Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Muni destroys park, dumps sewage, wastes millions crossing Islais Creek
Racism of all kinds in San Francisco
MUNI Destroys Park, Dumps Sewage, Wastes Millions Crossing Islais Creek
by Maurice Campbell, Barbara George and David Erickson
BEFORE: Three years ago, the beautiful Muwekma Ohlone Park and Wildlife Sanctuary on the north bank of Islais Creek was alive with Indian Gumweed, a medicinal flower used by Native Americans, and bevies of other flowers and plants, the last remaining colony of Pacific Chorus Frogs on Islais Creek, great blue herons, snowy egrets, red-tailed hawks and dozens of other bird species, including many rare ones, and flocks of school children, who came to help maintain the park, play on the beach and learn the secrets of this magical habitat.
AFTER: On Thanksgiving Day 2001, most of Muwekma Ohlone Park suddenly turned into bubbling mud when Muni, while trying to run this conduit under the huge sewer main that carries 80 million gallons a day of effluent from the sewage treatment plant into the Bay, cracked the concrete sewer main, flooding the park and adjacent property. Since then, the conduit, which is now filled with six large 115kV electrical cables, has been compressed to an egg shape and flooded, and Muni and PG&E are arguing over a better way to get electricity for the light rail line across Islais Creek.
It is well known that Muni’s Third Street Light Rail project has had a devastating impact on communities in southeast San Francisco. All up and down Third Street, Black businesses have closed because of the endless construction mess — three years and counting — that blocks sidewalks and leaves no room for parking. Muni has not met its minority and women (MBE and WBE) hiring and contracting goals. The only Blacks working on the project most days are flaggers and street sweepers — hardly a career path.
Less well known is the environmental and financial disaster related to the City’s incompetent construction of the electrical conduit for the rail line across Islais Creek, the pretty stream that runs just south of Cesar Chavez Street and divides Bay View Hunters Point from Dogpatch and Potrero. On Thanksgiving 2001, local artists were enjoying their hard-won little Muwekma Ohlone Park next to the bridge across Islais Creek when they noticed sinkholes and sand sprouts appearing all over the park. David Erickson grabbed his camera and photographed the sinkholes gradually getting bigger. Then the asphalt of a parking lot next door started to crack and a bulldozer sitting in it sank through.
What had happened is that the crew installing Muni’s electrical conduit, the pipe that holds and protects electrical lines, had tunneled under the huge “force main” sewer line carrying 80 million gallons a day of secondary sewage effluent from the Southeast sewage treatment plant. The force main runs along the north bank of Islais Creek and empties into the Bay some distance offshore.
Faulty construction of the electrical conduit had undermined and cracked the sewer main, pouring sewage into the creek and extensively damaging the park.
Why is this still an issue, three years later? It turns out the repairs, which further demolished the park, were as shoddy as the original construction, and the sewer main is leaking again. This time the situation is even more serious, as six large 115kV (kilovolt) electrical cables have been loaded into the conduit, which is now compressed to an egg shape and flooded.
Last week Muni delivered the devastating news that what little is left of Muwekma Ohlone Park will be excavated soon to make further repairs to the huge concrete sewer main. “Three years ago, they said the repairs would be complete in a couple of weeks,” recalls park guardian David Erickson. “All of this would never have happened if Muni had not chosen to drill at this location and had used one of the alternate routes currently being discussed.”
Meanwhile, the City is desperately trying to get PG&E to share the cost of rebuilding the conduit once again. PG&E and the City had been discussing a joint project whereby PG&E would run a new “AP-1” transmission line between its Potrero and Hunters Point substations in tandem with Muni’s electrical lines. PG&E claims that this transmission line will speed the closing of its Hunters Point power plant without the need for new power plants in the city. The plan is now delayed.
PG&E’s May 24, 2004, filing at the California Public Utilities Commission describes why PG&E is refusing to have anything to do with the City’s project and plans to route its transmission line around the west end of the creek instead. PG&E’s engineering analysis shows that the underwater crossing of Islais Creek should never have been attempted at all, because the soils in the area are unstable and subject to liquefaction in an earthquake:
“Now, with its reckless demand for time-consuming reconsideration of a routing alternative that months of expert engineering investigation have already shown to be infeasible, albeit financially advantageous for the city, CCSF (the City and County of San Francisco) places both of these important goals at risk,” PG&E’s filing states.
“Further, the underwater conduit is currently flooded that was constructed by CCSF without following basic engineering practices such as backfilling the casing with grout to prevent intrusion of water and was installed atop soils subject to liquefaction and other seismic problems.”
Bermuda Triangle in San Francisco?
by David Erickson
The Muwekma Ohlone Sanctuary, the only wildlife habitat located on Islais Creek, is truly the Bermuda Triangle of San Francisco. This wildlife sanctuary, officially established 11 years ago by community volunteers in conjunction with the Port of San Francisco and having received $105,000 in federal grants for habitat restoration and environmental education, is now facing final extinction due to a construction disaster created by Muni.
Nearly three years ago, during horizontal drilling under Islais Creek, Muni caused the Department of Public Works’ secondary effluent force main sewage outfall line to collapse, requiring the excavation of nearly 30 percent of the park and loss of the habitat of the Pacific Chorus Frogs. Within the next month, DPW will return to the park for more repairs and essentially destroy what little is left of this thin sliver of habitat on Islais Creek.
The drilling project, costing millions of taxpayers dollars, led by Muni to provide electric transmission lines for PG&E, will now be abandoned, and alternate routes, costing millions more dollars, are under way.
Not understood or known by many is that this location is under public and multiple jurisdictions, which include the Port of San Francisco, the DPW, SF Muni Third Street Light Rail, SF PUC, PG&E, SF Transportation Authority, various other city agencies, and some very important federal permitting agencies, including the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and, to a lesser degree, the U.S. Coast Guard and the Bay Conservation and Development Commission.
In a nutshell, the hypocrisy and, technically, the illegalities of any destruction or construction at the Muwekma Ohlone Sanctuary on Islais Creek, located in public jurisdiction, is that there has been no public process or notifications on record.
We request immediate tracking, documentation and publication of any permitting or public process that is associated with this area, the “Bermuda Triangle of San Francisco” and adjacent areas, under the Freedom of Information Act and federal law before the Muwekma Ohlone Sanctuary on Islais Creek is completely destroyed.
Local residents and the Community First Coalition of Bay View Hunters Point are also asking why the City ever allowed this project to go forward. They have a number of questions for the City:
• A Nov. 17, 2000, U.S. Geological Survey map shows liquefaction zones in San Francisco, including in this area. Why wasn’t this taken into consideration? The map was included in our Prop P implementation plan for cleanup of the Shipyard to residential standards, which was unanimously endorsed by the Board of Supervisors.
• Whose decision was it to build the conduit in this area? Was it Muni? Was it DPW (the Department of Public Works)? Was it SFPUC (San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, the City’s water and power agency)?
• What other City agencies are involved?
• Where does the San Francisco Department of Environment stand on protecting the environment? We’ve had millions and millions of gallons of secondary effluent going into Islais Creek while the main sewage outflow was being repaired. This violates state and federal laws. What is this doing to plant and fish life, the natural species of the creek, and the people who live and work around there – and go fishing in the creek?
