Category: Land Use

Posted on

S.F. official knew imploding nonprofit was ‘cash poor.’ Should he have rung the alarm?

By Michael Barba  : sfchronicle – excerpt (audio)

Nearly a year ago, the city’s top park official received an ominous message.

The San Francisco Parks Alliance, the big and politically connected nonprofit that Recreation and Park Department General Manager Phil Ginsburg had relied on for years as a conduit for private dollars to fund public projects, was facing “dire cash flow shortages.”

The words came not from a whistleblower, but directly from the nonprofit’s then-CEO, who admitted the problem in a message to a key donor last June that was forwarded to the city. Ginsburg sought assurances from the Parks Alliance that the funding it held for his department was secure.

But it wasn’t until 10 months later that Ginsburg halted his department’s relationship with the Parks Alliance and alerted other city officials. By then, the group had misspent millions of dollars earmarked for specific projects to cover its operating expenses and was headed toward potential insolvency…

The district attorney, city attorney and controller are investigating, and Mayor Daniel Lurie has frozen the flow of funding between the nonprofit and all agencies. Supervisor Shamann Walton is holding a hearing on the crisis at City Hall next week, and Supervisor Jackie Fielder has called for a full audit of Ginsburg’s department and its financial ties to the nonprofit.

The Parks Alliance has served as a pass-through for big donors to help fund city projects such as the construction of a state-of-the-art tennis center in Golden Gate Park and the opening of a new waterfront park in the Bayview. It also acts like a bank for more than 80 small community groups around San Francisco that pay the nonprofit a small fee to collect donations and grants on their behalf and disperse the money when they need to use it to care for playgrounds, trails and other parks projects

Former Supervisor Aaron Peskin, a longtime critic of Ginsburg and the Parks Alliance, said Ginsburg should have reported the organization’s financial problems months earlier to the mayor, the controller and other agencies that fund the nonprofit.

Peskin said Ginsburg had erred in protecting and championing the Parks Alliance for years, even after the organization in 2020 became implicated — but not charged — in an FBI bribery investigation. The nonprofit was used to funnel about $1 million from waste company Recology to disgraced former Public Works head Mohammed Nuru, who spent the donations on parties and merchandise for his staff.

“The public and the mayor need to know that this scandal was preventable and happened in large part because the general manager of rec and park was so closely tied to and invested in the Parks Alliance,” Peskin said. “If people are not held accountable, it sends a message to the public and to the rest of the government that there are no consequences.”…(more)

 I’m shocked! Shocked I say.” to hear that Ending Nuru’s reign at the Parks Alliance under a cloud did not end the corruption and abuse at the all to powerfully connected denounced non-profit. Ginsburg’s name popping up is no surprise. How could he have not have noticed that something was amiss with his department finances?

So many questions were never answered when Nuru left.

How much money was laundered through the agency that so many non-profits trusted to provide banking services for them?

Why were the investigations into Parks Alliance affiliates stalled after the Nuru incident was exposed?

How much momentum was lost by the switch between parties that cut off the initial FBI investigations based on complaints filed by whistleblowers?

How many cases were left out of the investigation? No doubt the successor to Nuru 1 cannot be far removed from the top of the power pyramid.

Has no one noticed that a lot of city departments and affiliates use the same PR firm? No one sees any conflicts during an election?

Posted on

In wake of nonprofit’s implosion, Fielder calls for audit of S.F. parks department

by MARGARET KADIFA :  missionlocal – excerpt

Parks Alliance art for donor campaigns

District 9 Supervisor Jackie Fielder will today submit legislation calling for an audit of San Francisisco’s Recreation and Parks department.

The move comes after a nonprofit affiliated with the department, the Parks Alliance, has come under fire for possibly misspending at least $3.8 million in donations.

Both the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office and the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office have recently launched investigations into the Parks Alliance, according to the San Francisco Chronicle…

As a city department, Rec and Parks is a separate entity from the Parks Alliance. But, the Parks Alliance has often served as a conduit for private money to flow into city projects, operating like “a city account without city oversight,” as the controller’s office put it in a 2020 audit of the Alliance…

This isn’t the first scandal at the Parks Alliance. In 2020, the since-convicted and incarcerated head of Public Works, Mohammed Nuru, used a Parks Alliance account as his personal slush fund to underwrite boozy holiday parties. Nuru was in 2022 convicted of fraud and sentenced to seven years in federal prison.

