Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Bayview Residents: the Hidden Treasure
Residents in the Bayview Hunters Point and Alice Griffith, the people that would be immediately affected by the redevelopment, have been left out of the creation propositions and ignored by politicians that are supposedly fighting for them.
Bayview Residents: The Hidden Treasure
It is common knowledge that San Francisco is known for its progressive and “progressive” politics, but what is really happening in low-income communities are a testament to the hypocrisy that goes on in our city, by politicians and reputed community leaders. Despite all of the media and political attention that the Bayview Hunters Point has undergone, very little has been accomplished by some so called progressives fighting for social change.
The decision to negotiate with Lennar and support prop. G stemmed from the Community Benefits Agreement created by the community most vulnerable to displacement. This process was outside the input of the “progressive politicians”, their organizational allies, and even the city. Is that why it’s being questioned?
Proposition F and Proposition G, on the June 2008 San Francisco ballot, have their problems and advertised good points, but how much of the content of each proposition actually address the needs of the community?
The Bayview Hunter Point is plagued with crime, violence, foreclosures, and Alice Griffith public housing with severely poor housing conditions – which, of course, make it the prime target, not only for developers, but non-profits and ambitious progressive politicians as well.
It should be understood that no one should expect a large profit-driven development company to provide community benefits because it sounds good – the rich didn’t get rich by giving their money away –but they will do good if it makes business sense. The community has a role to determine which businesses do business in their neighborhood, and also to determine the standards by which they do business. As horrible as Lennar’s track record is or is hyped up to be, a real challenge is finding another developer that has a better one. In this case, the practices of Lennar are defined through a Community Benefits Agreement, a legally binding document that allows the community to hold Lennar accountable to those terms through penalties and lawsuits.
In challenging the choice of Lennar and the feasibility of a carefully constructed CBA, the proponents of prop. F also challenge the work that community members who benefit from the CBA they themselves constructed, and are the most vulnerable to displacement. Also you also delay the Alice Griffith Public Housing Project rebuild by five to ten years. You could think what you want about public housing residents but a truth that also must be understood is that public housing is just that – public housing. It’s not a concentration of criminals ready to gun the next person down or a group of people waiting for a hand out. If we even considered a real definition of working class family, this is where would find them. There are single mothers struggling to make a better life for their children, seniors that have worked all their life to have a little bit at the end of their life, and families that have lost it all only to be given a second chance to make something of themselves. Alice Griffith represents the very essence of the problems of the Bayview Hunters Point and SHOULD be a starting point that paves the way for a solution.
Prop G provides for 8,000 jobs, 10,000 units of housing of which 25% is an encouraged to be affordable. Long story short, it’s a policy piece that guarantees little and overturns city zoning and subsidy caps that SF voters voted on 10 years ago. Left to its own devices, it’s a policy proposition that’s worth $2 million, might provide something for some eligible residents, and win Lennar a $1.4 billion deal. With the CBA it becomes something real.
The Affordable Housing Initiative Prop. F demands affordable housing that cannot save the Bayview. All of its 50% of Affordable housing is 100% rental. A proponent of Prop. F once told me that “housing provides permanence.” The distinct line between lower and middle class is homeownership. A renter is someone that doesn’t have an investment in the land or ownership and is a transitional tenant which provides permanence. Aside from the idea of renting indefinitely, which is one problem with Public Housing when there are no other options, Prop. F doesn’t guarantee jobs or any additional community benefits.
The Bayview Hunters Point has the highest homeownership rate in the entire city (65%) and one of the highest concentrations of union members in San Francisco. Most of the city’s major services, such as the Main San Francisco Post Office and Waste Water Sewage plant are located and employ residents in the Bayview Hunters Point. This is what has retained long-time residents: homeownership and well-paying jobs.
In the Bayview Hunters Point, there are problems, but fighting only for affordable housing is not going to solve those problems.
• Every year, the Bayview Hunters Point receives approximately $ 80 million a year in city grants and retains over 300 community based organizations that address the different community concerns. A portion of funding that goes to youth services only funds programs that service at risk youth, who comprise only 10% of the entire youth population of district 10. The other 90% of youth receive very little or nothing.
