Department of Children Youth and their families.

“At the end of this process, I hope to have the support of eleven members of the board,” Avalos noted. However, members of the Board of Supervisors who are sponsoring the legislation have already received from pushback from Mayor Ed Lee, who has reportedly been pressuring supervisors not to support Avalos’ measure. (Lee’s press office did not return a call seeking comment.)

“As we all know, San Francisco is experiencing incredible economic activity,” Avalos said at this afternoon’s press conference. “We’re experiencing growth and speculation that is lifting many boats, but not lifting all boats. And some of the people who are not doing so well are children and families – we’ve seen a decline in our population of families with children, over the past few decades, and it’s time that we … put the resources forward that are going to make it possible for San Francsicans and families to find affordability here.”

A second, closely related charter amendment, carried by Sup. Jane Kim with Yee as a cosponsor, would renew the Public Education Enrichment Fund, eliminate its expiration date, and provide for universal access to early childhood education for kids between three and five years instead of starting at age four.

The Public Education Enrichment Fund and the Children’s Fund, created after being placed on the ballot in 1991, currently set aside over $100 million for children and youth in San Francisco. The funding sources would sunset if action were not taken to extend them.

Theater Listings: April 30 – May 6, 2014

Michael Redmond

-

April 29, 2014

0

Stage listings are compiled by Guardian staff. Performance times may change; call venues to confirm. Reviewers are Robert Avila, Rita Felciano, and Nicole Gluckstern. Submit items for the listings at listings@sfbg.com.

THEATER

OPENING

“Des Voix: Found in Translation Biennial 2014” Various venues, SF; www.desvoixfestival.com. Prices vary. May 1-25. In addition to Communiqué N°10 (listed in Ongoing, below), this festival of contemporary French playwrights and cinema includes four new play translations, a “New Play Nightclub,” film screenings, and more. Presented by Playwrights Foundation, Tides Theatre, Cutting Ball Theater, French International School, and the French Consulate of San Francisco.

“DIVAfest” Exit Theatre, 156 Eddy, SF; www.divafest.info. Prices and showtimes vary. May 1-24. This 13th annual festival celebrates the work of women artists, with performances including the premiere of Rat Girl (adapted from the memoir by rocker Kristin Hersh), Margery Fairchild’s ballet comedy The Pas De Quatre, a reading by acclaimed poet Diane di Prima, and more.

Dracula Shelton Theater, 533 Sutter, SF; sfdracula.blogspot.com. $35. Opens Thu/1, 8pm. Runs Thu-Sat, 8pm. Through May 31. Kellerson Productions presents a new adaptation of the Bram Stoker classic.

Du Barry Was a Lady Eureka Theatre, 215 Jackson, SF; www.42ndstmoon.org. $25-75. Previews Wed/30-Thu/1, 7pm; Fri/2, 8pm. Opens Sat/3, 6pm. Runs Wed-Thu, 7pm; Fri, 8pm; Sat, 6pm (also May 10 and 17, 1pm); Sun, 3pm. Through May 18. 42nd Street Moon presents Cole Porter’s saucy musical comedy, with comedian and writer Bruce Vilanch starring.

Romeo and Juliet Phoenix Theatre, 414 Mason, Ste 601, SF; www.eventbrite.com. $20. Previews Thu/1, 8pm. Opens Fri/2, 8pm. Runs Thu-Sat, 8pm; May 11 and 24, 3pm. Through May 24. Ninjaz of Drama performs Shakespeare’s tragic romance.

Seminar San Francisco Playhouse, 450 Post, Second Flr, SF; www.sfplayhouse.org. $20-100. Previews Wed/30-Fri/2, 8pm. Opens Sat/3, 8pm. Runs Tue-Thu, 7pm; Fri-Sat, 8pm (also Sat, 3pm); May 18 and June 1 and 8, 2pm. Through June 14. San Francisco Playhouse performs Theresa Rebeck’s biting comedy.

Waxing West Brava Theater Center, 2781 24th St, SF; www.brava.org. $20. Opens Thu/1, 8pm. Runs Thu-Sat, 8pm (Sat/3, show at 3pm); Sun, 3pm. Through May 18. Brava! For Women in the Arts and RasaNova Theater present the West Coast premiere of Saviana Stanescu’s tale of a Romanian mail-order bride haunted by her country’s past.

BAY AREA

Nantucket Marsh Berkeley MainStage, 2120 Allston, Berk; www.themarsh.org. $25-100 (all tickets include a picnic dinner). Opens Sat/3, 7pm. Runs Thu and Sat, 7pm. Through June 14. Acclaimed solo perfomer Mark Kenward presents his “haunting yet hilarious” autobiographical show about growing up on Nantucket.

ONGOING

Communiqué N°10 Exit on Taylor, 277 Taylor, SF; www.cuttingball.com. $10-50. Opens Thu/1, 7:30pm. Runs Thu, 7:30; Fri-Sat, 8pm (also Sat, 2pm); Sun, 5pm. Through May 25. Cutting Ball Theater closes its 15th season with the American premiere of Samuel Gallet’s drama inspired by recent racial tensions in France.

E-i-E-i-OY! In Bed with the Farmer’s Daughter NOHSpace, 2840 Mariposa, SF; www.vivienstraus.com. $20. Fri-Sat, 8pm. Through May 10. Vivien Straus performs her autobiographical solo show.

Feisty Old Jew Marsh San Francisco Main Stage, 1062 Valencia, SF; www.themarsh.org. $25-100. Sat, 8pm; Sun, 7pm. Starting May 17, performance schedule changes to Sat-Sun, 5pm. Extended through July 13. Charlie Varon performs his latest solo show, a fictional comedy about “a 20th century man living in a 21st century city.”

Foodies! The Musical Shelton Theater, 533 Sutter, SF; www.foodiesthemusical.com. $32-34. Fri-Sat, 8pm. Open-ended. AWAT Productions presents Morris Bobrow’s musical comedy revue all about food.

Pearls Over Shanghai Hypnodrome Theatre, 575 10th St, SF; www.thrillpeddlers.com. $30-35. Thu-Sat, 8pm. Through May 31. Five years ago, Thrillpeddlers breathed new life into a glitter-dusted piece of Sixties flotsam, beautifully reimagining the Cockettes’ raunchy mock-operetta Pearls Over Shanghai (in collaboration with several surviving members of San Francisco’s storied acid-drag troupe) and running it for a whopping 22 months. Written by Cockette Link Martin as a carefree interpretation of a 1926 Broadway play, the baldly stereotyped Shanghai Gesture, it was the perfectly lurid vehicle for irreverence in all directions. It’s back in this revival, once again helmed by artistic director Russell Blackwood with musical direction by Cockette and local favorite Scrumbly Koldewyn. But despite the frisson of featuring some original-original cast members — including “Sweet Pam” Tent (who with Koldewyn also contributes some new dialogue) and Rumi Missabu (regally reprising the role of Madam Gin Sling) — there’s less fire the second time around as the production straddles the line between carefully slick and appropriately sloppy. Nevertheless, there are some fine musical numbers and moments throughout. Among these, Zelda Koznofsky, Birdie-Bob Watt, and Jesse Cortez consistently hit high notes as the singing Andrews Sisters-like trio of Americans thrown into white slavery; Bonni Suval’s Lottie Wu is a fierce vixen; and Noah Haydon (as the sultry Petrushka) is a class act. Koldewyn’s musical direction and piano accompaniment, meanwhile, provide strong and sure momentum as well as exquisite atmosphere. (Avila)

The Provoked Wife Fort Mason Center, Southside Theater, SF; www.generationtheatre.com. $15-35. Thu/1-Sat/3, 8pm; Sun/4, 3pm. Generation Theatre performs Sir John Vanbrugh’s Restoration comedy.

Shit & Champagne Rebel, 1772 Market, SF; shitandchampagne.eventbrite.com. $25. Fri-Sat, 8pm. Open-ended. D’Arcy Drollinger is Champagne White, bodacious blond innocent with a wicked left hook in this cross-dressing ’70s-style white-sploitation flick, played out live on Rebel’s intimate but action-packed barroom stage. Written by Drollinger and co-directed with Laurie Bushman (with high-flying choreography by John Paolillo, Drollinger, and Matthew Martin), this high-octane camp send-up of a favored formula comes dependably stocked with stock characters and delightfully protracted by a convoluted plot (involving, among other things, a certain street drug that’s triggered an epidemic of poopy pants) — all of it played to the hilt by an excellent cast that includes Martin as Dixie Stampede, an evil corporate dominatrix at the head of some sinister front for world domination called Mal*Wart; Alex Brown as Detective Jack Hammer, rough-hewn cop on the case and ambivalent love interest; Rotimi Agbabiaka as Sergio, gay Puerto Rican impresario and confidante; Steven Lemay as Brandy, high-end calf model and Champagne’s (much) beloved roommate; and Nancy French as Rod, Champagne’s doomed fiancé. Sprawling often literally across two buxom acts, the show maintains admirable consistency: The energy never flags and the brow stays decidedly low. (Avila)

Sleeping Cutie: A Fractured Fairy Tale Musical Thick House, 1695 18th St, SF; sleepingcutiemusical.tix.com. $30-40. Thu-Sat, 8pm; Sun, 2pm. Though May 11. Off a Cliff Productions and PlayGround present Diane Sampson and Doug Katsaros’ world-premiere musical.

The Speakeasy Undisclosed location (ticket buyers receive a text with directions), SF; www.thespeakeasysf.com. $70 (gambling chips, $5-10 extra; after-hours admission, $10). Thu-Sat, 7:40, 7:50, and 8pm admittance times. Extended through May 24. Boxcar Theater’s most ambitious project to date is also one of the more involved and impressively orchestrated theatrical experiences on any Bay Area stage just now. An immersive time-tripping environmental work, The Speakeasy takes place in an “undisclosed location” (in fact, a wonderfully redesigned version of the company’s Hyde Street theater complex) amid a period-specific cocktail lounge, cabaret, and gambling den inhabited by dozens of Prohibition-era characters and scenarios that unfold around an audience ultimately invited to wander around at will. At one level, this is an invitation to pure dress-up social entertainment. But there are artistic aims here too. Intentionally designed (by co-director and creator Nick A. Olivero with co-director Peter Ruocco) as a fractured super-narrative — in which audiences perceive snatches of overheard stories rather than complete arcs, and can follow those of their own choosing — there’s a way the piece becomes specifically and ever more subtly about time itself. This is most pointedly demonstrated in the opening vignettes in the cocktail lounge, where even the ticking of Joe’s Clock Shop (the “cover” storefront for the illicit 1920s den inside) can be heard underscoring conversations (deeply ironic in historical hindsight) about war, loss, and regained hope for the future. For a San Francisco currently gripped by a kind of historical double-recurrence of the roaring Twenties and dire Thirties at once, The Speakeasy is not a bad place to sit and ponder the simulacra of our elusive moment. (Avila)

The Suit ACT’s Geary Theater, 415 Geary, SF; www.act-sf.org. $20-120. Opens Wed/30, 8pm. Runs Wed-Sat, 8pm (also Sat and May 7 and 14, 2pm); Sun, 2pm (May 18, show at 1pm); Tue, 7pm (May 13, show at 8pm). Through May 18. ACT performs Peter Brook, Marie Hélène Estienne, and Franck Krawcyzk’s music-infused drama about betrayal and resentment adapted from the short story by South African author Can Themba.

Tipped & Tipsy Marsh Studio Theater, 1062 Valencia, SF; www.themarsh.org. $20-50. Sat, 5pm; Sun, 7pm. Extended through May 17. Last fall’s San Francisco Fringe Festival began on a high note with Jill Vice’s witty and deft solo, Tipped & Tipsy, and the Best of Fringe winner is now enjoying another round at solo theater outpost the Marsh. Without set or costume changes, Vice (who developed the piece with Dave Dennison and David Ford) brings the querulous regulars of a skid-row bar to life both vividly and with real quasi-Depression-Era charm. She’s a protean physical performer, seamlessly inhabiting the series of oddball outcasts lined up each day at Happy’s before bartender Candy — two names as loaded as the clientele. After some hilarious expert summarizing of the dos and don’ts of bar culture, a story unfolds around a battered former boxer and his avuncular relationship with Candy, who tries to cut him off in light of his clearly deteriorating health. Her stance causes much consternation, and even fear, in his barfly associates, while provoking a dangerous showdown with the bar’s self-aggrandizing sleazeball owner, Rico. With a love of the underdog and strong writing and acting at its core, Tipsy breezes by, leaving a superlative buzz. (Avila)

The World’s Funniest Bubble Show Marsh San Francisco, 1062 Valencia, SF; www.themarsh.org. $8-11. Sun, 11am. Extended through May 25. The popular, kid-friendly show by Louis Pearl (aka “The Amazing Bubble Man”) returns to the Marsh.

BAY AREA

Fences Marin Theatre Company, 397 Miller, Mill Valley; www.marintheatre.org. $37-58. Tue and Thu-Sat, 8pm (also Sat/3 and May 10, 2pm); Wed, 7:30pm; Sun, 2 and 7pm. Through May 11. Marin Theatre Company performs August Wilson’s Pulitzer- and Tony-winning drama, with an all-star cast of Bay Area talent: Carl Lumbly, Steven Anthony Jones, and Margo Hall.

The Letters Harry’s UpStage, Aurora Theatre Company, 2081 Addison, Berk; www.auroratheatre.org. $28-32. Wed-Sat, 8pm; Sun, 2pm. Through June 1. Aurora Theatre Company showcases its new second-stage performance space with John W. Lowell’s suspenseful thriller.

Not a Genuine Black Man Osher Studio, 2055 Center, Berk; www.berkeleyrep.org. $30-45. Wed, 7pm (no shows May 14, 21, or 28); Thu-Sat, 8pm (no shows Sat/3 or May 9-10). Through May 31. Brian Copeland brings his acclaimed, long-running solo show to Berkeley Rep for a 10th anniversary limited run.

Smash Dragon Theatre, 2120 Broadway, Redwood City; www.dragonproductions.net. $30. Thu/1-Sat/3, 8pm; Sun/4, 2pm. Dragon Theatre performs Jeffrey Hatcher’s political comedy.

Tribes Berkeley Repertory Theatre, Roda Theatre, 2015 Addison, Berk; www.berkeleyrep.org. $29-99. Tue and Thu-Sat, 8pm (also Sat, 2pm); Wed and Sun, 7pm (also Sun, 2pm; no 2pm show May 18). Through May 18. Berkeley Rep performs Nina Raine’s family drama about a young deaf man who comes of age.

The 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee Julia Morgan Theater, 2640 College, Berk; www.berkeleyplayhouse.org. $18-60. Thu/1-Fri/2, 7pm; Sat/3, 1 and 6pm; Sun/4, noon and 5pm. Berkeley Playhouse performs the Tony-winning musical comedy.

Wittenberg Aurora Theatre, 2081 Addison, Berk; www.auroratheatre.org. $32-60. Tue, 7pm; Wed-Sat, 8pm; Sun, 2 and 7pm. Extended through May 11. Aurora Theatre Company performs David Davalos’ comedy about reason versus faith.

PERFORMANCE/DANCE

“Acting Out: For the Health of It” Brava Theater Center, 2781 24th St, SF; bcation.org/actingout2014. Thu/1, VIP reception 6-7pm; show 7:15-9pm. $35-75. Breast Cancer Action benefits from this variety show featuring author Peggy Orenstein, the Sarah Bush Dance Project, comedian Irene Tu, bluegrass band Beauty Operators, and host Tania Katan.

“Baile en la Calle: The Mural Dances” Precita Eyes Mural Center, 2981 24th St, and Balmy Alley, SF; www.brava.org. Sun/4, tours at 11am, noon, 1pm, and 2pm. Free. Epiphany Productions, CuicacallDance Company, Cuicacalli Escuela de Danza, and Loco Bloco offer dance interpretations of the murals along the Mission’s historic Balmy Alley.

“Bay Area National Dance Week” Various locations; www.bayareadance.org. Wed/30-Sun/4. Free. This year’s theme is “iconic dance moves from pop culture,” and includes film screenings, free classes, outdoor dance performances, and more.

Caroline Lugo and Carolé Acuña’s Ballet Flamenco Peña Pachamama, 1630 Powell, SF; www.carolinalugo.com. Sun/4, May 10, 17, and 25, 6:15pm; May 11, 1pm. $15-19. Flamenco performance by the mother-daughter dance company, featuring live musicians.

Company C Contemporary Ballet ODC Theater, 3153 17th St, SF; www.odcdance.org. Thu/1-Sat/3, 8pm. $25-48. Also May 8-10, 8pm; May 11, 2pm, $25-48, Lesher Center for the Arts, 1601 Civic, Walnut Creek; www.lesherartscenter.org. With two world premieres by Maurice Causey and Charles Moulton.

“Dancing on the Edge of the World” Dance Mission, 3316 24th St, SF; www.dancemission.com. Fri/2, 8pm; Sat/3-Sun/4, 3pm (also Sun/4, 7pm). $15-20. Grrrl Brigade performs an homage to Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States.

“Dirty Little Ditties” Phoenix Theatre, 414 Mason, SF; www.brownpapertickets.com. Fri/2-Sat/3, 8pm. $20. Miss Jane Aquilina and Miss Robusta Capp perform a show that promises to be “not your mother’s cabaret.”

“The Eye of Horus” Jessie Square, 736 Mission, SF; www.dancersgroup.org. Wed/30 and Sat/3, 12:30pm. Free. Dancers’ Group and Yerba Buena Gardens Festival present a new, site-specific work by Sara Shelton Mann.

Feinstein’s at the Nikko 222 Mason, SF; www.feinsteinssf.com. This week: Jeremy Jordan, Thu/1-Fri/2, 8pm; Sat/3-Sun/4, 7pm, $45-60.

“Five Funny Females” Great Star Theater, 636 Jackson, SF; 5funnyfemales.eventbrite.com. Fri/2-Sat/3, 8 and 10pm. $20. A different bill of five female comedians at each show.

“Leonard Cohen Love Fest” Mechanics’ Institute Library and Chess Room, 57 Post, SF; www.milibrary.org. Wed/30, 7pm. $10-20. A capella choir Conspiracy of Beards and author-musician Sylvie Simmons pay tribute to the music of Leonard Cohen.

“The Lusty Month of May” Martuni’s, 4 Valencia, SF; www.tomshawtrio.com. Sat/3, 7pm. $10. Vocalist Karen Hirst salures spring, the Great American Songbook, and more, with singer-pianist Tom Shaw, drummer Roberta Drake, and violinist Donny Lobree.

“Magic at the Rex” Hotel Rex, 562 Sutter, SF; www.magicattherex.com. Sat, 8pm. Ongoing. $25. Magic and mystery with Adam Sachs and mentalist Sebastian Boswell III.

“Out of Line Improv” Stage Werx, 446 Valencia, SF; outoflineimprov.brownpapertickets.com. Sat, 10:30pm. $12. Ongoing. A new, completely improvised show every week.

“Purple: A Circus Tribute to Prince” Circus Center, 755 Frederick, SF; purpleshow.eventbrite.com. Sat/3, 7:30pm. $15-20. Circus acts set to Prince hits like “1999” and “Raspberry Beret.”

“Rotunda Dance Series” San Francisco City Hall, 1 Carlton B. Goodlett Place, SF; www.dancersgroup.org. Fri/2, noon. Free. This month: La Tania Baile Flamenco performs dances from Spain.

“San Francisco Comedy College” Purple Onion at Kells, 530 Jackson, SF; www.purpleonionatkells.com. $5-10. “New Talent Show,” Wed-Thu, 7. Ongoing. “The Cellar Dwellers,” stand-up comedy, Wed-Thu, 8:15pm and Fri-Sat, 7:30pm. Ongoing.

“Shiner” Mojo Theater, 2940 16th St, SF; www.faultlinetheater.com. Thu/1-Sat/3, 8pm; Sun/4, 7pm. $10-20. FaultLine Theater performs Christian Durso’s grunge-era drama.

“Terminator Too: Judgment Play” DNA Lounge, 373 11th St, SF; www.dnalounge.com. Thu/1, 9pm. $25-50. The creators of Point Break Live! take on James Cameron’s 1991 sci-fi classic, with an audience member picked on the night of the show to embody Schwarzenegger’s iconic role.

“Yerba Buena Gardens Festival” Yerba Buena Gardens, 760 Howard, SF; www.ybgfestival.org. Sun/4, 1pm. Free. Eddie Palmieri Salsa Orchestra kicks off the annual outdoor performance festival, which runs through Oct 26.

BAY AREA

“Cinderella” Lesher Center for the Arts, Margaret Lesher Theatre, 1601 Civic, Walnut Creek; www.fantasyforum.org. Thu/1-Fri/2, 9:30 and 11am (also Fri/1, 7pm); Sat/3, 10am, noon, 2pm, and 4pm; Sun/4, 11am and 1pm. $14. Fantasy Forum Actors Ensemble performs a family-friendly musical based on the fairy tale, with audience participation encouraged.

“Dance on Center” Osher Studio, 2055 Center, Berk; www.dlkdance.com. Sat/3, 8pm. $15-25. Kathryn Roszak’s Danse Lumiere kicks off a new series with dance works by Lissa Resnick, Dalia Rawson, and Kathryn Roszak, plus a film by Amy Seiwert.

“Doapcoev: A Town Where Dancing Was Not Allowed” Malonga Casquelourd Center for the Arts, 1428 Alice, Oakl; www.brownpapertickets.com. Sun/4, 3pm. $15-25. Dimensions Dance Theater and Rites of Passage present this dance performance inspired by Footloose.

“The Fifth String: Ziryab’s Passage to Cordoba” Islamic Cultural Center of Northern California, 1433 Madison, Oakl; www.goldenthread.org. Fri/2-Sat/3, 7pm; Sun/4, 3pm. $15-22. Also May 15-17, 8pm; May 18, 3pm, Brava Theatre Center, 2781 24th St, SF. Golden Thread continues its “Islam 101” performance series with this family-friendly play with live music.

“Lilith, The Night Demon in One Lewd Act” Hoytt Theater, Osher Marin JCC, 200 N. San Pedro, San Rafael; www.marinjcc.org. Thu/1, 7:30pm. $39-49. Also Sat/3, 8pm, $30-35, JCC of the East Bay, 1414 Walnut, Berk; www.jcceastbay.org. Also Sun/4, 3pm, $39-49, Menlo-Atherton High School, 555 Middlefield, Atherton; www.thecenteratma.org. “The bawdy alternate Jewish story of creation,” presented in folk-opera form.

