“Downtown’s slate”
Research by Sarah Phelan, chart by Ben Hopfer
By Tim Redmond
October 15, 2008
Follow the money: downtown and the landlords are trying to take over the Board of Supervisors.
It’s not surprising. For the past eight years, the progressives have had enough of a solid majority on the board to prevent Mayor Gavin Newsom from putting some of his worst plans in place and to propose — and often implement — a much better agenda.
This board brought us the living wage ordinance and the universal health care program. This board is moving to solve the budget crisis with taxes on wealthy property owners and big law firms. This board isn’t about to approve an Eastern Neighborhoods Plan that turns the city entirely over to the developers. This board supports public power and renewable energy, and is willing to go up against Pacific Gas and Electric Co.
Continue reading here.
The Hunger Site
October 15, 2008 at 10:21 am
“This board isn’t about to approve an Eastern Neighborhoods Plan that turns the city entirely over to the developers.”
What does Redmond think the progressive-backed Market/Octavia Plan and UC’s hijacking of the old extension property on lower Haight Street represent? Not to mention the progressive support for luxury highrise condos on Rincon Hill, backed by Chris Daly, Aaron Peskin, and Ross Mirkarimi.
The M/O Plan rezones more than 4,000 properties in the heart of the city to encourage developers by loosening zoning regs on set-backs, backyard space, density, height, and, of course, restricting parking for the new housing units. The M/O Plan also includes at least four 40-story highrises in the Market/Van Ness area. Supervisor Mirkarimi claims that the M/O Plan is all about affordable housing, but such provisions are impossible to find in the Plan itself.
Supervisor Mirkarimi is taking the lead in privatizing the old extension property by allowing UC to put a massive housing development on a site where working people used to take college courses at night. UC has had the property tax-free for 50 years because of its education “mission.” UC lied about why it abandoned the extension operation at the site, claiming that it couldn’t afford to maintain the property, but it later admitted that it is now spending $2,100,000 to house the same extension operation in downtown SF!
Our “progressive” board of supervisors has already rolled over for developers on the M/O Plan and the UC housing development. What makes anyone think they won’t do the same in the eastern neighborhoods?