I moved to California 27 years ago. I moved from a neighborhood in New York City. Yes, I’m from New York. I know it’s tough to tell. I moved from a neighborhood called Hell’s Kitchen, to Santa Barbara.

It was like moving to Mayberry.

When I moved here, everybody said, “Bobby, it’s California. You’ve got to be nice. Gotta be nice.” But nobody, absolutely nobody in Santa Barbara had any compunction about walking up to me and saying, “Oh, you’re from New York City and you’re Italian … you must be in the Mafia.”

People think it’s some sort of badge of courage for us, but most people who came to America at the time my parents did ‒ my parents are from the other side ‒ most of them were coming to get away from all of that, to get away from the corruption of the, you know, the 240 governments that Italy has had.

Though occasionally there would be some contact. Someone knows a guy, or hey, if you want a stereo you should talk to this guy, who doesn’t have a store but does have a garage.

Anyway, I went to this very prestigious all-boys high school in New York City, where a lot of made guys – members of organized crime ‒ would send their kids to straighten them out. It didn’t work most of the time.

In my senior year, I was a fairly good student, and I didn’t have to take any of my exams, except that I had three unexcused absences, so I did have to take my exams. So, I’m sitting in my history exam, waiting for it to start, and a fella comes in, Tony Romano, about six-foot-three, 350 pounds if he’s an ounce. A huge human being.

“Bobby, I don’t know nothin’ on this class,” he said. “Bobby, I know nothin’, you gotta help me, you gotta help me.”

I’m like, “Tony, what’s the problem?”

“Bobby, I don’t know nothin’ on this class.”

“Calm down Bobby. Let’s see what we can do.”

Mr. Mack gives us our exam and luckily, it’s a list of 10 essay questions, and we have to answer five of them perfectly. I answer five questions, I pass them back to Tony, and he starts to copy them in his own handwriting.

It wouldn’t matter. His handwriting looks like Sanskrit.

So, I answer the other five questions, and I walk out. We pass. Forward to graduation night. Before the graduation, Mr. Mack walks up to me and says, “Bobby, that was a really nice thing you did for Tony Romano.”

“What did I do?”

Yeah, right, like he doesn’t know.

Tony Romano comes over to me. Gives me a big hug and a kiss.

“Bobby! Thank you so much! Oh, you saved my live. You saved my life!”

And I was like, “Tony. Shhhh.”

He says, “Is your father here?”

“Yes, of course. He’s right here.”

Now, my father is five-foot-six and 270 pounds and nobody ever called him fat. He was like a filing cabinet with feet, this huge human being. I wear a size 48 sport coat, he wore a 56. His shoulders were out to here. When he passed we couldn’t fit him in the coffin. Had to put him in sideways. [In response the audiences’ laughter] Yeah, it’s funny now.

Anyway, Tony says, “My father would like to talk to him. Does your father speak Italian? Yes, good.”

My father goes over, and there they are, these two old Italian men. They look like two sardine fisherman on the wharf in San Francisco. They are talking, and they’re shaking hands and my father keeps looking at me over the shoulder of Mr. Romano with a look that is not good.

Anyway, they finish talking. They kiss each other on the cheek. They’re talking in a Sicilian dialect they both speak. He comes back over.

“Daddy, what did Tony’s father want?”

“I’ll talk to you later.”

So away we go. Graduation. It’s 10 o’clock at night, we’re back at my house, my father calls me into the back yard and says, “What did you do for Tony Romano?”

“I didn’t do nothin’ Daddy.”

“What did you do for Tony Romano?”

“I took his history test for him. Daddy, the guy’s got a head like a roast beef. He’s going to get a job with his father, and that’s going to be it.”

Now, Mr. Romano owned a short bus line, like a 500-mile-radius bus line like Greyhound. It was called Dominican Bus Tours.

So I said, “What did Mr. Romano want?” My father said, “He wants to give you a job over the summer.” I said, “Great. What, changing the oil? Washing the buses?” My father said, “He wants you to be the union delegate for the drivers.”

And now my father tells me about the decision I have to make. The same decision he made 50 years before that. My father was working for a company called Marolla Brothers Plumbing and Demolition. Mr. Marolla got a little behind with a guy in the neighborhood, a loan shark, and the guy sent two guys to get the money from Mr. Marolla. And they started slapping Mr. Marolla around, and the filing cabinet with feet goes over, and he says, “What’s wrong Mr. Marolla?” He smacks one of the guys, knocks him to the ground, then hits the other one, and knocks him out completely.

Anyway, making this story short, he had to make that decision, because this guy came back and said, “You just took out my two best men.” My father’s decision was either to go to work for that guy, or not. And I had to make the decision whether to go to work for Mr. Romano or not.