“MarshJam Improv Comedy Show” Marsh Berkeley, 2120 Allston, Berk; www.themarsh.org. Fri, 8pm. Ongoing. $10. Improv comedy with local legends and drop-in guests.

“Pele Ma” Hamilton Amphitheater Park, Hamilton Parkway, Novato; www.hulaon.org. Sat/3, 1-3pm. $10. Hula performance directed by Kumu Hula Shawna Alapa’i and featuring the students of Halau Hula Na Pua O Ka La’akea.

“Piñata Dance Ritual” Shawl Anderson Dance Center, 2704 Alcatraz, Berk; www.lizboubion.org. Sun/4, 4pm. $5-50. Piñata Dance Collective presents this performance to benefit artistic director Liz Boubion’s 350 Xochi Quetzal Artist Residency. *

Opening up

Leo Herrera

-

April 29, 2014

0

arts@sfbg.com

DANCE “Location, location, location” is real estate’s mantra, as those of us who keep running up against it know only too well. But location has also become essential to dance, especially for artists who want to forego the theater and make the outside world their stage.

For the last six years, Dancers’ Group, the Bay Area’s dance service organization, has sponsored the ONSITE series, weaving free dance performances into the urban fabric. Recent events have showcased Amara Tabor-Smith’s He Moved Swiftly (various locations), Jo Kreiter’s Niagara Falling (Seventh and Market streets), and Erika Chong Shuch’s Love Everywhere (City Hall Rotunda). Sara Shelton Mann’s The Eye of Horus, performed in Jessie Square, is the latest addition. She could not have chosen a better location.

Gently terraced and surrounded on three sides by glass and steel — but also the warmth of the old bricks of St. Patrick Church and the newer ones of the Contemporary Jewish Museum — Jessie Square opens itself to the greenery of Yerba Buena Gardens. The totality suggests an urban environment in which disparate perspectives (nature and culture, the past and the present, private and public spaces) harmoniously bump against each other.

In other words, Jessie Square was a perfect stage for Mann to send her dancer-disciples into a 40-minute performance in which they revealed different aspects of themselves, inspired by the way the Egyptian god Horus embodied multiple identities.

Each of the four — Christine Bonansea, Jorge de Hoyos, Jesse Hewit, and Sara Yassky — had developed a multi-sectional solo that, according to the preperformance information, was based on archetypes as derived from Caroline Myss’ book Sacred Contracts. Whatever the generating forces for these solos were, in performance they emerged and receded into the much larger activities at Jessie Square, the whole becoming a kind of moving tableau vivant. The dancers transformed lunchtime crowd actions — eating, talking, strolling, and waiting — into something beyond the commonplace. They injected poetry into daily life.

Generous and welcoming as these types of performances are, I personally miss the more intimate and more focused encounters that inside spaces offer. Mann and production designer David Szlasa stepped in with props or directions as needed. In a favorite moment, Szlasa’s breadcrumbs coaxed a flock of pigeons into a procession across the square. Mann pulled Bonansea up to her full height to send her off on an imaginary tightrope; she also shushed (or at least I think she did) Hewit’s screaming tantrum. Later on, when he sat immobile in a beggar’s pose, she brought him what I first saw as a fishing rod. It was a whip.

Eye is full of small incidents — some touching, some hilarious, some nonsensical — controlled by planning and a lot of serendipity. Hewit tried a shoulder stand, holding a carnation. De Hoyos raced along a diagonal as if shot from a bow. Yassick played what looked like a solitary game of bocce ball. Interspersing these lighter incidents were moments of anguish, lack of stability, and a sense of mortality. At one point or another, just about everyone looked dead as the plank that de Hoyos dragged around.

Bonansea bitterly wept as she put her clown makeup on; her mad laughter while racing the square became monstrous. Yassky, apparently in severe pain, rubbed a balloon against her belly and approached a passerby who politely put his phone away to acknowledge her.

Sometimes, the dancers disappeared in the crowd. I had lost sight of de Hoyos when someone pointed him out leaping and gesticulating on top of the parking garage. If there were any narrative suggestions, it was the ongoing give and take between de Hoyos and Mann. Or perhaps it was Bonansea marching up to de Hoyos, who had dropped to the ground after his lovely ballad fragment. In her best French rhetorical manner, the petite performer started a discourse (on, among other things, mortality) and the corpse in front of her. She finally decided that theory had run into reality and proceeded with mouth-to-mouth resuscitation.

If Bonansea was something of clown figure, the powerful Yassky seemed imprisoned inside her own body. She is a slender, gamine performer, and I don’t think I ever saw her relax. When she held her limbs tight to her body, they looked like they were enchaining her. When she crouched on a tiny stool on one leg, she repeatedly spilled water and salt offered to her. Whispering into a mike, she asked for help. Clawing her throat while lying on her back, she looked about ready to expire.

For all the portentous self-examination in Eye, the work was free-spirited, unpretentious, and yet quite serious. The boom box sound score, however, needs rethinking; much of it was too blatantly obvious. While Eye greatly benefited from its gorgeous location, at times it looked too thin, dissipating some of its energy. It probably will benefit from the additional performers — Sherwood Chen and a group of community volunteers — who will join the final show Sat/3. *

THE EYE OF HORUS

Wed/30 and Sat/3, 12:30pm, free

Jessie Square

736 Mission, SF

www.dancersgroup.org

Two views of the waterfront

Michael Redmond

-

April 29, 2014

31

rebecca@sfbg.com

The Golden State Warriors’ announcement that its planned 18,000-seat basketball arena would be moved off the San Francisco waterfront was fresh in everyone’s mind when former San Francisco Mayor Art Agnos visited the Bay Guardian office on April 23, and he was electrified by the win.

“I resent anyone suggesting that this is not a genuine people-powered victory — again,” Agnos said. “Because that’s what it was, bottom line.”

The former mayor has traveled up and down the city in recent months promoting Proposition B, an initiative on the June 3 ballot that may well have cleared the Warriors Arena from its proposed waterfront perch at Piers 30-32 had the team not announced that it would be taking that step independently.

If it passes, Prop. B will require voter approval for any development project along city-owned waterfront property that exceeds height limits set by the Waterfront Land Use Plan approved in 1997. Such a rule would have squarely targeted the Warriors’ proposal.

The sports arena had been slated for a 13-acre parcel a stone’s throw from the Bay Bridge that is now a parking lot, where it would have hovered above the water like a floating spacecraft. Across the street, at a site known as Seawall Lot 330, the Warriors had proposed installing shops, parking, a condo tower, and a hotel.

Agnos and the backers of Prop. B hadn’t anticipated the Warriors’ announcement that its waterfront venue would be moved to private property, a 12-acre lot in Mission Bay purchased from tech giant Salesforce.com.

“We thought, because people at the top of this city’s government told us so, they would prevail,” Agnos said of Mayor Ed Lee and others championing the waterfront arena. “They didn’t.”

Agnos and his allies say it was the prospect of voters having to sign off on a proposal that was hatched behind closed doors that caused the Warriors to choose a more appropriate location.

“We helped them go to a different place where we now support what they’re doing — because it makes more sense for this city, and for our bay, as well as our waterfront. That’s what the issue is,” Agnos told us. “The spin doctors had their ass handed to ’em … had their ass handed to ’em, by a low-income group of allies, over their $20,000–$30,000, gold-plated contracts per month. And so now, they understand.”

They understand that the waterfront of San Francisco is a battleground and the people are willing to fight to ensure the public interest trumps private profits.

A rendering of proposed development at Pier 70, envisioning tech offices and housing.

PRECIOUS PARCELS

A historic map hanging in a corridor at the Port of San Francisco building, in a rehabbed terminal at Pier 1 along The Embarcadero, traces the original curve of a coastline that once separated the city from San Francisco Bay.

The existing waterfront juts out considerably from where its natural edge once fell, and today’s urban landscape features a mix of entire neighborhoods, tall buildings, parks, restaurants, merchant corridors, and transport terminals, all perched atop fill covered by layers of concrete.

Its shipping days long gone, much of San Francisco’s human-constructed waterfront now serves as a draw for visitors, the iconic subject of countless tourist photographs. But at other locations along the shoreline, vacant waterfront parcels are hotly contested land-use battlefronts.

“We’re clearly in a period of significant controversy,” the Port’s Special Project Manager Brad Benson told us. The Warriors Arena, Benson said, had been an opportunity for the Port to rehabilitate and generate revenue from Piers 30-32, which originated as two finger piers constructed in 1912, joined by a concrete slab in the 1950s.

Despite being in control of some of the most valuable real estate along the West Coast, the Port of San Francisco remains in a perpetual financial pinch, due to its need to fix up crumbling piers and aging infrastructure. The Port is governed by a Waterfront Land Use Plan, outlining possible uses for each parcel, and it also conducted a survey to identify properties that could be developed to help generate revenue.

“The Port has a big capital need,” Benson said, noting that many of the “piers and buildings were beyond their useful life when they were transferred to the city” from the state in 1968. Facing nearly $2 billion in capital needs, the Port’s modus operandi is to seek out private developers to partner with on development projects for parcels under its ownership, in order to secure funding that would go toward backlogged improvements.

That didn’t happen with the Warriors, however — the sports team approached the city out of the blue, and the project quickly won the fervent backing of Mayor Lee, who has appointment power over the five-member commission that governs the Port. At one point, Lee even claimed that this flashy sports arena would be his “legacy project.”

To longtime grassroots activists who are deeply involved in how land-use decisions are made on valuable waterfront parcels, it looked to be yet another example of what Prop. B supporter Jennifer Clary called “kneejerk development” — out of sync with carefully thought out shoreline planning efforts.

“The Port gets jerked around by every mayor,” said Clary, president of San Francisco Tomorrow, part of the coalition backing Prop. B. “Every mayor comes up with some stupid project.” She ticked off a list of failed waterfront developments (such as Mills Mall, proposed for Piers 27-31; and a 50-story U.S. Steel Building that would have towered over the Ferry Building), only to have them voted down or halted by grassroots neighborhood activists who viewed them as inappropriate designs fueled by greed and greased by political connections.

Behind the objection to Prop. B, Clary added, “is that the mayor will have to think a little more” before backing projects of this nature.

Whether opponents of the Warriors Arena plan looked at it and saw a traffic nightmare, an inappropriate use of public land, or a bad financial deal for a city needing to contend with ever-growing pressures on its critical infrastructure, members of the coalition that’s backing Prop. B feared the public would have little sway when it came to the final decision-making. A bid to restore that balance, by arming voters with veto power under the law, was the impetus behind Prop. B.

City Hall has ignored the will of regular folks who collectively own Port land along the shoreline, said Agnos, campaign consultant Jon Golinger, and Prop. B proponent and Sierra Club volunteer Becky Evans — listening only to the Mayor’s Office and deep-pocketed developers who stand to make millions by building on extremely valuable land that’s held in the public trust under California law.

“The people are putting the developers in touch with the values of this city, and what we want in this city,” Agnos said, thumping his index finger on the table to emphasize the point. “Prop. B puts people in the room who have not been there, and now [developers] have to pay attention.”

The task of developing Piers 30-32 would have required expensive substructure modification, requiring the involvement of bureaucratic agencies such as the US Army Corps of Engineers, the Bay Conservation Development Commission, and the State Lands Commission. The Warriors estimated that it would invest $120 million in improvements such as seismic upgrades and an elevation grade to deal with the looming problem of sea-level rise, but the threat of having to win voter approval represented yet another hoop to jump through. So when a new option opened up offering greater certainty, the Warriors pulled the plug on Piers 30-32.

Even though Lee’s “legacy project,” the main physical target of Prop. B, is no longer a factor in the June election, backers of the initiative say the measure is still important to restore democratic balance in a development process that freezes out ordinary citizens. Opponents, meanwhile, say the initiative threatens to undermine a complex planning process that engages the public and needn’t be tampered with.

IN THE PIPELINE

Prop. B would prohibit city officials from approving taller buildings than are currently allowed under zoning for Port-owned waterfront parcels, unless voters give those height increases a green light at the ballot box.

Since many of the properties in question are already built out, or preserved by historic landmark designation, Prop. B would impact only a handful of waterfront lots that remain in play as potential sites for new development. Among them are Piers 30-32 and Seawall Lot 351, the site of the 8 Washington luxury condo tower that the electorate flushed down the tubes in a decisive ballot referendum vote last fall, despite Board of Supervisors’ approval.

The same group that opposed 8 Washington launched Prop. B. Last year’s ballot referendum — also named Prop. B, and buoyed by the campaign slogan No Wall on the Waterfront — asked voters whether they favored increasing building heights above the zoning limit at the waterfront site where the luxury condo project would have gone.

San Francisco voters, in no mood to support a high rise for the superrich at a time when anger over skyrocketing rents was bubbling over and droves of low-income residents were being edged out by eviction, shot it down. Many political observers took the outcome as a signal that City Hall politicians are out of touch with voters.

Simon Snellgrove, the developer of the failed 8 Washington project, is reportedly working on a new building design. But since any new plans for 8 Washington are embryonic at best, and the fate of Piers 30-32 is anyone’s guess, the Prop. B ballot measure has immediate implications for two waterfront developments in particular.

One, on and around Pier 48, is being pushed by the San Francisco Giants. The other lies farther south, at Pier 70, a sprawling strip of waterfront that runs behind Illinois Street, from The Ramp restaurant at Mariposa to the old Potrero Power Plant.

The Giants’ planned development would be a short distance from AT&T Park.

During World War II, some 18,500 workers built ships at Pier 70 for the war effort, in brick and metal warehouses that still stand vacant and dilapidated. The site also housed a coal-fired power plant that was later converted to natural gas, leaving behind toxic residue that is up to Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to remediate. Farther north along Pier 70, BAE Systems conducts ship repair, a task that has been performed at the site since 1868.

Today, a 28-acre parcel of Pier 70 that is proposed for development by Forest City is home to nothing more than pigeons, feral cats, and the occasional hawk that swoops into a cavernous metal-roofed structure that stands near the waterfront and dates back to 1941, barely visible from the street. Someday in the not-so-distant future, developers imagine it will be populated with tech office workers (Google is used as an example of an anchor tenant in slides presented to the city), makers and small vendors, and thousands of residents who would call the place home.

The site is zoned with a 40-foot height limit, but developers are considering plans with a range of building heights that would be on a similar scale to Mission Bay. Part of the improvements to the property will require raising the elevation grade to deal with sea-level rise. Forest City has planned for a minimum of around 1,000 residential units — the majority market-rate, but with a mix of affordable housing as well.

Representatives from Forest City said that if Prop. B passes, “We’ll be prepared to seek voter approval with a dynamic project guided by … a community-based master plan,” and had not taken an official stance on the ballot measure. If voters were to reject an increase of the 40-foot height limit at the site, which is zoned for heavy industry, the project would no longer be financially feasible.

GIANT TOWER SCRUTINIZED

At Seawall Lot 337, a parcel near the Giants’ stadium which is primarily used as a parking lot during baseball games, the team is backing a project that would include 3.5 million square feet of new residential, office, and retail development, possibly including a 380-foot tower. Across the way at Pier 48 would be a new Anchor Steam brewery, and about five acres of open space.

The Giants plan resulted from the Port’s request for potential development partners to submit bids for that property, which went out in 2007.

“They very quietly have been pushing a plan that Prop. B made public,” Golinger said of the Giants’ plans. “They screamed at everyone involved in our coalition during the signature drive to get us to drop it. They funded a lawsuit … to get it kicked off the ballot.”

The Guardian independently confirmed that the team is part of the group that has challenged Prop. B in court. That legal challenge was unsuccessful in getting the initiative struck from the June ballot, but a judge could take up the question again if Prop. B is approved.

The parcel where the Giants have pitched a rental housing, office, and retail complex with a maximum height limit of 380 feet is zoned with a height limit of zero, zoned for open space in city plans. Nevertheless, “The [Port’s request for qualifications] called for developing up to 300 feet,” Benson explained, calling the current zoning “a remnant of the old Mission Bay plan,” which envisioned a park with wetlands and open space. The Port’s request for proposals went out after a subcommittee was formed, and public hearings were held on the design plans.

Asked why the Port would bake such a tall height limit into its RFQ, Benson responded, “There was a desire to avoid replicating the heights at Mission Bay,” the nearby redevelopment area characterized by lower, boxy buildings that seem to be universally regarded as ugly and lacking charm.

Few people are as intimately familiar with Mission Bay as Corinne Woods, whose houseboat is enveloped on either side by the sprawling development. When Woods first claimed a berth at Mission Creek for her floating home in 1985, “it was surrounded by open empty fields, abandoned warehouses, and lots of fennel,” she said. “We had wonderful parties.”

Outside her dock just off Channel Street is a community garden, a strip of green space shaded by willow and eucalyptus trees where night herons take refuge. Just beyond that is the Mission Bay South redevelopment area, a sprawling construction site that’s ushered in building cranes, swirling dust, pile drivers, and more recently, a five-alarm blaze that required the entire Fire Department to extinguish.

The fledgling neighborhood that now occupies the already-built part of Mission Bay might as well have dropped out of the sky, and the building profiles are wide and flat. “I would rather see slim, articulated towers, with more open space,” Woods admitted.

In the years between 1985 and today, Woods has fought the Port on behalf of her live-aboard community to be allowed to remain floating in place, becoming an unlikely expert on the byzantine process of waterfront planning along the way.

As a key member of half-dozen or so community advisory groups formed to weigh in on major waterfront developments, Woods has ardent faith in the civic engagement aspect of the planning process. She fears Prop. B could upset years of careful neighborhood negotiations by limiting the discussion to nothing more than a conversation about height limits.

Corinne Woods opposes Prop. B.

Woods is a plaintiff in the lawsuit the Giants are funding to challenge Prop. B, aligned with developer-friendly housing activist Tim Colen and building trades head Michael Theriault on the side that opposes Prop. B. But despite the millions of dollars that are on the line, Woods insists she has no dog in this fight. “I can’t even get free tickets to Giants games,” she said.

She does hope for the five-acre park that the Giants plan would install as part of the Seawall 337 / Pier 48 plan, a short walk from her houseboat. But she says her opposition to Prop. B is rooted in her experience of a traditional planning process that rewards neighbors who have the patience to sit through hours of grueling advisory group meetings with negotiating power vis-à-vis developers. Asked directly what the problem is with letting voters weigh in, Woods responded, “Because they don’t know what the fuck they’re talking about!”

But that leave-it-to-the-experts attitude is just the thing that Prop. B’s backers say is dangerous for waterfront planning, since it places final decision-making in the hands of profit-seeking real estate interests, a public agency in dire need of funding, and a mayor with political ties to developers.

THE HOUSING QUESTION

Given that the thrust of Prop. B is to democratize the planning process, few are in a hurry to align themselves with the formal No on B campaign — most of the opposition money seems to have been funneled into the Giants’ lawsuit, even though the Giants have officially taken a neutral stance on Prop. B. However, the message from opponents of Prop. B is that the initiative would kill sorely needed housing.

The Port of San Francisco, which is legally barred from taking a position on the initiative, reported in a February analysis to the Department of Elections that it could have the effect of leaving between 1,990 and 3,690 new housing units “delayed, reduced, or abandoned,” including between 268 and 596 affordable units. Those figures are based on early project proposals brought by the Warriors, the Giants, and Forest City, assuming those planning proposals would be “delayed by a need for a vote, or rejected by the voters” under a Prop. B regime.

A nonbinding Giants term sheet notes that the team would build rental housing, 15-20 percent of those units affordable, while Forest City’s Pier 70 proposal includes 1,000 new housing units with on-site affordable that would exceed the 12 percent required under city law.

Targeting housing “is a scary message,” campaign consultant Golinger said, charging the opposition with preying on voters’ fears to encourage people to vote down a measure that would democratize waterfront planning.

“This myth that we’re trying to stop housing is just that,” Agnos chimed in. “It’s just a political ploy by those who want to build high-end, high-rise, luxury condos — a la 8 Washington, a la Giants — on public property.”

The housing question is key. At a time when so many people are facing eviction or being priced out, the refrain that building more housing is the only solution to relieve pressure is oft-repeated, particularly by developers. However, these projects would introduce far more market-rate units than affordable projects, plopping down well-to-do neighborhoods in spaces that have sat on the margins in recent history, further changing the social character of the city. And proponents of Prop. B question whether the waterfront is really the right place to add new affordable units.

Meanwhile, the affordable housing community seems to be aligned in its support of Prop. B. The San Francisco Tenants Union, the Affordable Housing Alliance, the AIDS Housing Alliance of San Francisco, and other organizations that have aligned to push for stronger tenants’ rights and promote affordable housing have all endorsed the measure.

WHO DECIDES?

Given the popularity of a measure that fundamentally seeks to democratize the planning process, all development teams with skin in the game have declined to take a position on the measure. So have Mayor Lee and Board of Supervisors President David Chiu, who each played significant roles in recent waterfront battles, with Lee championing the Warriors Arena and Chiu opposing 8 Washington and assisting with the signature-gathering effort to stop it.

Sup. David Campos, in contrast with Chiu and Lee, has taken a stance on Prop. B. In a recent interview, he outlined his reasons for supporting it.

“I think that something has happened in City Hall, where I think the approval process is such that it has led to certain projects being approved that don’t really reflect the reality of what this city needs, and that have truly left the public out of the process in a meaningful way,” Campos told us. “And 8 Washington passed 8-3 at the Board of Supervisors, with a supermajority. The fact that the voters overwhelmingly rejected that project tells you that there has been a disconnect between what the board and folks in City Hall are doing, and where the public actually is.” To correct that imbalance and allow more San Franciscans to shape the city’s waterfront, Campos said, “I think it’s appropriate for us to go to the ballot and let the voters decide.”

Alerts: April 30 – May 6, 2014

Michael Redmond

-

April 29, 2014

0

WEDNESDAY 30

Nature slideshow: The Wilds of San Francisco and You

474 Valencia, Suite 295, SF. www.wildequity.org. 6:30-8:30pm, free. San Francisco has 32 pockets of undeveloped land set aside for the preservation of the natural world. These pockets hold the last remnants of wildness once found across the lands where we now live, but do we have room in our parks and our hearts for nature in this city? Please join Brent Plater, Executive Director of the Wild Equity Institute, for a photographic exploration of the remaining wild areas in San Francisco, discuss the threats they face, and learn how you can help these areas thrive.