• Did the project’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR) take these impacts into consideration, or were they omitted?
• Where is the state’s Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) and the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)? Have they been notified of these violations?
• How is this disaster impacting San Francisco’s budget deficit? This multimillion dollar job is trash. How much is it costing the City – for the faulty engineering design, to digging the trench, to placing the conduit, to repairing the sewer main outfall line, the parking lot and the other areas that were damaged, including the park, and then rebuilding the conduit? What is the total accumulated cost? What is the estimated cost of repairing it all over again?
• If the force main has to be repaired, how long is it going to take? How many gallons more effluent will pour into Islais Creek and what will be the environmental effect on the community?
• Whose budget is this coming out of? Muni’s tubes for the light rail are funded by the County Transportation Authority (CTA), which disburses federal transportation money. Muni is taking money out of the operations budget and putting it into construction, making the unions unhappy. Does that have something to do with finding money for this project?
• What is the estimated cost of building PG&E’s line using an alternate route? If PG&E puts in a separate line — which they and their experts say is necessary – it means that the ratepayers will end up paying for that separately. The people of San Francisco are being double-billed.
• Will the City’s Muni conduit be abandoned?
• PG&E’s consultant, Black & Veatch, did the independent study showing the engineering problems on the Muni’s Islais Creek route. What was the cost of that?
• Was PG&E involved in the City’s project in any way? The City and PG&E have held many meetings to plan their joint project. When did those meetings begin, and what was discussed?
• Will San Francisco taxpayers have to pick up the cost of Muni’s fiasco? What recourse or mitigation is there for taxpayers, electricity ratepayers and members of the impacted community?
• Was this project insured and bonded? Will the insurance companies relieve the taxpayers’ burden and go after the contractors and all the people at fault?
• This is a power project, which would involve the SFPUC. PG&E’s document mentions that the City planned to use the conduit for other projects but is now abandoning those plans. What are those projects? Were the City’s proposed “peakers” going to use these lines? The peakers are the new power plants the City wants to site alongside the existing Potrero power plant, just a few blocks from this area.
• SFPUC happens to have billions of bond money for rebuilding Hetch Hetchy. Is Muni attempting to raid these funds? Why is Susan Leal, now the city treasurer, being moved to SFPUC? Would she try to cover this up?
• Could this have been prevented if Muni had hired local people who would have been proud to do this work and are likely to have been more careful? Instead, the work was done by people who get their paycheck and leave town, who don’t care.
• Are the buildings in that area in danger of collapse?
• The community meeting to discuss PG&E’s project was held Thursday, the same night as the monthly meeting of the Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) for the Shipyard. Many environmental activists in Bay View Hunters Point were tied up at the RAB meeting. Why are so many environmental meetings in this community held on the same night as the RAB?
What you can do
Readers are encouraged to contact the Board of Supervisors and ask them to conduct an investigation based on these questions. Demand fair treatment on jobs and contracts and demand environmental protection. Insist on money to rebuild Muwekma Ohlone Park, since we as taxpayers and ratepayers are going to pay for this fiasco. The community and all City residents are entitled to a clear explanation of what happened, including a financial breakdown.
Maurice Campbell, mecsoft [at] pacbell.net, is convener of the Community First Coalition, a member of executive committee of the Hunters Point Shipyard Citizens’ Advisory Committee, co-chair of the Restoration Advisory Board (RAB), and host of “Connecting the Dots” on alternate Thursdays at 1 p.m. on KPOO 89.5 FM. As head of the Economic Committee of the RAB, he caused the Navy to contract locally in 94107, 94124 and 94134. He received the City’s Unsung Heroes Award for his work. Barbara George, bgwem [at] igc.org, heads Women’s Energy Matters, fighting for energy rights and environmental justice. As an official participant in cases at the California Public Utilities Commission, WEM is leading a statewide effort to dramatically increase energy efficiency in California. WEM and CFC have forced PG&E and the San Francisco Department of the Environment to provide more energy efficiency in BVHP. See http://www.womensenergymatters.org. David Erickson, zabudam [at] pacbell.net, is an artist, environmental guardian of Islais Creek, and founder of the Muwekma Ohlone Park. For more information, visit http://islaiscreek.org/sewerpipecollapseatislais.html.
=====
By July 2003, when this picture was taken, the 115kV lines had been installed in Muni’s conduit, but PG&E refuses to run electricity through the lines because the conduit is leaking and is located in a known liquefaction hazard zone. Muni’s incompetence is costing taxpayers millions.
Photo: David Erickson
Muni’s incompetent engineering and installation of conduit under the concrete force main sewage line cracked the line, an environmental disaster that poured 80 million gallons of sewage a day into Islais Creek, destroying the park and the adjacent parking lot. The disaster is one more excuse for keeping the Hunters Point PG&E power plant open.
Photo: Maurice Campbell
=====
For more information, visit http://islaiscreek.org/sewerpipecollapseatislais.html. Wildlife photos are at http://www.monkeyview.net/id/56/islais_creek_wildlife/index.vhtml, http://www.monkeyview.net/id/56/herring2002/index.vhtml, http://www.monkeyview.net/id/56/islaiscreekfrogs/index.vhtml. Please enter your comments or suggestions at http://www.islaiscreek.org/messages.html. Email David at zabudam [at] pacbell.net.
About us
Search sfbayview.com
Search WWW
Advertise in the Bay View!
San Francisco Bay View
National Black Newspaper
4917 Third Street
San Francisco California 94124
Phone: (415) 671-0789
Fax: (415) 671-0316
Email:
editor [at] sfbayview.com
by Maurice Campbell, Barbara George and David Erickson
BEFORE: Three years ago, the beautiful Muwekma Ohlone Park and Wildlife Sanctuary on the north bank of Islais Creek was alive with Indian Gumweed, a medicinal flower used by Native Americans, and bevies of other flowers and plants, the last remaining colony of Pacific Chorus Frogs on Islais Creek, great blue herons, snowy egrets, red-tailed hawks and dozens of other bird species, including many rare ones, and flocks of school children, who came to help maintain the park, play on the beach and learn the secrets of this magical habitat.
AFTER: On Thanksgiving Day 2001, most of Muwekma Ohlone Park suddenly turned into bubbling mud when Muni, while trying to run this conduit under the huge sewer main that carries 80 million gallons a day of effluent from the sewage treatment plant into the Bay, cracked the concrete sewer main, flooding the park and adjacent property. Since then, the conduit, which is now filled with six large 115kV electrical cables, has been compressed to an egg shape and flooded, and Muni and PG&E are arguing over a better way to get electricity for the light rail line across Islais Creek.
It is well known that Muni’s Third Street Light Rail project has had a devastating impact on communities in southeast San Francisco. All up and down Third Street, Black businesses have closed because of the endless construction mess — three years and counting — that blocks sidewalks and leaves no room for parking. Muni has not met its minority and women (MBE and WBE) hiring and contracting goals. The only Blacks working on the project most days are flaggers and street sweepers — hardly a career path.