The proposed audit of Recreation and Parks would not directly review Parks Alliance funding. The Parks Alliance was most recently audited in 2020 by the controller. The proposed 2025 audit would more broadly review partnerships between the department with nonprofit organizations, according to a press release from Fielder’s office… (more)

 

 

 

Posted on

The last Black building inspector in San Francisco

By Joe Eskenazi : missionlocal – excerpt

Onaje Boone says he applied the building code fairly — and flunked builders who’d done poor work. He was abruptly let go with only weeks remaining in his probationary period.

Not long into his brief wondrous life as a San Francisco building inspector, Onaje Boone was taken aside by a higher-up. It was, to Boone’s recollection, a strange and terrible discussion.

Boone, 47, a former carpenter, a licensed contractor and a building inspector in both the public and private sector for more than a decade, was last year told there were issues with his report writing. Specifically: They were too detailed. If the rebar is good, just write Rebar Good.

This was not the sort of advice Boone expected to receive while being paid six figures to serve as a building inspector in a major city.

“The code calls for so much space, so much cleanliness of the area, a certain type of waterproofing,” he says, going into minute details about lap splicing and other matters of some importance in a town situated between two major earthquake faults.

“I write it specifically to what the code book calls out,” he continues. “Whatever was required was noted. I know how to write a report.”

For Boone, Rebar Good was not good enough. He continued to write reports his way. And do inspections his way: as in, failing people who didn’t meet the code. There were a few… (more)

The plan seems to be to let the problems fester for years and then jump up and “discover” hundreds or buildings were not properly built decades ago, Force the owners to pay for costly inspections and repairs now. Who was running planning and DBI back in the 1970s and 80s?

 

Posted on

The Bay Area has hundreds of below-market rate apartments sitting vacant

By Katalerico : mercurynews – excerpt

Some new moderate-income units offer little discount to market-rate rents. Some question whether we should prioritize building them at all

In April 2023, a new luxury apartment complex on Alameda’s waterfront, Launch, opened to renters, advertising views of the yacht club from its rooftop deck, poolside cabanas and a co-working lounge.

As required by Alameda’s inclusionary zoning law, the developer, Pacific Development, set aside 49 of the 368 units for low- and moderate-income households making between 50% to 120% of the area median income, $51,800 to $124,250 for a single person. The idea was to fill the complex with a variety of tenants, not just the kind of renters who could afford $3,000 a month.

Two years later, the results are mixed: units for the poorest tenants have filled, but all 19 designated for moderate-income renters — the so-called “missing middle” — remain empty, much to the frustration of the developer, Sean Murphy.

“The last thing we want to do as a developer is build housing units that sit vacant,” he said. “That doesn’t solve any social problems.”…(more)

Posted on

Unprecedented vote shows Dems fractured over housing policy

By Ben Christopher : calmatters – excerpt

IN SUMMARY

Two consecutive committee chairs getting overruled by their committee members signifies a growing rift among California Democrats about how to address the housing crisis.

One of the most controversial housing bills of the year has lived to be voted upon another day, but only by surviving the Legislative equivalent of two back-to-back prison breaks.

Last week, Senate Bill 79, a bill by San Francisco Democratic Sen. Scott Wiener to boost apartment and commercial construction around major public transportation hubs, passed the Senate Housing Committee over the strenuous objections of its chair, Sen. Aisha Wahab, a fellow Democrat from Fremont.

That was a notable development in its own right. Chairs tend to get their way on the bills that pass through their committees. When a majority of a committee’s members decide to buck legislative decorum and tradition and steamroll that committee’s chair, it’s often taken as a sign that California’s dominant Democrats are unusually divided over an issue; that the issue at hand is especially contentious; that the legislators either aren’t receiving clear guidance from legislative leadership or are willing to ignore that advice; or some combination of all of the above.

Fast forward to this week and it happened again.

In the Senate Local Government Committee, Sen. María Elena Durazo, a Los Angeles Democrat, urged a no vote on Wiener’s bill.

She didn’t get her way. The bill passed with the backing of all the other Democrats on the committee. Durazo voted “no” with the two Republicans.

A chair getting “rolled” is an unusual spectacle in Sacramento. In the typically arcane and perfunctory proceedings of the Legislature, this bit of human drama pops up once or twice a year. For it to happen twice in a row for the same bill is without any obvious precedent.

