Dan Walters

A few days ago, the toll for driving on San Francisco’s Golden Gate Bridge took another jump. It will now cost motorists at least $6.75 to cross the entrance to San Francisco Bay — if they are using carpool lanes — and as much as $9.75 if they are invoiced for their crossing.

It appears the tolls are destined to climb even higher.

The iconic bridge is owned by the multi-county Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District, whose directors have directed a series of toll increases over five years. They were done to cover rising maintenance costs and — this is the most important factor — offset a decline in traffic since the COVID-19 pandemic began three-plus years ago.

It’s an aspect of a larger phenomenon that has upended the San Francisco Bay Area’s economy. Many workers, particularly those in technology and financial services, shifted to working remotely when the pandemic struck and the work-from-home tendency has persisted after the health threat eased.

Downtown San Francisco suffered what some call a “doom loop” of reduced in-place employment, wholesale declines in office space usage and closure of retail businesses.

Fewer commuters also translated into lower bridge toll income and very sharp drops in transit use and revenues, particularly on the Bay Area Rapid Transit system.

BART and other transit systems pleaded with Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislators for a package of state aid to offset declining farebox revenue and got a $5.1 billion, four-year commitment in the new state budget.

“Public transportation is easy to take for granted, but allowing it to collapse would have been devastating for our state’s future,” state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, said. “This budget extends a critical lifeline that will help transit agencies maintain service while making critical improvements to cleanliness and safety.”

However, Wiener added, “the future of public transportation in the Bay Area is still under threat due to pandemic-related operational deficits that, without help, will lead to severe service cuts.”

Learn more about legislators mentioned in this story

Wiener and other Bay Area legislators are proposing a $1.50 per vehicle hike on motorists who use the region’s seven state-owned bridges to provide transit systems with more operating revenue. The nonstate Golden Gate Bridge would not be affected by the proposal but, as noted earlier, is already raising its prices.

The $1.50 toll increase has been amended into a Wiener bill, Senate Bill 532, that has already passed the Senate and is pending in the Assembly, which could lead to fast track (no pun intended) approval.

Auto tolls on the seven bridges are generally $7 now, so Wiener’s bill would boost them to $8.50, roughly in line with the new Golden Gate Bridge tolls.

“Bay Area transit ridership continues to climb, but it’s not happening quickly enough to make up for the loss of federal emergency assistance,” Wiener said. “SB 532 provides critical lifeline funding for our transit systems — ensuring they have the resources they need to provide safe, reliable service for our residents.”

How, one might wonder, would raising the already stiff tolls on Bay Area bridges impact a region that is struggling to recover economically from the pandemic?

Classic economics would say that increasing their commuting costs would make San Francisco’s workers even less likely to return to their cubicles and therefore hinder downtown recovery.

However, perhaps it would merely persuade them to take BART or other transit services, thus reducing auto traffic on the bridges, which in turn would decrease revenues from the new tolls.

Dan Walters has been a journalist for more than 60 years, spending all but a few of those years working for California newspapers. He began his professional career in 1960, at age 16, at the Humboldt Times. CalMatters.org is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media venture explaining California policies and politics. He can be reached at dan@calmatters.org.

The post How will elevating bridge tolls have an effect on San Francisco Bay Space’s financial restoration? | Visitor Views appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

Four HOA bills in California have good intentions, but may create more problems than they solve. (iStockphoto)

The Legislature is active on HOAs this year, and eight bills may significantly affect California associations.

Four helpful calculations were discussed in last week’s column. Unfortunately, the four bills discussed here have good intentions, but they can create more problems than they solve.

The worst of the four is Assembly Bill 572, drafted by San Francisco Assembly Member Matt Haney. AB 572 would cap appraisal increases for charter-restricted affordable housing units and limit the HOA board to a maximum increase of 5% for those units.

If the HOA needed to increase ratings for all units by more than 5%, a member vote would be required to make it happen. This law tries to protect owners of affordable housing units, but it’s a terrible idea.

Why? It creates affordable housing as a separate class of homeowners who would pay less of their fair share of HOA expenses than their neighbors. It would arguably override most CC&Rs, which normally specifically allocate the distribution of reviews among owners.

Assembly Bill 1033, authored by San Francisco Assemblymember Phil Ting, proposes making a simple but potentially problematic amendment to Government Code Section 65852.2, specifically the section on municipal approval of secondary housing units.