THURSDAY 1

May Day: Worker’s rally

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett, SF. 11:30-1:30pm, free. May Day is International Workers Day and in San Francisco, like many other places around the world, workers come out to support each other and rally for better benefits and safer work environments. Workers, community advocates, community members and environmentalists, along with hundreds of supporters, will come together in front of City Hall to celebrate the achievements the labor movement has made throughout the years.

FRIDAY 2

Tenant rights training

San Francisco Main Library, 100 Larkin, SF. www.tenantstogether.org. 1-3pm, free. Issues such as eviction lawsuits (and threats thereof), rent increases, cost pass-throughs, unsafe living conditions, and security deposit theft are some of the major problems tenants face in San Francisco. This workshop will teach basic San Francisco tenant rights and identify the major nonprofit groups who specialize in assisting tenants with their rights. The workshop is oriented for nonprofit community service providers who want to better help and refer their clients who are having tenant problems. All are welcome.

SATURDAY 3

Elections 2014: Meet the Candidates

Starry Plough Pub, 3101 Shattuck, Berk. (510) 465-9414. 2-4:30pm, free. The 2014 candidates from the Peace and Freedom Party and the Green Party for California leadership will be at a forum on Saturday to express their solutions for the problems that our state currently faces. The Peace and Freedom Party is committed to socialism, democracy, ecology, feminism, racial equality, and internationalism. Come to hear their responses to defeat the “corporate capitalism” that runs our state.

TUESDAY 6

The Case for Six Californias

595 Market, SF. www.commonwealthclub.org. 6pm, $20 or $7 for students. Come hear the argument for the infamous “six Californias” idea you’ve seen circulating all over your Facebook feed. Tim Draper, the main proponent behind the potential ballot initiative, will be speaking about how our state has become ungovernable, and why splitting up into smaller states would be beneficial for everybody. It’s a radical idea, but could it work? Come with your questions and criticisms for this radical proposal that could be on the ballot this November.

Guardian Intelligence: April 30 – May 6, 2014

Michael Redmond

-

April 29, 2014

0

ONE FOR THE BOOKS

Polish your reading glasses: Sat/3 marks this first ever California Bookstore Day, a party featuring readings, author and artist appearances, and one-day-only, limited-edition book releases, taking place simultaneously at some 90 bookstores up and down the state. It’s modeled on the mega-successful Record Store Day, natch. A dozen bookstores in San Francisco have signed on, including Green Apple, City Lights, Booksmith, Books Inc., and Borderlands. Check www.cabookstoreday.com to find the celebration closest to you. Because hey, what kind of party has Amazon thrown for you lately?

ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST

The Attic, the dank 24th Street dive bar known for its decrepit vinyl booths, a pervasive questionable smell, and, somehow, boatloads of charm, closed its doors for good last week. Those in the know say owner Roger Howell (a former owner of Mad Dog in the Fog) will be using his liquor license at the schmancy new Gashead Tavern on Mission. No word yet on whether there will be DJs at that establishment who play nothing but the Clash if you ask them, or bartenders who give you endless bowls of Goldfish crackers, or a welcoming gang of hard-drinking regulars who cheer when you find your phone still at the bar after leaving it there the night before. RIP.

AIRBNB REG SHIT SHOW

Last year, when we at the Guardian were the only ones shouting about Airbnb‘s tax evasion and illegal short-term rentals, is was a lonely struggle. Then other journalists caught onto the story, Sup. David Chiu introduced his regulatory legislation a couple weeks ago, and the issue began to heat up. This week it all became a full-blown shit show, with rival rallies at City Hall on April 29. Opponents of the legislation are threatening a fall ballot measure that would reinforce the short-term rental ban in residential areas and give rewards to people who rat out their Airbnb-using neighbors. Perhaps we should be careful what we wish for.

MANY HAPPY RETURNS

It’s alive! The UC Theatre — the 1,460-seat Berkeley landmark, once beloved for its killer repertory film programming, but closed since 2001 — will undergo an eight-month renovation starting this summer and re-open as a nonprofit live music venue in 2015. According to a press release sent out by its new directors, Berkeley Music Group, the venue will present “approximately 75 to 100 shows a year, featuring a culturally diverse range of local, national, and international artists performing music genres ranging from Americana to zydeco and everything in between.” Located just two blocks from the Downtown Berkeley BART station, it will feature both touring and local bands and musicians, as well as comedy shows, a speaker series, and (yesss!) film screenings. Bonus: a full-service restaurant and bar, too. Bookmark www.theuctheatre.org to stay posted on the latest.

GLOBAL ECO-ACTIVISTS HONORED

Six winners of the Goldman Environmental Prize were awarded this week in San Francisco. The prestigious awards were given to Desmond D’Sa of South Africa, who organized a campaign to shut down a toxic waste dump; Ramesh Agrawal of India, who led disenfranchised communities in a successful effort to seek information on industrial activities and shut down a proposed coal mine; Suren Gazaryan of Russia, who helped expose the illegal use of federally protected forestland; Rudi Putra of Indonesia, who is targeting palm oil plantations that have triggered massive deforestation; Helen Slottje of New York, who provided pro-bono legal assistance to help pass bans on fracking; and Ruth Buendía Mestoquiari who led indigenous people of Peru in a fight against large-scale dams that would have displaced them.

WESTERN HIPNESS

Missionites and other east-side San Franciscans are always bashing the Outer Richmond and the Outer Sunset. Dubbed the Outerlands, its too foggy, too far, too quiet, or too-blah to make the visit worthwhile. You know what? The Outerlands doesn’t need you anymore, Mission! They’ve got a brand new parklet at Simple Pleasures Cafe on 35th avenue. Soon they’ll have overpriced coffee, Google buses, and white-washed ethnic food too! Avenues, represent.

TECH HEAD GOES FREE

San Francisco-based RaidumOne CEO Gurbaksh Chalal allegedly beat his girlfriend 117 times, but the man will not go to jail. A jury found Chalal guilty of misdemeanor violence and battery charges, and will serve three years probation, spend 52 weeks in a domestic violence program and perform 25 hours of community service. The court through out video evidence of the incident that police had seized from Chalal’s home as inadmissible. Chalal wrote on his blog, “This was all overblown drama because it generates huge volumes of page views for the media given what I have accomplished in the valley.” He then invoked the “American Dream” and lamented the cost to his soon-to-go-public company. Silicon Valley doesn’t have an entitlement problem. Nope.

FLAPPING FANCY

The Guardian’s Roaring ’20s-themed “Feathers and Fedoras” party last Friday at the de Young Museum drew a huge crowd of vintage-lovers. Zincalo Trio performed old-time favorites and gypsy jazz, the flapper-attired Decobelles dance troupe did a mean Charleston, and the de Young’s dazzling “Georgia O’Keefe and Lake George” exhibit provided a perfect artistic backdrop.

NOW READ THESE

The 2014 Northern California Independent Book Awards were announced last week, and must-read winners include Anthony Marra’s A Constellation of Vital Phenomena (fiction), George Albon’s Fire Break (poetry), Mary Roach’s Gulp: Adventures on the Alimentary Canal (nonfiction), Amy Stewart’s The Drunken Botanist (food writing) and Al Capone Does My Homework by Gennifer Choldenko (middle-grade readers). The NCIBA winners were determined by a coalition of independent bookstores, see more at www.nciba.com

CLIPPERS OWNER RACISM

How did people react to the racist comments allegedly made by Los Angeles Clippers owner Don Sterling? Clippers players: Removed their warmup shirts in a silent protest so that Clippers team logos would not be displayed. Magic Johnson: “He shouldn’t own a team any more. And he should stand up and say, ‘I don’t want to own a team any more.'”

President Barack Obama: “When ignorant folks want to advertise their ignorance, you don’t really have to do anything, you just let ’em talk.”

Snoop Dogg (in an online video addressing Sterling directly): “Fuck you, your mama, and everything connected to you, you racist piece of shit.”

Guardian endorsements

Michael Redmond

-

April 29, 2014

139

OUR CLEAN SLATE VOTERS GUIDE TO TAKE TO THE POLLS IS HERE.

Editor’s Note: Election endorsements have been a long and proud part of the Guardian’s 48-year history of covering politics in San Francisco, the greater Bay Area, and at the state level. In low-turnout elections like the one we’re expecting in June, your vote counts more than usual, and we hope our endorsements and explanations help you make the best decisions.

GOVERNOR: JERRY BROWN

There is much for progressives to criticize in Jerry Brown’s latest stint as governor of California. He has stubbornly resisted complying with federal court orders to substantially reduce the state’s prison population, as well as shielding the system from needed journalistic scrutiny and reforms of solitary confinement policies that amount to torture. Brown has also refused to ban or limit fracking in California, despite the danger it poses to groundwater and climate change, irritating environmentalists and fellow Democrats. Even Brown’s great accomplishment of winning passage for the Prop. 30 tax package, which eased the state back from financial collapse, sunsets too early and shouldn’t have included a regressive sales tax increase. Much more needs to be done to address growing wealth disparities and restore economic and educational opportunity for all Californians.

For these reasons and others, it’s tempting to endorse one of Brown’s progressive challenges: Green Party candidate Luis Rodriguez or Peace and Freedom Party candidate Cindy Sheehan (see “Left out,” April 23). We were particularly impressed by Rodriguez, an inspiring leader who is seeking to bring more Latinos and other marginalized constituencies into the progressive fold, a goal we share and want to support however we can.

But on balance, we decided to give Brown our endorsement in recognition of his role in quickly turning around this troubled state after the disastrous administration of Arnold Schwarzenegger — and in the hope that his strong leadership will lead to even greater improvement over his next term. While we don’t agree with all of his stands, we admire the courage, independence, and vision that Brown brings to this important office. Whether he is supporting the California High-Speed Rail Project against various attacks, calling for state residents to live in greater harmony with the natural world during the current drought, or refusing to shrink from the challenges posed by global warming, Jerry Brown is the leader that California needs at this critical time.

LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: GAVIN NEWSOM

Gavin Newsom was mayor of San Francisco before he ascended to the position of Lieutenant Governor, and we at the Bay Guardian had a strained relationship with his administration, to put it mildly. We disagreed with his fiscally conservative policies and tendency to align himself with corporate power brokers over neighborhood coalitions. As lieutenant governor, Newsom is tasked with little — besides stepping into the role of governor, should he be called upon to do so — but has nevertheless made some worthwhile contributions.

Consider his stance on drug policy reform: “Once and for all, it’s time we realize that the war on drugs is nothing more than a war on communities of color and on the poor,” he recently told a crowd at the Democratic Party convention in Los Angeles. “It is fundamentally time for drug policies that recognize and respect the full dignity of human beings. We can’t wait.” In his capacity as a member of the UC Board of Regents, Newsom recently voted against a higher executive compensation package for a top-level administrator, breaking from the pack to align with financially pinched university students. In Sacramento, Newsom seems to come off as more “San Francisco” than in his mayoral days, and we’re endorsing him against a weak field of challengers.

SECRETARY OF STATE: DEREK CRESSMAN

Although the latest Field Poll shows that he has only single-digit support and is unlikely to make the November runoff, we’re endorsing Derek Cressman for Secretary of State. As a longtime advocate for removing the corrupting influence of money from politics through his work with Common Cause, Cressman has identified campaign finance reform as the important first step toward making the political system more responsive to people’s needs. As Secretary of State, Cressman would be in a position to ensure greater transparency in our political system.

We also like Alex Padilla, a liberal Democrat who has been an effective member of the California Senate. We’ll be happy to endorse Padilla in November if he ends up in a runoff with Republican Pete Peterson, as the current polling seems to indicate is likely. But for now, we’re endorsing Cressman — and the idea that campaign finance reform needs to be a top issue in a state and country that are letting wealthy individuals and corporations have disproportionate influence over what is supposed to be a democracy.

CONTROLLER: BETTY YEE

The pay-to-play politics of Leland Yee and two other California Democrats has smeared the Assembly. Amid the growls of impropriety, a report by the Center for Investigative Reporting has painted Speaker of the Assembly John Perez, a leading candidate for Controller, with a similar brush. CIR revealed Perez raised money from special interest groups to charities his lover favored, a lover later sued for racketeering and fraud.

Betty Yee represents an opportunity for a fresh start. On the state’s Board of Equalization she turned down campaign donations from tobacco interests, a possible conflict of interest. She also fought for tax equity between same-sex couples. The Controller is tasked with keeping watch on and disbursing state funds, a position we trust much more to Yee’s careful approach than Perez’s questionable history. Vote for Yee.

TREASURER: JOHN CHIANG

While serving as California’s elected Controller, John Chiang displayed his courage and independence by refusing to sign off on budgetary tricks used by then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and some legislative leaders, insisting on a level of honesty that protected current and future Californians. During those difficult years — as California teetered on the brink of bankruptcy, paralyzed by partisan brinksmanship each budget season, written off as a failed state by the national media — Chiang and retiring Treasurer Bill Lockyer were somehow able to keep the state functioning and paying its bills.

While many politicians claim they’ll help balance the budget by identifying waste and corruption, Chiang actually did so, identifying $6 billion by his estimate that was made available for more productive purposes. Now, Chiang wants to continue bringing fiscal stability to this volatile state and he has our support.

ATTORNEY GENERAL: KAMALA HARRIS

Kamala Harris has kept the promise she made four years ago to bring San Francisco values into the Attorney General’s Office, focusing on the interests of everyday Californians over powerful vested interests. That includes strengthening consumer and privacy protections, pushing social programs to reduce criminal recidivism rather than the tough-on-crime approach that has ballooned our prison population, reaching an $18 billion settlement with the big banks and mortgage lenders to help keep people in their homes, and helping to implement the Affordable Care Act and the legalization of same-sex marriage in the state.

Harris has maintained her opposition to the death penalty even though that has hurt her in the statewide race, and she brings to the office an important perspective as the first woman and first African American ever to serve as the state’s top law enforcement officer. While there is much more work to be done in countering the power of wealthy individuals and corporations and giving the average Californian a stronger voice in our legal system, Harris has our support.

INSURANCE COMMISSIONER: DAVE JONES

We’ve been following Dave Jones’s legislative career since his days on the Sacramento City Council and through his terms in the California Legislature, and we’ve always appreciated his autonomy and progressive values. He launched into his role as Insurance Commissioner four years ago with an emergency regulation requiring health insurance companies to use no more than 20 percent of premiums on profits and administrative costs, and he has continued to do what he can to hold down health insurance rates, including implementing the various components of the Affordable Care Act.

More recently, Jones held hearings looking at whether Uber, Lyft, and other transportation network companies are adequately insured to protect both their drivers and the general public, concluding that these companies need to self-insure or otherwise expand the coverage over their business. It was a bold and important move to regulate a wealthy and prosperous new industry. Jones deserves credit for taking on the issue and he has earned our endorsement.

SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS: TOM TORLAKSON

This race is a critical one, as incumbent Tom Torlakson faces a strong challenge from the charter school cheerleader Marshall Tuck. An investment banker and Harvard alum, Tuck is backed by well-heeled business and technology interests pushing for the privatization of our schools. Tech and entertainment companies are pushing charter schools heavily as they wait in the wings for lucrative education supply contracts, for which charter schools may open the doors. And don’t let Waiting for Superman fool you, charter schools’ successful test score numbers are often achieved by pushing out underperforming special needs and economically disadvantaged students.

As national education advocate Diane Ravitch wrote in her blog, “If Tuck wins, the privatization movement will gain a major stronghold.” California ranks 48th in the nation in education spending, a situation we can thank Prop. 13 for. We’d like to see Torlakson advocate for more K-12 school dollars, but for now, he’s the best choice.

BOARD OF EQUALIZATION: FIONA MA

Fiona Ma was never our favorite member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, and in the California Legislature, she has seemed more interested in party politics and leadership than moving legislation that is important to San Francisco. There are a few exceptions, such as her attempts last year to require more employers to offer paid sick days and to limit prescription drug co-payments. But she also notoriously tried to ban raves at public venues in 2010, a reactionary bill that was rejected as overly broad.

But the California Board of Equalization might just be a better fit for Ma than the Legislature. She’s a certified public accountant and would bring that financial expertise to the state’s main taxing body, and we hope she continues in the tradition of her BOE predecessor Betty Yee in ensuring the state remains fair but tough in how it collects taxes.

ASSEMBLY, DISTRICT 17: DAVID CAMPOS

The race to replace progressive hero Tom Ammiano in the California Assembly is helping to define this important political moment in San Francisco. It’s a contest between the pragmatic neoliberal politics of Board of Supervisors President David Chiu and the populist progressive politics of Sup. David Campos, whom Ammiano endorsed to succeed him.

It’s a fight for the soul of San Francisco, a struggle to define the values we want to project into the world, and, for us at the Bay Guardian, the choice is clear. David Campos is the candidate that we trust to uphold San Francisco’s progressive values in a state that desperately needs that principled influence.

Chiu emphasizes how the two candidates have agreed on about 98 percent of their votes, and he argues that his effectiveness at moving big legislation and forging compromises makes him the most qualified to represent us in Sacramento. Indeed, Chiu is a skilled legislator with a sharp mind, and if “getting things done” — the prime directive espoused by both Chiu and Mayor Ed Lee — was our main criterion, he would probably get our endorsement.

But when you look at the agenda that Chiu and his allies at City Hall have pursued since he came to power — elected as a progressive before pivoting to become a pro-business moderate — we wish that he had been a little less effective. The landlords, tech titans, Realtors, and Chamber of Commerce have been calling the shots in this city, overheating the local economy in a way that has caused rapid displacement and gentrification.

“Effective for whom? That’s what’s important,” Campos told us during his endorsement interview, noting that, “Most people in San Francisco have been left behind and out of that prosperity.”

Campos has been a clear and consistent supporter of tenants, workers, immigrants, small businesses, environmentalists — the vast majority of San Franciscans, despite their lack of power in City Hall. Chiu will sometimes do right by these groups, but usually only after being pushed to do so by grassroots organizing and lobbying efforts.

Campos correctly points out that such lobbying is more difficult in Sacramento, with its higher stakes and wider range of competing interests, than it is on the local level. Chiu’s focus on always trying to find a compromise often plays into the hands of wealthy interests, who sometimes just need to be fought and stopped.

We have faith in Campos and his progressive values, and we believe he will skillfully carry on the work of Ammiano — who is both an uncompromising progressive and an effective legislator — in representing San Francisco’s values in Sacramento.

ASSEMBLY, DISTRICT 19: PHIL TING

Incumbent Phil Ting doesn’t have any challengers in this election, but he probably would have won our support anyway. After proving himself as San Francisco’s Assessor, taking a strong stance against corporate landowners and even the Catholic Church on property assessments, Ting won a tough race against conservative businessman Michael Breyer to win his Assembly seat.

Since then, he’s been a reliable vote for legislation supported by most San Franciscans, and he’s sponsoring some good bills that break new ground, including his current AB 1193, which would make it easier to build cycletracks, or bike lanes physically separated from cars, all over the state. He also called a much-needed Assembly committee hearing in November calling out BART for its lax safety culture, and we hope he continues to push for reforms at that agency.

PROPOSITION 41: YES

Over a decade ago, Californians voted to use hundreds of millions of our dollars to create the CalVet Home and Farm Loan Program to help veterans purchase housing. But a reduction in federal home loan dollars, the housing crisis, and a plummeting economy hurt the program.

Prop. 41 would repurpose $600 million of those bond funds and raise new money to create affordable housing rental units for some of California’s 15,000 homeless veterans. This would cost Californians $50 million a year, which, as proponents remind us, is one-tenth of 1 percent of the state budget. Why let hundreds of millions of dollars languish unused? We need to reprioritize this money to make good on our unfulfilled promises to homeless veterans.

PROPOSITION 42: YES

This one’s important. Last year, Gov. Jerry Brown sought to gut the California Public Records Act by making it optional for government agencies to comply with many of the requirements built into this important transparency law. The CPRA and the Ralph M. Brown Act require government agencies to make records of their activities available for public scrutiny, and to provide for adequate notice of public meetings. Had the bill weakening these laws not been defeated, it would have removed an important defense against shadowy government dealings, leaving ordinary citizens and journalists in the dark.

Prop. 42 is a bid to eliminate any future threats against California’s important government transparency laws, by expressly requiring local government agencies — including cities, counties, and school districts — to comply with all aspects of the CPRA and the Brown Act. It also seeks to prevent local agencies from denying public records requests based on cost, by eliminating the state’s responsibility to reimburse local agencies for cost compliance (the state has repeatedly failed to do so, and local bureaucracies have used this as an excuse not to comply).

SF’S PROPOSITION A: YES

Prop. A is a $400 million general obligation bond measure that would cover seismic retrofits and improvements to the city’s emergency infrastructure, including upgrades to the city’s Emergency Firefighting Water System, neighborhood police and fire stations, a new facility for the Medical Examiner, and seismically secure new structures to house the police crime lab and motorcycle unit.

The Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to place Prop. A on the ballot, and a two-thirds majority vote is needed for it to pass. Given that San Franciscans can expect to be hit by a major earthquake in the years to come, upgrading emergency infrastructure, especially the high-pressure water system that will aid the Fire Department in the event of a major blaze, is a high priority.

SF’S PROPOSITION B: YES

As we report in this issue (see “Two views of the waterfront”), San Francisco’s waterfront is a valuable place targeted by some ambitious development schemes. That’s a good thing, particularly given the need that the Port of San Francisco has for money to renovate or remove crumbling piers, but it needs to be carefully regulated to maximize public benefits and minimize private profit-taking.

Unfortunately, the Mayor’s Office and its appointees at the Port of San Francisco have proven themselves unwilling to be tough negotiators on behalf of the people. That has caused deep-pocketed, politically connected developers to ignore the Waterfront Land Use Plan and propose projects that are out-of-scale for the waterfront, property that San Francisco is entrusted to manage for the benefit of all Californians.

