Category Archives: social justice
by JIM MEKO
Supervisor John Avalos has amended the inclusionary housing legislation he recently introduced to apply affordability requirements to buildings that have not yet received their building permits as of May 2015.
The amendment would embrace two Tenderloin “group housing” projects, at 361 Turk Street and 145 Leavenworth Street, that are scheduled to go before the Planning Commission on June 4. Continue reading →
The vote was 10-3 and it required 10 votes to pass (a quorum issue). The final motion was to provide $1.8 million and the representative from the Transportation Authority guaranteed us an additional $200,000 to make us whole.
Kudos to Glendon Hyde and Demetri Moshoyannis too. They brought out more than a dozen folks for public comment and each and every story they told almost brought me to tears. It was a solemn and hushed crowd and an important moment for the body.
from JAMIE WHITAKER
The poor City of San Francisco refused to accept a speck of green space for the 6,000+ and growing population of residents in high-rise towers in Rincon Hill because Phil Ginsburg claims they can’t come up with the $24,000 per year to cut the lawn and hose down the benches a few times. Continue reading →
OPPOSE: Supervisor Wiener’s CEQA Legislation, which curtails public participation and the ability of public officials to make well-informed decisions.
SUPPORT: bringing Supervisor Kim’s alternative CEQA Legislation to completion—before any legislative action is taken.
TESTIFY: Land-Use Committee, Monday, April 8, 1:30 PM, City Hall Room 263
EMAIL: Scott.Wiener@sfgov.org, Jane.Kim@sfgov.org, David.Chiu@sfgov.org
ADD: Your Organization’s Name: Along with the Sierra Club and others, add your organization’s name in opposing the Wiener CEQA Legislation—by emailing email@example.com . Continue reading →
By JAMIE WHITAKER
“Recreation and Parks refuses to take the donation of a new park at 333 Harrison Street from Oz Erickson’s Emerald Fund because they refuse to maintain it at $30,000 or so per year. Did I mention that Rincon Hill’s existing buildings contribute about 20 times that amount just to the 2.5 cents per $100 of assessed value Open Space Special Revenue Fund set aside? Instead, SoMa neighborhoods like Rincon Hill are told that we have to form our own non-profits called Community Benefit Districts (CBDs) and tax ourselves a parcel tax in addition to our ad valorem property taxes to take care of any parks in our neighborhoods. When did San Francisco become a supporter of such blatant inequality between geographic regions of the City?” Read more →