“Extra unique” is how Chris Micheli, a longtime California lobbyist and public commentator on the Legislative process, described the situation. “Beyond the particular bill at hand, it could give an indication that there is a philosophical split in the caucus.”… (MORE)

Pushback is probably coming from the public that no longer trusts the government that has been running the same scheme for over a decade and still complains and blames everyone else for the lack of housing. The huge number of entitlements cannot be lost of the public. We have a much more neutral media, including CalMatters, to thank for bringing the truth to the public. The obvious is becoming hard to ignore.

Posted on

Dozens of Mission homes could gain historic preservation protections

By Keith Menconi : sfexaminer – excerpt

Two miniature neighborhoods in the Mission district could soon gain historical-preservation protections.

A committee of San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors advanced a pair of resolutions Monday marking the first step in a legal process that could eventually result in the residential areas — which together comprise 53 properties — receiving official historical-landmark designations.

Monday’s resolution, sponsored by Board President Rafael Mandelman, is part of a decades-long campaign to preserve buildings within the Mission Dolores neighborhood, the historical core of the broader Mission district with roots tracing all the way back to the 18th-century Spanish settlement that sprung up around the still-standing Mission Dolores adobe chapel that now gives the neighborhood its name.

Two miniature neighborhoods in the Mission district could soon gain historical-preservation protections.

A committee of San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors advanced a pair of resolutions Monday marking the first step in a legal process that could eventually result in the residential areas — which together comprise 53 properties — receiving official historical-landmark designations.

Monday’s resolution, sponsored by Board President Rafael Mandelman, is part of a decades-long campaign to preserve buildings within the Mission Dolores neighborhood, the historical core of the broader Mission district with roots tracing all the way back to the 18th-century Spanish settlement that sprung up around the still-standing Mission Dolores adobe chapel that now gives the neighborhood its name…

If the full board approves Mandelman’s resolution, it will trigger further rounds of public review by San Francisco’s Historic Preservation Commission. Final approval of the designations will still require another sign off from the Board of Supervisors as well as the mayor.

The two districts would join a roster of other highly recognizable historic districts in San Francisco, including Alamo Square, Civic Center and Dogpatch.

In recent years, local preservationists have redoubled their efforts to add historical protections to San Francisco buildings in response to a raft of housing legislation aimed at spurring widespread development in the coming years.

During his remarks Monday, Mandelman echoed their fear that unchecked construction could lead to demolitions that would erase San Francisco’s history from the cityscape.

“The reality is that healthy cities do change and grow,” Mandelman said, “but as we prepare for that growth and that change, I think it is especially important that we take steps to preserve our architectural heritage.”… (more)

Posted on

Notice Ordinance Passed

via email from Neighborhoods United SF

This week, the Board of Supervisors approved long-overdue legislation requiring direct notice to residents and businesses when their property, or one within 300 feet, is proposed for upzoning, specifically increases in height and/or density.

The measure passed with an 8–3 supermajority!

We are especially grateful to Supervisor Chan (D1) for championing this effort, and to the Supervisors who stood with her for transparency and the public’s right to know: Sherrill (D2), Sauter (D3), Engardio (D4), Mandelman (D8), Fielder (D9), Walton (D10), and Chen (D11).

Unfortunately, Supervisors Mahmood (D5), Dorsey (D6), and Melgar (D7) opposed the measure, citing concerns that transparency could “scare residents.” This is deeply troubling—especially given that more than 400,000 homes and businesses could be impacted by sweeping zoning changes. A simple notification should not be controversial.

We urge every Supervisors to host public town halls and explain this permanent shift in land use policy to their constituents. We remain hopeful Supervisors will respond to the growing demand for common sense, fairness, and community involvement as these changes move forward.

If you have time write a letter of thanks to the supervisors who support notice and transparency.

 

Posted on

ABUNDANCE MEETS RESISTANCE: ARE DEMOCRATS FINALLY READY TO GO ALL IN ON BUILDING HOUSING?