Less well known is the environmental and financial disaster related to the City’s incompetent construction of the electrical conduit for the rail line across Islais Creek, the pretty stream that runs just south of Cesar Chavez Street and divides Bay View Hunters Point from Dogpatch and Potrero. On Thanksgiving 2001, local artists were enjoying their hard-won little Muwekma Ohlone Park next to the bridge across Islais Creek when they noticed sinkholes and sand sprouts appearing all over the park. David Erickson grabbed his camera and photographed the sinkholes gradually getting bigger. Then the asphalt of a parking lot next door started to crack and a bulldozer sitting in it sank through.
What had happened is that the crew installing Muni’s electrical conduit, the pipe that holds and protects electrical lines, had tunneled under the huge “force main” sewer line carrying 80 million gallons a day of secondary sewage effluent from the Southeast sewage treatment plant. The force main runs along the north bank of Islais Creek and empties into the Bay some distance offshore.
Faulty construction of the electrical conduit had undermined and cracked the sewer main, pouring sewage into the creek and extensively damaging the park.
Why is this still an issue, three years later? It turns out the repairs, which further demolished the park, were as shoddy as the original construction, and the sewer main is leaking again. This time the situation is even more serious, as six large 115kV (kilovolt) electrical cables have been loaded into the conduit, which is now compressed to an egg shape and flooded.
Last week Muni delivered the devastating news that what little is left of Muwekma Ohlone Park will be excavated soon to make further repairs to the huge concrete sewer main. “Three years ago, they said the repairs would be complete in a couple of weeks,” recalls park guardian David Erickson. “All of this would never have happened if Muni had not chosen to drill at this location and had used one of the alternate routes currently being discussed.”
Meanwhile, the City is desperately trying to get PG&E to share the cost of rebuilding the conduit once again. PG&E and the City had been discussing a joint project whereby PG&E would run a new “AP-1” transmission line between its Potrero and Hunters Point substations in tandem with Muni’s electrical lines. PG&E claims that this transmission line will speed the closing of its Hunters Point power plant without the need for new power plants in the city. The plan is now delayed.
PG&E’s May 24, 2004, filing at the California Public Utilities Commission describes why PG&E is refusing to have anything to do with the City’s project and plans to route its transmission line around the west end of the creek instead. PG&E’s engineering analysis shows that the underwater crossing of Islais Creek should never have been attempted at all, because the soils in the area are unstable and subject to liquefaction in an earthquake:
“Now, with its reckless demand for time-consuming reconsideration of a routing alternative that months of expert engineering investigation have already shown to be infeasible, albeit financially advantageous for the city, CCSF (the City and County of San Francisco) places both of these important goals at risk,” PG&E’s filing states.
“Further, the underwater conduit is currently flooded that was constructed by CCSF without following basic engineering practices such as backfilling the casing with grout to prevent intrusion of water and was installed atop soils subject to liquefaction and other seismic problems.”
Bermuda Triangle in San Francisco?
by David Erickson
The Muwekma Ohlone Sanctuary, the only wildlife habitat located on Islais Creek, is truly the Bermuda Triangle of San Francisco. This wildlife sanctuary, officially established 11 years ago by community volunteers in conjunction with the Port of San Francisco and having received $105,000 in federal grants for habitat restoration and environmental education, is now facing final extinction due to a construction disaster created by Muni.
Nearly three years ago, during horizontal drilling under Islais Creek, Muni caused the Department of Public Works’ secondary effluent force main sewage outfall line to collapse, requiring the excavation of nearly 30 percent of the park and loss of the habitat of the Pacific Chorus Frogs. Within the next month, DPW will return to the park for more repairs and essentially destroy what little is left of this thin sliver of habitat on Islais Creek.
The drilling project, costing millions of taxpayers dollars, led by Muni to provide electric transmission lines for PG&E, will now be abandoned, and alternate routes, costing millions more dollars, are under way.
Not understood or known by many is that this location is under public and multiple jurisdictions, which include the Port of San Francisco, the DPW, SF Muni Third Street Light Rail, SF PUC, PG&E, SF Transportation Authority, various other city agencies, and some very important federal permitting agencies, including the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and, to a lesser degree, the U.S. Coast Guard and the Bay Conservation and Development Commission.
In a nutshell, the hypocrisy and, technically, the illegalities of any destruction or construction at the Muwekma Ohlone Sanctuary on Islais Creek, located in public jurisdiction, is that there has been no public process or notifications on record.
We request immediate tracking, documentation and publication of any permitting or public process that is associated with this area, the “Bermuda Triangle of San Francisco” and adjacent areas, under the Freedom of Information Act and federal law before the Muwekma Ohlone Sanctuary on Islais Creek is completely destroyed.
Local residents and the Community First Coalition of Bay View Hunters Point are also asking why the City ever allowed this project to go forward. They have a number of questions for the City:
• A Nov. 17, 2000, U.S. Geological Survey map shows liquefaction zones in San Francisco, including in this area. Why wasn’t this taken into consideration? The map was included in our Prop P implementation plan for cleanup of the Shipyard to residential standards, which was unanimously endorsed by the Board of Supervisors.
• Whose decision was it to build the conduit in this area? Was it Muni? Was it DPW (the Department of Public Works)? Was it SFPUC (San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, the City’s water and power agency)?
• What other City agencies are involved?
• Where does the San Francisco Department of Environment stand on protecting the environment? We’ve had millions and millions of gallons of secondary effluent going into Islais Creek while the main sewage outflow was being repaired. This violates state and federal laws. What is this doing to plant and fish life, the natural species of the creek, and the people who live and work around there – and go fishing in the creek?
• Did the project’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR) take these impacts into consideration, or were they omitted?
• Where is the state’s Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) and the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)? Have they been notified of these violations?
• How is this disaster impacting San Francisco’s budget deficit? This multimillion dollar job is trash. How much is it costing the City – for the faulty engineering design, to digging the trench, to placing the conduit, to repairing the sewer main outfall line, the parking lot and the other areas that were damaged, including the park, and then rebuilding the conduit? What is the total accumulated cost? What is the estimated cost of repairing it all over again?
• If the force main has to be repaired, how long is it going to take? How many gallons more effluent will pour into Islais Creek and what will be the environmental effect on the community?
• Whose budget is this coming out of? Muni’s tubes for the light rail are funded by the County Transportation Authority (CTA), which disburses federal transportation money. Muni is taking money out of the operations budget and putting it into construction, making the unions unhappy. Does that have something to do with finding money for this project?
• What is the estimated cost of building PG&E’s line using an alternate route? If PG&E puts in a separate line — which they and their experts say is necessary – it means that the ratepayers will end up paying for that separately. The people of San Francisco are being double-billed.
• Will the City’s Muni conduit be abandoned?
• PG&E’s consultant, Black & Veatch, did the independent study showing the engineering problems on the Muni’s Islais Creek route. What was the cost of that?
• Was PG&E involved in the City’s project in any way? The City and PG&E have held many meetings to plan their joint project. When did those meetings begin, and what was discussed?
• Will San Francisco taxpayers have to pick up the cost of Muni’s fiasco? What recourse or mitigation is there for taxpayers, electricity ratepayers and members of the impacted community?