The bill would authorize local jurisdictions to allow property owners (including owners in proposed developments) to convert their properties into miniature condos, allowing both the primary residence and the ADU on the property to be sold to buyers.

Fortunately, the bill does not say that it would override planned development CC&Rs, because if it did override CC&Rs, it would essentially allow for a rewrite of the subdivision map under which planned developments are made.

In a new mini-condo HOA scenario within a proposed development, would there be additional members of the proposed development association? Additionally, many (if not most) tiny HOAs ignore the Davis-Stirling Act, so it doesn’t help homebuyers create more.

Assembly Bill 1572, authored by Burbank Assembly Member Laura Friedman, proposes the creation of a new Water Code Section 10608.14 that would ban all owners (other than single-family homes) from using potable water on “unserviceable lawns” after early 2029.

For larger HOAs, this could mean huge plumbing and landscaping costs to irrigate green belts or other public areas that are considered “non-functional”. It could also mean major problems and costs for the HOA and for the community in areas where treated water is not currently available.

Senate Bill 403, authored by Senator Aisha Wahab of Fremont, would declare illegal discrimination on the basis of “caste,” defined as “an individual’s perceived position in a system of social stratification based on inherited status.”

In North American culture, caste is not usually recognized. This very broad definition could lead to misunderstandings and misapplication within HOA neighborhoods.

Does someone avoid social interaction because another comes from more humble beginnings or perhaps comes from a more privileged upbringing? Although such behavior is superficial and ignorant, should it be illegal? Taking a practice from another culture and trying to define, understand, and prohibit it in our North American culture seems problematic.

The deadline for bills that must pass through their original house of origin is June 2nd. So you have time to contact your representative and give your opinion. Visit leginfo.legislature.ca.gov to read the bills and leave comments for the author.

Kelly G Richardson, Esq. is a Fellow of the College of Community Association Lawyers and a partner at Richardson Ober LLP, a California law firm known for its expertise in community associations. Submit column questions to Kelly@roattorneys.com.

The post How 4 pending payments would badly have an effect on HOAs – Orange County Register appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

If you own a car or a television, you’ve probably noticed — gas prices are surging to record highs. AAA reported a national average of $4.25 per gallon last week, with gas prices predicted to creep up even more in the near future. This extra cost is adding fuel to an already hot fire for business owners and consumers in the grip of inflation. But is this pressure at the pump going to impact homeowners looking to hire pros for their home improvement projects?

Most likely. Here’s what we know.

Angi recently polled our pros to find out how this recent spike is impacting their businesses. More than 90% of Angi pros say they expect higher gas prices this year and nearly 95% (94.9%) say those costs will impact their businesses. Due to surging gas prices, nearly 75% of pros say they will raise prices or rates (or already have) to make up for this added expense.

Joshua Belcher, owner and operator at Liberty Landscaping in Knightstown, Ind., used to offer all his customers free estimates. But now, due to gas prices and inflation, he’s had to start charging for that service and raise prices by 20%.

“You want to do the best you can for your customers and give them fair deals,” he said. “But in order to stay afloat, you have to charge for things you used to do for free before.”

About half of Belcher’s customer base has been able to afford the price increase. For the most part, homeowners understand where he’s coming from.

“Customers who appreciate your business and have the financial means do have your back during these hard times,” he said. “It’s a bummer for them but they understand. Certain customers we’ve lost because they say they can’t take the price increase.”

Phil Boonstra, owner of PR Builders in Windsor, Colo., says rising gas prices increase his subcontractor costs and he has no choice but to pass that on to homeowners.

“Some of my subcontractors are an hour away from the job, and every time they’re filling up, they’re seeing a $20 or $30 increase in cost,” he said. “They start adding trip charges to their work, and that gets passed on to the consumer. On a basement remodeling job, that’s an extra few hundred dollars. It really starts to add up.”

But there are ways for both homeowners and pros to work together and save on transportation costs.

Tips to budget for home projects amid gas price surge

Communicate with your pro and expect the extra charge

Pros have to factor in the extra cost of gasoline required to make it to your home. Asking about any extra fees related to gas prices can save homeowners sticker shock later on.

Many pros are now wrapping this additional cost into their home project quotes. Until gas prices cool off, it’s helpful for homeowners to budget for this extra expense when hiring a pro.