All Prop. B does is require voter approval when projects exceed existing height limits. It doesn’t kill those projects, it just forces developers to justify new towers on the waterfront by providing ample public benefits, restoring a balance that has been lost. San Francisco’s waterfront is prime real estate, and there are only a few big parcels left that can be leveraged to meet the needs of the Port and the city. Requiring the biggest ones to be approved by voters is the best way to ensure the city — all its residents, not just the politicians and power brokers — is getting the best deals possible.

SF SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE: DANIEL FLORES

Daniel Flores has an impressive list of endorsers, including the Democratic, Republican, and Green parties of San Francisco — a rare trifecta of political party support. But don’t hold the GOP nod against Flores, who was raised in the Excelsior by parents who immigrated from El Salvador and who interned with La Raza Centro Legal while going to McGeorge School of Law. And he did serve in the Marines for six years, which could explain the broad range of support for him.

Flores is a courtroom litigator with experience in big firms and his own practice, representing clients ranging from business people to tenants fighting against their landlords. Flores told us that he wants to ensure those without much money are treated fairly in court, an important goal we support. We also liked Kimberly Williams and hope she ends up on the bench someday, but in this race, Flores is the clear choice.

CONGRESS, DISTRICT 12: NANCY PELOSI

This was a hard decision for us this year. Everyone knows that Pelosi will win this race handily, but in past races we’ve endorsed third party challengers or even refused to endorse anyone more often than we’ve given Pelosi our support. While Pelosi gets vilified by conservatives as the quintessential San Francisco liberal, she’s actually way too moderate for our tastes.

Over her 21 years in Congress, she has presided over economic policies that have consolidated wealth in ever fewer hands and dismantled the social safety net, environmental policies that have ignored global warming and fed our over-reliance on the private automobile, and military policies that expanded the war machine and overreaching surveillance state, despite her insider’s role on the House Intelligence Committee.

Three of her opponents — Democrat David Peterson, Green Barry Hermanson, and fiery local progressive activist Frank Lara of the Peace and Freedom Party — are all much better on the issues that we care about, and we urge our readers to consider voting for one of them if they just can’t stomach casting a ballot for Pelosi. In particular, Hermanson has raised important criticisms of just how out of whack our federal budget priorities are. We also respect the work Lara has done on antiwar and transit justice issues in San Francisco, and we think he could have a bright political future.

But we’ve decided to endorse Pelosi in this election for one main reason: We want the Democrats to retake the House of Representatives this year and for Pelosi to once again become Speaker of the House. The Republican Party in this country, particularly the Tea Party loyalists in the House, is practicing a dangerous and disgusting brand of political extremism that needs to be stopped and repudiated. They would rather shut the government down or keep it hopelessly hobbled by low tax rates than help it become an effective tool for helping us address the urgent problems that our country faces. Pelosi and the Democrats aren’t perfect, but at least they’re reasonable grown-ups and we’d love to see what they’d do if they were returned to power. So Nancy Pelosi has our support in 2014.

CONGRESS, DISTRICT 13: BARBARA LEE

Barbara Lee has been one of our heroes since 2001, when she was the only member of Congress to vote against the Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Terrorists, braving the flag-waving nationalism that followed the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon to warn that such an overly broad declaration of war was dangerous to our national interests. She endured death threats and harsh condemnation for that principled stand, but she was both courageous and correct, with our military overreach still causing problems for this country, both practical and moral.

Lee has been a clear and consistent voice for progressive values in the Congress for 16 years, chairing both the Congressional Black Caucus and Congressional Progressive Caucus, taking stands against capital punishment and the Iraq War, supporting access to abortions and tougher regulation of Wall Street, and generally representing Oakland and the greater Bay Area well in Washington DC. She has our enthusiastic support.

CONGRESS, DISTRICT 14: JACKIE SPEIER

Jackie Speier has given her life to public service — almost literally in 1978 when she was an aide to then-Rep. Leo Ryan and survived the airstrip shootings that triggered the massacre at Jonestown — and she has earned our ongoing support. Speier has continued the consumer protection work she started in the California Legislature, sponsoring bills in Congress aimed at protecting online privacy. She has also been a strong advocate for increasing federal funding to public transit in the Bay Area, particularly to Muni and for the electricification of Caltrain, an important prelude to the California High-Speed Rail Project. In the wake of the deadly natural gas explosion in San Bruno, Speier has pushed for tough penalties on Pacific Gas & Electric and expanded pipeline safety programs. She has been a strong advocate of women’s issues, including highlighting the epidemic of sexual assault on college campuses and in the military, seeking greater protections, institutional accountability, and recourse for victims. More recently, Speier has become a key ally in the fight to save City College of San Francisco, taking on the federal accreditation process and seeking reforms. Speier is a courageous public servant who deserves your vote.

New coalition opposes Chiu’s Airbnb legislation UPDATED

Sasha Cuttler

-

April 28, 2014

28

New coalition opposes Chiu’s Airbnb legislation UPDATED

An unlikely coalition has formed to oppose legislation sponsored by Board of Supervisors President David Chiu that would legalize and regulate short-term apartment rentals facilitated by Airbnb and other online companies, which are now illegal in San Francisco.

[UPDATE: Some of those same opponents are also now threatening to place a rival measure on the fall ballot, the San Francisco Chronicle just reported. It reportedly shares some aspects with the Chiu legislation, such as a registration system, but it limits rentals to only commercial areas and includes rewards for those who turn in violators to the authorities].

The coalition includes landlord and tenant activists, as well as organized labor and neighborhood groups. It will square off against Airbnb and its hosts, which have pledged to lobby against limits created by the Chiu legislation — all of which could elevate this to the biggest fight of the summer at City Hall. Tomorrow [Tues/28], the coalition of opponents will rally outside City Hall at 10am, while Airbnb supporter will hold a “Speak Up for Home Sharing” rally at 12:30pm.

As we’ve been reporting, it took Chiu more than a year of negotiations with Airbnb, the San Francisco Tenants Union, affected city agencies, and other interested parties to arrive at legislation that requires hosts to register with the city, finally pay the city’s transient occupany tax, and limits stays to 90 nights per year.

But after more than two years of Airbnb’s defying city law and refusing to pay its taxes — scofflaw behavior tacitly supported by Mayor Ed Lee, who share a financial benefactor for the company in venture capitalist Ron Conway — several city constituencies pledged to oppose legislation that would now legalize its activities.

In particular, some longtime affordable housing and neighborhood activists say the legislation irresponsibly legalizes the conversion of residential apartments into tourist hotels throughout the city, creating neighborhood safety concerns and overturning decades of work to protect rent-controlled housing.

Meanwhile, Chiu’s opponent in the race for the Assembly District 17, David Campos, has been highlighting lobbying reports showing 61 contacts between representatives of Airbnb — including formers City Hall insiders David Owen and Alex Tourk — and Chiu’s office.

“Do you think tenant and neighborhood groups met with David Chiu 61 times?” Campos said during his endorsement interview with the Guardian last week, accusing Chiu of letting Airbnb write its own regulations without regard to neighborhood concerns.

Chiu didn’t immediately return our phone calls, but we’ll update this post if and when we hear back. [UPDATE: Chiu legislative aide Judson True just called and disputed how the legislation is being characterized by its opponents and rejecting calls to withdraw the legislation: “Everyone is entitled to a position on Sup. Chiu’s legislation, but we would hope they would engage in the legislative process and not just toss hand grenades. This is a serious policy issue that requires thoughtful dialogue and to simply call for the withdrawal of the legislation is irresponsible.”

True also said the legislation only legalized short term rentals “under very narrow circumstance and that legalization allows enforcement against the most egregious actors.” He also noted how Chiu has consistently opposed converting apartments to tourist uses and called for Airbnb to pay its taxes, calling the legislation a difficult balancing act: “We know that Airbnb has issues with the legislation. They didn’t write the legislation, period.”]

In the meantime, here’s the full text of the press release issued today by the new coalition, which will be holding a press conference at 10am tomorrow on the steps of City Hall:

For Immediate Release:
Monday, April 28, 2014

NEWS RELEASE

SAN FRANCISCO CITYWIDE COALITION SAYS NO
TO PROPOSED CHIU LEGISLATION

Board of Supervisors trying to convert residential housing to
short-term rentals

Press conference Tuesday April 29, 2014 Steps of City Hall at 10:00 am

San Francisco — Organizations representing usually divergent interests ranging from tenants to landlords, and from hotel workers to the hospitality industry have joined forces with neighborhood and homeowner associations to oppose legislation introduced by Supervisor David Chiu to legalize the short term rentals of residential property throughout San Francisco.

“In the face of an unprecedented housing crisis, Supervisor Chiu’s legislation to legalize the short term rentals of residential property will only exacerbate the housing crisis. This practice is detrimental to our rent-controlled housing stock”, said Janan New, Executive Director of the San Francisco Apartment Association.

“Our studies have shown that with over 10,000 units of housing being rented out over Airbnb, HomeAway and other websites this practice is having a negative impact on hotel workers and San Francisco’s hospitality industry”, said Mike Casey, President of UNITE HERE Local 2.

“The proposed legislation would rezone the entire city from residential zoning to commercial zoning in one fell swoop. We hear complaints from almost every neighborhood about the detrimental effects of short term rentals on the quality of life of tenants and residents”, said John Bardis, former President of the Coalition for San Francisco Neighborhoods and former San Francisco Supervisor.

“Supervisors Chiu’s legislation would repeal hard won controls on Single Resident Occupancy housing, threatens current affordable housing provisions for over 30,000 permanently affordable units, would transform newly approved “in-law units” into high priced motel rooms and make “below market rate” units lifetime luxury hotels. It is the single biggest threat to affordable housing ever proposed by a San Francisco Supervisor” stated longtime affordable housing advocate Calvin Welch.

“Airbnb and other hosting platforms owe the City millions of dollars in unpaid hotel taxes. It is high time that the City collect these taxes which pay for the arts and vital city services and programs. The proposed legislation does not clearly hold Airbnb and similar organizations responsible for collecting and remitting the hotel tax”, said former Supervisor Aaron Peskin.

All of these organizations are calling for Supervisor Chiu to withdraw his legislation at a press conference on Tuesday April 29 on the steps of City Hall at 10:00 am.

Events: April 23 – 29, 2014

Michael Redmond

-

April 22, 2014

0

Listings are compiled by Guardian staff. Submit items for the listings at listings@sfbg.com. For further information on how to submit items for the listings, see Selector.

WEDNESDAY 23

Susie Hara Green Arcade, 1680 Market, SF; www.thegreenarcade.com. 7pm, free. The author launches her new noir, Finder of Lost Objects.

“101 Vagina” Goforaloop Gallery, 1458 San Bruno, SF; www.101vagina.com. Noon-8pm. Free. Through Sun/27. Exhibit of 101 photographs (by artist Philip Werner) and 101 accompanying stories (by each photo’s subject) celebrating the female body.

Gertrude Stein centennial SF Public Library, Main Branch, 100 Larkin, SF; www.sfpl.org. 6-7pm, free. Celebrate the author’s Tender Buttons with editor Seth Perlow and guests Michelle Tea, Juliana Spahr, and Renate Stendahl.

“Word Performances” Lost Church, 65 Capp, SF; www.wordperformances.com. 8pm, $14. Poetry, prose, comedy, fiction, and memoir reading with Tina D’Elia, John Panzer, Ginger Murray, Tomas Moniz, and others, plus music by the Mark Growden Trio.

THURSDAY 24

Nitza Agam BookShop West Portal, 80 West Portal, SF; (415) 564-8080. 7pm, free. The author discusses her memoir Scent of Jasmine.

Andrew Demcak Books Inc., 2275 Market, SF; (415) 864-6777. 7:30pm, free. The poet and writer shares his latest, Ghost Songs.

Andrew Sean Greer Booksmith, 1644 Haight, SF; www.booksmith.com. 7:30pm, free. The novelist reads from his latest work, The Impossible Lives of Greta Wells.

“Poems Under the Dome” City Hall, North Light Court, 1 Carlton B. Goodlett Place, SF; www.poemdome.net. 5:30-8pm, free. Ninth annual celebration of National Poetry Month, with readings by SF poet laureate Alejandro Murguía and others.

Tony Serra City Lights Bookstore, 261 Columbus, SF; www.citylights.com. 7pm, free. The veteran attorney celebrates the release of Tony Serra: The Green, Yellow and Purple Years in the Life of a Radical Lawyer.

FRIDAY 25

Anne Carson San Francisco State University, Humanities Building, Rm 133, 1600 Holloway, SF; moderngreekstudies.sfsu.edu. 7pm, free. The MacArthur-winning scholar, poet, and translator reads from her latest work.

Omnidawn Book Party Pegasus Downtown, 2349 Shattuck, Berk; www.omnidawn.com. 7pm, free. Celebrate National Poetry Month with readings by Robin Caton, Maxine Chernoff, Gillian Conoley, and others.

SATURDAY 26

“Bug Day!” Randall Museum, 199 Museum Wy, SF; www.randallmuseum.org. 10am-2pm, $3. Family fun day all about bugs, with an “Insect Olympics,” honeybee hives, bug-related crafts, edible bugs, and more.

“Make It Reign 2014” Runway Style House Boutique, 1635 Broadway, Oakl; oaklandfashion.wordpress.com. 8pm, $5. Fashion show highlighting 18 Oakland and Bay Area indie designers.

Treasure Island Flea Great Lawn, Treasure Island; www.treasureislandflea.com. 10am-4pm, $3. Through Sun/27. It’s wine month at Treasure Island Flea — because nothing makes shopping more fun than a wine-tasting break. Also new: a produce part, a new section for DIY workshops, and more.

“Wrong’s What I Do Best” Walter and McBean Galleries, San Francisco Art Institute, 800 Chestnut, SF; sfai.edu/walter-and-mcbean-galleries. 7-10pm, free. Exhibit through July 26. Group show examining “the self-searing impulses of artists playing the role of one’s self as someone else.”

SUNDAY 27

Northern California Book Awards SF Public Library, Main Branch, 100 Larkin, SF; www.sfpl.org. 1-4pm, free. This year’s award-winning authors read, discuss, and sign their works.

Pacific Coast Dream Machines Show Half Moon Bay Airport, 9850 N. Cabrillo Hwy, Half Moon Bay; www.miramarevents.com. 10am-4pm, $5-20. Showcase of more than 2,000 antique, classic, custom, and exotic motorized marvels, plus boats, aircraft, live music, a “kidzone,” and more.

SF Native Plant Garden Tour Various locations, SF; www.sfnativegardentour.org. 11am-3pm, free. Check the website for the self-guided tour route, which offers a chance to see San Francisco-specific and Bay Area-native plants in gardens both wild and carefully tended.

MONDAY 28

Tess Taylor and D.A. Powell City Lights Bookstore, 261 Columbus, SF; www.citylights.com. 7pm, free. The poets read from their works, including Taylor’s new collection The Forage House.

TUESDAY 29

“Customs and Traditions of Ohlone Natives in the Bay Area” St. Philip’s Catholic Church, 725 Diamond, SF; www.sanfranciscohistory.org. 7:30pm, $5. SF History Association presents this talk by Ruth Orta and her daughter, Ramona Garibay, descendents of the Ohlone/Bay Miwok native people of the Bay Area.

Pamela Turner Saylor’s Restaurant (upstairs room), 2009 Bridgeway, Sausalito; www.acs-sfbay.org. 7-9pm, $5. The science writer, author of The Dolphins of Shark Bay, discusses bottlenose dolphins. *

Chronicle endorsement of Chiu shows that perspective is everything

Sasha Cuttler

-

April 22, 2014

69

Chronicle endorsement of Chiu shows that perspective is everything

It’s no surprise that the San Francisco Chronicle today endorsed David Chiu in his race to replace Tom Ammiano in the California Assembly, given that Chiu and the Chronicle share a business-friendly neoliberal ideology. But what the Chronicle wrote in its endorsement reinforced progressive criticisms of Chiu and could have easily passed for an endorsement of David Campos if the paper was a bit more progressive.

“They really reinforced the arguments we’ve been making,” Campos told us this morning, saying he wasn’t at all surprised by the endorsement.

“First elected as a progressive, Chiu has proved willing to move to the center on various critical issues. He backed the Twitter tax break, which is rejuvenating a seedy stretch of Market Street, and opposed re-instating Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi after his conviction in a domestic violence case,” the Chronicle wrote.

Progressives have long felt betrayed by Chiu for courting their support and then siding with the so-called moderates (aka fiscal conservatives or neoliberals) to win and hold the board presidency and appoint Ed Lee as mayor. The Twitter tax break was also opposed by progressives at the time, criticism that has widened as people question why a wealthy company should get tens of millions of dollars in corporate welfare while driving up the cost-of-living for the rest of us and leaving the city facing big budget deficits. And Chiu’s vote to remove the elected sheriff from office for a misdemeanor criminal plea seemed like political pandering that would have set a terrible precedent for the city.

“Since taking leadership of the board in 2009, Chiu has helped dial down the personal rancor and policy triviality that kept Fox News and comedians stocked with material but distracted from the job at hand. He’s also proved a productive legislator with interests spanning city finances, housing, and personnel,” the Chronicle wrote.

Being a “productive legislator” in a City Hall bent on catering to the interests of landlords, developers, and corporate interests isn’t necessarily a good thing, a point that Campos has been making on the campaign trail. Frankly, if right-wing Fox News isn’t finding legislation to mock in San Francisco then maybe we’re way off course. The progressive era that Chiu help usher out was one where wealthy corporations were asked to support their workers and the city.

It was when San Francisco required employers to provide health coverage, paid sick days, and a high minimum wage for their employees. These were all things The Nation recognized in its current cover story, “Power to the City: The progressive case for going local.”

And they were all things in San Francisco’s past, the era before Chiu came to power, and they were mostly things that the Chronicle opposed at the time. By contrast, The Nation wrote favorably of more recent progressive trends in America’s biggest and most important cities, such as New York City, Seattle, Boston, and Minneapolis, cities where leftist mayors are moving to address economic and environmental justice issues, the kind of thing San Francisco used to be known for.

We at the Guardian haven’t made our endorsement decisions for the June election yet, they come out next week. But when Chiu comes to meet with us tomorrow morning, we’ll have some hard questions for him to answer about the very same issues that the Chronicle finds so praiseworthy.

Tale of two tech titans

Sasha Cuttler

-

April 17, 2014

19

San Francisco Magazine just published an intriguing interview with Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff, and Benioff’s attitude and approach to San Francisco seems to be a striking contrast to the city’s other top tech titan, venture capitalist Ron Conway, who we profiled over a year ago.

While Conway burst onto the political scene a few years ago with a pledge to destroy the progressive movement in San Francisco, sponsoring Mayor Ed Lee and his allies as the main vehicle for those ambitions, Benioff is a San Francisco native who seems to understand this city’s values and accept the responsibilities that come with great wealth and power.

“I say, if you want to be in this city and take advantage of all this great infrastructure—our mass transit, our schools, our hospitals, the safety and stability that we have—then also give back. These are the table stakes for doing business here. This is not a new idea,” Benioff told San Francisco Magazine Editor Jon Steinberg in this extended Q&A.

The news peg for the article was a new Benioff initiative in which he’s asking local tech companies to contribute $500,000 each to Tipping Point Community, which funds local community service programs, an effort that Benioff calls SF Gives.

“The first person I called was Ron Conway. I said, ‘Ron, what we’re going to do is get companies to give $500,000, and I’m going to raise $10 million, and we are going to give back to S.F. en masse with money from organizations, not just individuals.’ He said, ‘This is never gonna work. I run sf.citi [a political advocacy group for 500 local tech companies], and people won’t even pay their dues. You’re not going to raise millions of dollars,’” Benioff told the magazine.

The difference is that Conway is pushing an aggressive political agenda, seeking business tax breaks and special treatment from City Hall for the companies he’s invested in while being tone-deaf to the political backlash it’s causing in San Francisco, one that Benioff acknowledges and says the industry must address.

“Because this is not about any political agenda. It’s not. It’s about pure-play philanthropy: giving back to nonprofits and NGOs that can make a difference in S.F,” was how Benioff answered the question about why companies are more willing to donate to SF Gives than sf.citi.

As we documented in our profile of Conway, this guy is a old school conservative with a history of right-wing politics who conveniently dropped his Republican Party affiliation when he arrived in San Francisco pushing an aggressive pro-business agenda.

As we wrote in our article about an event seven years ago when Conway burst onto the scene and declared his intentions: “’This guy stood up and said that we have to take the city back from the progressives,’ [former Mayor Art] Agnos told us. ‘I barely knew who he was. I’ve been in San Francisco since 1966, and here he comes telling us what to do.;”

To understand this tale of two tech titans, contrast that approach with this comment from Benioff: “It’s a city of innovation, of flamboyance, of transformation, and during boom times, S.F. always changes and evolves. But tied into that has always been generosity: the Haas family, the Hellmans, the Fishers, the Shorensteins. During every one of these boom times, the people who benefited the most were also giving back the most. But this time around, we haven’t been able to talk about a broad philanthropic effort to couple with the growth. So this seemed like a great opportunity.”

SFMTA repeals paid Sunday parking meters, loses $9.8 million

Erica Hanna

-

April 15, 2014

92

SFMTA repeals paid Sunday parking meters, loses $9.8 million

San Francisco transit riders won some and lost some today [Tue/15] at the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency’s Board of Directors meeting. The board voted to repeal Sunday parking meters, effective July 1. It also asked SFMTA Director Ed Reiskin to add 18-year-olds into the Free Muni for Youth program, which will take effect Nov. 1.

But a proposal for free Muni for seniors and the disabled hit a snag, and the board decided it would evaluate their budget in January 2015 to identify available funding for the program. Until then, the program is in limbo.

“I think free Muni for seniors and people with disabilities is a great need, it’s a moral imperative,” said Tom Nolan, chairman of the SFMTA board. “It’s not a question if these things will happen, it’s when.”

Nearly 100 of advocates for the Free Muni For Youth and Free Muni for Seniors and the Disabled programs packed into the small board chamber at City Hall Tuesday. Some came in wheelchairs, others walked in carefully with canes, and small children bounded into the chamber playfully. At least 100 more people waited outside the doors of the chamber in line to speak. All came with a purpose: to tell the SFMTA that free Muni would help them live in a city increasingly inhospitable to poor and middle class San Franciscans.