We went down, we talked to Mr. Romano, we shook hands, we straightened it all out.

Fast forward 10 years, and I’m an assistant director in the film industry at this point. I’m standing in front of St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City, and we’re doing a movie. And I hear, “Hey Bob-by!”

And there’s Tony Romano, turning a bus onto Fifth Avenue, wearing a $10,000 watch, leaning out the window to say, “Hey! You should’ve taken the job!”

The post A Actually Robust Choice appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

Five years ago, a federal court issued a crucial ruling. People experiencing homelessness, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals said, can’t be punished for sleeping outside on public property if there are no adequate alternatives available.

The 2018 decision in Martin v. Boise did not create the homelessness crisis, which researchers attribute primarily to the lack of affordable housing. The number of people experiencing unsheltered homelessness — meaning those sleeping on the streets, in parks, in abandoned buildings or train stations, or anywhere not meant for humans to live — was rising before the decision.

But as the number of unsheltered homeless people continued to grow over the past half-decade, the Martin decision has become a pivotal factor in shaping how cities respond to the very visible problem of tent encampments, particularly on the West Coast. While the case never gained huge name recognition, it undergirds the policy and politics of homelessness in 2023. So much of the fight about how to address homelessness today is, at this point, a fight about Martin.

The case dates back to 2009, when Robert Martin and a group of fellow homeless residents in Boise, Idaho, sued, arguing that police citations they received for breaking local camping bans violated their constitutional rights. In 2018, the Ninth Circuit agreed that prosecuting people for sleeping or camping on public property when they have no home or shelter to go to violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

“The government cannot criminalize indigent, homeless people for sleeping outdoors, on public property, on the false premise they had a choice in the matter,” the court declared.

States, cities, and counties urged the US Supreme Court to take up the case, arguing the Ninth Circuit had created “a de facto” right to live on sidewalks and in parks that would “cripple” local leaders’ ability to safely govern their communities. But in 2019, the court declined, baffling some experts, though others suspect it’s because there were no conflicting circuit decisions at the time. Since then, Martin has shaped cities’ response — or lack thereof — to the growing challenge of homeless tent encampments.

While the decision only formally applies in areas under the Ninth Circuit’s jurisdiction, the ruling has reverberated nationally, as local governments consider how to address unsheltered homelessness in ways that could avoid costly constitutional legal battles. There have already been dozens of court cases citing Martin, including in the Fourth Circuit in Virginia, and federal lower courts in Ohio, Missouri, Florida, Texas, New York, and Hawaii.

For now, though, Martin’s impact can be seen most clearly out West. Just before Christmas 2022, for example, a district judge cited Martin when she ruled that San Francisco can no longer enforce encampment sweeps — meaning clear out homeless individuals and their property from an outdoor area — since the city lacks enough shelter beds for those experiencing homelessness to move into. San Francisco appealed the decision, arguing it’s “unnecessarily broad and has put the City in an impossible situation.”

In Phoenix, Arizona, residents and business owners filed a lawsuit last summer against the city for allowing a downtown homeless encampment to grow with nearly 1,000 people, but a federal judge — echoing Martin — barred Phoenix in December from conducting sweeps if there are more homeless people than shelter beds available. A competing decision issued in March by a state judge ordered Phoenix officials to clean up the “public nuisance” at the encampment by July 10, arguing the city has “erroneously” applied Martin to date.

Desi Hurd, 62, uses her wheelchair in the Phoenix, Arizona, homeless encampment known as “The Zone.”

Caitlin O’Hara/Washington Post via Getty Images

In Portland, Oregon, meanwhile, officials have scrambled to revise their local camping ordinance to be a “daytime” camping ban from 8 am to 8 pm instead, in recognition that any total camping ban is likely illegal under Martin.

Supporters of a more “get tough” approach to encampments say the social and political costs of allowing tent cities to proliferate are too high, and that waiting for cities to build enough new housing before acting is untenable, both morally and politically. Some think officials are getting complacent in relying on Martin as an excuse to maintain the status quo.

Advocates for those experiencing homelessness say politicians are squandering an important opportunity by fighting for the right to conduct encampment sweeps — which can be both cruel and counterproductive to the larger goal of ending homelessness. Instead of looking for legal loopholes to Martin like daytime camping bans and sanctioned encampment sites, advocates say leaders should be investing more in solutions like affordable housing and shelter options that afford people more privacy.

“Our end goal is not to create a right for people to sleep on the streets. That’s the limited remedy we’ve been given under our Constitution,” said Eric Tars, the legal director for the National Homelessness Law Center. “They’re missing the point of Martin if they’re just trying to continue a criminalization approach in a more constitutional way.”