• In 2005, the city cut the budget to public health, crippling the handful of senior centers and one health clinic in District 10. Currently, St. Luke’s is scheduled to close, leaving the over crowed public hospital, San Francisco General, the only hospital in the Southeast Sector. With Bayview Hunters Point having the highest concentration of children and residents with asthma, how will its families get emergency medical care? This isn’t consistent with the “Mayor’s Universal Healthcare Plan.”
• The T train, that once advertised “Bayview: the hidden treasure” and replaced the 15 line, in its first year had an average wait time of an hour and a half, longer during rush hour or a ball game. A recent survey showed that 10% of riders had lost their job because of the wait and another 30% were at risk of losing their jobs. Even in the T train’s construction, although many residents flocked to apply for jobs on the construction, very little residents were hired on and if so, were hired to hold up stop signs. This change and so called improvement in transportation is not benefiting the existing community.
It’s hard to attest to the real goings on of the political fight as the political contenders have not genuinely engaged the community. The real community work, you will find if one chooses to spend time in the Bayview Hunters Point, happens with little or no money. The work that addresses the real immediate needs of the community is when the community advocates for themselves. By making decision on behalf of a community whose challenges are systemic, you only contribute to and perpetuate the systemic problem. So, wouldn’t it make sense that people who look to change the community systemically, on behalf of the residents, engage the residents and include them in the process of the change they want?
In 2002, ACORN, Labor, and several other groups embarked in a campaign to raise the minimum wage to pull families that they collectively organize out of poverty and into a position to increase their earning power. The ballot initiative that passed wasn’t just to increase the minimum wage for that moment in time, but to adjust for inflation, increasing as the cost of living and the worth of the dollar increases. There were several big businesses that opposed having to pay their employees more but there wasn’t one progressive politician or organization that opposed it. Why? One, it was an investment in the future. Two, it put working class families into a position to move up into homeownership.
Again, the proponents of Prop. F contradict what they set out to do. Its affordable housing income threshold prices out the families who make minimum wage. How is this investing in our families or our future? A survey of five hundred residents in the Bayview Hunters Point stated that the most important things to them were affordable home ownership and jobs that hired residents. Their voice is the mandate of what should be done in their community.
This is what the CBA is about, residents of working class and low-income communities fighting for things that provide economic stability, provide jobs and careers, provide opportunities for homeownership, and provide an opportunity for the children of the families that currently live in the Bayview to be able to buy a home in the Bayview 20 years from now. We shouldn’t think of redevelopment as only the redevelopment of the land, but as the redevelopment of the people who live there. The community’s revolutionary CBA is only one component of this transformation.
As you can imagine, it wasn’t work that happened overnight because it had to include community members. It became the summation of several years of door knocking, data collection and research, and most importantly, the education and organization of residents that saw beyond the political rhetoric, and handouts. In this organizing drive, a majority of the residents put together a series of house meetings to determine what they wanted out of a massive redevelopment plan; meetings that ran in Samoan, Spanish, and English.
In the small complex and recently popular Alice Griffith Housing Project, you find people like Sister Stephanie Hughes who uses all of her income to make sure the children in the community are given opportunities to go outside of their community or have afternoon snacks because, simply, “her children are hungry”; and Jackie Williams that tends to the community garden that receives very little city resources to operate; and the United Fathers Coalition that works with men to become better fathers and relies on weekly fundraisers to support their work; and the Good Samaritan Church down the street from the housing projects that turned their congregation numbers around from 15 to 300 in a year because they preach about community and leadership; and the mothers and fathers in the neighborhood that watch each others children and care for them like their own because the only people they can count on are the people that, good or bad, are there to stay – or least, in light of everything, want to stay. They have learned they cannot count on the people that just pass through the community, ask for their vote, signature, or support on an issue that they didn’t help to create but purports to help them. It is these people who should decide the fate of their community and future.
At any rate, change isn’t just policy and idealogy of propositions on a ballot - it’s organizing people to hold policy makers and enforcers accountable to what the community decides. In this case, supporting Proposition G, and the CBA. Denying the change that a community wants isn’t a solution, but a part of the problem. Real change comes from educating people and then organizing them, not the other way around.
