Post by Thad Floryan
That's very odd. Almost weekly on SFgate I would read how the
city of San Francisco hates chain stores and will do everything
possible to discourage them moving into town including denying
them the permits, etc. needed. Perhaps the city's policy has
changed and/or the new Board of Stupidvisors worked out "deals"
(under the table, obviously) to encourage such retailers. I
haven't been in San Francisco since 2006 (due to traffic and
parking issues) so I am unaware of such changes.
It's unfair to call them "stupidvisors"; the SF Board of Supervisors is very
conscientious about their work, as attendance at any of their meetings or
watching them on cable TV shows. Last night I watched a subcommittee debate
a proposed change in the parking notice changes for filming. There is a LOT
of filming in SF and the normal procedure is to notify residents and
merchange 72 hours in advance of production when film crews need to clear
streets. Sometimes some of these productions remove 30 to 50 parking spaces
at a time!
Well, the debate was about allowing the film commission to be able at their
discretion to reduce the notice time to just 24 hours. The argument was
rational on their side; there are situations where delays such as
unavailability of equipment, problems with weather, crew sickness, etc. can
interfere with even the best-laid plans. But there was a real question, is
24 hours enough notice? The law allows people to park on the street for up
to 72 hours, and all OTHER organizations that need to use parking spaces
have no special exemption; they're all 72 hours, be them PG&E, AT&T,
And this is just one little exemption in a small little law. But in SF,
this kind of thing affects lots of people.
As far as your assertion that the board members receive kickbacks from
companies under the table, show us the PROOF! Lots of us would love to see
proof of this kind of thing. Believe me, if any such thing were going on,
it would be known far and wide. We just don't stand for this stuff.
Any deals that are made are above-board. Even Willie Brown, when he was
mayor, made deals above board.
There's no question that there are many different political agendas at play
here. Supervisor Scott Wiener usually sides with business in most matters,
but he does speak out in favor of neighborhoods when they can are
One assertion is that mayor Ed Lee caved in to Twitter, Zynga, and fellow
travelers in giving tax breaks to them if they'd locate to the Mid-Market
(Civic Center) neighborhood. Lots of people called it unfair. HOWEVER (and
I'm no fan of Ed Lee by any means), this change succeeded in doing that
NOBODY had been able to do since Joseph Alioto in the 1960s: Turn the
Mid-Market from a slum into something usable. Mid-Market had been a hell
hole ever since Market was torn up for BART in the 1960s!
Now, I go on the record as AGAINST home building because I believe that the
more homes you build the more people will want to live there and the home
prices are driven UP not down. The building boom South of Market that
displaced light industry and built every spare parcel with junk condos (aka
"live/work" spaces) drove South of Market prices to heights never seen in
the history of SF! People want to live near other people, and if you build
more places for them to live, it creates a buying frenzy and the prices go
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.