Cities are scrambling to comply with — and find loopholes in — Martin v. Boise

Unsheltered homelessness has risen sharply over the last seven years, and at a faster rate than homelessness overall. Unsheltered homeless people now account for 40 percent of all homeless people in the country, up from 31 percent in 2015.

Political pressure has mounted to respond to this growing problem of people sleeping in alleys, parks, and train stations. While it’s not clear this would be legal under Martin, a number of cities have turned to the idea of so-called sanctioned encampments, or legalized campsites. These are effectively designated areas where unhoused individuals can live outside, and some come with varying degrees of public services, like bathrooms, power outlets, medical care, and on-site case management.

In Portland, Oregon, lawmakers voted in November to create several large sanctioned campsites for homeless individuals, and ban the more than 700 other encampments spread across the city. Austin, Texas, has operated one sanctioned encampment of so-called “tiny homes” since 2019, on a seven-acre plot of asphalt near the airport. Denver, Colorado, is also moving to make its so-called “managed campsites” from the pandemic a permanent homelessness response tool.

The trade-off for legalized campsites, however, is that sleeping outside anywhere else in a city would then be illegal. This helps alleviate leaders’ political problem of having tents pitched all over a city, but activists worry it’s just a way to steer the sight of homelessness out of public view, and criminalize people who refuse to go. Some cities are considering sanctioned encampments with a six-month residency limit, even if there’s no permanent affordable housing option for those experiencing homelessness to go to after that point.

Some advocates have taken a firm stance against the idea; they see sanctioned encampments as a means to segregate and criminalize unhoused people and effectively kick the can down the road by not finding them permanent housing.

They’re not wrong that sanctioned encampments can require a great deal of money, staff time, and effort. In 2018, the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness warned that “creating these environments may make it look and feel like the community is taking action to end homelessness on the surface — but, by themselves, they have little impact on reducing homelessness.”

For these reasons, some cities — like Houston — have rejected the idea. “We can do better as a society. We shouldn’t tolerate it and say that’s okay,” Marc Eichenbaum, the special assistant to Houston’s mayor on homeless initiatives, told NPR.

But other cities with fewer available housing options say sanctioned encampments represent a decent interim solution, and maybe even better for unhoused residents compared to scattered campsites if cities can more effectively target social services to those corralled together.

Legalized campsites can also have a lower barrier to entry than many existing shelters, so supporters are framing them as a harm-reduction approach to homelessness. Groups like the National Homelessness Law Center, which used to firmly oppose sanctioned encampments, have recently softened their stance to say they should be considered on a case-by-case basis.

“The only time that we would see a role for that approach is if you had an exit plan,” said Tars, who pointed to some models in Seattle and Gainesville, Florida, that he thought were more positive. “Otherwise you are just creating a permanent shanty town.”

Meanwhile, Republican-governed states are exploring more punitive models. In at least half a dozen states, lawmakers have pushed sanctioned encampment bills based on templates from the Cicero Institute, an Austin-based conservative think tank. The bills propose to penalize cities that permit tent encampments, to put time limits on sanctioned encampment sites, and to divert funding from permanent supportive housing into things like mandatory drug treatment.

In 2022, Tennessee became the first state to pass a bill that would make camping on local public land a felony. Missouri’s version will allow the state’s attorney general to sue local governments that don’t enforce encampment bans. Activists say Cicero’s aggressive opposition to housing-first will lead invariably to more homeless people in jail.

Looming ultimately above all these various sanctioned encampment models is the Martin decision, which says a city-wide camping ban would be unconstitutional if the city lacks sufficient shelter options. Leaders recognize they probably can’t ban camping everywhere under Martin, but they want to see if they can ban it in most places instead. Yet whether any bans could exist if a city lacks enough shelter beds remains an open Eighth Amendment question.

Tars, of the National Homelessness Law Center, thinks the answer is no. “Martin is very clear when it’s talking about ‘adequate’ [housing] alternatives it’s talking about indoor shelter beds, and legalized encampments are not shelter beds,” he said, pointing to a 2021 federal court decision that found a sanctioned encampment site in Chico, California, was inadequate “shelter” under Martin. A federal judge described Chico’s encampment as “open space with what amounts to a large umbrella for some shade” that “affords no real cover or protection to anyone.”

Tars acknowledged, though, there’s a “legal gray area” in the Martin decision, as one footnote suggests cities could create some “time/manner/place” restrictions for camping.

Earlier this year, when a Maricopa County Superior Court judge ordered Phoenix officials to clear its notoriously large downtown encampment, he urged the city to consider “the creation of controlled, outdoor camping spaces on vacant City property” if there were not enough shelter beds to move people into.