It is common knowledge that San Francisco is known for its progressive and “progressive” politics, but what is really happening in low-income communities are a testament to the hypocrisy that goes on in our city, by politicians and reputed community leaders. Despite all of the media and political attention that the Bayview Hunters Point has undergone, very little has been accomplished by some so called progressives fighting for social change.
The decision to negotiate with Lennar and support prop. G stemmed from the Community Benefits Agreement created by the community most vulnerable to displacement. This process was outside the input of the “progressive politicians”, their organizational allies, and even the city. Is that why it’s being questioned?
Proposition F and Proposition G, on the June 2008 San Francisco ballot, have their problems and advertised good points, but how much of the content of each proposition actually address the needs of the community?
The Bayview Hunter Point is plagued with crime, violence, foreclosures, and Alice Griffith public housing with severely poor housing conditions – which, of course, make it the prime target, not only for developers, but non-profits and ambitious progressive politicians as well.
It should be understood that no one should expect a large profit-driven development company to provide community benefits because it sounds good – the rich didn’t get rich by giving their money away –but they will do good if it makes business sense. The community has a role to determine which businesses do business in their neighborhood, and also to determine the standards by which they do business. As horrible as Lennar’s track record is or is hyped up to be, a real challenge is finding another developer that has a better one. In this case, the practices of Lennar are defined through a Community Benefits Agreement, a legally binding document that allows the community to hold Lennar accountable to those terms through penalties and lawsuits.
In challenging the choice of Lennar and the feasibility of a carefully constructed CBA, the proponents of prop. F also challenge the work that community members who benefit from the CBA they themselves constructed, and are the most vulnerable to displacement. Also you also delay the Alice Griffith Public Housing Project rebuild by five to ten years. You could think what you want about public housing residents but a truth that also must be understood is that public housing is just that – public housing. It’s not a concentration of criminals ready to gun the next person down or a group of people waiting for a hand out. If we even considered a real definition of working class family, this is where would find them. There are single mothers struggling to make a better life for their children, seniors that have worked all their life to have a little bit at the end of their life, and families that have lost it all only to be given a second chance to make something of themselves. Alice Griffith represents the very essence of the problems of the Bayview Hunters Point and SHOULD be a starting point that paves the way for a solution.
Prop G provides for 8,000 jobs, 10,000 units of housing of which 25% is an encouraged to be affordable. Long story short, it’s a policy piece that guarantees little and overturns city zoning and subsidy caps that SF voters voted on 10 years ago. Left to its own devices, it’s a policy proposition that’s worth $2 million, might provide something for some eligible residents, and win Lennar a $1.4 billion deal. With the CBA it becomes something real.
The Affordable Housing Initiative Prop. F demands affordable housing that cannot save the Bayview. All of its 50% of Affordable housing is 100% rental. A proponent of Prop. F once told me that “housing provides permanence.” The distinct line between lower and middle class is homeownership. A renter is someone that doesn’t have an investment in the land or ownership and is a transitional tenant which provides permanence. Aside from the idea of renting indefinitely, which is one problem with Public Housing when there are no other options, Prop. F doesn’t guarantee jobs or any additional community benefits.
The Bayview Hunters Point has the highest homeownership rate in the entire city (65%) and one of the highest concentrations of union members in San Francisco. Most of the city’s major services, such as the Main San Francisco Post Office and Waste Water Sewage plant are located and employ residents in the Bayview Hunters Point. This is what has retained long-time residents: homeownership and well-paying jobs.
In the Bayview Hunters Point, there are problems, but fighting only for affordable housing is not going to solve those problems.
• Every year, the Bayview Hunters Point receives approximately $ 80 million a year in city grants and retains over 300 community based organizations that address the different community concerns. A portion of funding that goes to youth services only funds programs that service at risk youth, who comprise only 10% of the entire youth population of district 10. The other 90% of youth receive very little or nothing.
• In 2005, the city cut the budget to public health, crippling the handful of senior centers and one health clinic in District 10. Currently, St. Luke’s is scheduled to close, leaving the over crowed public hospital, San Francisco General, the only hospital in the Southeast Sector. With Bayview Hunters Point having the highest concentration of children and residents with asthma, how will its families get emergency medical care? This isn’t consistent with the “Mayor’s Universal Healthcare Plan.”