“To some people $23 may not be much, but to (seniors), every penny counts,” Pei Juan Zheng, vice president of the Community Tenants Association told the board at public comment. She spoke in Cantonese, and was later translated by a woman at her side. “I know some senior couples who can only afford one Muni pass and share it, taking turns to go on doctor’s visits.”

Many public commenters reminded the board that free Muni for the disabled and seniors could be paid for by paid Sunday parking meters, which the SFMTA ultimately decided to repeal. The SFMTA’s budget proposal estimates free Muni for seniors and the disabled to cost about $4 million annually. Conversely, repealing paid parking meters is estimated to cost Muni $9.8 million annually. SFMTA spokesperson Paul Rose said the loss could actually be as high as $11 million.

The reason for repealing the paid parking meters was made clear as day: Mayor Ed Lee and the SFMTA board are tip-toeing around car-driving voters, afraid several ballot measures to fund Muni this November will tank. To that end, they’re willing to appease drivers however they can.

“It’s clear we don’t have support for (paid Sunday meters),” board member Joel Ramos said after the vote. “We have failed, frankly, to convince the great majority of people. Read [San Francisco Chronicle columnists] Matier & Ross and see the sentiment out there, it’s a negative one.”

For his part, Mayor Lee was pleased the board enacted his repeal proposal. His statement to the press released shortly after the vote laid clear his need to appease car-driving voters.

“Repealing Sunday parking meters is about making San Francisco a little more affordable for our families and residents on Sunday, plain and simple,” he wrote in his statement. “Instead of nickel and diming our residents at the meter on Sunday, let’s work together to support comprehensive transportation funding measures this year and in the future that will invest in our City’s transportation system for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders and drivers alike.”

Just two weeks ago, Reiskin suggested reducing enforcement of Sunday meters, perhaps in efforts to find a compromise. He has repeatedly publicly stated his support for paid Sunday meters. Apparently he was outnumbered.

There are silver linings. In January the SFMTA board will mull a 7 percent transit service increase for 2016, additional funding for cleaning Muni’s fleet, and providing free Muni for low and moderate income seniors and disabled. The wait is due to the uncertainty of June contract negotiations with Muni workers, as well as the impending Muni funding ballot measures in November. If all goes well, the board said, funding may be identified for all of those projects. Until then, the loss of paid Sunday meters means Muni is out $9.8 million a year out of its $677 million budget.

The repeal of the paid markers doesn’t just hit transit riders though. Local businesses may also lose out.

Back in our story “Muni Fare Shakedown [2/25],” Jim Lazarus, senior vice president of public policy at the business-friendly San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, told us he is a supporter of the paid Sunday meters. “You can drive into merchant areas now where you couldn’t before,” he told us.

Near the end of public comment, Cynthia Crews of the League of Pissed Off Voters put the board’s vote into context.

“The MTA’s purpose is to manage the effing streets, not do the mayor’s bidding,” she told the board. “This is a $9 million giveaway no one is asking for but Ed Lee.“

“This,” she said, “sucks.”

Tweets from the SFMTA board of directors meeting

SFMTA mtg when 2-year budget could be passed is so full even media having trouble getting in http://t.co/8OZuZdPjXM pic.twitter.com/tNnRTsmNFS

— Jessica Kwong (@JessicaGKwong) April 15, 2014

Everyone’s favorite @sfchronicle curmudgeon @cwnevius is locked out of the SFMTA board meeting too. pic.twitter.com/PxyuqaQEDj

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 15, 2014

Policy wonk/advocate spotting! At the @sfmta_muni board meeting: Tom Radulovich, Tony Robles, Dan Weaver, and interest groups abound.

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 15, 2014

At @sfmta_muni meeting, SFUSD disability education program “The Arc” rep: “We want to make sure you know we exist” asks for free #muni

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 15, 2014

Mario Tanev of the @SFTRU to the @sfmta_muni board on Sunday meters: “your own study shows meters are beneficial to businesses and shoppers”

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 15, 2014

Poet and activist Tony Robles is up, speaking to @sfmta_muni: “Many seniors are outright targeted for eviction…”

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 15, 2014

Tony Robles to @sfmta_muni “bottom line is, living in San Francisco is not cheap for seniors. Seniors, quite frankly, need a break.” #Muni

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 15, 2014

These advocates from POWER said they were “surprised we had to be here again” to advocate for free #muni for youth. pic.twitter.com/EnuzNCR6Ip

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 15, 2014

Supervisor @ericmar415 to SFMTA board: “baby boomers like you will be seniors soon. They struggle with isolation.” pic.twitter.com/RZc7x3F7Eb

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 15, 2014

The broadcast news folks are here. Are they confused or deeply concentrating? @KTVU w/ #Muni spokesperson Paul Rose. pic.twitter.com/dP0tIJ0kxJ

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 15, 2014

Chinatown Community Development Center, Aaron Dong days “we don’t spend enough on pedestrian safety, that’s a fact.” pic.twitter.com/b1JNQ0Xds7

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 15, 2014

@FitzTheReporter The “best political minds” doing the political calculus that “no one likes meters” must not have double-checked their math.

— Michael Rhodes (@Perambulations) April 16, 2014

Claim filed over SFPD shooting of Alejandro Nieto

Sasha Cuttler And Mary Magee

-

April 15, 2014

17

Claim filed over SFPD shooting of Alejandro Nieto

The family of Alejandro Nieto, the 28-year-old City College student and community activist who was gunned down by the San Francisco Police Department March 21, has filed a claim against the city in preparation for a lawsuit responding to what they allege was an unjustified shooting.

Friends, family and supporters of Nieto gathered in front of San Francisco City Hall April 14 with attorney John Burris, who is representing Nieto’s family. Burris is a prominent civil rights lawyer known for representing families whose sons have died as a result of officer involved shootings, including the family of Oscar Grant.

An initial examination of the body suggests Nieto died from wounds inflicted by at least 10 bullets, fired by multiple officers, Burris said. Police initially encountered Nieto in Bernal Heights Park in response to a 911 call reporting a man with a gun. Nieto, who was employed full-time as a security guard, actually possessed a Taser and not a firearm. Police said officers opened fire because he pointed the Taser at them, and they confused it with a gun when they saw a red dot emitted from the device after it was drawn, tracking officers.

Burris isn’t buying the police department’s account, but said he faces obstacles obtaining key information that would shed light on the incident.

“We have not been able to obtain the 911 audio,” or other communications records documenting what happened just before and after the shooting, Burris said. So far, the San Francisco Medical Examiner has not released an official report.

“That is part of the problem we are up against. We can make requests and ask for it to be preserved,” he said of the audio files, “but we cannot get it. And unfortunately, lawsuits are one way that we know we’re going to get it.”

Benjamin Bac Sierra, a friend of Nieto’s who is serving as a spokesperson for the family, waved a bundle of petitions he and community members had collected to call for an investigation at the local level. “Besides filing this claim, the family demands that San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon launch an official investigation into Alex’s killing by the San Francisco Police Department,” Bac Sierra said. “We demand that the district attorney fully investigate this case on behalf of Alex and his family.”

Burris said he believed moving forward with an independent lawsuit was necessary even as the Office of Citizen Complaints, an independent agency overseen by the San Francisco Police Commission, advances its own investigation.

“I’ve worked with the OCC on many cases in the past, but that’s on a parallel track. They have one process, we have another,” he said. “At the end of the day, we have to do our own to protect ourselves.”

Burris also said that given the recent history of federal prosecution against the SFPD, he believed the involvement of the U.S. Attorney’s office would be appropriate. “We’re requesting that the U.S. Attorneys here with the Department of Justice conduct an independent investigation into the circumstances surrounding Alex’s death,” Burris said, “and if necessary, file criminal charges against these officers.”

In a later conversation with the Bay Guardian, Bac Sierra noted that an audio recording of the shooting had been obtained from a neighbor of the park, who captured it through a home security system. Bac Sierra said the recording suggests two shots were initially fired, followed by a pause, followed by “a continuous volley” of shots. Bac Sierra, who declined to provide the neighbor’s name, said the sound file did not contain audible verbal communications prior to the shots being fired.

Community members angered by Nieto’s death have set up a website, justice4alexnieto.org, and have planned an event for the one-month anniversary of the shooting. Called Burritos on Bernal Hill, the gathering is scheduled for Monday, April 21, at Precita Park at 5pm.

Chiu introduces legislation to regulate Airbnb and short-term housing rentals UPDATED

Sasha Cuttler

-

April 15, 2014

27

Chiu introduces legislation to regulate Airbnb and short-term housing rentals UPDATED

After more than a year in development, Board of Supervisors President David Chiu is introducting legislation today to legalize and regulate the short-term housing rentals facilitated by Airbnb and other online companies. But the legislation won’t address all the concerns of Airbnb’s critics — from landlords to tenants to labor to neighborhood associations — and it’s unclear why it took so long to develop.

Yet the introduction of legislation is the latest in a rapid series of developments surrounding the scofflaw but politically connected SF-based Airbnb, which announced a couple weeks ago it would finally collect and pay the transient occupancy taxes it has been dodging in recent years, and it issued new terms of services to its SF hosts making it clearer that short-term rental aren’t legal in San Francisco.

As the Chiu legislation says, “Under Chapter 41A of the San Francisco Administrative Code, renting a residential unit for less than a 30-day term is prohibited. Similar prohibitions are found in the Planning Code. These restrictions are designed to prohibit owners, businesses, and residents from converting rental units and other residences in the City from longer-term residential use to tourist use.”

The most significant change the legislation makes to the lawless status quo is legalizing most short-term rental and limiting them to just 90 nights per year, the flip side of the legislation’s requirement that residents physically occupy their units at least 275 days per year.

“You have to be physically present in your apartment for 275 days,” Chiu told the Guardian.

This legislation changes that prohibition for permanent city residents (which it defines as living in the city at least 275 days per year and 60 days in a row and with an intention to make the unit a permanent dwelling) who maintain liability insurance and register with the city — a requirement that could help landlords more easily identify and evict tenants who are breaking their leases by subletting (while names will be redated from the publicly available list, addresses won’t).

“This has been a difficult process but we didn’t see any other way around the issue but to do a registry so we know who’s doing these rentals,” Chiu told the Guardian.

The legislation doesn’t give many new protections to tenant renters, such as attempting to give them greater rights to sublet their units, and it explicitly reinforces city laws against charging guests more that tenants pay for their rent-controlled units. But it does prevent landlords from immediately evicting them after the first offense.

Airbnb and other companies would also be required to specifically notify San Francisco hosts about local laws and restrictions, which would be a step further than Airbnb’s recent move.

Chiu’s office will hold a press briefing on the legislation at 1pm before formally introducing the legislation at today’s Board of Supervisors meeting, so check back later for updates.

UPDATE 5PM:

In a press conference this afternoon inside City Hall, Chiu told reporters there has been “an explosion of short term rentals” in San Francisco in recent years, and even though they’re been illegal, “the current reality is these laws are broken everyday and enforcement in difficult.”

He described four major components of the legislation: distinguishing being unacceptable and reasonable short-term rentals, code compliance and enforcement, regulation of Airbnb and other rental platforms, and ensuring that taxes are paid on these rentals.

While Chiu said he wants to allow people to supplement their income by occasionally hosting paying guests, he said the legisation really targets “the worst offenders that have taken entire units off the market and turned them into year-round hotels.”

Planning Director John Rahaim, who also spoke at the press conference, said his office has been inundated with complaints and needed the tools to act: “This is an important issue we’ve been hearing about for quite some time.”

Significantly, Chiu said his legislation extends the short-term rental controls to buildings with two or more units, which have been increasingly targeted by owners seeking to skirt rent-control restrictions.

Ted Gullicksen of the San Francisco Tenants Union, who worked with Chiu on crafting the legislation and spoke at the event, said his group is currently working with the City Attorney’s Office to help residents of eight small apartment building who were recently evicted by landlords seeking to make more money through short-term rentals.

“We’ve identified thousands of units that have been removed from the rental housing stock,” Gullicksen said.

While the legislation goes a long way toward addressing the situation, there are still some tricky hurdles to navigate. For example, although the legislation prevents tenants from charging more than they pay in rent, it does so on a monthly basis, potentially still allowing tenants to cover full month’s rent while living in the units at least three-quarters of the time — a provision sure to draw opposition from landlord groups such as the San Francisco Apartment Association, who consider that stealing.

Landlords will also likely use the registry to find tenants who violate no subletting clauses in their leases. Although the legislation prevents such tenants from being evicted for a first offense, they would need to comply with orders to desist. And those who don’t register would be blacklisted from using the sites, under a provision that requires the companies to cooperate with the city.

Airbnb issued a statement commending Chiu for introducing the legislation and supporting the goal of legalizing its operations, but it took issue with specific provisions and promised to rally its customers to help shape the legislation, which won’t like be considered in hearings until this summer.

“There are certainly provisions in this proposal that could be problematic to our hosting community, including a registration system that could make some of their personal information public, so there is much work to be done to ensure that we pass legislation that is progressive, fair, and good for San Francisco and our hosting community,” Airbnb wrote. “But this is an important first step, and it is just the beginning of what promises to be a very long process during which the entire Board of Supervisors will look at this proposal, hear from all sides—including our community—and make decisions about how to proceed.”

Mayor Ed Lee, who has been a steadfast supporter of Airbnb — a company invested in by Lee’s biggest political benefactor, venture capitalist Ron Conway — today seemed to signal his tentative support for the legislation, without committing to its details. Previously, Lee had supported Airbnb’s two-year effort to stonewall the city and refuse to pay its taxes, even after the Tax Collectors Office concluded they were owed, a position that became untenable as problems associated with short-term rental mounted.

“We were focused on helping an industry begin, but I believe with some smart regulation — particuarly now that Airbnb and perhaps others have indicated they want to pay the taxes associated with those rentals — I think we have a way forward. But we’ll get into all the details,” Lee told us following his monthly appearance before the Board of Supervisors.

As to whether he supports limiting short-term rentals to 90 days a year, Lee said, “That’s an open question. There needs to be some guidelines established because we do have very congested neighborhoods and I know that companies like Airbnb want to be good neighbors as well.”

Proposed food voucher pilot program could feed thousands of hungry San Franciscans

Erica Hanna

-

April 14, 2014

10

Proposed food voucher pilot program could feed thousands of hungry San Franciscans

A pilot project to fund healthy fruit and vegetable vouchers for food insecure San Franciscans was proposed at the Board of Supervisors Neighborhood Services and Safety Committee hearing last Thursday. The innovative solution would bridge a startling hunger gap affecting thousands of Social Security beneficiaries, often seniors and families, who have little to no access to healthy food.

Sup. Eric Mar called for the hearing on food insecurity, and afterward promised a bevy of solutions to address hunger.

“In one of the wealthiest cities in this world, no child, no senior, no person with disability should be hungry,” Mar said to the gathered crowd that day. “I know we have some work before us though.”

At the hearing, members of the San Francisco Food Security Task Force, St. Anthony’s Church, the San Francisco and Marin Food Bank, the SFUSD and other organizations, laid out a number of solutions to approaching food insecurity in San Francisco, which is defined not only by lack of food, but lack of nutritious and healthy food. For instance, a family may not be starving necessarily, but may subsist on malnutritious food, leading to a host of health problems.

At a City Hall food security hearing. 1 in 4 San Franciscans are food insecure, according to dept. of pub. health pic.twitter.com/xJQdlTztYp

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 10, 2014

Most vexing, health experts said, is even if every government food program were fully enrolled, it still wouldn’t be enough.

Fully enroll Cal-Fresh (food stamps). Feed every kid free lunch in every city school. Though many thousands would be fed, tens of thousands of San Franciscans would still remain hungry.

The service gap exists in a conflict of requirements: when seniors or other persons receive Supplemental Security Income, Social Security benefits known as SSI, they are ineligible for food stamps, known in California as Cal Fresh.

Teri Olle, associate director of policy at the San Francisco and Marin Food bank, said SSI benefits aren’t enough to live on in our high-cost city, let alone eat healthily with.

“SSI monthly is about $850. Imagine using that to pay your rent in San Francisco, and then try to buy food,” she said. “That’s not a lot of money.”

The latest numbers from the Social Security Administration show 45,223 San Franciscans receive SSI benefits. Their benefits range from $877 to $1,133 a month for single persons, though most benefits are on the lower end of that scale.

The San Francisco Food Security Task Force developed the voucher program to meet just that need. The program would give food vouchers to eligible seniors and families receiving SSI benefits who cannot afford healthy food. The vouchers could be redeemed specifically for fresh or frozen fruits and vegetables at local grocery stores and supermarkets.

A sample program run by UCSF’s Center for Vulnerable Populations found that a majority of participants in the pilot of the pilot, if you will, bought oranges, grapes, bananas and avocados. Participants ate healthier and more nutritiously. The spending also could spur the local economy, Olle said.

“Of course there’s a moral dictate to do something, and of course we all care,” she said. “But from a city perspective the important aspect is: what are we all spending?”

Supervisors @NormanYeeSF @ericmar415 @DavidCamposSF getting hungry listening to us talk about #foodsecurity @sfbos pic.twitter.com/CPACOFUXfG

— St. Anthony’s (@stanthonysf) April 10, 2014

A year’s worth of healthy food to a senior costs the same as a day in the hospital, health experts at the hearing noted. And a presentation prepared for the hearing by the Food Security Task Force wrote that for every $1 invested in food stamps, $1.79 in local economic activity was spurred.

The voucher program is still in its planning stages, Olle said. Nickolas Pagoulatos, an aide to Mar, said the next step is to assign a city department to lead the pilot. The task force will make that recommendation in the coming months. After proposals are made, it will be up to the mayor or the supervisors to find city funding for the pilot, which would cost $512,000 and would serve 1,000 people.

Notably, the supervisors approved a mandate last December to eliminate food insecurity by 2020.

The fully implemented program serving 25,000 people is estimated to cost as much as $13 million. Advocates proposed private partners supply funding to supplement the program. But so far, everything is just a proposal.

“It’s definitely something we want to implement, work on, and try to find funding for,” Pagoulatos said.

But, he said, that will take time.

Assessment of Food Security in San Francisco by FitztheReporter

Theater Listings: April 9 – 15, 2014

Michael Redmond

-

April 8, 2014

0

Stage listings are compiled by Guardian staff. Performance times may change; call venues to confirm. Reviewers are Robert Avila, Rita Felciano, and Nicole Gluckstern. Submit items for the listings at listings@sfbg.com.

THEATER

OPENING

Fences Marin Theatre Company, 397 Miller, Mill Valley; www.marintheatre.org. $37-58. Previews Thu/10-Sat/12, 8pm; Sun/13, 7pm. Opens Tue/15, 8pm. Runs Tue and Thu-Sat, 8pm (also April 19, May 3, and May 10, 2pm; April 24, 1pm); Wed, 7:30pm; Sun, 2 and 7pm. Through May 11. Marin Theatre Company performs August Wilson’s Pulitzer- and Tony-winning drama, with an all-star cast of Bay Area talent: Carl Lumbly, Steven Anthony Jones, and Margo Hall.

Smash Dragon Theatre, 2120 Broadway, Redwood City; www.dragonproductions.net. $30. Previews Thu/10, 8pm. Opens Fri/11, 8pm. Runs Thu-Sat, 8pm; Sun, 2pm. Through May 4. Dragon Theatre performs Jeffrey Hatcher’s political comedy.

Tribes Berkeley Repertory Theatre, Roda Theatre, 2015 Addison, Berk; www.berkeleyrep.org. $29-99. Previews Fri/11-Sat/12 and Tue/15, 8pm; Sun/13, 7pm. Opens April 16, 8pm. Runs Tue and Thu-Sat, 8pm (also Sat, 2pm); Wed and Sun, 7pm (also Sun, 2pm). Berkeley Rep performs Nina Raine’s family drama about a young deaf man who comes of age.

ONGOING

Bauer San Francisco Playhouse, 450 Post, SF; www.sfplayhouse.org. Tue-Thu, 7pm; Fri-Sat, 8pm (also Sat, 3pm); Sun/13, 2pm. Through April 19. San Francisco Playhouse presents the world premiere of Lauren Gunderson’s drama about artist Rudolf Bauer.

E-i-E-i-OY! In Bed with the Farmer’s Daughter NOHSpace, 2840 Mariposa, SF; www.vivienstraus.com. $20. Fri-Sat, 8pm. Through May 10. Vivien Straus performs her autobiographical solo show.

Every Five Minutes Magic Theatre, Fort Mason Center, Marina at Laguna, SF; www.magictheatre.org. $20-60. Tue, 7pm; Fri-Sat, 8pm (also Wed/9, 2:30pm); Sun, 2:30pm. Through April 20. Magic Theatre presents the world premiere of Linda McLean’s drama about a man’s homecoming after years behind bars.

Feisty Old Jew Marsh San Francisco Main Stage, 1062 Valencia, SF; www.themarsh.org. $25-100. Sat, 8pm; Sun, 7pm. Extended through May 4. Charlie Varon performs his latest solo show, a fictional comedy about “a 20th century man living in a 21st century city.”

Foodies! The Musical Shelton Theater, 533 Sutter, SF; www.foodiesthemusical.com. $32-34. Fri-Sat, 8pm. Open-ended. AWAT Productions presents Morris Bobrow’s musical comedy revue all about food.

The Habit of Art Z Below Theatre, 470 Florida, SF; www.therhino.org. $15-25. Wed/9-Sat/12, 8pm; Sun/13, 3pm. Theatre Rhinoceros performs a “very British comedy” by History Boys author Alan Bennett.