Consider bundling your home projects together

Have a few things that need tackling at your home? Think about hiring a handyperson who is able to handle a few different jobs in one visit. That way, you (and your pro) will save on transportation costs.

Book pros close to your home

Hiring a local service (as opposed to one that is a town or two away) can save homeowners money in transportation costs. Plus, pros may be more likely to take on jobs that are nearby, so they can avoid spending more money at the pumps.

Tweet your home care questions with #AskAngi and we’ll try to answer them in a future column.

The post How will gasoline costs have an effect on residence companies prices? appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

San Francisco is now the second major US city to require proof of vaccination in “indoor high-contact areas”, sending a clear message to art fans: It is no longer enough to see a show in a theater or concert hall to provide evidence of a recent negative coronavirus test or simply wearing a mask.

The mandate given by Mayor London Breed on Thursday, August 12, goes into effect on August 20, ordering venues for events with a crowd of 1,000 or more to require a full vaccination for all guests 12 and older. The only exception is events where tickets were sold before Thursday, with a show date on or before September 15; these allow a negative test instead of a vaccination.

The citywide mandate also applies to employees at local arts and entertainment venues.

The artist Robin Lara puts on her mask in the West of Pecos restaurant before a performance in the Mission District on November 29th. Photo: Gabrielle Lurie / The Chronicle 2020

“We know that in order for our city to recover from the pandemic and thrive, we must use the best way to fight COVID-19 and that is vaccines,” Breed said in a statement. “Vaccines are our way out of the pandemic and our way back to a life where we can be safe together.”

BroadwaySF, that reopened “Hamilton” at the Orpheum Theater on Tuesday, August 10th, allowed the audience to present a vaccination record or recent negative test, “but will shortly update our guidelines and inform our customers,” said Communications Director Scott Walton.

The Chase Center, which has already required proof of vaccination or a negative coronavirus test for entry to the 18,064-person venue, plans to honor the order, starting with the next concert under the heading of Tame Impala on September 15.

The co-founder of the San Francisco Playhouse, Susi Damilano, meets theatergoer Patrick Colford in front of “Hold These Truths” at the San Francisco Playhouse on August 8th. Photo: Scott Strazzante / The Chronicle

“My gut reaction is okay, we’re pretty much doing that,” said Susi Damilano, production director of the San Francisco Playhouse, about Thursday’s order. She added that all but a few bystanders of the company had been in possession of vaccination cards as of June.

“If anything, I hope that people who are vaccinated but are nervous about going out will feel more comfortable with the introduction of this mandate.”

Indeed while lots Local venues and organizations in San Francisco and beyond have already begun demanding proof of vaccination from viewers in order to perform live.

“The Roxie feels great about San Francisco’s decision,” said Lex Sloan, executive director of the Mission District cinema. “We hope that it helps our employees and customers to feel safe so that everyone can enjoy their time in the cinema.”

Randy Taradash, Feinstein’s general manager and creative director at the Nikko, doesn’t think the mandate will be an issue for Bay Area art lovers. He cited studies that showed that the art audience was vaccinated more often than the general population. (On July 19, the art research firm WolfBrown Approved Data showing 98% of the art audience in the Bay Area are vaccinated, based on 1,870 responses from local polls. It received applause from the start, ”he said. “I think I had a mean tweet the minute we announced it and that was it.”

Junru Wang is one of the cast members in “Dear San Francisco: A High-Flying Love Story,” by Club Fugazi Experiences. Photo: Jon Bauer / Club Fugazi Experiences

A number of San Francisco performing arts organizations, including the San Francisco Opera and ODC / Dance, have already issued guidelines requiring proof of vaccination from both patrons and staff. The San Francisco Symphony has adopted a similar policy and planned to announce it on Monday, August 16, according to an orchestra spokesman.

Likewise, David Dower, co-producer and executive director of Club Fugazi Experiences, a circus scheduled to begin performing in September, said his company is already planning a similar policy for itself. He is relieved that the San Francisco audience isn’t more has to navigate a confusing patchwork of guidelines every time they see a show in a different location.

“I’m actually pretty glad the city said something clear in time for most of our seasons to start,” said Dower. “It is a public health responsibility to protect the public.”

San Francisco Performances, which showcases chamber music concerts in the city’s fall theater, plans to implement the new policy in the coming season starting in October, spokeswoman Nancy Bertossa said.