As in Houston, Phoenix officials have rejected the sanctioned encampment approach to date, saying resources should be invested into housing solutions with air conditioning: Over 80 percent of Maricopa County’s 425 heat-related deaths in 2022 occurred outside. Local officials estimate unsheltered homeless people are at “200 to 300 times higher risk” of heat-related deaths than the rest of the population.

Still, even if Phoenix leaders embraced sanctioned encampments, it’s not clear the idea would hold up under Martin. Resolving some of these questions will realistically require the Supreme Court, but that’s unlikely to happen until there’s competing circuit court decisions to pressure it to take the issue up.

Homelessness policy is at a crossroads

There are court rulings, and then there’s enforcement of those rulings. Homeless advocates say it seems as though too many cities are failing to comply with rulings that bar unconstitutional sweeps.

For example, lawyers say little has changed in San Francisco since a federal judge ruled against sweeps six months ago, and that homeless residents continue to be displaced under the guise of street cleaning.

“What we’ve seen has been a really aggressive media campaign led by the city to suggest we are pro-open-air drug markets and anti-accessibility for sidewalks,” said Zal Shroff, an attorney with Lawyer’s Committee For Civil Rights representing the homeless plaintiffs.

“You’re allowed to clear genuine public safety hazards, but when you do that and throw their laptops and cellphones into dumpsters, that’s not a cleaning — that’s a seizure of someone’s belongings without due process,” he added. In late May, Shroff’s team filed a court motion, calling for increased monitoring.

Jen Kwart, a spokesperson for San Francisco’s city attorney, told Vox they’re “complying with the preliminary injunction while simultaneously expending hundreds of millions of dollars annually to provide shelter and services to unhoused people.”

In Phoenix, while the city is working to clear out its large homeless encampment by July 10, per the Maricopa County Superior Court, the ACLU has been arguing the city’s clearings have violated the rights of unhoused people.

“Even if you’re unsheltered, you have due process rights to your belongings under the Fourth and 14th Amendments,” said Benjamin Rundall, an attorney with ACLU of Arizona. “You can’t violate someone’s constitutional rights in order to vindicate someone’s private property rights.”

It’s not clear at all where the estimated 700 unhoused people living in the downtown Phoenix encampment are supposed to go. There are not enough available shelter beds in the city; the four largest ones were at 97 percent capacity as of April.

A spokesperson for Phoenix’s Mayor Kate Gallego did not return requests for comment, but an April city press release said they were exploring hotel options and expected 800 new shelter beds to come online before the end of 2024.

Some conservative legal advocates see the Maricopa County Superior Court ruling as offering a blueprint for other cities and states to clear out their tent encampments. “For too long, liberal leaders have used the Martin ruling as an excuse to allow rampant crime and homelessness to take over neighborhoods,” argued Austin Vanderheyden, a liaison at the Goldwater Institute, in the Orange County Register. “But no longer.”

“Our lawsuit was never about solving homelessness,” wrote Ilan Wurman, who represented the Phoenix business and property owners. “It was about solving the humanitarian crisis that these encampments create.”

Meanwhile, as pandemic eviction aid dries up, homeless advocates are bracing for more people to lose their housing in the coming months. Washington, DC, recently reported an 11.6 percent increase in homelessness from 2022. While the nation has been increasing its shelter bed capacity over the last few years, fewer people are choosing to stay in them. Many have decided sleeping outdoors is preferable to the rules and conditions of congregate shelters.

Figuring out where cities go next will be shaped in no small part by how leaders and courts land on interpreting Martin.

“It really feels like we’re at a tipping point,” said Tars. “Things could either get much better or much worse.”

The post The federal courtroom choice affecting homeless tent encampments in America appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

San Francisco could finally get some clarity on the future of the Castro Theater this week as the long-delayed landmark vote across the Board of Supes comes up Tuesday/6.

The measure before the Board, approved by the Land Use and Transportation Committee, includes wording that would protect the existing theater-style seating and raked floor. That would run counter to the plans of promoter Another Planet Entertainment, who want to convert the theater into a nightclub with live music and a dance floor. APE’s plans include removing the existing seats and installing detachable seats on platforms that would allow for some film screenings.

The future of theater still lies in the balance

Sup. Rafael Mandelman has proposed amending the landmark bill to remove specific protections for the existing configuration. So the first and most important vote will be on his amendment.

The last time this was mentioned was three weeks ago, Sup. Catherine Stefani was gone and Mandelman told me neither side had six votes. That potentially makes the Second District Boss the swing vote on an issue of tremendous importance to the Castro neighborhood and the LGBTQ community.

To add one more element, the Castro Conservancy has confirmed to me that they have selected one or more donors who would fund the first two years of operation and renovation and have a plan for the complete overhaul that would cost $15-20 million. could cost dollars.

