Category: California

Posted on

The housing crisis Scott Wiener created

By Tim Redmond : 48hills – excerpt

This 50 story tower planned for 2700 Sloat  next to a half-empty brand new housing complex is being blamed on Scott Wiener. He is up for re-election and opposed by three people so far:  Cynthia Cravens (D), Yvette Corkrean (R), and Jingchao Xiong (recent immigrant form China) 

Demolitions. Displacement. And zero new affordable housing. That’s the bill the state senator got passed, and the supes have to deal with it this week.

On KQED news Sunday night, a reporter announced that “housing advocates” in San Francisco were pushing the Board of Supes to approve the mayor’s housing legislation this week.

The reporter quoted one person, from Habitat for Humanity, which is a fine organization but has never been involved in local housing politics and isn’t a member of the Council of Community Housing Organizations, which has serious problems with the bill.

Nobody from CCHO, from the Race and Equity in All Planning Coalition, or from the Anti-Displacement Coalition, made the cut…

In all of the news media coverage about the issue, there’s been little discussion about the role Wiener has played in essentially screwing his own city. But the Wiener bill, and the Newsom administration, with the apparent support of Breed, are pushing toward the point where developers will have what’s called the “builder’s remedy,” which means anyone can build anything they want, including demolishing existing rent-controlled housing, without any public input.

Breed, with the support of almost all of the local news media, is trying to blame the supes for delaying or seeking to amend her legislation. And if the supes don’t go along with everything the state is asking for, the Yimbys and the mayor will blame them when a 50-story tower that Wiener and the Breed Administration say they oppose starts construction near Ocean Beach…(more)

This is literally a case of convicted felons moving into San Francisco to take over our beachside community. (Details on sonsf.org)

KQED has lost its local charm and the respect from the community they seek to serve. They bought the “build the perfect place” Kool-Aide and spent a bundle on their new digs. Their funding and programming are suffering. Too bad they did not take a serious stab at a real discussion about the state bills that are pushing homeowners and many others to new levels of anger and disgust with Sacramento politicians. When they open their mouths words come out but the meaning is not there.

Posted on

Why the next four months could make or break London Breed’s reelection hopes

By Joe Garofoli : sfchronicle – excerpt

The next four months will go a long way toward determining whether London Breed will continue to be San Francisco’s mayor.

The clock starts ticking this week, when the APEC conference — an international gathering attracting President Biden, doom loop-curious international journalists and scores of protesters — puts San Francisco and all its ills and joys under the microscope.

But that is only the first test Breed will face. The election isn’t until November 2024, but we will know how vulnerable Breed will be by spring, thanks to a timeline that the mayor set in place for herself…

“If it was my candidate and I staked a lot of money and my candidate’s credibility on these ballot measures and they go down, then you have to throw your hands up and say, ‘This is not for me this time,’ ” said Jim Stearns, a longtime San Francisco Democratic consultant.

Even if just one measure loses, Stearns said, “that means that she will have spent a lot of political capital and won’t have moved the needle” on what voters think about her. That makes the ballot measure move “a kind of win-at-all costs strategy for them.”

Yes, for two decades Stearns has advised Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin, who will be closely watching March’s results to see whether they give him a reason to jump in and provide a progressive voice in the race. For now, Stearns said, “I don’t have the green light from him that’s happening.”

Meanwhile, tying yourself to ballot measures comes with risks for Breed…

Breed hopes to bask in the reflected glow of these ballot measures, and wow, does she need their positivity. Only 32% of respondents to a September survey from the moderate GrowSF advocacy organization approve of the job she’s doing.

Worse: 68% of respondents felt that San Francisco is going in the wrong direction. That’s a political doom loop for any incumbent…

I don’t know if those (ballot measures) are going to offer quick change,” said Kanishka Cheng, CEO of Together SF Action, a moderate political advocacy organization that has not taken a position on the measures yet. “The public is sort of out of patience. So if they approve things in March, and they don’t see results by November, I don’t think they’ll have much patience left.”…(more)

You cannot play the blame game forever. The media and the political wags are hot on the trail. Either someone is done or it isn’t. The voters will not be easy to fool. The real question is who is going to run for state offices. Not a lot of options on those postions yet.