• Was this project insured and bonded? Will the insurance companies relieve the taxpayers’ burden and go after the contractors and all the people at fault?
• This is a power project, which would involve the SFPUC. PG&E’s document mentions that the City planned to use the conduit for other projects but is now abandoning those plans. What are those projects? Were the City’s proposed “peakers” going to use these lines? The peakers are the new power plants the City wants to site alongside the existing Potrero power plant, just a few blocks from this area.
• SFPUC happens to have billions of bond money for rebuilding Hetch Hetchy. Is Muni attempting to raid these funds? Why is Susan Leal, now the city treasurer, being moved to SFPUC? Would she try to cover this up?
• Could this have been prevented if Muni had hired local people who would have been proud to do this work and are likely to have been more careful? Instead, the work was done by people who get their paycheck and leave town, who don’t care.
• Are the buildings in that area in danger of collapse?
• The community meeting to discuss PG&E’s project was held Thursday, the same night as the monthly meeting of the Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) for the Shipyard. Many environmental activists in Bay View Hunters Point were tied up at the RAB meeting. Why are so many environmental meetings in this community held on the same night as the RAB?
What you can do
Readers are encouraged to contact the Board of Supervisors and ask them to conduct an investigation based on these questions. Demand fair treatment on jobs and contracts and demand environmental protection. Insist on money to rebuild Muwekma Ohlone Park, since we as taxpayers and ratepayers are going to pay for this fiasco. The community and all City residents are entitled to a clear explanation of what happened, including a financial breakdown.
Maurice Campbell, mecsoft [at] pacbell.net, is convener of the Community First Coalition, a member of executive committee of the Hunters Point Shipyard Citizens’ Advisory Committee, co-chair of the Restoration Advisory Board (RAB), and host of “Connecting the Dots” on alternate Thursdays at 1 p.m. on KPOO 89.5 FM. As head of the Economic Committee of the RAB, he caused the Navy to contract locally in 94107, 94124 and 94134. He received the City’s Unsung Heroes Award for his work. Barbara George, bgwem [at] igc.org, heads Women’s Energy Matters, fighting for energy rights and environmental justice. As an official participant in cases at the California Public Utilities Commission, WEM is leading a statewide effort to dramatically increase energy efficiency in California. WEM and CFC have forced PG&E and the San Francisco Department of the Environment to provide more energy efficiency in BVHP. See http://www.womensenergymatters.org. David Erickson, zabudam [at] pacbell.net, is an artist, environmental guardian of Islais Creek, and founder of the Muwekma Ohlone Park. For more information, visit http://islaiscreek.org/sewerpipecollapseatislais.html.
=====
By July 2003, when this picture was taken, the 115kV lines had been installed in Muni’s conduit, but PG&E refuses to run electricity through the lines because the conduit is leaking and is located in a known liquefaction hazard zone. Muni’s incompetence is costing taxpayers millions.
Photo: David Erickson
Muni’s incompetent engineering and installation of conduit under the concrete force main sewage line cracked the line, an environmental disaster that poured 80 million gallons of sewage a day into Islais Creek, destroying the park and the adjacent parking lot. The disaster is one more excuse for keeping the Hunters Point PG&E power plant open.
Photo: Maurice Campbell
=====
For more information, visit http://islaiscreek.org/sewerpipecollapseatislais.html. Wildlife photos are at http://www.monkeyview.net/id/56/islais_creek_wildlife/index.vhtml, http://www.monkeyview.net/id/56/herring2002/index.vhtml, http://www.monkeyview.net/id/56/islaiscreekfrogs/index.vhtml. Please enter your comments or suggestions at http://www.islaiscreek.org/messages.html. Email David at zabudam [at] pacbell.net.
About us
Search sfbayview.com
Search WWW
Advertise in the Bay View!
San Francisco Bay View
National Black Newspaper
4917 Third Street
San Francisco California 94124
Phone: (415) 671-0789
Fax: (415) 671-0316
Email:
editor [at] sfbayview.com
For more information:
http://sfbayview.com/072804/munidestroys07...
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
The More Things Change The More They Stay The Same
For more information:
http://www.ci.sf.ca.us/site/uploadedfiles/...
At the Sierra Club Energy meeting last night Jared Blumenfeld (head of SF Dept. of Environment) was asked about our article published yesterday (7/28/04) in the Bayview newspaper "Muni destroys park, dumps sewage, wastes millions crossing Islais Creek" (see http://www.sfbayview.com) This is the first agency responding to the article. He said it wasn't their area of responsibility. "We don't have anyone involved in water issues." However, they do have people who deal with power, habitat and Muni issues - all involved with the disaster. The following are from the Bylaws for the Commission on the Environment (on their website):
Article II - Mission Statement - Section 1: The Commission on the Environment
The mission of the Commission on the Environment is to improve, enhance, and preserve the environment; and to promote San Franciscoís long-term environmental sustainability as laid out in Section 4.118 of the City Charter.
Section 6: Duties and Responsibilities
A. The Commission on the Environment shall:
(5) Have the authority to investigate and make recommendations to all City agencies related to operations and functions, such as solid waste management, recycling, energy conservation, natural resource conservation, environmental inspections, toxics, urban forestry and natural resources, habitat restoration and hazardous materials;
---
The cost of building a line along the City's route, according to PG&E, is $26.8 million. PG&E's alternate route costs $26.6 million. Rehab and building a new crossing of the creek would cost $5 million and take 3 years. San Franciscans will be double billed for separate routes. We have not yet seen how much the City has already spent on their line.
At the 11pm budget hearing Jared mentioned (in another context), Supervisor Sandoval said aren't most of your programs in the Southeast sector? Jared answered yes. Sandoval asked how many people do you have making over $80,000 a year? He said, 8 or 10. How many people of color? "one Chinese, Annie Eng, one (east) Indian - Sraddha Mehta." How many Latino? "I don't know - may be one, his last name sounds Hispanic." How many black? None.
Note the following 17 Principles of Environmental Justice:
First National People of Color
Environmental Leadership Summit
Principles of Environmental Justice
(1991)
We, the People of Color, are gathered together at this First National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit, to begin to build a national movement of all peoples of color to fight the destruction of our lands and communities, do hereby reestablish our spiritual interdependence to the sacredness of our Mother Earth; we respect and celebrate each of our cultures, languages and beliefs about the natural world and our roles in healing ourselves; to insure environmental justice; to promote economic alternatives which would contribute to the development of environmentally safe livelihoods; and to secure our political, economic and cultural liberation that has been denied for over 500 years of colonization and oppression, resulting in the poisoning of our communities and land and the genocide of our peoples, do affirm and adopt these Principles of Environmental Justice.
1. Environmental justice affirms the sacredness of Mother Earth, ecological unity and the interdependence of all species, and the right to be free from ecological destruction.
2. Environmental justice demands that public policy be based on mutual respect and justice for all peoples, free from any form of discrimination or bias.
3. Environmental justice mandates the right to ethical, balanced and responsible uses of land and renewable resources in the interest of a sustainable planet for humans and other living things.