• The T train, that once advertised “Bayview: the hidden treasure” and replaced the 15 line, in its first year had an average wait time of an hour and a half, longer during rush hour or a ball game. A recent survey showed that 10% of riders had lost their job because of the wait and another 30% were at risk of losing their jobs. Even in the T train’s construction, although many residents flocked to apply for jobs on the construction, very little residents were hired on and if so, were hired to hold up stop signs. This change and so called improvement in transportation is not benefiting the existing community.
It’s hard to attest to the real goings on of the political fight as the political contenders have not genuinely engaged the community. The real community work, you will find if one chooses to spend time in the Bayview Hunters Point, happens with little or no money. The work that addresses the real immediate needs of the community is when the community advocates for themselves. By making decision on behalf of a community whose challenges are systemic, you only contribute to and perpetuate the systemic problem. So, wouldn’t it make sense that people who look to change the community systemically, on behalf of the residents, engage the residents and include them in the process of the change they want?
In 2002, ACORN, Labor, and several other groups embarked in a campaign to raise the minimum wage to pull families that they collectively organize out of poverty and into a position to increase their earning power. The ballot initiative that passed wasn’t just to increase the minimum wage for that moment in time, but to adjust for inflation, increasing as the cost of living and the worth of the dollar increases. There were several big businesses that opposed having to pay their employees more but there wasn’t one progressive politician or organization that opposed it. Why? One, it was an investment in the future. Two, it put working class families into a position to move up into homeownership.
Again, the proponents of Prop. F contradict what they set out to do. Its affordable housing income threshold prices out the families who make minimum wage. How is this investing in our families or our future? A survey of five hundred residents in the Bayview Hunters Point stated that the most important things to them were affordable home ownership and jobs that hired residents. Their voice is the mandate of what should be done in their community.
This is what the CBA is about, residents of working class and low-income communities fighting for things that provide economic stability, provide jobs and careers, provide opportunities for homeownership, and provide an opportunity for the children of the families that currently live in the Bayview to be able to buy a home in the Bayview 20 years from now. We shouldn’t think of redevelopment as only the redevelopment of the land, but as the redevelopment of the people who live there. The community’s revolutionary CBA is only one component of this transformation.
As you can imagine, it wasn’t work that happened overnight because it had to include community members. It became the summation of several years of door knocking, data collection and research, and most importantly, the education and organization of residents that saw beyond the political rhetoric, and handouts. In this organizing drive, a majority of the residents put together a series of house meetings to determine what they wanted out of a massive redevelopment plan; meetings that ran in Samoan, Spanish, and English.
In the small complex and recently popular Alice Griffith Housing Project, you find people like Sister Stephanie Hughes who uses all of her income to make sure the children in the community are given opportunities to go outside of their community or have afternoon snacks because, simply, “her children are hungry”; and Jackie Williams that tends to the community garden that receives very little city resources to operate; and the United Fathers Coalition that works with men to become better fathers and relies on weekly fundraisers to support their work; and the Good Samaritan Church down the street from the housing projects that turned their congregation numbers around from 15 to 300 in a year because they preach about community and leadership; and the mothers and fathers in the neighborhood that watch each others children and care for them like their own because the only people they can count on are the people that, good or bad, are there to stay – or least, in light of everything, want to stay. They have learned they cannot count on the people that just pass through the community, ask for their vote, signature, or support on an issue that they didn’t help to create but purports to help them. It is these people who should decide the fate of their community and future.
At any rate, change isn’t just policy and idealogy of propositions on a ballot - it’s organizing people to hold policy makers and enforcers accountable to what the community decides. In this case, supporting Proposition G, and the CBA. Denying the change that a community wants isn’t a solution, but a part of the problem. Real change comes from educating people and then organizing them, not the other way around.
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
The main proponent of Proposition G are Aurelious Walker, Lola Whittle, and Robert Sims. None of them live in the Alice Griffith Projects. None of them have truly represented Planning Issues in the Bayview Hunters Point. All of them are on the take.