Posted on

Once it was hailed as a drought fix — but now California’s moving to restrict synthetic turf over health concerns

By Shreya Agrawal : Calmatters – excerpt (includes audio track)

IN SUMMARY: California cities can ban synthetic turf under a law Gov. Gavin Newsom signed. He rejected a bill to ban PFAS in fake lawns.

Gov. Gavin Newsom last week passed on a chance to limit the use of the so-called “forever chemicals” in legions of plastic products when he vetoed a bill that would have banned them in synthetic lawns.

His veto of an environmental bill that overwhelmingly passed the Legislature underscores California’s convoluted guidance on the plastic turf that some homeowners, schools and businesses use in place of grass in a state accustomed to drought.

Less than a decade ago then-Gov. Jerry Brown signed a law prohibiting cities and counties from banning synthetic grass. At the time, the state was in the middle of a crippling drought and fake lawns were thought to be helpful in saving water…(more)

Posted on

50 Story Skyscraper Hearing July 26

Money Money Money as High as your eye can see!

City and Supervisor Engardio claim the project is a no go on San Francisco  Beach. Petition against skyscraper in SF’s Sunset District draws over 2,500 signatures. Planning Department will hear the matter on July 26. One other issue that has been raised is over who is  behind the caper.

By Joe Kukurta  wrote in sfist, ” There are other things that smell funny about this proposal. CH Planning “project consultant” John Hickey, the wife of listed developer Raelynn Hickey, was convicted on securities fraud and mail fraud charges in 2006. Plus, YIMBY Law executive director Sonja Trauss has been doing a full-court press giving interviews on behalf of this project. That indicates this whole scheme may be a ruse to create Housing Element-related lawsuits, albeit lawsuits that could push the Overton window of San Francisco height limits up a little more. And that would benefit real estate developers pretty much across the board.… (more)”

RELATED:
Prison term for developer who defrauded investors / S.F. man ordered to pay $17.4 million in restitution as well

 

 

Posted on

State Won’t Cut Homelessness Funding—but Demands Results

By Sarah Wright : sfstandard – excerpt

Despite a massive budget deficit, California won’t cut funding for homelessness programs but sent a clear message to cities like San Francisco: Use it wisely, or else.

“People are dying in the streets in the name of compassion,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said at a press conference on Tuesday morning, a statement echoed by his Deputy Chief of Staff Jason Elliott later in the afternoon.

“At some point, the money can no longer be an excuse for inaction,” Elliott said. “We need to muster the political courage to match that investment.”

On Tuesday, the governor came through with his promise to keep funding the Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Program, adding $1 billion to the pot after pausing funding late last year as a warning to cities to get serious about getting more people off the streets and into more permanent housing.

But the state doesn’t currently have the tools to do much more enforcement than that…

Though homelessness funding will remain intact, the governor announced $350 million in cuts to housing. Those cuts affect three homeownership programs that provide grants and loans to low- and moderate-income first-time homebuyers and support the production of Accessory Dwelling Units… (more)

Posted on

An unlikely backer

By Dustin Garndiner : sfchronicle – excerpt (via email)
Ride-hailing company Lyft has poured more than $15 million into Proposition 30, which would raise the income tax rate for wealthy people and earmark the money for climate projects, including getting more people into electric cars.
Lyft’s involvement has divided Democrats who are otherwise aligned when it comes to fighting climate change. Environmentalists say the company is an important ally as the state struggles to meet its goals to phase out gas-powered cars, while Gov. Gavin Newsom and other opponents say it’s a self-interested ploy to get taxpayers to cover its cost to meet a state mandate to electrify its vehicle fleet.
Posted on

Call Newsom: Don’t Tax the Sun

By Sue Vaughan : burningplanet – excerpt

Solar employees and advocates gather at the CPUC in San Francisco on June 2, 2022

Solar employees and advocates gather at the CPUC in San Francisco on June

ACTION ITEMS FOR TODAY

There are two major downsides to capitalism. One, in capitalism there are winners and there are losers. And two, the end product of capitalism is an unlivable planet.