4. Environmental justice calls for universal protection from extraction, production and disposal of toxic/hazardous wastes and poisons that threaten the fundamental right to clean air, land, water and food.
5. Environmental justice affirms the fundamental right to political, economic, cultural and environmental self-determination to all peoples.
6. Environmental justice demands the cessation of the production of all toxins, hazardous wastes, and radioactive substances, and that all past and current producers be held strictly accountable to the people for detoxification and the containment at the point of production.
7. Environmental justice demands the right to participate as equal partners at every level of decision-making including needs assessment, planning, implementation, enforcement and evaluation.
8. Environmental justice affirms the right of all workers to a safe and healthy work environment, without being forced to choose between an unsafe livelihood and unemployment It also affirms the right of those who work at home to be free from environmental hazards.
9. Environmental justice protects the rights of victims of environmental justice to receive full compensation and reparations for damages as well as quality health care.
10. Environmental justice considers governmental acts of environmental injustice a violation of international law, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, and the United Nations Convention on Genocide.
11. Environmental justice recognizes the special legal relationship of Native Americans to the US government through treaties, agreements, compacts, and covenants affirming their sovereignty and self-determination.
12. Environmental justice affirms the need for an urban and rural ecology to clean up and rebuild our cities and rural areas in balance with nature, honoring the cultural integrity of all our communities, and providing fair access for all to the full range of resources.
13. Environmental justice calls for the strict enforcement of principles of informed consent, and a halt to the testing of experimental reproductive and medical procedures and vaccinations on people of color.
14. Environmental justice opposes the destructive operations of multi-national corporations.
15. Environmental justice opposes military occupations, repression and exploitation of lands, peoples and cultures.
16. Environmental justice calls for the education of present and future generations which emphasizes social and environmental issues, based on our experiences and an appreciation of our diverse cultural perspectives.
17. Environmental justice requires that we, as individuals, make personal and consumer choices to consume as little of Mother Earthís resources and to produce as little waste as possible; and make the conscious decision to challenge and reprioritize our lifestyles to insure the health of the natural world for present and future generations.
Article II - Mission Statement - Section 1: The Commission on the Environment
The mission of the Commission on the Environment is to improve, enhance, and preserve the environment; and to promote San Franciscoís long-term environmental sustainability as laid out in Section 4.118 of the City Charter.
Section 6: Duties and Responsibilities
A. The Commission on the Environment shall:
(5) Have the authority to investigate and make recommendations to all City agencies related to operations and functions, such as solid waste management, recycling, energy conservation, natural resource conservation, environmental inspections, toxics, urban forestry and natural resources, habitat restoration and hazardous materials;
---
The cost of building a line along the City's route, according to PG&E, is $26.8 million. PG&E's alternate route costs $26.6 million. Rehab and building a new crossing of the creek would cost $5 million and take 3 years. San Franciscans will be double billed for separate routes. We have not yet seen how much the City has already spent on their line.
At the 11pm budget hearing Jared mentioned (in another context), Supervisor Sandoval said aren't most of your programs in the Southeast sector? Jared answered yes. Sandoval asked how many people do you have making over $80,000 a year? He said, 8 or 10. How many people of color? "one Chinese, Annie Eng, one (east) Indian - Sraddha Mehta." How many Latino? "I don't know - may be one, his last name sounds Hispanic." How many black? None.
Note the following 17 Principles of Environmental Justice:
First National People of Color
Environmental Leadership Summit
Principles of Environmental Justice
(1991)
We, the People of Color, are gathered together at this First National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit, to begin to build a national movement of all peoples of color to fight the destruction of our lands and communities, do hereby reestablish our spiritual interdependence to the sacredness of our Mother Earth; we respect and celebrate each of our cultures, languages and beliefs about the natural world and our roles in healing ourselves; to insure environmental justice; to promote economic alternatives which would contribute to the development of environmentally safe livelihoods; and to secure our political, economic and cultural liberation that has been denied for over 500 years of colonization and oppression, resulting in the poisoning of our communities and land and the genocide of our peoples, do affirm and adopt these Principles of Environmental Justice.
1. Environmental justice affirms the sacredness of Mother Earth, ecological unity and the interdependence of all species, and the right to be free from ecological destruction.
2. Environmental justice demands that public policy be based on mutual respect and justice for all peoples, free from any form of discrimination or bias.
3. Environmental justice mandates the right to ethical, balanced and responsible uses of land and renewable resources in the interest of a sustainable planet for humans and other living things.
4. Environmental justice calls for universal protection from extraction, production and disposal of toxic/hazardous wastes and poisons that threaten the fundamental right to clean air, land, water and food.
5. Environmental justice affirms the fundamental right to political, economic, cultural and environmental self-determination to all peoples.
6. Environmental justice demands the cessation of the production of all toxins, hazardous wastes, and radioactive substances, and that all past and current producers be held strictly accountable to the people for detoxification and the containment at the point of production.
7. Environmental justice demands the right to participate as equal partners at every level of decision-making including needs assessment, planning, implementation, enforcement and evaluation.
8. Environmental justice affirms the right of all workers to a safe and healthy work environment, without being forced to choose between an unsafe livelihood and unemployment It also affirms the right of those who work at home to be free from environmental hazards.
9. Environmental justice protects the rights of victims of environmental justice to receive full compensation and reparations for damages as well as quality health care.
10. Environmental justice considers governmental acts of environmental injustice a violation of international law, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, and the United Nations Convention on Genocide.
11. Environmental justice recognizes the special legal relationship of Native Americans to the US government through treaties, agreements, compacts, and covenants affirming their sovereignty and self-determination.
12. Environmental justice affirms the need for an urban and rural ecology to clean up and rebuild our cities and rural areas in balance with nature, honoring the cultural integrity of all our communities, and providing fair access for all to the full range of resources.
13. Environmental justice calls for the strict enforcement of principles of informed consent, and a halt to the testing of experimental reproductive and medical procedures and vaccinations on people of color.
14. Environmental justice opposes the destructive operations of multi-national corporations.
15. Environmental justice opposes military occupations, repression and exploitation of lands, peoples and cultures.
16. Environmental justice calls for the education of present and future generations which emphasizes social and environmental issues, based on our experiences and an appreciation of our diverse cultural perspectives.
17. Environmental justice requires that we, as individuals, make personal and consumer choices to consume as little of Mother Earthís resources and to produce as little waste as possible; and make the conscious decision to challenge and reprioritize our lifestyles to insure the health of the natural world for present and future generations.
For more information:
http://womensenergymatters.org
'...Unfortunately, in today's regulatory system lack of proof of harm is usually misinterpreted as proof of safety. In San Francisco, we want to create a means to take action despite scientific uncertainty about the degree of a given risk. Too often, regulatory agencies get stuck in "paralysis by analysis"; the new framework removes excuses for inaction on the grounds of scientific uncertainty..."
Chris Gupta
Monday, August 4, 2003 (SF Chronicle) New Approaches to Safeguarding the earth/An environmental version of the Hippocratic oath Jared Blumenfeld
A bold environmental code becomes law in San Francisco today, one whose overarching framework is called the Precautionary Principle. Through it, San Francisco is taking a significant step away from the Bush administration's anti-environmental policies.