The main issue about people living in Projects is that Projects were created for "interim" housing. All those that live in Projects - mostly poor people need good permanent housing.
Proposition F is very open to accommodating - poor people. People with no income and low income.
The author should have addressed how is Proposition G legal accommodating poor people. Refer to one single clause that guarantees poor people- housing. Proposition G does make some vague suggestion but there is no mandate. No real binding and legal language. I challenge anyone to point to the language that accommodates people with low income and no income with reference to San Francisco's Median Income.
Some of us have worked for years - attending planning meetings linked to the Bayview Hunters Point. Attended the Disposition and Development Agreement meetings linked to Parcel A. Attended other public meetings - in the hundreds - and have NOT seen ACORN any where near or close by and personal at these meetings.
ACORN has sneaked into the community - mostly hiding out at Alice Griffith. ACORN once was exposed in public for collecting work order forms linked to maintenance issues facing the residents of Alice Griffith.
We found out about this ploy - and this is public knowledge that only those that paid dues to ACORN, had their Work Order Forms in - were submitted to the Housing Authority to be catered to for repairs.
It is such types of deeds that will bring the down fall of ACORN and those that subscribe that this organization - means well. So far it has been dubious in nature.
The Proponents of Proposition F really dealt with Proposition G and did their best to accommodate all sections of the people that need Affordable Housing.
We mandate Fifty Percent Affordable Housing - and once we are at the table - we will embrace everyone. That has been our position from day one.
While embracing those that make no income and low income is difficult. We the proponents of Proposition F from day one - have stated clearly and I have for one as the main Proponent of Proposition F - that our sincere intent is to help those with no income and low income.
In fact Espanola Jackson and I stated this and fought for this a long time ago before the SF Board of Supervisors - when the District 10 Supervisor introduce a Resolution that would have kept poor Alice Griffith residents out. Sophie Maxwell then made a right about turn and accommodated Alice Griffith residents - in some vague language and pointed to one to one housing. All dubious in nature.
In the SouthBayshore Planning there was real language that favored Alice Griffith residents.
But, the author in her ignorance has not mentioned this fact. She has chosen some focus meetings, some charity work, and other mundane social outreach - as greater then the fact to face to face encounters and negotiations - with SF City and County Officials, the SF Redevelopment Agency, the Planning Department, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Toxic and Substance Control, the SF Health Commission and the SF Health Department, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and so on.
We the community represented all of the Bayview Hunters Point including Alice Griffith made a case for Quality of Life issues - including Affordable Housing for those with low and no income.
Lennar Urban and Lennar BVHP LLC has no intention what so ever to accommodate low and no income.
While their so called fake Proposition G states 25% Affordable Income it does not break down the income level the San Francisco Median Income.
Proposition F does. Proposition F will win and when we win - and are at the table we will invite Alice Griffith representatives - but, we will make sure the present sell outs are NOT there. Be certain of this fact. Very certain of this fact.
We are fully aware of the deal at 900 Innes with the new owner of that site - too. ACORN has made a deal with the owner on the quiet and I hope will accommodate the residents of Alice Griffith. We are not stupid - I for one know too much about ACORN and its dubious ploys.
Several people have been shot and killed at Alice Griffith. Many of them Samoans. We are monitoring the situation. What is ACORN doing about this?
Groups like ACORN have not addressed Quality of Life issues. Have not had a model for Work Force or for that matter have no plans - less informed on issues like Infrastructure and problems related to Liquefaction, Cumulative Pollution - linked to the whole of Candlestick Point area and beyond.
ACORN has been used like a dirty rag - by Dwayne Jones, Michael Cohen, Kofi Bonner, Sophie Maxwell, and the mostly Black sell outs that I have mentioned before.
What do you think the Communities of Opportunity have stood for?
Why do you think Sophie Maxwell amended the SouthBayshore Plan if not to adversely impact Alice Griffith Housing and its residents?
What does the author know about Land Banking and Lennar?
Is the author fully cognizant of the fact that the Proponents Aurelious Walker, Lola Whittle, and Robert Sims have all got money from Lennar. That one Roy Willis gave tons of money to Sophie Maxwell and she continues to get money from Lennar - why?