Hundred Days Z Space, 450 Florida, SF; www.zspace.org. $10-100. Thu/10-Sat/12, 8pm; Sun/13, 7pm. Married musical duo the Bengsons (Abigail and Shaun) provide the real-life inspiration and guiding rock ‘n’ roll heart for this uneven but at times genuinely rousing indie musical drama, a self-referential meta-theater piece relating the story of a young couple in 1940s America who fall madly in love only to discover one of them is terminally ill. As an exploration of love, mortality, and the nature of time, the story of Sarah and Will (doubled by the Bengsons and, in movement sequences and more dramatically detailed scenes, by chorus members Amy Lizardo and Reggie D. White) draws force from the potent musical performances and songwriting of composer-creators Abigail and Shaun Bengson (augmented here by the appealing acting-singing chorus and backup band that also feature El Beh, Melissa Kaitlyn Carter, Geneva Harrison, Kate Kilbane, Jo Lampert, Delane Mason, Joshua Pollock). Playwright Kate E. Ryan’s book, however, proves too straightforward, implausible, and sentimental to feel like an adequate vessel for the music’s exuberant, urgent emotion and lilting, longing introspection. Other trappings of director Anne Kauffman’s elaborate production (including an inspired set design by Kris Stone that echoes the raw industrial shell of the theater; and less-than-inspired choreography by the otherwise endlessly inventive Joe Goode) can add texture at times but also prove either neutral figures or distracting minuses in conveying what truth and heft there is in the material. Ultimately, this still evolving world premiere has a strong musical beat at its core, which has a palpable force of its own, even if it’s yet to settle into the right combination of story and staging. (Avila)

I Never Lie: The Pinocchio Project Phoenix Theatre, 414 Mason, SF; www.99stockproductions.org. $15. Thu/10-Sat/12, 8pm. 99 Stock Productions performs Meredith Eden’s bold fairytale retelling.

Lovebirds Marsh San Francisco Studio, 1062 Valencia, SF; www.themarsh.org. $15-50. Thu/10-Fri/11, 8pm; Sat/12, 8:30pm. Theater artist and comedian Marga Gomez presents the world premiere of her 10th solo show, described as “a rollicking tale of incurable romantics.”

Painting the Clouds With Sunshine Eureka Theatre, 215 Jackson, SF; www.42ndStMoon.org. $25-75. Wed-Thu, 7pm; Fri, 8pm; Sat, 6pm (also Sat/12, 1pm); Sun, 3pm. Through April 20. 42nd Street Moon performs a world premiere, a first for the company: Greg MacKellan and Mark D. Kaufmann’s tribute to songs from 1930s movie musicals.

Pearls Over Shanghai Hypnodrome Theatre, 575 10th St, SF; www.thrillpeddlers.com. $30-35. Thu-Sat, 8pm. Through May 31. Thrillpeddlers present the fifth anniversary revival production of its enormously popular take on the 1971 Cockettes musical.

The Scion Marsh San Francisco, 1062 Valencia, SF; www.themarsh.org. $15-60. Thu-Fri, 8pm; Sat, 5pm. Through April 18. In his latest solo show, Brian Copeland (Not a Genuine Black Man; The Waiting Period) explores an infamous crime in his hometown of San Leandro: the 2000 murder of three government meat inspectors by Stuart Alexander, owner of the Santos Linguisa Factory. The story is personal history for Copeland, at least indirectly, as the successful comedian and TV host recounts growing up nearby under the common stricture that “rules are rules,” despite evidence all around that equity, fairness, and justice are in fact deeply skewed by privilege. Developed with director David Ford, the multiple-character monologue (delivered with fitful humor on a bare-bones stage with supportive sound design by David Hines) contrasts Copeland’s own youthful experiences as a target of racial profiling with the way wealthy and white neighbor Stuart Alexander, a serial bully and thug, consistently evaded punishment and even police attention along his path to becoming the “Sausage King,” a mayoral candidate, and a multiple murderer (Alexander died in 2005 at San Quentin). The story takes some meandering turns in making its points, and not all of Copeland’s characterizations are equally compelling. The subject matter is timely enough, however, though ironically it is government that seems to set itself further than ever above the law as much as wealthy individuals or the bogus “legal persons” of the corporate world. The results of such concentrated power are indeed unhealthy, and literally so — Copeland’s grandmother (one of his more persuasive characterizations) harbors a deep distrust of processed food that is nothing if not prescient — but The Scion’s tale of two San Leandrans leaves one hungry for more complexity. (Avila)

She Rode Horses Like the Stock Exchange Thick House, 1695 18th St, SF; www.crowdedfire.org. $15-35. Wed/9-Sat/12, 8pm. Crowded Fire offers a fine West Coast premiere of a clever if less than satisfying satire of the nouveaux riche and pauvre by American playwright Amelia Roper, in which two married couples meet on the grass of their neighborhood park and unravel their tangled, starkly childlike relations and dreams. Amy (a sharp and spirited Zehra Berkman) is a smart and restless woman who knows what she wants and can get it too, but without the slightest idea of how to sit comfortably still and enjoy a sunny Sunday morning. Her husband, Henry (a droll, unfussy, good-natured George Sellner), is clearly the antidote to the corporate jungle Amy works in, an agreeably boyish nurse and nurturer, who alleviates the stress of his own workweek in a children’s cancer ward with a scoop of strawberry-flavored ice cream on a cone. Soon they are sharing their modest picnic blanket with a bounding, slightly older couple, well-pampered housewife Sara (Marilee Talkington, alternately splendid and deflated in a beautifully modulated performance) and bank-owning breadwinner Max (an equally dynamic Kevin Clarke, outwardly suave yet reveling in Ubu-esque paroxysms of infantile yearning). Against a backdrop of post-pastoral suburban ease (succinctly evoked in scenic designer Maya Linke’s dangling mobiles, a lovely abstraction of dappled light and trees), we see the couples first commiserate then trade places, like pirate ships on the high seas of finance capitalism. Yet their viciousness has a gentleness around it too, like children playing pirates. In their jockeying, they seem both utterly willful and beyond their ken, while the triumphs and possibilities of a bygone innocence reassert themselves in unguarded moments like a lost Eden. If anything, the play hits its themes (including this sandbox metaphor) a little too forcefully even for satire, and its fleet 80 minutes get only so far in producing a sense of personal and systemic exhaustion as well as transcendence. The play’s agile humor and director M. Graham Smith’s strong and astute cast make the going a pleasure, however, even if we leave wanting a deeper excavation of that pristine lawn. (Avila)

Shit & Champagne Rebel, 1772 Market, SF; shitandchampagne.eventbrite.com. $25. Fri-Sat, 8pm. Open-ended. D’Arcy Drollinger is Champagne White, bodacious blond innocent with a wicked left hook in this cross-dressing ’70s-style white-sploitation flick, played out live on Rebel’s intimate but action-packed barroom stage. Written by Drollinger and co-directed with Laurie Bushman (with high-flying choreography by John Paolillo, Drollinger, and Matthew Martin), this high-octane camp send-up of a favored formula comes dependably stocked with stock characters and delightfully protracted by a convoluted plot (involving, among other things, a certain street drug that’s triggered an epidemic of poopy pants) — all of it played to the hilt by an excellent cast that includes Martin as Dixie Stampede, an evil corporate dominatrix at the head of some sinister front for world domination called Mal*Wart; Alex Brown as Detective Jack Hammer, rough-hewn cop on the case and ambivalent love interest; Rotimi Agbabiaka as Sergio, gay Puerto Rican impresario and confidante; Steven Lemay as Brandy, high-end calf model and Champagne’s (much) beloved roommate; and Nancy French as Rod, Champagne’s doomed fiancé. Sprawling often literally across two buxom acts, the show maintains admirable consistency: The energy never flags and the brow stays decidedly low. (Avila)

The Speakeasy Undisclosed location (ticket buyers receive a text with directions), SF; www.thespeakeasysf.com. $70 (gambling chips, $5-10 extra; after-hours admission, $10). Thu-Sat, 7:40, 7:50, and 8pm admittance times. Extended through May 24. Boxcar Theater’s most ambitious project to date is also one of the more involved and impressively orchestrated theatrical experiences on any Bay Area stage just now. An immersive time-tripping environmental work, The Speakeasy takes place in an “undisclosed location” (in fact, a wonderfully redesigned version of the company’s Hyde Street theater complex) amid a period-specific cocktail lounge, cabaret, and gambling den inhabited by dozens of Prohibition-era characters and scenarios that unfold around an audience ultimately invited to wander around at will. At one level, this is an invitation to pure dress-up social entertainment. But there are artistic aims here too. Intentionally designed (by co-director and creator Nick A. Olivero with co-director Peter Ruocco) as a fractured super-narrative — in which audiences perceive snatches of overheard stories rather than complete arcs, and can follow those of their own choosing — there’s a way the piece becomes specifically and ever more subtly about time itself. This is most pointedly demonstrated in the opening vignettes in the cocktail lounge, where even the ticking of Joe’s Clock Shop (the “cover” storefront for the illicit 1920s den inside) can be heard underscoring conversations (deeply ironic in historical hindsight) about war, loss, and regained hope for the future. For a San Francisco currently gripped by a kind of historical double-recurrence of the roaring Twenties and dire Thirties at once, The Speakeasy is not a bad place to sit and ponder the simulacra of our elusive moment. (Avila)

“Standing On Ceremony: The Gay Marriage Plays” New Conservatory Theatre Center, 25 Van Ness, SF; www.nctcsf.org. $25-45. Wed-Sat, 8pm; Sun, 2pm. Through April 27. New Conservatory Theatre Center performs short plays about marriage equality by Mo Gaffney, Neil LaBute, Wendy MacLeod, Paul Rudnick, and others.

Top Girls Gough Street Playhouse, 1620 Gough, SF; www.custommade.org. $15-35. Thu/10-Sat/12, 8pm; Sun/13, 7pm. Custom Made Theatre Company performs Caryl Churchill’s celebration of powerful women.

The Two Chairs Bindlestiff Studios, 185 Sixth St, SF; www.performersunderstress.com. $10-30. Thu/10-Sat/12, 8pm; Sun/13, 2pm. In this world premiere by Performers Under Stress of its co-founder Charles Pike’s play, two chairs, per title, come matched with two cameras projecting two angles on two characters — He (Vince Faso, alternating nights with Duane Lawrence) and She (Juliana Egley, alternating nights with Valerie Fachman) — who sit at right angles to one another in a series of terse, vaguely clinical encounters. Introduced and concluded each time with cheeky inter-titles (à la Beckett) and the sound of a buzzer (à la Beckett — pretty much everything here is à la Beckett), their interactions unfold as progressive variations on a theme, freighted with references to the Goldberg Variations and other pretentious class markers (belied somewhat by the characters’ less than wholly sophisticated demeanors). Each mysterious not to say unorthodox session also concludes with a limp slap and the exchange of an envelope, as a banal male heterosexual masochist fantasy is jokily and tediously pursued to the point of He’s final erasure. Directed by PUS’s Scott Baker, the production adds a generational variation too across the alternating casts. But at least with the younger cast (Faso and Egley), the exploration comes across as glib and lifeless, and Pike’s self-conscious regression to an old-school avant-garde style feels too ersatz to be persuasive. (Avila)

Venus in Fur Geary Theater, 415 Geary, SF; www.act-sf.org. $20-120. Wed/9-Sat/12, 8pm (also Sat/12, 2pm); Sun/13, 7pm. American Conservatory Theater performs a new production of David Ives’ 2012 Tony-nominated play.

The World’s Funniest Bubble Show Marsh San Francisco, 1062 Valencia, SF; www.themarsh.org. $8-11. Sun, 11am. Extended through May 25. The popular, kid-friendly show by Louis Pearl (aka “The Amazing Bubble Man”) returns to the Marsh.

BAY AREA

Accidental Death of an Anarchist Berkeley Repertory Theatre, Roda Theatre, 2015 Addison, Berk; www.berkeleyrep.org. $29-99. Tue and Thu-Sat, 8pm (no show April 18; also Sat and April 17, 2pm); Sun, 2 and 7pm. Through April 20. Berkeley Rep presents comic actor Steven Epp in Dario Fo’s explosive political farce, directed by Christopher Bayes.

Arms and the Man Barn Theatre, 30 Sir Francis Drake, Ross; www.rossvalleyplayers.com. $13-26. Thu/10, 7:30pm; Fri/11-Sat/12, 8pm; Sun/13, 2pm. Ross Valley Players perform George Bernard Shaw’s romantic comedy.

The Coast of Utopia Ashby Stage, 1901 Ashby, Berk; www.shotgunplayers.org. $20-35 (three-show marathon days, $100-125). Part One: Voyage runs through April 17; Part Two: Shipwreck runs through April 19; Part Three: Salvage runs through April 27. Three-play marathon April 26. Through April 27. Check website for showtime info. Shotgun Players performs Tom Stoppard’s epic The Coast of Utopia trilogy, with all three plays performed in repertory.

East 14th Marsh Berkeley, 2120 Allston, Berk; www.themarsh.org. $20-50. Fri, 8pm; Sat, 8:30pm. Through April 26. Don Reed’s hit autobiographical solo show returns to the Marsh Berkeley.

Geezer Marsh Berkeley, 2120 Allston, Berk; www.themarsh.org. $25-50. Thu, 8pm; Sat, 5pm. Through April 26. Geoff Hoyle moves his hit comedy about aging to the East Bay.

The Hound of the Baskervilles Mountain View Center for the Performing Arts, 500 Castro, SF; www.theatreworks.org. $19-73. Tue-Wed, 7:30pm; Thu-Sat, 8pm (also Sat, 2pm); Sun, 2 and 7pm. Through April 27. TheatreWorks performs Stephen Canny and John Nicholson’s comedic send-up of Sherlock Holmes.

Johnny Guitar, the Musical Masquers Playhouse, 105 Park Place, Point Richmond; www.masquers.org. $22. Fri-Sat, 8pm; Sun, 2pm. Through April 26. Masquers Playhouse performs the off-Broadway hit based on the campy Joan Crawford Western.

Sleuth Center REPertory Company, 1601 Civic, Walnut Creek; www.centerrep.org. $33-54. Wed, 7:30pm; Thu-Sat, 8pm (also April 26, 2:30pm); Sun, 2:30pm. Through April 26. Center REPertory Company performs Anthony Shaffer’s classic, Tony-winning thriller.

The 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee Julia Morgan Theater, 2640 College, Berk; www.berkeleyplayhouse.org. $18-60. Fri, April 24, and May 1, 7pm; Sat, 1 and 6pm; Sun, noon and 5pm. Through May 4. Berkeley Playhouse performs the Tony-winning musical comedy.

Vampire Lesbians of Sodom and Sleeping Beauty or Coma Live Oaks Theater, 1301 Shattuck, Berk; www.viragotheatre.org. $28. Thu-Sat, 8pm; Sun, 2pm. Through April 19. Virago Theatre Company performs Charles Busch’s outrageous double bill.

Wittenberg Aurora Theatre, 2081 Addison, Berk; www.auroratheatre.org. $32-60. Previews Wed/9, 8pm. Opens Thu/10, 8pm. Runs Tue, 7pm; Wed-Sat, 8pm; Sun, 2 and 7pm. Through May 4. Aurora Theatre Company performs David Davalos’ comedy about reason versus faith.

PERFORMANCE/DANCE

BATS Improv Bayfront Theater, B350 Fort Mason Center, SF; www.improv.org. $20. “Super Scene,” Fri, 8pm. Through April 25. “Spring Musical,” Sat, 8pm. Through April 26.

“The Big Gay Comedy Show” Marines’ Memorial Theater, 609 Sutter, SF; www.richmondermet.org. Sun/13, 7:30pm. $35-70. Benefit for the Richmond/Ermet AIDS Foundation with Bruce Vilanch, Marga Gomez, Shann Carr, Ali Mafi, and others.

Caroline Lugo and Carolé Acuña’s Ballet Flamenco Peña Pachamama, 1630 Powell, SF; www.carolinalugo.com. Sat/12, April 19, 30, May 4, 10-11, 17, and 25, 6:15pm. $15-19. Flamenco performance by the mother-daughter dance company, featuring live musicians.

“CubaCaribe Festival of Dance and Music” Dance Mission Theater, 3316 24th St, SF; www.brownpapertickets.com. Fri/11-Sat/12, 8pm; Sun/13, 7pm. $27. “Week One: Moving Forward” with Alafia Dance Ensemble (Haiti), Alayo Dance Company (Afro-Cuban), Cunamacué (Peru), Duniya Dance and Drum Company (West Africa), Las Que Son Son (Cuba), Las Puras (US), and Nicole Klaymoon’s Embodiment Project (African Diaspora).

“Dream Queens Revue” Aunt Charlie’s Lounge, 133 Turk, SF; www.dreamqueensrevue.com. Wed/9, 9:30pm. Free. Drag with Collette LeGrande, Ruby Slippers, Sophilya Leggz, Bobby Ashton, and more.

Feinstein’s at the Nikko 222 Mason, SF; www.feinsteinssf.com. Fri/11, 8pm. $60-75. Joan Collins in “One Night with Joan.”

“Invidious” Private Mission District home, SF; www.brownpapertickets.com. Thu/10-Sun/13, 6:30 and 9pm. $40. Contemporary dance company FACT/SF performs a new, site-specific work.

“The Life You’ll Never Have” Stage Werx Theatre, 446 Valencia, SF; www.foulplaysf.com. Wed/9, 7pm writing party; 8pm performance. $20. The audience crafts each evening’s soap opera-inspired play at this interactive, immersive performance by Exquisite Corpse Theatre.

“Magic at the Rex” Hotel Rex, 562 Sutter, SF; www.magicattherex.com. Sat, 8pm. Ongoing. $25. Magic and mystery with Adam Sachs and mentalist Sebastian Boswell III.

“Mischief” Skylark Bar, 3089 16th St, SF; www.hunnybunnyburlesque.com. Fri/11, 8pm. Free. Burlesque and variety show.

“Mission in Motion” Brava Theater Center, 2781 24th St, SF; www.brava.org. Sun/13, 3pm. $5-10. Mission Academy for the Performing Arts presents a showcase and benefit for Brava youth performing arts programs.

“Mortified” DNA Lounge, 375 11th St, SF; www.getmortified.com. Fri/11, 7:30pm. $21. Also Sat/12, 8pm, $20, Uptown, 1928 Telegraph, Oakl. Fearless storytellers share their most adorably embarrassing childhood writings.

“Rotunda Dance Series” San Francisco City Hall, 1 Carlton B. Goodlett Place, SF; www.dancersgroup.org. Fri/11, noon. Free. This month, the Tiruchitrambalam School of Dance performs classical Indian dance.

“San Francisco Comedy College” Purple Onion at Kells, 530 Jackson, SF; www.purpleonionatkells.com. $5-10. “New Talent Show,” Wed-Thu, 7. Ongoing. “The Cellar Dwellers,” stand-up comedy, Wed-Thu, 8:15pm and Fri-Sat, 7:30pm. Ongoing.

“Shotz: EarthTax” Tides Theatre, 533 Sutter, SF; www.amiosnyc.com. Tue/15, 8pm. $10. Seven plays, five minutes each, created in less than a month, and united under the theme “EarthTax.”

Terminator Too: Judgment Play DNA Lounge, 373 11th St, SF; www.dnalounge.com. May 1, 9pm. $25-50. The creators of Point Break Live! take on James Cameron’s 1991 sci-fi classic, with an audience member picked on the night of the show to embody Schwarzenegger’s iconic role.

“Yuri and Friends presents Thai Rivera” Punch Line Comedy Club, 444 Battery, SF; www.punchlinecomedyclub.com. Tue/15, 8pm. $15. Stand-up comedy.

BAY AREA

AXIS Dance Company Malonga Casquelourd Center for the Arts, 1428 Alice, Oakl; axisdance.brownpapertickets.com. Fri/11-Sat/12, 8pm; Sun/13, 2pm. $10-25. The company performs Yvonne Rainer’s iconic Trio A.

Diablo Ballet Hillbarn Theatre, 1285 E. Hillsdale, Foster City; www.diabloballet.org. Fri/11-Sat/12, 8pm. $45. The company’s 20th season continues with Emotions into Movement.

“IMPACT” Odell Johnson Theater, Laney College, 900 Fallon, Oakl; www.destinyarts.org. Fri/11-Sat/12, 7:30pm (also Sat/12, 2pm). $13-30. Destiny Arts Youth Performance Company celebrates the youth arts and violence prevention organization’s 25th anniversary with this world-premiere show, a mix of dance, theater, spoken word, rap, and song.

“MarshJam Improv Comedy Show” Marsh Berkeley, 2120 Allston, Berk; www.themarsh.org. Fri, 8pm. Ongoing. $10. Improv comedy with local legends and drop-in guests.

“A Month in the Country” Ashby Stage, 1901 Ashby, Berk; www.shotgunplayers.org. Tue/15, 7pm. $20. Staged reading of Ivan Turgenev’s play presented by Shotgun Players.

“Stand-Up Sit-Down” La Peña Cultural Center, 3105 Shattuck, Berk; www.lapena.org. Fri/11, 8pm. $15. Comedy and interview show with Karinda Dobbins and Dhaya Lakshminarayanan.

*

Privatization of public housing

Michael Redmond

-

April 8, 2014

14

news@sfbg.com

Like so many San Franciscans, Sabrina Carter is getting evicted.

The mother of three says that if she loses her home in the Western Addition, she’ll have nowhere to go. It’s been a tough, four-year battle against her landlord — a St. Louis-based development company called McCormack Baron — and its law firm, Bornstein & Bornstein. That’s the same law firm that gained notoriety for holding an “eviction boot camp” last November to teach landlords how to do Ellis Act evictions and sweep tenants out of rent-controlled housing.

But Carter’s story isn’t your typical Ellis eviction. Plaza East, where she lives, is a public housing project. Public housing residents throughout the country are subject to the “one-strike and you’re out” rule. If residents get one strike — any misdemeanor or felony arrest — they get an eviction notice. In Carter’s case, her 16-year-old was arrested. He was cleared of all charges — but Carter says McCormack Baron still wouldn’t accept her rent payment and wouldn’t respond to her questions.

“I was never informed of my status,” she said.

That is, until her son was arrested again, and Carter found herself going up against Bornstein & Bornstein. She agreed to sign a document stipulating that her eviction would be called off unless her son entered Plaza East property (he did). It was that or homelessness, said Carter, who also has two younger sons.

“They criminalized my son so they could evict my family,” Carter said.

McCormack Baron and Bornstein & Bornstein both declined to comment.

On March 12, Carter and a band of supporters were singing as they ascended City Hall’s grand staircase to Mayor Ed Lee’s office.

“We’re asking the mayor to call this eviction off. Another black family cannot be forced out of this city,” Lisa “Tiny” Gray-Garcia, co-founder of Poor Magazine, said at the protest.

Nearly half of San Francisco’s public housing residents are African American, according to a 2009 census from the city’s African American Out-Migration Task Force. These public housing residents represent a significant portion of San Francisco’s remaining African American population, roughly 65 percent.