Should APE withdraw, the monument protection authority states that they would be willing to take over the lease and keep the facility as a cinema.

The session begins at 2 p.m. and this is the second item on the agenda (although the Commanders-in-Chief sometimes defer the more contentious items to later in the session).

The full board will also consider a plan to stop accepting new applications for cannabis retail outletsessentially freezing the number of stores and delivery services at the level of existing stores and those in the current application pipeline.

It’s partly because some neighborhoods feel overwhelmed by the number of pot shops, though most areas have found the outlets to be more than just good neighbors; With the necessary security at street level, they actually make residents and other traders feel safer.

According to the sponsors, the more pressing reason is: The market is becoming quite swamped, and with all applicants seeking permits, existing businesses will struggle to survive on the traffic they receive – and equity applicants will lose out.

There are currently 33 permanent recreational cannabis businesses in the city, 31 of which are physical stores and the other two are delivery services. There are 15 temporary licenses for delivery services and 32 medicinal cannabis dispensaries, many of which have applied for licenses to sell recreational cannabis.

Approximately 100 verified equity applicants have pending approval and an additional 71 from applicants not applying for equity participation. From the invoice:

Based on data from the Office of the Controller on earnings trends at retail cannabis companies, it seems doubtful that the San Francisco market will be able to support additional retail cannabis companies in larger numbers than those already in the bidding pipeline. Additionally, new applicants for a retail cannabis business permit will slow the pace of the permit process for previous applicants due to limited city resources required to process pending applications. Many equity program applicants are eligible for a reduction or waiver of approval fees, leaving the burden of processing additional applications largely borne by scarce General Fund revenues.

The problem of participation applicants is great: the city has a special process for people struggling with the aftermath of the failed war on drugs, but so far the number of participation providers has been quite limited.

The Cannabis Oversight Committee recommends that Supervisors turn this into a two-year moratorium on new outlets and encourage more capital applicants:

Although the Committee recommends such a moratorium (the motion passed with a four-vote in favor: Jamalian, Flynn, Stout, Richard; two against: Parks & Cry), we would like to inform your offices that there are large comments in the community Concerns have been expressed that the process in Permits and Licensing is still unfair and that removing the ability to submit applications does not help create a more level playing field for people harmed by the “war on drugs”. Community members shared that those harmed by the “war on drugs” are trying to catch up in acquiring the knowledge and skills to start businesses in a highly regulated cannabis industry.

The city’s Cannabis Bureau recommends that the legislation expire after two to three years and that the city “allow all verified equity applicants and those wishing to be verified an additional period of six months from the effective date to register a cannabis -Submit business application for retail activities.” .”

Everyone in City Hall is talking about the concept of converting empty office buildings into living space. but developers are generally dubious. It is an expensive process as the plumbing and electrical work in office buildings is very different from that in residential buildings (many offices have a bathroom for an entire floor, which could become ten apartments, each with their own plumbing with water and drains would need). ). In addition, offices have large interior spaces with no windows or access to natural light, which is required for homes.

My suggestion of converting these buildings into artist lofts (and letting the artists do much of the work in exchange for equity) doesn’t seem to get much traction.

But now the mayor’s office wants to create all sorts of incentives to get property developers to think about converting the home. The latest: Exempt office-to-residential conversions from all city fees except for the affordable housing requirement.

Among other things, this would remove the requirement for developers to contribute to a public school fund.

Tuition is there for a reason: People who move into San Francisco housing units often have or will have children, some of whom will attend public schools, so building housing has an impact on school capacity. That doesn’t change just because the residential building used to be an office building.

The current fee is approximately $3.75 per square foot. So if you convert a 400,000-square-foot office building into housing, schools should get about $1.5 million.

Except when this passes, that goes away.

Legislation is presented to the Land Use and Transportation Committee Monday/6th at 1:30 p.m.

The post Possibly, lastly, a call on the Castro Theater appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

“Be careful, we have a land contract in Las Vegas,” Thao’s President Dave Kaval told her, reporting the call at a news conference Thursday. Thao said she was caught off guard by the news that Oakland was likely to lose its third professional sports team in five years.

In the call, Kaval said the team has a deal to buy 49 acres in Las Vegas, where it plans to build a stadium with up to 35,000 seats. That deal likely shatters the team’s longstanding plans to build a privately funded, $1 billion, 35,000-seat waterfront ballpark at the Howard Terminal and nearby multi-billion dollar residential and commercial development, though Kaval emphasized Wednesday that the Las Vegas deal is far from over.

City officials said they were surprised by the call because both sides had made progress towards reaching an agreement and expected to have a significant update on the negotiations by the end of the week. Thao, who said she was serious about reaching an agreement with the A’s, had hired a mediator, Steve Kawa, a San Francisco political powerhouse, to help guide the negotiations. Kawa had helped the two sides negotiate an agreement to meet daily for a “negotiating summit” this week. Kawa declined to comment.