By JEANNE KUANG : calmatters – excerpt

Amid a post-2024 wave of Democratic interest in the burgeoning pro-development “abundance” movement, this seemed to be an easy year for California’s yes-in-my-backyard housing development activists.
Democratic leaders in the state Legislature declared their intention to tackle affordability this year. Gov. Gavin Newsom and other politicians have since embraced the “abundance” platform, which argues that Democrats must do more to quickly deliver housing, transportation and other infrastructure projects to their constituents.
Lawmakers have introduced ambitious bills that would, for housing developments in existing neighborhoods, blow a hole through the longstanding thicket of environmental reviews and regulations that often slow down projects and add costs. One of those passed its first committee on Monday.
Still, YIMBY-ism hit a stumbling block Tuesday in the form of the Senate housing committee. The committee, led by Sen. Aisha Wahab, nearly killed a closely watched bill to require cities to allow taller, denser apartments and condo construction near public transit stations.
Wahab said she was acting on a chorus of familiar objections from progressives and others who have long delayed housing construction in California: The legislation didn’t guarantee that projects would be built with union labor. It didn’t require that the new units be affordable for low-income residents. It could infringe on local governments’ ability to block or green-light projects. It opened up the possibility of bypassing certain environmental reviews.
In the end, the committee voted 6-2 against Wahab’s objections to narrowly advance Senate Bill 79, by Sen. Scott Wiener, a San Francisco Democrat and prominent advocate for housing production. Some Democrats were absent or didn’t vote. The committee also killed a different Wiener bill that would have further loosened restrictions on property owners who want to split single-family homes into duplexes. It was a stark reversal from prior years in the Legislature, when Wiener chaired the housing committee and pushed through several bills to spur housing production…
A progressive who is focused on preserving explicitly affordable units for low-income tenants, Wahab, a Hayward Democrat, was pushing for legislation to help cities that enact rent caps compete with other municipalities for state housing and planning grants. Some studies have found rent control in San Francisco has reduced rental supply, while other economists say capping rents is still needed to help those who are housing insecure.
“The state has prioritized development, development, development,” Wahab said. “The types of development that are going up with zero parking and all these giveaways to developers have also not translated to housing that has dignity that people want to stay in and raise their families in.”
Her bill (SB 262) drew skepticism from some colleagues on the committee, who noted the state funding programs are for development and production, but nevertheless voted to advance it… (more)

SB 262: Housing element: prohousing designations: prohousing local policies. https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202520260sb262

Posted on

SF upzoning could displace small businesses, advocates warn

By Keith Menconi : sfexaminer – excerpt (audio)

A new front is opening up in the brewing political battle over San Francisco’s still-in-progress plan to upzone large swaths of the west and north of The City.

A coalition of local businesses and progressive advocates is raising the alarm about the possibility that widespread upzoning could result in a large number of mom-and-pop shops getting displaced as looser zoning rules unlock a wave of new residential construction projects.

Such projects often force small businesses to relocate for lengthy periods to make way for demolition or remodeling work, they contend.

“As commercial corridors are upzoned and the value of buildings and parcels in these corridors increase as a result, we anticipate a substantial increase in landlords using these tactics to push long-term community-serving businesses out,” said Justin Dolezal, a co-founder of local advocacy group Small Business Forward.

For the most part, small businesses in San Francisco do not own their own buildings, according to the group. That leaves local establishments — including bars, restaurants, retailers, and nail salons — highly vulnerable when landlords decide to increase rents or simply choose not to renew lease agreements.

Dolezal’s group is making the case that as city leaders consider adopting a new zoning map that would increase height and density limits along dozens of commercial corridors, The City should first put stronger safeguards in place to protect the thousands of small businesses dotting San Francisco’s cityscape.

Local small-business advocates turned out in large numbers during last Thursday’s meeting of the Planning Commission to present their list of proposals, including additional requirements that developers provide financial support to small businesses displaced as a result of building demolitions.

In making the case for such safeguards, they described such small businesses as beloved local institutions that serve as valuable engines of commerce as well as highly prized communal hubs for the neighborhoods they serve… (more)

 

Posted on

Waymo to operate on car-free Market Street

The robotaxis are coming to the city’s largest car-free roadway, but critics worry about pedestrian safety… (more)

If anyone had any questions about where our new mayor’s alliance lies, we learned it this week. He wants to expand and upend the city in an effort to find more revenue in pushing land values and he favors more Wamos as a mean to transport the wealthy new patrons he envisions coming to drink till 4 AM on his closed downtown streets. We hope they don’t stay too long or they will become his new nightmare.