Carter’s eviction was postponed, but it raises an important question: Why is a public housing resident facing off with private real estate developers and lawyers in the first place?

PUBLIC HOUSING, PRIVATE INTERESTS

Plaza East is one of five San Francisco public housing properties that was privatized under HOPE VI, a federal program that administers grants to demolish and rebuild physically distressed public housing.

The modernized buildings often have fewer public housing units than the ones they replaced, with private developers becoming their managers. San Francisco’s take on HOPE VI, called HOPE SF, is demolishing, rebuilding, and privatizing eight public housing sites with a similar process.

US Department Housing and Urban Development is rolling out a new program to privatize public housing. The San Francisco Housing Authority is one of 340 housing projects in the nation to be chosen for the competitive program. The city is now starting to implement the Rental Assistance Demonstration program. When it’s done, 75 percent of the city’s public housing properties will be privatized.

Under RAD, developers will team up with nonprofits and architectural firms to take over managing public housing from the Housing Authority. RAD is a federal program meant to address a nationwide crisis in public housing funding. Locally, the effort to implement the program has been spurred by the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development.

MOHCD Director Olson Lee has described RAD in a report as “a game-changer for San Francisco’s public-housing residents and for [Mayor] Lee’s re-envisioning plan for public housing.” Later, Lee told us, “We have 10,000 residents in these buildings and they deserve better housing. It’s putting nearly $200 million in repairs into these buildings, which the housing authority doesn’t have. They have $5 million a year to make repairs.”

Funding is sorely needed, and this won’t be enough to address problems like the perpetually broken elevators at the 13-story Clementina Towers senior housing high-rises or SFHA’s $270 million backlog in deferred maintenance costs.

But RAD is more than a new source of cash. It will “transform public housing properties into financially sustainable real estate assets,” as SFHA literature puts it.

RAD changes the type of funding that supports public housing. Nationally, federal dollars for public housing have been drying up since the late ’70s. But a different federal subsidy, the housing choice voucher program that includes Section 8 rent subsidies, has been better funded by Congress.

Under RAD, the majority of the city’s public housing will be sustained through these voucher funds. In the process, the Housing Authority will also hand over responsibility for managing, maintaining, and effectively owning public housing to teams of developers and nonprofits. Technically, the Housing Authority will still own the public housing. But it will transfer the property through 99-year ground leases to limited partnerships established by the developers.

The RAD plan comes on the heels of an era marked by turmoil and mismanagement at the Housing Authority. The agency’s last director, Henry Alvarez, was at the center of a scandal involving alleged racial discrimination. He was fired in April 2013.

In December 2012, HUD declared SFHA “troubled,” the lowest possible classification before being placed under federal receivership. A performance audit of the agency, first submitted in April 2013 by the city’s Budget and Legislative Analyst, determined that “SFHA is expecting to have no remaining cash to pay its bills sometime between May and July of 2013.”

Six of the seven members of the Housing Authority Commission were asked to resign in February 2013, and were replaced with mayoral appointees.

Joyce Armstrong is not a member of this commission, but she sits on the dais with them at meetings, and gives official statements and comments alongside the commissioners. Armstrong is the president of the citywide Public Housing Tenants Association, and she talked about RAD at a March 27 meeting, conveying tenants’ apprehension toward the expansion of private managers in public housing.

“Staff in HOPE VI developments are very condescending,” Armstrong said. “We’re not pleased. We’re being demeaned, beat up on, and talked to in a way I don’t feel is appropriate.”

NONPROFITIZATION

When RAD is implemented, it won’t just be development companies interacting with public housing residents. San Francisco’s approach to RAD is unique in that it will rely heavily on nonprofit involvement. Each “development team” that is taking over at public housing projects includes a nonprofit organization. Contracts haven’t been signed yet, but the Housing Authority has announced the teams they’re negotiating with.

“We call it the nonprofitization of public housing,” said Sara Shortt, executive director of the Housing Rights Committee.

The developers are a list of the usual players in San Francisco’s affordable housing market, including the John Stewart Company, Bridge Housing Corporation, and Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation.

Community-based organizations that are involved include the Mission Economic Development Agency, the Japanese American Religious Federation, Ridgepoint Nonprofit Corporation, Glide Community Housing, Bernal Heights Housing Corporation, and the Chinatown Community Development Center.

On March 13, when the Housing Authority Commission announced who would be on these teams, the meeting was packed with concerned members of the public. Two overflow rooms were set up. One group with a strong turnout was SEIU Local 1021, which represents public housing staff.

Alysabeth Alexander, vice president of politics for SEIU 1021, said that 120 workers represented by the union could be laid off as management transfers to development teams, and 80 other unionized jobs are also on the line.

“They’re talking about eliminating 200 middle-class jobs,” Alexander said.

She also noted that SEIU 1021 wasn’t made aware of the possible layoffs — it only found out because of public records requests. (Another downside of privatization is that certain information may no longer be publicly accessible.)

“We’re concerned about these jobs,” Alexander said. “But we’re also concerned about the residents.”

RESIDENTS’ RIGHTS

HUD protects some residents’ rights in its 200-page RAD notice. These include the right to return for residents displaced by renovations and other key protections, but rights not covered in the document — some of which were secured under the current system only after lengthy campaigns — are less clear. In particular, rights relating to house rules or screening criteria for new tenants aren’t included.

Negotiations with development teams are just beginning. Lee said tenants’ rights not included in the RAD language would be discussed as part of that process.

“It will be a function of what is best practice,” Lee said.

But developers have already expressed some ideas about public housing policies they want to tweak when they take over. At one point, the city was considering developers’ requests to divide the citywide public housing wait-list into a series of site-specific lists. Lee says that this option is no longer on the table.

But as developers’ interests interact with local, state, and federal tenant regulations, things could get messy. James Grow, deputy director of the National Housing Law Project, says that whatever standard is the most protective of residents’ rights should apply.

Still, Grow said, “There’s going to be inconsistencies and gray areas.”

Grow said that inevitably some residents’ rights will be decided “on a case-by-case basis, in litigations between the tenant and the landlord…They’ll be duking it out in court.”

This will be true nationwide, as each RAD rollout will be different. But at least in San Francisco, “Most of the tenant protections in public housing will remain,” said Shortt. “We are trying to tie up any holes locally to make sure that there is no weakening of rights.”

Grow’s and Shortt’s organizations are also involved in San Francisco’s RAD plan. The National Housing Law Project, along with the Housing Rights Committee and Enterprise Community Partners, have contracts to perform education and outreach to public housing residents and development teams.

UNCERTAIN FUTURE

Just how much money will go to RAD is still under negotiation. The RAD funding itself, derived from the voucher program, will surpass the $32 million the city collected last year in HUD operating subsidies. But its big bucks promise is the $180 million in tax credit equity that the privatization model is expected to bring in.

The city will also be contributing money to the program, but how much is unclear.

“The only budget I have right now is the $8 million,” Lee said, money that is going to the development teams for “pre-development.”

Lee added that funding requests would also be considered; those requests could total $30-50 million per year from the city’s housing trust fund, according to Shortt.

To access that $180 million in low-income housing tax credits, development teams will need to create limited partnerships and work with private investors. The city wants to set up an “investor pool,” a central source which would loan to every development team.

It’s a complicated patchwork of money involving many private interests, some of whom don’t have the best reputations.

Jackson Consultancy was named as a potential partner in the application for the development team that will take over management at Westbrook Apartments and Hunters Point East-West. That firm is headed by Keith Jackson, the consultant arrested in a FBI string in late March on charges of murder-for-hire in connection with the scandal that ensnared Sen. Leland Yee and Chinatown crime figure Raymond “Shrimp Boy” Chow.

Presumably, Jackson is no longer in the running, although the entire transformation is rife with uncertainties.

Residents often feel blindsided when management or rules change at public housing properties. And RAD will be one of the biggest changes in San Francisco’s public housing in at least a decade.

“People are concerned about their homes. When they take over the Housing Authority property, what’s going to happen? They keep telling us that it’s going to stay the same, nothing is going to change,” said Martha Hollins, president of the Plaza East Tenants Association.

Hollins has been part of Carter’s support network in her eviction case.

“They’re always talking about self-sufficient, be self-sufficient,” Hollins said. “How can we be self-sufficient when our children are growing up and being criminalized?”

Public housing has many complex problems that need radical solutions. But some say RAD isn’t the right one. After seeing developers gain from public housing while generational poverty persists within them, Gray-Garcia says that her organization is working with public housing residents to look into ways to give people power over their homes. They are considering suing for equity for public housing residents.

“‘These people can’t manage their own stuff and we need to do it for them.’ It’s that lie, that narrative, that is the excuse to eradicate communities of color,” Gray-Garcia said. “We want to change the conversation.”

A tale of two Google buses

Michael Redmond

-

April 8, 2014

5

joe@sfbg.com

At the San Francisco Board of Supervisors on April 1, an environmental appeal hearing on the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency’s commuter shuttle pilot program elevated the so-called Google Bus into a powerful symbol with two narratives — of gentrification and displacement, or the misguided belief that tech workers are to blame for those trends in San Francisco.

Those weren’t the only divergent tales to emerge at the seven-hour long, emotion-packed hearing. While the buses were praised as good alternatives to San Franciscans driving to work in the Silicon Valley, there was also a surprising level of consensus that they’re causing conflicts at local bus stops and need to be better regulated by the SFMTA.

The tale of the Google Bus as told by the tech industry is this: the buses ferry the workers of a bourgeoning economic sector in a city that now leads the world in innovation. At its most basic, the Google Bus reduces wasteful driving, an environmental boon to the region.

But activists decrying displacement have beaten down a Google Bus effigy in the form of a piñata, and the morning before the hearing, protesters in clown costumes blockaded another Google Bus. Their tale of the Google Bus is about monstrous private transports that hurt low-income San Franciscans by clogging up Muni stops and driving up the price of nearby housing.

Protesters dressed as clowns blockade a Google bus the day the CEQA hearing was held.

In this increasingly economically polarized city, A Tale of Two Cities is oft-mentioned in progressive political circles. But now A Tale of Two Google Buses has become the story of the moment, a story whose moral depends on one’s perspective.

SILENT ON SHUTTLES

Carli Paine, who manages this and other pilot programs at the SFMTA, listened to over an hour’s worth of public complaints about the shuttles at the hearing before enduring a tough grilling by Sup. David Campos and others.

“I don’t have a problem with tech workers, but the arrogance of the tech companies,” a woman who identified herself as a nurse said at public comment. “I’m on the Muni bus that’s packed to the gills that’s held up behind a Google bus.”

Paine has heard many variations on that since the Google buses arrived six years ago. The shuttles blocked Muni buses, held up traffic, and blocked bike lanes, but Paine said the SFMTA’s early efforts to cite buses for illegally using Muni stops weren’t working.

“That’s not a comprehensive policy,” she told us in a phone interview after the hearing. “It’s reactionary. We recognized we needed a policy to address commuter shuttles.”

In 2010, the SFMTA applied for grants to measure shuttle impacts, receiving funding in 2011. The first step was to go to the tech companies — Google, Facebook, Yahoo and their ilk — to get the data. The questions were basic, asking for counts: the number of shuttles, stops, riders, and trips. The tech industry flatly ignored SFMTA’s inquiries.

“Some data was private, they felt,” Paine said. “One of the reasons we’re doing the pilot is there’s information we haven’t been successful in getting voluntarily.”

Tech companies were incommunicado at the hearing as well. Hundreds of people, from technology workers to activists to everyday San Franciscans showed up, but representatives of the technology sector did not announce themselves.

“I think it’s worth pointing out how absent the tech companies are,” Sup. Malia Cohen said at the hearing, contrasting that with three years ago, when Twitter and other companies sought city tax breaks. “The tech executives were swarming City Hall.”

That night, the public finally got a peek at the fruits of Paine’s research. The Budget and Legislative Analyst Office released a report aggregating data from many sources, including the SFMTA. The findings tell the story of the damage caused by commuter shuttles on city streets.

BIG BAD BUSES

The BLA’s report makes one thing clear: while the commuter shuttle plot program applies to all privately owned shuttles, the main public debate is directed at regional shuttle buses ferrying workers to Silicon Valley.

The BLA estimates there are 131 regional shuttles with 8,030 boardings (to San Francisco and back) per a day. Of the shuttles making 273 trips to and from San Francisco daily, the lion’s share (57) are owned by Google. Its workers represent just over half of daily boardings.

The invading buses are also enormous. Taller than a Muni bus, the BLA reports that the Google buses weigh 31 tons when fully loaded, nearly twice the weight of a big rig truck. That’s also a far cry from the seven-ton intra-city shuttles used by the likes of the Academy of Art University and Kaiser Permanente. That size comes with a cost.

“The Department of Public Works staff concur that heavier vehicles contribute to faster roadway deterioration,” the BLA wrote. The damage a shuttle makes on the pavement with a single trip accounts for $1.08 out of the $1 million it will ultimately cost the city to reconstruct a mile of pavement. A typical personal car will cause $0.00023 of damage to pavement over its entire lifetime. So one shuttle trip is “equivalent to 4,700 passenger vehicles driving over the same lane.”

But the city isn’t allowed to charge for that damage. The SFMTA is precluded from charging a fee for road damage pursuant to California Vehicle Code, the BLA report wrote, which restricts local governments for taxing use of city streets.

The SFMTA could opt to collect money by fining shuttle scofflaws. The BLA reports that, “half of the known stops” for all private shuttles take place in Muni bus zones, which is against city law — stops can only be made in white zones, and Muni stops are striped red.

“These are pirate shuttles,” said Richard Drury, the attorney who appealed the program on behalf of the SEIU Local 1021 and other appellants. “They are illegal.”

But at the hearing, the BLA reported that of 13,085 citations made to vehicles in red zones since January 2014, only 45 were issued to commuter shuttles. Campos fired verbal salvos at Paine and SFMTA Director Ed Reiskin, demanding to know why red zone parking laws weren’t enforced.

“Was there a policy not to cite the buses?” Campos asked, pointedly, to which Reiskin replied, “There was not.”

SFMTA dir. Ed Reiskin answers the $1 million question: Out of 13,000 traffic citations, why only 45 to #googlebus? pic.twitter.com/Od8IaibL4A

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 2, 2014

But in an email obtained by Tim Redmond of 48Hills.org (and formerly of the Bay Guardian), a vice president at Bauer (a shuttle provider contracting with tech companies) wrote to Paine in January asking her to dismiss its shuttle citations. “As I assume you know, we have had a ‘handshake’ agreement with SFMTA for many years that allowed us to use stops under a ‘Muni First’ condition.”

Paine refused to comment on whether the shuttles had permission to use the stops. But the practice of using them has definitely had an impact on the cost of nearby housing as tech employees pay top dollar for the convenience.

HOUSING BOOMLETS

From 2010 to 2012, San Francisco’s population increased by more than 20,000, the BLA reported, and consequently, “The demand for housing has increased.”

“We’re bussing wealthy, predominantly white adults into low-income neighborhoods, where they in turn displace low-income people,” Drury said at the hearing. “This is the reverse of affirmative action.”

The BLA cites multiple studies demonstrating a spike in rental prices immediately around the shuttle stops. On Lombard in the Marina, rents soared by 30 percent near the shuttle stops, as opposed to 17 percent in the rest of the neighborhood. Near the Dolores Street shuttle stops, rents soared by 43 percent, as opposed to 23 percent just a few blocks away.

Even a cursory search of Craigslist shows higher rents at listings that advertise “easy access for commuters and 10 minutes to Apple/Google/Yahoo shuttle bus stops!”

I drew the #PirateShuttle because somebody had to. #Googlebus #CEQA pic.twitter.com/WrrbdYzODR

— Julia Wong (@juliacarriew) April 2, 2014

The BLA admits this anecdotal evidence doesn’t “show causation.” But at the hearing, a tech worker named Martin MacKerel pleaded with his colleagues to recognize the shuttles may hurt San Franciscans, despite the industry’s best intentions.

“I’m here to talk to my fellow tech workers here,” he said. “We’ve got to consider that we’re displacing people into Antioch, San Pablo, the East Bay. If they have to drive in to San Francisco, we need to know that.”

Tech worker Andrew Textor delivered a different message at the hearing, decrying the villainization of tech workers.

“I’ve lived in the city for 10 years, I’ve been riding the shuttles four and a half,” he said. “Please let this program go forward. I’m not a new arrival, I don’t like being called ‘techie.’ I’m still a San Franciscan.”

In the Tale of Two Google Buses, the shuttles are symbols of populist anger and economic frustration, but also real vehicles that harm San Francisco in ways that can be measured and regulated, which officials claim the 18-month pilot program will do. The supervisors denied the environmental appeal on an 8-2 vote.

“We don’t want to stop the buses,” Cynthia Crews of the League of Pissed Off Voters said at the hearing. “We just want the companies to pay their fair share.”

Tech worker Andrew Textor “I’m not a new arrival, I don’t like being called ‘techie.’ I’m still a San Franciscan.” pic.twitter.com/sq3kG8P0JJ

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 2, 2014

This is 911, please hold

Sasha Cuttler And Mary Magee

-

April 3, 2014

119

The contentious tax breaks given to tech companies in San Francisco are under fire once again, as emergency dispatchers protested crippling budget shortages yesterday (Wed/2) in front of the Department of Emergency Management.

With sweeping budget cuts across all public sectors over the past few years, everyone is clamoring for more money wherever they can get it. But these protesters, organized by SEIU Local 1021, made some pretty compelling arguments for being prioritized.

“When you call 911, there should be enough people working to pick up the phone,” said Ron Davis, who has been an emergency dispatcher in San Francisco for 13 years. “It’s upsetting when you or someone you love is in a life-threatening emergency and you’re put on hold for 30 seconds, 45 seconds, or even a minute and longer.”

The department receives, on average, nearly 3,000 phone calls per day, and the workers who spoke at the rally described long hours and inadequate coverage for the volume of calls that they receive. California law mandates that 90 percent of 911 calls be answered in ten seconds or less, but in San Francisco that number often drops to 60 percent or lower. Davis said that on particularly busy nights, such as New Year’s Eve, there can be up to 20 calls in the queue waiting for an available dispatcher.

“I don’t even go out on holidays,” Davis said. “I’m too afraid that if something happens to me or someone in my family, we won’t get through to 911.”

Protesters directed much of their frustration at the tech companies, especially those which received massive tax breaks as an incentive to remain in San Francisco. The estimated tax break for Twitter alone, estimated to be $56 million, is greater than the entire annual budget for the DEM.

The rally is a part of “Worker Wednesdays,” a series of events created by SEIU Local 1021 in response to Mayor Ed Lee’s Tech Tuesday meetings with local technology leaders. The goal is to draw Lee out to meet with and prioritize city workers. Since the mayor did not attend the rally himself, the protesters chanted and yelled at a seven-foot cardboard cutout of a smiling Lee.

The emergency dispatchers are just a part of the union’s contract negotiations with the city, as SEIU Local 1021 represents over 13,000 employees in San Francisco. Larry Bradshaw, vice president for the San Francisco region of the union, said that so far they had made no progress in their bargaining with city leaders. The contract is set to be written by May 2. After that, union members will decide whether or not they accept the terms.

Workers were willing to make sacrifices during the recession, Bradshaw said. But now that the economy has turned around, “we just want to recoup our losses and make up for lost ground.”

A concurrent meeting of the Budget and Finance Committee at City Hall brought up many of the same points. A report from the City Controller, Ben Rosenfield, confirmed that the economic growth in San Francisco has been among the fastest in the nation and that he expects the progress to continue.

Sup. London Breed specifically asked how emergency services play into this recent boom, and a representative from the Mayor’s Budget Office said that the DEM is currently working with the mayor’s office on a revised budget, which should be released later this month or early May.

Protester barfs on windshield of Yahoo bus — Viva La Vomit!

Erica Hanna

-

April 2, 2014

49

Protester barfs on windshield of Yahoo bus — Viva La Vomit!

Yesterday at City Hall there was a seven hour long hearing on the validity of the tech buses, known colloquially as Google buses. Do they cause displacement? Are they too heavy (and break the pavement)? Are they merely a symbol of gentrification, or do they cause gentrification?

All of those questions were thoughtfully, pointedly argued, left and right. But the world of news spins fast, and now the latest tech bus news is less thought-provoking and more ick-provoking: a protester allegedly puked all over the front of a Yahoo bus, supposedly in protest of the bus, not his or her lunch.

Protester on roof of yahoo bus vomited on the windshield #techbus #googlebus #vomit #takethattechiescum pic.twitter.com/Midy6WO3JD

— The Red Son (@revscript) April 2, 2014

Erin McElroy, one of the lead organizers of the colorful San Francisco Google bus protest yesterday, said that though the methods used by the Oaklanders may be different than her group, it’s all part of one cause.

“I support a diversity of tactics,” she told us in a phone interview today. “It’s helpful that our tactics are different than theirs.”

Local news site Indybay reported over 50 protesters blockaded an Apple, Google and Yahoo bus this morning. From the photos they posted, you can see one protester standing on the roof of the bus. Perhaps the perfect angle for a barf barrage?

No word yet on who the purported puker was, but as long as we have your attention, check out the Bay Guardian’s coverage of yesterday’s acrobat-filled San Francisco protest, and our coverage of last night’s environmental review hearing of the Google buses — both stories that hopefully provide a much deeper look at the issues than this one, somewhat ridiculous headline.

@revscript @mappingbabel why are people protesting yahoo? they are doing better with marissa mayer there. they struggled for a while

— Christopher Reeves (@cjreeves2011) April 2, 2014

@cjreeves2011 Because rents are rocketing up in the Bay Area especially around SF/Oakland due to influx of well-paid techies @revscript

— Jack Clark (@mappingbabel) April 2, 2014

@mappingbabel @revscript if tech employees bought houses instead of rent it would fix the problem.

— Christopher Reeves (@cjreeves2011) April 2, 2014

@ellenhuet @revscript projectile vomit? or throwing a bucket of something gross? otherwise how

— Nitasha Tiku (@nitashatiku) April 2, 2014

@ellenhuet @nitashatiku Shuttle protests are basically Lady Gaga shows now, I guess?