Oakland Athletics President Dave Kaval said the city of Oakland is not moving fast enough to secure a baseball deal. He pointed to financial concerns and organized shipping industry opposition to the proposed development at the Howard Terminal.

Jeff Chiu/Associated Press

As of Thursday afternoon, Oakland and Alameda County leaders said they would not be used as leverage for a team seeking subsidies from another city, even if they were at the table with Oakland.

“Based on the A’s desire for certainty in 2023, we have drawn up a detailed and specific plan to bring the project to a city council vote this summer,” Thao said on Thursday, referring to this week’s negotiation summit . “But it has become apparent that we cannot achieve acceptable terms and that the A’s are not good partners in this endeavour.”

“We were as close as we’ve ever been to a deal,” she added.

The news comes as Thao, who took office just four months ago, must address several serious issues the city is facing, including the biggest budget shortfall in history and efforts to revitalize the downtown area as major companies turn to remote work decide. Now she too is facing the likely departure of the A’s and what that could mean for the city’s economy. The likely failure of the deal also raises questions about Oakland’s ability to secure a major multibillion-dollar development deal as the city negotiates with a development group over a mega-project at the Coliseum, part of which the A’s own.

Thao struck a firm tone on Thursday, similar to that of her predecessor Libby Schaaf, who had overseen the deal with the A’s throughout her tenure but failed to reach a final agreement before leaving office. The points of contention between the city and the team were infrastructure costs, how much affordable housing should be included, and the team’s relocation agreement. Schaaf did not respond to a request for comment Thursday.

While Thao and other city officials were aware that Kaval was focused on Las Vegas as a potential baseball field, they said they still believed they could make headway by working with a negotiation team attached to A’s owner, John Fisher, reports, said Leigh Hanson, Thao’s chief of staff.

Thao said on Wednesday that the city would halt negotiations, but signaled on Thursday that it might be ready to resume talks.

Kaval told The Chronicle Wednesday night that the city is not moving fast enough to reach an agreement, citing financial concerns and organized opposition from the maritime industry to the waterfront ballpark. If the A’s clear more hurdles, Kaval said the team could break ground at a Las Vegas ballpark next year with a projected opening date of 2027 compared to Oakland’s 2030, which he says is too late. Kaval said he envisions building an entertainment area with bars and restaurants to go hand in hand with a new baseball stadium in Las Vegas.

But the city insisted it had cleared many hurdles – pointing to a significant legal victory just last month when the courts sided with the city and the A’s in its environmental review.

In addition to the stadium, the team wanted 3,000 residential units, up to 1.5 million square feet of commercial space, up to 270,000 square feet of retail space, an indoor performance center, 400 hotel rooms and up to 18 acres of open space on the Oakland shoreline.

Business leaders encouraged the city to remain open to retaining the A.

Barb Leslie, president of the Oakland Chamber of Commerce, said in a statement that the A’s “were a major local employer and are woven into the city’s cultural fabric. We hope circumstances allow the team to remain rooted in Oakland, but we are a strong and resilient community.”

Jim Wunderman, president and CEO of the Bay Area Council, which counts the A’s among its members, urged the city and the team to remain open to further discussions.

“Emotions are very high,” Wunderman said in a statement. “Even with some of the city leaders’ strong statements that the talks are dead, it’s still not entirely clear if there could be a way forward in the negotiations between the team and the city, or if there could be another alternative to get around.” keeping the A’s Oakland when it comes to that. … We encourage the city, the A’s and Major League Baseball to explore every possible option to keep the team in Oakland.”

Retired Stanford University economics professor Roger Noll said that the A’s departure was inevitable and that observers had already predicted it with the Mount Davis renovation, which obstructed baseball sightlines and did nothing to improve the Coliseum’s dilapidated plumbing system or fix other structural problems. As other cities built ballparks with huge concessions, Oakland’s venue began to look more antiquated.

As soon as other West Coast cities learned that the A’s would have to pay to build a new stadium, they started a bidding war, with Portland, Ore., Sacramento, and Las Vegas all willing to hand out significant subsidies to entice the A’s A point, said Noll.

He argued that Howard Terminal was never a good location for a sports stadium and that Oakland would be better off financially if the teams just let go, demolish the Coliseum and convert it into apartments and offices.

Alameda County Supervisor Nate Miley said that while the A’s could be on the way out, Oakland still has a football team in the Roots and could attract a WNBA extension team.

“I’ve seen three professional sports teams leave Oakland and the county and it’s just unfortunate that we lost all three teams,” Miley said Thursday. “But I also want to see it as an opportunity — one door closes and another opens.”