The author is throwing arrows in the air - make some drab points that do not address the real issues. Proposition F being a Citywide Measure embraces the whole City and that includes Alice Griffith Housing. We will not pander to some issues that do not have Citywide implications.
This is a Ballot Measure that happens to involve Alice Griffith or Double Rock. This is an issue that being a Ballot Measure - addresses issues City wide - all of San Francisco. We the proponents of Proposition F have spent less then $8000 with grass roots support - Lennar the Rogue Company has spent over $4 million.
Lennar Urban has spent over $4 million. What does this mean to the author?
The author is blind sighted by mundane issues, is not cognizant of the facts, and bullied by the SF Labor Council, the rogue locals 22 and 38, the SF Organizing Project and of course ACORN leadership who have some bread crumbs to gain in the short run.
ACORN has not been on the table when it counted.
It did protest outside Sophie Maxwell house but sits with her to eat some bread crumbs - now. Has made a pact with the devil.
It did protest on the floor of the Mayor's Office in Room 200 as a ploy to side track us - but now is making deals behind close doors. In bed with Mayor Gavin Newsom - time will tell.
We are watching ACORN and the drab writings in the above article to which I am replying - point to an organization that has sold out and is working against those that need help most.
Some of the data on home ownership and salaries stated and provided by the author is totally out of sync and false.
Vote on Proposition F.
Pick up the latest Bay Guardian - on the front page it say YES on F and NO on G.
Read what Sarah Pelan has written and please be educated on issues.
We have had sufficient tales spun by idiots that do not really fundamentally understand Economics, Infrastructure, Planning, the Housing Element, the Superfund Site, issues related to Public Safety and Health - they talk the talk but cannot walk the walk.
This author thought she was going some where with her drab article - but she has got stuck in the cesspool of her own making.
We had a rally yesterday with supporters from all over San Francisco and some from Double Rock and Alice Griffith. Some spies from Lennar came and took off - because they could not handle the good they saw.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/franciscodacosta/sets/72157605304933543/show/
Francisco Da Costa
Director
Environmental Justice Advocacy
The main issue about people living in Projects is that Projects were created for "interim" housing. All those that live in Projects - mostly poor people need good permanent housing.
Proposition F is very open to accommodating - poor people. People with no income and low income.
The author should have addressed how is Proposition G legal accommodating poor people. Refer to one single clause that guarantees poor people- housing. Proposition G does make some vague suggestion but there is no mandate. No real binding and legal language. I challenge anyone to point to the language that accommodates people with low income and no income with reference to San Francisco's Median Income.
Some of us have worked for years - attending planning meetings linked to the Bayview Hunters Point. Attended the Disposition and Development Agreement meetings linked to Parcel A. Attended other public meetings - in the hundreds - and have NOT seen ACORN any where near or close by and personal at these meetings.
ACORN has sneaked into the community - mostly hiding out at Alice Griffith. ACORN once was exposed in public for collecting work order forms linked to maintenance issues facing the residents of Alice Griffith.
We found out about this ploy - and this is public knowledge that only those that paid dues to ACORN, had their Work Order Forms in - were submitted to the Housing Authority to be catered to for repairs.
It is such types of deeds that will bring the down fall of ACORN and those that subscribe that this organization - means well. So far it has been dubious in nature.
The Proponents of Proposition F really dealt with Proposition G and did their best to accommodate all sections of the people that need Affordable Housing.
We mandate Fifty Percent Affordable Housing - and once we are at the table - we will embrace everyone. That has been our position from day one.
While embracing those that make no income and low income is difficult. We the proponents of Proposition F from day one - have stated clearly and I have for one as the main Proponent of Proposition F - that our sincere intent is to help those with no income and low income.
In fact Espanola Jackson and I stated this and fought for this a long time ago before the SF Board of Supervisors - when the District 10 Supervisor introduce a Resolution that would have kept poor Alice Griffith residents out. Sophie Maxwell then made a right about turn and accommodated Alice Griffith residents - in some vague language and pointed to one to one housing. All dubious in nature.
In the SouthBayshore Planning there was real language that favored Alice Griffith residents.