— Andrew Dalton (@dolftown) April 2, 2014

@revscript He must be so proud of his achievement. I’m sure that’s going to look great on his resume… #GetAJob

— Rev (@Rev48026523) April 2, 2014

SF’s culture of corruption

-

April 2, 2014

12

EDITORIAL The extent of the charges in the criminal complaint against Sen. Leland Yee, political consultant Keith Jackson, and others are shocking and sensational: international arms trafficking, drug dealing, money laundering, cavorting with organized crime figures, murder for hire. But the basic allegation that Yee and Jackson practiced a corrupt, transactional kind of politics wasn’t surprising to anyone who knew how they operated.

What’s worse, they were simply a more extreme — and now, thanks to FBI wiretaps and undercover agents, a better documented — example of the political corruption that is endemic to San Francisco and some other high-stakes American cities. The city of St. Francis gets sold out to the highest bidders everyday, by politicians who value wealthy constituents over the vast majority of us who are just trying to get by — and over the interests of city finances and governance.

Part of the problem is inherent in our money-driven political system, in which politicians are constantly hustling for cash from people who want things from them. Politicians deny they take actions with political contributions in mind, but well-heeled capital and labor interests don’t spend millions of dollars on contributions out of the goodness of their hearts. These are business transactions.

We wholeheartedly support the call Senate President Darrell Steinberg made for fundamental political reform during the March 28 vote to suspend Yee and two of his allegedly corrupt colleagues. These cases aren’t aberrations, they are indicative of how power get wielded when it’s based on wealth. That’s the reality that has gotten even uglier since the Citizens United decision equated money with political speech and upped the ante for would-be public servants.

But much of the problem is particular to San Francisco, where cozy relationships between politicians and corporate interests are often feted in plain view. Former Mayor Willie Brown — a lawyer and unregistered lobbyist who won’t reveal his huge corporate client list despite having an influential weekly column in the San Francisco Chronicle — helped install his longtime City Hall functionary Ed Lee into Room 200 to guard against anyone asking too much of the rich and powerful. Yee and Lee represented rival Chinatown economic factions, both wanting to use the power of the Mayor’s Office for their interests.

In his March 22 column, Brown once again repeated a joke he’s used before, that the “e” in email stands for “evidence,” which is really only funny in a sick political culture that celebrates slick rule-breakers. And it was from Brown that Lee learned it was acceptable to brazenly give tax breaks and regulatory passes to the tech companies that his top fundraiser, venture capitalist Ron Conway, are invested in.

Megadeveloper Lennar Urban used its wealth and political connections to take control of San Francisco’s biggest tracts of undeveloped and underdeveloped land, including Hunters and Candlestick points and Treasure Island, paying off community groups and hiring Jackson and other political henchmen to get the job done.

In fact, the FBI complaint says Jackson was working on behalf of that project when he approached accused Chinatown gangster Raymond “Shrimp Boy” Chow for support, leading to their alleged involvement in a string of wild criminal conspiracies. Meanwhile, Chow was getting public commendations from San Francisco-based politicians including Lee, Yee, Gavin Newsom, Dianne Feinstein, Fiona Ma, and even Tom Ammiano. Chow courted political legitimacy the same way politicians seek cash, and mainstream media outlets were happy to play along.

Throughout his political career, Yee has carried water for Pacific Gas & Electric, perhaps the most corrupting contributor to political campaigns in the city’s history. PG&E’s influence at City Hall had thankfully waned in recent years as a result of overreach and deadly criminal negligence, until Lee and his appointees last year killed CleanPowerSF (see “Challenge Mayor Lee and his lies,” 9/17/13) on a pretext so thin it could only be gift to PG&E.

In many ways, San Francisco hasn’t changed. It’s still the old Barbary Coast, ruled by capitalist thugs and corrupt politicians, only with glossy modern spin created by armies of well-paid political consultants. But we all deserve better.

Yee and Jackson should go to prison if there’s even a slice of truth to the allegations against them. And maybe they’ll cut deals and take other political figures down with them, giving us more of a peek behind the curtain of political power. But it’s up to all of us to break the close ties between economic and political power and begin to restore the democratic power of everyday people.

SF supervisors reject challenge of Google bus pilot program

Erica Hanna

-

April 1, 2014

75

SF supervisors reject challenge of Google bus pilot program

An appeal of the Google bus pilot program’s exemption from environmental review was denied at a contentious Board of Supervisors hearing Tuesday night that went on for six and a half hours straight. The vote was 8-2 to move forward with the 18-month pilot program without environmental review, with only Supervisors David Campos and John Avalos voting nay.

“You can’t say that you support the shuttles but don’t support their ability to pick people up and drop people off,” Sup. Scott Wiener said at the end of the hearing. “I disagree with the appellants.”

Sup. David Campos, who voted in favor of the environmental review, criticized the lack of public input in shaping the flawed program and said the city would likely lose in a future lawsuit on the issue: “If this is denied, there may be a legal victory for the appellants in court.”

The decision followed a heated, hours long public hearing on the environmental impacts of the San Francisco Metropolitan Transportation Agency’s commuter shuttle pilot program at City Hall, called for after an environmental appeal was filed in February by the SEIU Local 1021, The League of Pissed Off Voters, and the Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club. The pilot program will measure the impact of regional commuter shuttles at 200 bus stops around San Francisco, paid for by charging the shuttles $1 per stop, which the SFMTA said is the cost of administering the program.

The appellants had one goal: to call on the city of San Francisco to study how regional commuter shuttles affect San Franciscans.

“These are pirate shuttles, they are illegal,” Richard Drury, the attorney for the appellants filing the CEQA review, told the supervisors. “We’re bussing wealthy, predominantly white adults into low-income neighborhoods, where they in turn displace low-income people. This is the reverse of affirmative action.”

Importantly, a distinction was made between intra-city shuttles, like those for hospitals and colleges, and intra-city or regional shuttles, which are largely run by tech companies located outside San Francisco.

Those present were there to discuss the impact of the regional shuttles, whose larger size (measured in tons) more greatly impacts road wear and tear, uses diesel fuel in lieu of gasoline, and, the appellants say, displaces communities wherever they regularly stop.

I drew the #PirateShuttle because somebody had to. #Googlebus #CEQA pic.twitter.com/WrrbdYzODR

— Julia Wong (@juliacarriew) April 2, 2014

Pictured above, a journalist tweets an artist rendering of the pirate shuttles.

An Anti-Eviction Mapping Project study found 69 percent of no-fault evictions occurred within a four-block radius of the shuttle stops. CEQA recognizes displacement of people as an environmental impact, and the debate that night centered around whether or not to study if shuttle stops caused displacement of middle to low income residents. Some of the supervisors defended the tech companies to the nines, especially Wiener.

Wiener most ardently argued against the CEQA review, and he stuck it to the appellants’ attorney, Drury.

“It’s not a CEQA issue,” Wiener said. “There’s a certain set of assumptions that technology workers are not real San Franciscans. That they’re part of some invading force that is not part of the city, and aren’t one of us. Isn’t it part of your contention that people on these shuttles aren’t San Franciscans? That’s how [the environmental appeal] reads.”

Drury said it’s not about hating tech workers, or some sort of cultural rift. What this is about, he said, is tech companies paying for the impact they have on communities.

“Let me clarify: CEQA doesn’t mean stop the project,” Drury told Wiener. “It means study the project before you take action, and when you take action impose mitigation measures with eyes wide open.”

Sup. Jane Kim said the SFMTA could have used the pilot program as an opportunity to ask for smaller shuttles, use of white zones (as opposed to Muni stops), or any number of changes to the shuttle program. “There’s a lot more,” she said, “that the pilot could have done.”

Video of a Google protest the morning before the hearing shot by Guardian News Editor Rebecca Bowe.

Alysabeth Alexander of the SEIU 1021 said that overlooking the displacement the buses are causing in San Francisco is downright insulting.

“A handful of wealthy companies should not be able to come into our city and make a private infrastructure and ask San Franciscans to step aside,” she told the room.

Activists, city workers, and San Franciscans of all stripes aired their concern for skyrocketing rents in the areas immediately around regional commuter shuttle stops — the stops of the tech buses.

The supervisors also used the hearing as an opportunity to stick it to the concept that the buses would only cost $1 per stop.

Ultimately some 50 or so supporters of the environmental review came out, who all had gripes about the Google buses, as they’ve come to be called. Later in the night past about 8pm the tech workers finally got to have their say.

There weren’t many of them, but those who spoke were impassioned.

Andrew Textor, a tech worker who did not want his employer named, said “I’ve lived in the city for 10 years, I’ve been riding the shuttles four and a half. Please let this program go forward. I’m not a new arrival, i don’t like being called ‘techie.’ I’m still a San Franciscan.”

But Textor was one of only a few tech workers in attendance by the time the counter argument to the review was heard (hours later), most remaining were paid public relations persons. Sup. Malia Cohen called out the tech companies for not showing up to the meeting and participating in their community.

“I think it’s worth pointing out how absent the tech companies are,” she said, differentiating this hearing from when Twitter was seeking tax breaks three years ago. “The tech executives were swarming City Hall when they wanted something.”

SFMTA dir. Ed Reiskin answers the $1 million question: Out of 13,000 traffic citations, why only 45 to #googlebus? pic.twitter.com/Od8IaibL4A

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 2, 2014

When asked why the SFMTA did not ticket commuter shuttles when in red zones in violation of state law, SFMTA Diretor Ed Reiskin said “I don’t know.”

That’s a point that tech worker Martin MacKerel touched on while speaking during public comment earlier.

“I’m here to talk to my fellow tech workers here, I’m asking you to reconsider this,” he said, speaking of opposing an environmental review. “We’ve got to consider that we’re displacing people into Antioch, San Pablo, the East Bay. If they have to drive in to San Francisco, we need to know that. We need a real study.”

But that’s not the way the night went. The supervisors voted against the environmental review. Campos’ remarks before the vote sounded like a eulogy.

“This is about a small group of people going to the city behind closed doors,” Campos said. “As long as we keep doing that, we’re only going to exacerbate the tension that’s out there. Working with the tech industry does not mean you roll over and give them everything they ask for.”

The 18-month pilot program will move forward and launch July 1, barring intervention by the courts.

Tweets from the night, some from the Bay Guardian, some not:

No matter what dog and pony show is going on at SF City Hall tonight. The money Google is putting up for #googlebus is a CHEAP price to pay.

— Jeffrey Taylor (@jeffreytaylor) April 2, 2014

Sarcastic #googlebus commenter is the best commenter. THANKS for “displacing Latinos, no public input, breaking laws” pic.twitter.com/SCEWdFsgUb

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 2, 2014

Tech worker Andrew Textor “I’m not a new arrival, I don’t like being called ‘techie.’ I’m still a San Franciscan.” pic.twitter.com/sq3kG8P0JJ

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 2, 2014

Damn. Malia Cohen suggests MTA skirt the state law limiting permit fees to cost recovery instead of state law on red zones #googlebus

— Julia Wong (@juliacarriew) April 2, 2014

#muni @EdReiskin would love to charge #googlebus more than $1 but prevented by state law Others say pilot breaks law pic.twitter.com/GcgUGYaxEn

— Steve Rhodes (@tigerbeat) April 2, 2014

The #GoogleBus hearing is so long, @TechCrunch said “fuck it!” and published a story midmeeting, before anyone voted: http://t.co/EWI9bXdCTN

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 2, 2014

Woman in wheelchair talks about not being able to get on #muni because of #googlebus http://t.co/rTAzOd4W1x

— Steve Rhodes (@tigerbeat) April 2, 2014

Cynthia Crews of the League of Pissed off Voters reminds everyone this would study shuttle impacts, not stop shuttles pic.twitter.com/GahlTnsfRJ

— Joe Fitz Rodriguez (@FitzTheReporter) April 2, 2014

Just a reminder that Scott Weiner doesn’t like #CEQA “abuse” http://t.co/rXU7D8eCi2 #googlebus

— Julia Wong (@juliacarriew) April 1, 2014

MTA sheet on #googlebus pilot program (https://t.co/t3riiub3l2) appears to be citing data from 130-rider Cal study (http://t.co/NMprdv63sL)

— Ellen Huet (@ellenhuet) April 1, 2014

Literature from this a.m.’s Google bus block at 24th & Valencia in SF #Gmuni #freeMUNIforall pic.twitter.com/MDH33Gi0mN

— Cindy Milstein (@CindyMilstein) April 1, 2014

Where to eat right now

Michael Redmond

-

April 1, 2014

0

culture@sfbg.com

TABLEHOPPING If we were finance people, we’d say Q1 of 2014 was a hella strong start to the year. But since we’re food people, we’re just going to hook you up with our version of a PowerPoint slideshow of all the latest openings, hot spots, and new dish faves. Please, leave your Google Glass at home, turn off your iPhone flash when taking food pics for Instagram, and just dig in.

WHAT’S THAT? I CAN’T HEAR YOU OVER THE BUZZ

Any of you SF old-timers will remember how nuts it was when Blowfish and Tokyo Go Go opened in the city. Yeah, both those places were bonkers. Well, the new incarnation of ICHI Sushi and NI Bar (3282 Mission, SF. www.ichisushi.com) in Bernal is registering on the same Richter scale, with hip-hop blasting, hour-plus waits at the sushi bar — on a Tuesday! — and crazy-delicious izakaya dishes, like miso asari clams (you will want to drink the entire bowl of porky and garlicky broth, trust) and ICHI’s famed yuzu-fried chicken wings. Why have spinach gomae when you can have asparagus gomae? Exactly. And deep-fried ocean trout in dashi is the best of both worlds: beautiful sushi-grade fish with a homey and belly-filling presentation. Be sure to try the ICHIBIER, a partnership with local brewer Almanac: It’s a shiso-yuzu ale that’s built for lather, rinse, repeat.

YOU HAVE TO BE HOT TO WORK HERE

Well, that’s not exactly true, but it sure seems that way at the new Valencia Street digs of Loló (974 Valencia, SF. www.lolosf.com). When you’re not busy ogling the darling servers, the caliente bartenders making you mezcal-y cocktails, or the cute clientele, the menu will also be winking at you with sabrosito dishes like fried-in-panko avocado tacos (you gotta get ’em!), smoky and juicy gorditas with mezcal barbecue beef, and the tuna tacon with seared albacore and a shellfish aioli. Ay, papi. The megawatt interior provides all kinds of color therapy — you’ll definitely leave even happier than you were when you arrived, for a multitude of reasons.

———-

A classic Margherita pizza at Il Casaro

———

THE NEXT GREAT HAWT BRUNCH

Have you hit Verbena (2323 Polk, SF. www.verbenarestaurant.com) yet on Russian Hill? What, you don’t like the sound of sourdough pancakes with maple butter, biscuits and herb sausage gravy with pepper vinegar, and poached eggs with braised duck ragout with peas and their leaves — plus excellent craft cocktails, handsome dining room decor, and an appealing wine list? Maybe the new brunch launching the weekend of April 5th is what’s going to get you to come visit. Really, you ought to experience the flavor-packed vittles from chef Sean Baker, also of beloved Gather in Berkeley.

IT’S OK TO DRINK YOUR DINNER (BUT REALLY, YOU SHOULD EAT SOMETHING, TOO)

You may be inspired to simply hit the sauce once you look over the thirst-inducing drink lists at Trou Normand (140 New Montgomery, SF. www.trounormandsf.com) and The Coachman (1148 Mission, SF. www.coachmansf.com), both new joints in SoMa with exceptional cocktail pedigrees. But that would be a mistake, because you would miss the beef tartare topped fried smelt at The Coachman, or the charcuterie plate and the honking pork chop at Trou Normand. You can still down a whiskey-laced Calvados cocktail at Trou, or let ye olde Coachman’s barkeeps fix you up a sherry cobbler or three. Just do it all. More is more.

PIZZA! PIZZA! PIZZA! OH, AND PIZZA.

Just because our city likes to prove that you can never have enough pizza, here are four more pizza outposts for you, starting with another place for a legit Neapolitan-style pizza: Il Casaro (348 Columbus, SF. www.ilcasarosf.com). Since casaro means “cheesemaker,” you should dive into the raspa dura, a cheese shaved off its wheel and served in a cone. Plus there’s housemade fior di latte mozzarella, pure heaven. Looking for something new to North Beach? Try the panuozzo, a pizza dough sandwich. Sounds good, huh!

Pizza lovers are making the pilgrimage to La Lengua to sink their choppers into the pies by Jeff Krupman at PizzaHacker (3299 Mission, SF. www.thepizzahacker.com). A good place to start? The Yo Vinny (marinated onions, Mama Lil’s pickled goat horn peppers, 4505 hot Italian sausage, tomato sauce, mozzarella). The arugula pie with lemon, chile paste, and garlic is also big on flavor. Grab a seat and share a slice with some strangers at indoor picnic tables. Drink beer. Good times.

Another quest-worthy pie can be found in Dogpatch at Long Bridge Pizza Company (2347 Third St, SF. www.longbridgepizza.com), whose pizzas are a little bit New York and a little bit Neapolitan in style. Pile on the toppings with a Loading Dock, or go tomato-less with a White Pie. Small or large — wait, scratch that, isn’t the answer always large?

The Mission has a new slice shop, and it’s definitely not one of those nasty places you so often find around town claiming to be the best. (Like, the best of the worst at 1am, maybe.) Anyway, swing by The Pizza Shop (3104 24th St, SF. 824-1840) for a $4 slice or $19 whole pie. Thin crust, yes! Check out the white spinach. Be impressed. And bring your cash.

———–

Cochon de lait po’boy at High Cotton Kitchen

————

MEAT-SEEKERS, HUNT THESE DOWN

Not like we’re trying to exclude vegetarians here, but here are five meaty dishes that really have us sharpening our canines.

— There is some very special fried chicken and waffle (2-piece plus side, $9.25) action for brunch — and that’s all-day brunch during the weekend, people! — at soul food respite Little Skillet’s expansion into the kitchen of Victory Hall & Parlor (330 Ritch, SF. www.victoryhallsf.com). Cocktails too. Fun.

— The $6.95 El Frijolazo hot dog at Los Shucos Latin Hot Dogs (3224 1/2 22nd St, www.losshucos.com) is gonna be your next bad habit. A toasty bun comes with a bacon-wrapped frank, refried beans, smashed avocado, mayo, imported salsa chapina (a green sauce from Guatemala), and queso fresco. WHAT?! Ridiculous!

— The $8 housemade chorizo burger — with a runny fried egg, oh you know it — at New Central Café (301 S. Van Ness, SF. 722-0601) is great for breakfast, lunch, brunch, whenever. Plus it comes with sautéed kale, roasted squash, and cilantro mayo, and you get sweet potato fries. Sweet.

— The $9 cochon de lait po’boy at High Cotton Kitchen thrills at Second Act Marketplace (1727 Haight, SF. www.secondactsf.com). Juicy, mustardy, drippy, messy as hell. And made by a legit New Orleans native, which means it’s big enough to share. (Really, you should.)

— The $5 bacon Twix at Pinkie’s Bakery (1196 Folsom, SF. www.pinkiesbakery.com) is also on this list. I was lucky to work with owner Cheryl Burr on this custom-treat twist for a special promotion, and now she’s offering these bad boys for sale. Dare we say they’re better than the original? We dare!

THE LATE-NIGHT BERMUDA TRIANGLE

We often complain that San Francisco shuts down too early — but, in fact, we’re the ones who can’t stay up. So many restaurants open with the noble intention of wanting to feed us late into the night. But six weeks after opening and seeing too many empty tables at midnight, well, they start rolling back the kitchen hours to 10pm. Unless. We. Support. Them. So here are three new spots serving up post-midnight snacks. Do your civic duty and hit them up after bar time. (And hey, if you’re a night owl, you should download my app, Tablehopper’s Top Late-Night Eats, ya heard?)

SHE’S A VERY KIN KHAO GIRL

Pim Techamuanvivit’s Kin Khao (55 Cyril Magnin, SF. www.kinkhao.com) a very unique Thai place — how often do you get Devil’s Gulch Ranch rabbit in your handmade green curry? But it also boasts late-night bites, 11pm–1am, and a full bar, with a cocktail list created by the Bon Vivants. Try the Thai chili-spiced Priew Wan Sour or the mezcal-kicked Kafe Mao if you need a little boost. Don’t miss the pretty hot wings, the kua kling ribs (fried pork ribs in a dark and spicy dry rub, you do the math), Dungeness crab rice noodles that will make you give up pad Thai forever, and the beautiful yum yai salad with tempura asparagus and chili jam. Bonus tip: the restaurant is just blocks from ACT, making it a perfect pre– and post–theater stop — go see Venus in Fur, right now.

————-

Yum Yai salad at Kin Khao

—————

HIGH LIFE

It’s not like we ever get tired of the late-night hours of our beloved Zuni, but just a few blocks down Market Street is Alta CA (1420 Market, SF. www.altaca.co), a new-ish NorCal bistro from the Daniel Patterson Group. It opened in December, with a kitchen serving until 1am. Chef de cuisine Yoni Levy’s housemade bialy and pastrami, a mighty-fine burger, and the much-lauded cracked wheat porridge with mushrooms are as awesome at 11:30pm as they are at lunch, when you’ll probably have some Twitter folks (the HQ is kitty corner) and City Hall types filling the room. Late night draws more of an industry crowd (der). It’s a handsome space with a horseshoe bar, where you can get your craft cocktail on too. Winos, you’ll be happy here as well.

CIRCLE GETS A SQUARE

North Beach is usually where the wheels come off the proverbial party bus. (Girls! Girls! Girls! Drinks! Drinks! Drinks!) Fortunately, there are a number of tasty places that can catch you before you fall (Comstock Saloon and Golden Boy Pizza, I’m looking at you). But there’s a brand-new kid on Washington Square, appropriately called The Square (1707 Powell, SF. www.thesquaresf.com), with a bit of a pedigree: The owners are behind lauded Sons and Daughters. Unlike that upscale restaurant, this lovely spot is less about tweezer food and more about shareable, satisfying fare, like gougères, steak tartare, an aged cheddar cheeseburger, and some large-format feasting: whole roasted crab and guinea hen, a delectable rack of ribs. Manly! Cocktails, check. All until 1am Wed—Sun.

Marcia Gagliardi is the founder of the weekly tablehopper e-column: Subscribe for more at www.tablehopper.com. Get her app: Tablehopper’s Top Late-Night Eats. On Twitter: @tablehopper.