Political analysts said the city has made great strides in obtaining port and state permits for development at the Howard Terminal. Thao said in a statement Wednesday that the city will pursue other redevelopment options at the Howard Terminal. But whether developers want to build there remains a question.

“They have this waterfront property that’s ready to be developed right now,” said Jim Ross, an Oakland-based policy analyst. “How the city and the port use (this), here lies a real opportunity. It’s probably the most valuable piece of land you can develop in the Bay Area.”

The city has raised $375 million in state and federal funding for off-site infrastructure and is waiting to hear nearly $100 million more in state and federal grant applications. Overall offsite infrastructure costs were estimated at $568 million.

The A’s still have many hurdles to clear before they can move to Las Vegas, where Kaval said they would next seek a public-private partnership to help fund a stadium. The A’s also still need approval from MLB owners to move via a 75% approval vote.

“It’s not all over yet,” said Kaval. “We have secured a land deal in Nevada and are in positive discussions with public decision makers about an incentive package. But nothing is complete.”

Reach Rachel Swan: rswan@sfchronicle.com

Reach Sarah Ravani: sravani@sfchronicle.com; Twitter: @SarRavani

The post Oakland officers shocked by A’s determination to pursue Las Vegas ballpark appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

Browns defensive coordinator Joe Woods watches a game against the Buccaneers on Nov. 27. (Kirk Irwin – The Associated Press)

The question that has hung over the Browns since the second game of the season – will Joe Woods return as defensive coordinator in 2023? — will be answered shortly, probably as early as next week.

Woods made the case for returning for a fourth season on Jan. 5 during his weekly session with media covering the Browns. Special teams coordinator Mike Priefer and offensive coordinator Alex Van Pelt walked into the interview room ahead of Woods.

The Browns conceded 371 points last season. They allowed 353 points into the last game of 2022 on Jan. 8 in Pittsburgh.

“Right now my focus is on the Steelers game — it’s a big game for us,” Woods said when asked about his future. “But I hope I have the opportunity to come back. I know things didn’t go the way we would have liked this year, but we went into the playoffs two years ago and won a playoff game for the first time (since 1994).

“Last year we didn’t win many games (8-9) and that’s the point, but we improved defensively. We were number 5. We’ll play better until the end of this season. We have a young team. They all come back. Next year we have a complete offseason. Long story short, I hope I get the opportunity, but it’s not my choice.”

The Browns allowed 29 touchdown passes last season. They’ve allowed 19-16 games this season, but opponents have already racked up 20 rushing touchdowns after hitting 13 in 17 games in 2021. They conceded 1,857 rushing yards in 2021 and have conceded 2,151 yards on the ground so far in the 2022 season.

#Browns defense coordinator Joe Woods opens up about recurring issues with run defense. pic.twitter.com/9bdqxGbsIa

— Jeff Schudel (@jsproinsider) January 5, 2023

A diner in Pittsburgh would provide an increase from last season. The Browns finished last season with 13 interceptions and six fumble recoveries. Led by four picks from Grant Delpit, they have 11 interceptions and eight fumble recoveries this season. The Browns have 11 takeaways in their last five games.

“I think everyone knows we’ve struggled with the running game this year, so it makes sense to give up more touchdowns,” Woods said. “I feel like our boys in secondary, it’s another year of these boys together. Communication has improved over the season.

“I feel like we have guys who can take on other top receivers. That’s why I think we play better from the pass. The running game again, of course, we have to get better there.”

Head coach Kevin Stefanski and general manager Andrew Berry are expected to hold a final press conference a day or two after the season ends. An announcement of any change of coach could then be made.

The Browns were eliminated from the playoffs on Christmas Eve when the Saints defeated them 17-10. They’re 7-9 and will finish with a losing record for the 21st time in 24 years no matter what happens in Pittsburgh.

Woods was the defensive coordinator for the Denver Broncos from 2016 to 2018. The San Francisco 49ers trailed 4-12 in 2018 in Kyle Shanahan’s second year as head coach. The 2018 season also marked Robert Saleh’s second year as the 49ers’ defensive coordinator. The Niners were 6-10 in 2017. Woods was hired as the 49ers’ defensive backs/passing game coordinator in 2019.

“When I got there, a lot of people were calling out for Saleh (to get fired) because they were a little defensively withdrawn,” Woods said. “Kyle made some changes and we went in and they were 4-12, bottom in the division in 2018. We had a few key additions in the off-season and we went from last to first in the division, 13-3 . and went to the Super Bowl. I think that’s something that’s possible here, just with the squad we have. I think the boys will be better again next year.”