The Precautionary Principle sets out to improve the way we make environmental decisions. While the Bush team asks, "How much environmental harm will be allowed?," in San Francisco, decision-makers will ask a very different question: "How little harm is possible?"
San Francisco is a leader in making choices based on the least environmentally harmful alternatives, thereby challenging traditional assumptions about risk management. The 11 existing laws consolidated in the Environment Code have introduced more than 700 zero- or low-emission vehicles to the city's fleet, conserved 6,800 trees and more than half-a-million gallons of water each year by purchasing recycled content paper, cut toxic- pesticide use in half and protected worker health by designing buildings that use less energy and other precious natural resources.
We acknowledge that our world will never be free from risk. However, a risk that is unnecessary, and not freely chosen, is never acceptable. San Francisco's Precautionary Principle, enacted as part of the Environment Code, insists that environmental decision-making be based on rigorous science -- science that is explicit about what is known, what is not known and what may never be known about potential hazards.
Unfortunately, in today's regulatory system lack of proof of harm is usually misinterpreted as proof of safety. In San Francisco, we want to create a means to take action despite scientific uncertainty about the degree of a given risk. Too often, regulatory agencies get stuck in "paralysis by analysis"; the new framework removes excuses for inaction on the grounds of scientific uncertainty.
The costs of not taking precautionary action are often very high, as we've seen in the case of tobacco, lead and asbestos. Early scientific warnings about risks to health went unheeded by government agencies. As a result, billions of dollars have been spent to deal with the consequences of these problems. Costs include health care and health insurance, lost economic productivity, absenteeism, lost wages and cleanup. The Precautionary Principle process also requires decision-makers to consider possible impact to the local economy.
Our Precautionary Principle calls for a careful analysis of a range of alternatives using the best available information. The goal of this process is to determine whether a potentially hazardous activity is necessary, and whether less hazardous options are available. For instance, our pesticide reduction program eliminated all of the most toxic chemicals used by city gardeners and identified less-toxic ways to solve weed and pest problems, some as benign as using goats to clear weed-choked hillsides or heat cannons to kill termites in walls. Science provides vital evidence for making these decisions. However, elected officials will ultimately use a combination of scientific data and judgments of what is necessary, useful and fair to make environmental decisions.
Both locally and internationally, the public bears the direct consequences of environmental decisions. A government's course of action is necessarily enriched by broadly based public participation when a range of alternatives is considered. This concept of environmental democracy is deeply ingrained in San Francisco's Precautionary Principle.
At the World Trade Organization, the Bush administration is fighting the European Union's right to restrict imports of genetically modified foods; beef containing hormones, and proposed legislation that would require some 30,000 chemicals now in use to be immediately registered with EU authorities. The failure of the United States to adopt the Precautionary Principle is yet another way in which we are ostracizing ourselves from the rest of the planet.
San Francisco's Precautionary Principle presents a historic opportunity to refocus environmental decision-making on reducing harm. In doing so, we are sending a message to Washington: The days of letting polluters and industries set our health and environmental agenda may be over sooner than you think.
Chris Gupta
Monday, August 4, 2003 (SF Chronicle) New Approaches to Safeguarding the earth/An environmental version of the Hippocratic oath Jared Blumenfeld
A bold environmental code becomes law in San Francisco today, one whose overarching framework is called the Precautionary Principle. Through it, San Francisco is taking a significant step away from the Bush administration's anti-environmental policies.
The Precautionary Principle sets out to improve the way we make environmental decisions. While the Bush team asks, "How much environmental harm will be allowed?," in San Francisco, decision-makers will ask a very different question: "How little harm is possible?"
San Francisco is a leader in making choices based on the least environmentally harmful alternatives, thereby challenging traditional assumptions about risk management. The 11 existing laws consolidated in the Environment Code have introduced more than 700 zero- or low-emission vehicles to the city's fleet, conserved 6,800 trees and more than half-a-million gallons of water each year by purchasing recycled content paper, cut toxic- pesticide use in half and protected worker health by designing buildings that use less energy and other precious natural resources.
We acknowledge that our world will never be free from risk. However, a risk that is unnecessary, and not freely chosen, is never acceptable. San Francisco's Precautionary Principle, enacted as part of the Environment Code, insists that environmental decision-making be based on rigorous science -- science that is explicit about what is known, what is not known and what may never be known about potential hazards.
Unfortunately, in today's regulatory system lack of proof of harm is usually misinterpreted as proof of safety. In San Francisco, we want to create a means to take action despite scientific uncertainty about the degree of a given risk. Too often, regulatory agencies get stuck in "paralysis by analysis"; the new framework removes excuses for inaction on the grounds of scientific uncertainty.
The costs of not taking precautionary action are often very high, as we've seen in the case of tobacco, lead and asbestos. Early scientific warnings about risks to health went unheeded by government agencies. As a result, billions of dollars have been spent to deal with the consequences of these problems. Costs include health care and health insurance, lost economic productivity, absenteeism, lost wages and cleanup. The Precautionary Principle process also requires decision-makers to consider possible impact to the local economy.
Our Precautionary Principle calls for a careful analysis of a range of alternatives using the best available information. The goal of this process is to determine whether a potentially hazardous activity is necessary, and whether less hazardous options are available. For instance, our pesticide reduction program eliminated all of the most toxic chemicals used by city gardeners and identified less-toxic ways to solve weed and pest problems, some as benign as using goats to clear weed-choked hillsides or heat cannons to kill termites in walls. Science provides vital evidence for making these decisions. However, elected officials will ultimately use a combination of scientific data and judgments of what is necessary, useful and fair to make environmental decisions.
Both locally and internationally, the public bears the direct consequences of environmental decisions. A government's course of action is necessarily enriched by broadly based public participation when a range of alternatives is considered. This concept of environmental democracy is deeply ingrained in San Francisco's Precautionary Principle.
At the World Trade Organization, the Bush administration is fighting the European Union's right to restrict imports of genetically modified foods; beef containing hormones, and proposed legislation that would require some 30,000 chemicals now in use to be immediately registered with EU authorities. The failure of the United States to adopt the Precautionary Principle is yet another way in which we are ostracizing ourselves from the rest of the planet.
San Francisco's Precautionary Principle presents a historic opportunity to refocus environmental decision-making on reducing harm. In doing so, we are sending a message to Washington: The days of letting polluters and industries set our health and environmental agenda may be over sooner than you think.
For more information:
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2003...
Environmental Racism
A Status Report & Recommendations
A report on Environmental Racism in Bayview/Hunters Point:
The City and the Community working together
to promote environmental justice
Published by
The Human Rights Commission
December 2003
A Status Report & Recommendations
A report on Environmental Racism in Bayview/Hunters Point:
The City and the Community working together
to promote environmental justice
Published by
The Human Rights Commission
December 2003
For more information:
http://mecresources.com/envirorace.htm
As taxpayers and ratepayers and the community we want relief
They say if the project is too expensive then the peakers can be terminated by DWR, well you be the judge since it is now going to cost the ratepayer and taxpayer (YOU) one hell of a lot. Then YOU be the judge
We have decent people who live and work in San Francisco and then we have the crooks.