One year ago, Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez. D-San Diego, the David in the so-far failed battle against the Goliaths of Uber, Lyft, Instacart, Doordash, and other exploitative and polluting gig industries, got very confused about who the winners and losers in the energy industry are, and tried to take on a new “enemy” — the California rooftop solar industry..

So their marketing wizards came up with a campaign that argued that lower income Californians who could not afford rooftop solar were subsidizing the rooftop solar of those who could – and who got rebates for returning energy to the grid. Gonzalez sponsored AB 1139, a bill that would have decreased the amount that people with rooftop solar would be paid for the energy they pump into the grid and increased the amount they would have been charged for monthly grid maintenance.(See analysis of donations to state lawmakers at the end of this story.).

Rooftop solar providers, customers, environmentalists, and working class advocates got organized – and the measure didn’t make it out of the Assembly.

But the idea hasn’t gone away. It’s just been moved to the five, unelected members of the California Public Utilities Commission...

On Thursday, June 2, hundreds of rooftop solar installers, rooftop solar customers, environmentalists, and representatives of disadvantaged communities rallied at the CPUC buildings in San Francisco and Los Angeles to protest the newest proposals. The essence of their opposition? Reducing net metering rates (the rebates that go back to entities that pump electricity into the grid from rooftop solar) and raising grid maintenance rates would enrich these utilities at the expense of the planet. Crucially, these proposals would eliminate the financial incentives that homeowners now have to install rooftop solar. Opponents have called the proposals a tax on the sun. They also would have put about 2,000 solar companies out of business and eliminated around 70,000 jobs, according to the California Solar & Storage Association...(more)

Read the rest of the articles linked above for more details on the various players so you will know where to push the matter at the state level. Phil Ting supported AB1139. Call him to let him know where you stand and how likely you are to oppose his next run for office if he continues to support Big Energy companies efforts to kill solar.

In our case, we should also call and send letters to Senator Wiener and Assemblymembers Ting and Haney and any oher people in Sacramento you know. Phone calls to the CPUC directors are also encouraged. See some contact info here:  https://discoveryink.wordpress.com/ca-legislative-process

ACTION ITEMS FOR TODAY

 

 

 

Posted on

Questions Linger Over Future of San Francisco Neighborhood ‘Slow Streets’

By tyndicated Local – CBS San Francisco : msn – excerpt (includes video)

 

SAN FRANCISCO (KPIX 5) — Over the course of the pandemic, so-called “slow streets” popped up in neighborhoods throughout San Francisco. They’re designed to limit through traffic on some residential streets to create a common, shared space for those also traveling on foot and by bicycle.

There are nearly 30 corridors throughout the city, according to the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA).

But at Kirkham St. and 34th Ave., longtime local Elisa Smith thinks the slow street there is more of a nuisance than a benefit.

“The one here on Kirkham, it’s almost never used by anybody other than cars whizzing around the signage,” she said. “A lot of these are just causing more problems than they are a source of enjoyment for people.”…(more)

RELATED:

Residents Fight To Preserve San Diego’s Last Remaining ‘Slow Street’ 
…In January and February, the city quietly removed slow streets in the College Area, North Park and Emerald Hills. Now Diamond Street in Pacific Beach is the last that remains of the program…(more)

Surveys and polls are rigged everywhere. This is a non-partisan issue. Mayor Falconer is  a Republican who follows the Democratic biker path down the road of lost political causes. California politicians have decided to link transportation and housing programs under a program that forces density and removes cars at a pace that most people object to. Sacramento created the war on cars and it is up to the voters to fight back, surrender, or leave.  We shall soon see where the SF voters stand.

Posted on

Guiding Principals of Home Rule

This document states some rather interesting principals:
NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES
 Principles of Home Rule for the 21 st Century

https://www.nlc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Home-Rule-Principles-ReportWEB-2-1.pdf

This one caught my eye as it appears to be relevant when accessing state bills that orride local control government authorities :  The Local Fiscal Authority Principle :   Home rule should guarantee local fiscal authority and recognize the value of fiscal stability at the local level. This principle accordingly includes local power to raise revenue and manage spending consistent with local budgets and priorities. To support local fiscal authority, a state should ensure adequate intergovernmental aid for general welfare at the local level and be prohibited from imposing unreasonable unfunded mandates.