“I think (the order) is appropriate for the moment we are in,” said Taradash. “Trust me, I’ll be the first in line to see everything. I’m just as much a fan as I am a theater maker and producer. But if we’re not sure right now, our business won’t return any sooner. ”

The Chronicle’s authors, Lily Janiak, Joshua Kosman, and Mick LaSalle contributed to this report.

The post San Francisco’s new vaccination mandate to have an effect on native arts neighborhood appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

The damage caused by Hurricane Ida forced the Packers’ opening game against the Saints to be moved from New Orleans to Jacksonville. But what does this change mean for the Green Bay Packers? How will it affect the game itself and the preparation of the team?

The most obvious change is that the Packers are now playing in a neutral location. The Packers have not played a regular NFL game in a neutral location since 1938, when they faced the Chicago Cardinals in Buffalo on September 28.

The game was played on a Wednesday night in front of a crowd of 10,678 fans who showed up to see the pack defeat the Cardinals 24-22. Tiny Engebretsen scored the winning field goal in the fourth quarter and gave the Packers the win, improving their season record to 3-1-0. Arnie Herber, Clarke Hinkle and Don Hutson scored in-game touchdowns for Green Bay.

Going back to 2021, that game will now be played in a neutral location, although technically it will be a home game for the Saints. While Saints management reportedly picked Jacksonville because it was more difficult and expensive for the Packers and their fans to get to this game, it is still expected that there will be more Packers fans than Saints fans in the season opener. The Packers have fans all over the country and travel well. Additionally, Saints fans living in Louisiana are still grappling with the aftermath of the hurricane and many have more important issues to deal with.

The game will feel more like a Packers home game as most of the fans in the stadium will be standing for the Packers. That clearly speaks in favor of Green Bay. Last season there were no fans in the stands for most of the season because of the Covid-19 pandemic. Only a limited number of fans were allowed to participate in the playoffs. Having most of the fans cheering on the Packers will be an even bigger thing this year than it would be after a typical season.

The game is now played outdoors instead of the New Orleans dome. Last year the Saints were 6-2 in the Superdome. They also played another game in a dome, a 35-29 win over the Lions in Detroit. That means the Saints were 7-2 inside and 5-2 outside last season.

The Packers played five indoor street games last year, going 4-1 in their only loss to the Colts in Indianapolis. The Packers won indoors in Minnesota, New Orleans, Houston and Detroit. The Packers ended 2020 with a 9: 2 mark outdoors.

The game is now also played on natural grass. The Jacksonville stadium features Bermuda grass. The Packers played 11 games on grass in 2020, going 9-2, with their only losses in week 6 against the Bucs and at home in week 8 against the Vikings.

The Saints only played six games on natural turf in 2020 and went through 4-2 in those games. They were 8-2 on man-made surfaces.

While both teams were strong overall last season, with the Packers 13-3 and the Saints 12-4, the Packers are a turf team while the Saints play most of their games on artificial turf. For this reason, the change slightly favors the packers.

Now that the game is being played outdoors in Jacksonville, the heat and humidity are likely to be a factor. The average temperature in Jacksonville, Florida is in the low to mid 80s in mid-September, and the humidity in northern Florida is usually higher than in Wisconsin at this time of year.

As a result, the Saints will likely wear their white shirts for the game and force the Packers to wear their dark green home shirts. On a hot, sunny day, dark colors absorb heat while white reflects it. The Saints hope that wearing their white jerseys will give them an edge especially in the fourth quarter when the players on both teams are more likely to tire, especially in Week 1 when they are not yet in ideal football shape.

The Packers wore their white jerseys at home in the early games of the season, also to take advantage of wearing white in the heat. In 1989, the Pack played their first two games of the season at Lambeau Field, but wore their white street jerseys in each competition. In the first game, Green Bay lost the Bucs 23-21, while the Packers scored an exciting 35-34 win over the Saints in Week 2 when Don Majkowski received a late touchdown pass from Sterling Sharpe.

When all is said and done, the Packers and Saints have one more game of soccer to play. It is played in different environments and in different color uniforms, but it will still be the 2021 season opener and it will still count as one game in the NFL rankings.

Overall, the change in venue should give the Packers a slight advantage over the game in New Orleans. Now it is up to the team to take advantage of this.

The post How Shifting the Saints Sport to Jacksonville Will Have an effect on the Packers in Week 1 appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.