But, the author in her ignorance has not mentioned this fact. She has chosen some focus meetings, some charity work, and other mundane social outreach - as greater then the fact to face to face encounters and negotiations - with SF City and County Officials, the SF Redevelopment Agency, the Planning Department, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Toxic and Substance Control, the SF Health Commission and the SF Health Department, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and so on.
We the community represented all of the Bayview Hunters Point including Alice Griffith made a case for Quality of Life issues - including Affordable Housing for those with low and no income.
Lennar Urban and Lennar BVHP LLC has no intention what so ever to accommodate low and no income.
While their so called fake Proposition G states 25% Affordable Income it does not break down the income level the San Francisco Median Income.
Proposition F does. Proposition F will win and when we win - and are at the table we will invite Alice Griffith representatives - but, we will make sure the present sell outs are NOT there. Be certain of this fact. Very certain of this fact.
We are fully aware of the deal at 900 Innes with the new owner of that site - too. ACORN has made a deal with the owner on the quiet and I hope will accommodate the residents of Alice Griffith. We are not stupid - I for one know too much about ACORN and its dubious ploys.
Several people have been shot and killed at Alice Griffith. Many of them Samoans. We are monitoring the situation. What is ACORN doing about this?
Groups like ACORN have not addressed Quality of Life issues. Have not had a model for Work Force or for that matter have no plans - less informed on issues like Infrastructure and problems related to Liquefaction, Cumulative Pollution - linked to the whole of Candlestick Point area and beyond.
ACORN has been used like a dirty rag - by Dwayne Jones, Michael Cohen, Kofi Bonner, Sophie Maxwell, and the mostly Black sell outs that I have mentioned before.
What do you think the Communities of Opportunity have stood for?
Why do you think Sophie Maxwell amended the SouthBayshore Plan if not to adversely impact Alice Griffith Housing and its residents?
What does the author know about Land Banking and Lennar?
Is the author fully cognizant of the fact that the Proponents Aurelious Walker, Lola Whittle, and Robert Sims have all got money from Lennar. That one Roy Willis gave tons of money to Sophie Maxwell and she continues to get money from Lennar - why?
The author is throwing arrows in the air - make some drab points that do not address the real issues. Proposition F being a Citywide Measure embraces the whole City and that includes Alice Griffith Housing. We will not pander to some issues that do not have Citywide implications.
This is a Ballot Measure that happens to involve Alice Griffith or Double Rock. This is an issue that being a Ballot Measure - addresses issues City wide - all of San Francisco. We the proponents of Proposition F have spent less then $8000 with grass roots support - Lennar the Rogue Company has spent over $4 million.
Lennar Urban has spent over $4 million. What does this mean to the author?
The author is blind sighted by mundane issues, is not cognizant of the facts, and bullied by the SF Labor Council, the rogue locals 22 and 38, the SF Organizing Project and of course ACORN leadership who have some bread crumbs to gain in the short run.
ACORN has not been on the table when it counted.
It did protest outside Sophie Maxwell house but sits with her to eat some bread crumbs - now. Has made a pact with the devil.
It did protest on the floor of the Mayor's Office in Room 200 as a ploy to side track us - but now is making deals behind close doors. In bed with Mayor Gavin Newsom - time will tell.
We are watching ACORN and the drab writings in the above article to which I am replying - point to an organization that has sold out and is working against those that need help most.
Some of the data on home ownership and salaries stated and provided by the author is totally out of sync and false.
Vote on Proposition F.
Pick up the latest Bay Guardian - on the front page it say YES on F and NO on G.
Read what Sarah Pelan has written and please be educated on issues.
We have had sufficient tales spun by idiots that do not really fundamentally understand Economics, Infrastructure, Planning, the Housing Element, the Superfund Site, issues related to Public Safety and Health - they talk the talk but cannot walk the walk.
This author thought she was going some where with her drab article - but she has got stuck in the cesspool of her own making.
We had a rally yesterday with supporters from all over San Francisco and some from Double Rock and Alice Griffith. Some spies from Lennar came and took off - because they could not handle the good they saw.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/franciscodacosta/sets/72157605304933543/show/
Francisco Da Costa
Director
Environmental Justice Advocacy
For more information:
http://www.propositionF.com
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$160.00 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