Looking up to all these folks is a Chorus Frog that is on the verge of extinction because of the actions of a few who are all out to destroy. Who will come to the rescue of the Chorus Frog? The Chorus Frog made its stand, its fight for survival at Islais Creek by 3rd Street and Marin Street - 1800 Illinois Street to be precise. Go check out the site!
The Chorus Frog is very small the size of your thumbnail but boy can he or she sing. Here in San Francisco many of us have not heard about the red leg frog, the chorus frog, and for that matter nothing at all when it comes to endangered species that has come about because of human stupidity. The encroachment and destruction of the environs of the endangered species by stupid human beings all over San Francisco.
Do you think the Department of Public Works with Mr. Lee and Mohammed Nuru would know anything about the Chorus Frog? Do you think the San Francisco Port Authority with director damsel Monique Moyer has ever visited Islais Creek? Do you think - anyone not understanding a simple question like the Commissioner on the Port Commission - Sue Bierman, understands the workings and corruption prevailing at the San Francisco Port Authority? The ineptness is all prevailing and has reached saturation point. Corruption and more of it.
At Islais Creek the only Open Space that was saved by David Erickson and which is still San Francisco Port Property was cleaned and taken care of because the SF Port Authority lacked the decency and the knowledge to know or do better. This guerrilla garden made the list on the world map and the chorus frog grew by leaps and bounds and made history. This Chorus Frog was and is still an inspiration to the few human beings left on this planet who are caring and humane.
It so happened that while the Chorus Frog was singing in its habitat above. Below its habitat lay the Force Main and evil forces were digging 3 conduits under the Chorus Frog habitat that would destroy the habitat.
Long before the Force Main collapsed and spilled the half-treated sewage all over the Muwekma Park that is the abode of the Chorus Frog by Islais Creek we all had hope.
The San Francisco Port Commission heard me as I represent the concerns and hope of the First People of San Francisco - the Muwekma Ohlone. David Erickson chose to name the Park after the First People and keeps the aspirations of the Muwekma Park and in doing so give hope to the endangered Chorus Frog.
The Chorus Frog cannot talk and human beings evil by choice can and have destroyed much of what was good in San Francisco. Try convincing the Board of Supervisors and Sophie Maxwell the most corrupt Supervisor from District 10 about the plight of the Force Main and the Chorus Frog? The woman agreed with San Francisco Public Utilities Commission to build 3 conduits under the Force Main and cause tremendous damage that will imperil the health and safety of the City and County of San Francisco.
Right now as the Chorus Frog is being killed because the environs are polluted with toxic waste. The rest of the Muwekma Park slated for destruction to dig and try to fix the 3 failed conduits that are filled with slurry and cannot be used as Transmission Lines for electricity and Cable Lines for communication. Millions of dollars spent without due consideration. A failed plan with proper soil analysis in an area that is all landfill. No Environmental Impact Report or Study. Shame.
It is a paradox that human beings will not take that little effort to ask for an Environmental Impact Study or Report. Federal and State Agencies should fine and jail all those who with intent killed the Chorus Frog that is an endangered species.
We have so many Environmentalists and others who fake to be community leaders. How can they be leaders when they have NO education? How can they be leaders when they are not informed on issues?
How can they be humane when they with intent, under the shadow of ignorance destroy all that is good - the little that is left in San Francisco?
The Muwekma Ohlone Park was a project taken to save the Chorus Frog and one of its last habitats by Islais Creek.
Another important habitat was covered by concrete and the frogs killed when the Friend of Islais Creek mostly ignorant White Folks headed by Julia Viera built a Park that is utilized by drug dealers and those who have fallen out on their luck. The Park is filthy and constantly bombarded by the filthy stench from the near by Pelphs Raw Sewage Treatment Plant. Over $10 million was wasted on this project and the City and County of San Francisco, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission sees nothing wrong with wasting so much money.
The Project killed thousands of Chorus Frogs but there was no one to save them. This will not happen this time around. Anyone who kills and harms the Chorus Frog will be taken before the Court of Justice. Let this warning be heard by MUNI, SFPUC, the City and County of San Francisco. Most importantly Monique Moyer and the SF Port Authority.
The Muwekma Ohlone Park is the only Park named after the First People of San Francisco. The Board of Supervisors has passed several Resolutions acknowledging the Muwekma Ohlone. The City has yet to name one Single Street, road, park, or building after the Muwekma Ohlone.
David Erickson took upon himself with permission from the Tribal Chairperson to save a site and the habitat of the Chorus Frog. He also deemed it fit to name the site the Muwekma Ohlone Park and Sanctuary.
I went before the San Francisco Port Commission and in the August 12, 2000 San Francisco Port Commission the Commissioners acknowledge the work of David Erickson and agreed that the name: Muwekma Ohlone Park and Sanctuary was a fitting name and approved by all Commissioners present. Anyone can have access to the minutes of this important meeting.
It took some persuasion from Francisco Da Costa but he managed against odds to make this important procedure happen. In doing so the SF Port Authority gave its tacit permission for the Chorus Frog to be saved and the Muwekma Park and Sanctuary to exist.
To date the San Francisco Port Authority has done nothing substantially to help David Erickson. Three quarters of the Muwekma Ohlone Park and Sanctuary is destroyed as a result of the collapse of the failed Force Main under the Park. The other area is now slated for complete destruction to fix the conduits also under the Park that has cost the taxpayer and the constituents of San Francisco millions.
Our Board of Supervisors (BOS) were told about the conduits and the Force Main and how the conduits imperiled the Force Main. The BOS were told this many times but they could not fathom the consequences of this ill timed and ill planned project under the Muwekma Ohlone Park and Sanctuary. Especially the inept, ignorant, and arrogant Sophie Maxwell. Also the SFPUC, MUNI, and the SF Port Authority.
At no time was David Erickson notified by the San Francisco Port Authority the legal owner of this site that was neglected and saved by David Erickson about any digging under the site of the Park.
At no time did the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, MUNI, the City and County of San Francisco inform anyone and David Erickson about the 3 conduits that cost millions and destroyed the Muwekma Ohlone Park and Sanctuary. Caused the permanent leakage and collapse of the Force Main that carries over 180 million gallons of half treated sewage into the Bay by Pier 80. Pier 80 is a few hundred feet from the Muwekma Park and Sanctuary.
The San Francisco Port Authority has left huge areas between Piers 98 to Pier 70 that are in disrepair. It is here that the SF Port Authority has chosen to dump the worse operations polluting the air, land and water. The SF Port Authority should be taken to task and some of its employees like Diane Oshima, Carol Bach taken to court.
It is not right to kill the Chorus Frog. It is not right to not come to the defense of this Chorus Frog that stands for all things right. This Chorus Frog is a symbol that points out to all of us who have some decency the state of corruption and lack of Accountability and Transparency. Shame on MUNI, Sophie Maxwell, the SFPUC, the City and County of San Francisco and foremost the SF Port Authority.
Who will challenge the Crooks? Who will save the Chorus Frog?
The Chorus Frog Fight for Survival.
Looking up to all these folks is a Chorus Frog that is on the verge of extinction because of the actions of a few who are all out to destroy. Who will come to the rescue of the Chorus Frog? The Chorus Frog made its stand, its fight for survival at Islais Creek by 3rd Street and Marin Street - 1800 Illinois Street to be precise. Go check out the site!
The Chorus Frog is very small the size of your thumbnail but boy can he or she sing. Here in San Francisco many of us have not heard about the red leg frog, the chorus frog, and for that matter nothing at all when it comes to endangered species that has come about because of human stupidity. The encroachment and destruction of the environs of the endangered species by stupid human beings all over San Francisco.
Do you think the Department of Public Works with Mr. Lee and Mohammed Nuru would know anything about the Chorus Frog? Do you think the San Francisco Port Authority with director damsel Monique Moyer has ever visited Islais Creek? Do you think - anyone not understanding a simple question like the Commissioner on the Port Commission - Sue Bierman, understands the workings and corruption prevailing at the San Francisco Port Authority? The ineptness is all prevailing and has reached saturation point. Corruption and more of it.
At Islais Creek the only Open Space that was saved by David Erickson and which is still San Francisco Port Property was cleaned and taken care of because the SF Port Authority lacked the decency and the knowledge to know or do better. This guerrilla garden made the list on the world map and the chorus frog grew by leaps and bounds and made history. This Chorus Frog was and is still an inspiration to the few human beings left on this planet who are caring and humane.
It so happened that while the Chorus Frog was singing in its habitat above. Below its habitat lay the Force Main and evil forces were digging 3 conduits under the Chorus Frog habitat that would destroy the habitat.
Long before the Force Main collapsed and spilled the half-treated sewage all over the Muwekma Park that is the abode of the Chorus Frog by Islais Creek we all had hope.
The San Francisco Port Commission heard me as I represent the concerns and hope of the First People of San Francisco - the Muwekma Ohlone. David Erickson chose to name the Park after the First People and keeps the aspirations of the Muwekma Park and in doing so give hope to the endangered Chorus Frog.
The Chorus Frog cannot talk and human beings evil by choice can and have destroyed much of what was good in San Francisco. Try convincing the Board of Supervisors and Sophie Maxwell the most corrupt Supervisor from District 10 about the plight of the Force Main and the Chorus Frog? The woman agreed with San Francisco Public Utilities Commission to build 3 conduits under the Force Main and cause tremendous damage that will imperil the health and safety of the City and County of San Francisco.
Right now as the Chorus Frog is being killed because the environs are polluted with toxic waste. The rest of the Muwekma Park slated for destruction to dig and try to fix the 3 failed conduits that are filled with slurry and cannot be used as Transmission Lines for electricity and Cable Lines for communication. Millions of dollars spent without due consideration. A failed plan with proper soil analysis in an area that is all landfill. No Environmental Impact Report or Study. Shame.
It is a paradox that human beings will not take that little effort to ask for an Environmental Impact Study or Report. Federal and State Agencies should fine and jail all those who with intent killed the Chorus Frog that is an endangered species.
We have so many Environmentalists and others who fake to be community leaders. How can they be leaders when they have NO education? How can they be leaders when they are not informed on issues?
How can they be humane when they with intent, under the shadow of ignorance destroy all that is good - the little that is left in San Francisco?
The Muwekma Ohlone Park was a project taken to save the Chorus Frog and one of its last habitats by Islais Creek.
Another important habitat was covered by concrete and the frogs killed when the Friend of Islais Creek mostly ignorant White Folks headed by Julia Viera built a Park that is utilized by drug dealers and those who have fallen out on their luck. The Park is filthy and constantly bombarded by the filthy stench from the near by Pelphs Raw Sewage Treatment Plant. Over $10 million was wasted on this project and the City and County of San Francisco, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission sees nothing wrong with wasting so much money.
The Project killed thousands of Chorus Frogs but there was no one to save them. This will not happen this time around. Anyone who kills and harms the Chorus Frog will be taken before the Court of Justice. Let this warning be heard by MUNI, SFPUC, the City and County of San Francisco. Most importantly Monique Moyer and the SF Port Authority.
The Muwekma Ohlone Park is the only Park named after the First People of San Francisco. The Board of Supervisors has passed several Resolutions acknowledging the Muwekma Ohlone. The City has yet to name one Single Street, road, park, or building after the Muwekma Ohlone.
David Erickson took upon himself with permission from the Tribal Chairperson to save a site and the habitat of the Chorus Frog. He also deemed it fit to name the site the Muwekma Ohlone Park and Sanctuary.
I went before the San Francisco Port Commission and in the August 12, 2000 San Francisco Port Commission the Commissioners acknowledge the work of David Erickson and agreed that the name: Muwekma Ohlone Park and Sanctuary was a fitting name and approved by all Commissioners present. Anyone can have access to the minutes of this important meeting.
It took some persuasion from Francisco Da Costa but he managed against odds to make this important procedure happen. In doing so the SF Port Authority gave its tacit permission for the Chorus Frog to be saved and the Muwekma Park and Sanctuary to exist.
To date the San Francisco Port Authority has done nothing substantially to help David Erickson. Three quarters of the Muwekma Ohlone Park and Sanctuary is destroyed as a result of the collapse of the failed Force Main under the Park. The other area is now slated for complete destruction to fix the conduits also under the Park that has cost the taxpayer and the constituents of San Francisco millions.
Our Board of Supervisors (BOS) were told about the conduits and the Force Main and how the conduits imperiled the Force Main. The BOS were told this many times but they could not fathom the consequences of this ill timed and ill planned project under the Muwekma Ohlone Park and Sanctuary. Especially the inept, ignorant, and arrogant Sophie Maxwell. Also the SFPUC, MUNI, and the SF Port Authority.
At no time was David Erickson notified by the San Francisco Port Authority the legal owner of this site that was neglected and saved by David Erickson about any digging under the site of the Park.
At no time did the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, MUNI, the City and County of San Francisco inform anyone and David Erickson about the 3 conduits that cost millions and destroyed the Muwekma Ohlone Park and Sanctuary. Caused the permanent leakage and collapse of the Force Main that carries over 180 million gallons of half treated sewage into the Bay by Pier 80. Pier 80 is a few hundred feet from the Muwekma Park and Sanctuary.
The San Francisco Port Authority has left huge areas between Piers 98 to Pier 70 that are in disrepair. It is here that the SF Port Authority has chosen to dump the worse operations polluting the air, land and water. The SF Port Authority should be taken to task and some of its employees like Diane Oshima, Carol Bach taken to court.
It is not right to kill the Chorus Frog. It is not right to not come to the defense of this Chorus Frog that stands for all things right. This Chorus Frog is a symbol that points out to all of us who have some decency the state of corruption and lack of Accountability and Transparency. Shame on MUNI, Sophie Maxwell, the SFPUC, the City and County of San Francisco and foremost the SF Port Authority.
Who will challenge the Crooks? Who will save the Chorus Frog?
The Chorus Frog Fight for Survival.
For more information:
http://www.franciscodacosta.net/articles/f...
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$260.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network