The 49ers drafted defensive end Nick Bosa with their second overall pick of 2019 and second-round wide receiver Deebo Samuel. Jimmy Garopollo threw 27 touchdown passes as a starting quarterback in the 2019 Super Bowl.

Woods was one of the first assistants hired by Stefanski when Stefanski was hired as the Browns’ head coach in January 2020.

Brown’s safety Grant Delpit has become one of Woods’ most valued students. Delpit missed his 2020 rookie season with a torn Achilles tendon. He played in 16 games and started 2021 in seven games. This season, Delpit leads the Browns with 99 tackles and four interceptions.

“Coach Woods and I have been close for three years,” Delpit said in the locker room on Jan. 5. “I didn’t play the first year because I was injured, but I was always in the building, paying attention and picking up little things.

“Coach Woods is a great coach. He spends time after training sharing knowledge and small nuggets. He was DB Bus before he was here.”

Woods began coaching in 1992 as defensive backs coach at Muskingum College. Since then he has trained every year. He made six more stints on the college coaching trail before joining the NFL in 2004 as the Buccaneers’ Quality Control Coach. The Browns is his fifth NFL coaching job.

The post Browns’ determination on Joe Woods’ destiny as defensive coordinator may come subsequent week – Information-Herald appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

One of the biggest surprises of the offseason is that Jimmy Garoppolo is still a member of the San Francisco 49ers. Garoppolo was anticipated to be traded this offseason but hasn’t seen a trade materialize. This situation muddies the 49ers’ quarterback room, as Trey Lance is still waiting in the wings.

ESPN insider Jeremy Fowler released an update about Jimmy Garoppolo on Sunday. In his latest update, Fowler revealed why Garoppolo remains on the roster. He said:

“The market hasn’t been overly hot right now, largely because of Garoppolo’s shoulder surgery. Teams don’t know when he’ll be able to throw; it might be later in the summer. And so, can he pass a physical? “There are questions that teams are sort of asking right now. We mentioned the Panthers earlier in relation to (Baker Mayfield); they’ve done their homework on Garoppolo too. They’ve looked at all options, and Garoppolo is one. So that’s.” Something to watch down the road. Right now, San Fransisco is prepared to hold on to that $26 million salary, at least as a placeholder for now. They believe they can do all of their business with draft picks and free agents until they sort all of this out.” “I really do think that Jimmy [Garoppolo] would have a starting job right now, if it hadn’t been for the shoulder surgery.” – @AlbertBreer said on the @RichEisenShow.

Albert shared how the shoulder injury complicates things & made teams concerned he’ll miss key off-season time.

“I really do think that Jimmy [Garoppolo] would have a starting job right now, if it hadn’t been for the shoulder surgery.” – @AlbertBreer said on the @RichEisenShow.Albert shared how the shoulder injury complicates things & made teams concerned he’ll miss key off-season time. https://t.co/9YTPC42gqe

Garoppolo’s shoulder surgery couldn’t have been timed worse. Despite reports that he’ll be ready to throw in training camp, teams are skeptical he’ll recover in time to be worth trading significant assets for.

Another juicy piece of information dropped from Fowler was regarding the starting job. Fowler reports that Lance will be the Week 1 starter. fowler wrote:

“Meanwhile, Trey Lance has been working out in the Bay Area. I’m told that he’s got indications, at least informal indications from the team, that he’ll be the guy next year. He’s set to be that. Now, whether that means that they would still keep Garoppolo and that could change the dynamic, possibly. But right now, Lance is going to be the starter.” Here’s the entire quote from ESPN’s Jeremy Fowler about #49ers QB’s Jimmy Garoppolo and Trey Lance“/>Here’s the entire quote from ESPN’s Jeremy Fowler about #49ers QB’s Jimmy Garoppolo and Trey Lance https://t.co/Io8HONOzlw

Trey Lance as starting quarterback for San Francisco 49ers over Jimmy Garoppolo is significant news

The San Francisco 49ers have looming contract extensions due to Nick Bosa and Deebo Samuel. Bosa and Samuel are two of the best players in the league at their positions and are each likely to command over $20 million per year.

So read
Article Continues below

Moving on from Jimmy Garoppolo gives the 49ers financial flexibility to extend one of them. Understandably, they want compensation for Garoppolo, but eventually, you have to cut your losses. Especially if a player like Samuel is willing to hold out or request a trade due to the lack of a new contract.

Edited by Akshay Saraswat

Login to reply

The post Insider believes San Francisco 49ers have made their determination between Jimmy Garoppolo and Trey Lance for 2022 season appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

OAKLAND (CBS SF/AP) — The family of Erik Salgado, a 23-year-old unarmed man fatally shot in 2020 by California Highway Patrol officers, on Tuesday denounced a report from the district attorney saying there was not enough evidence to prosecute the officers.

Salgado was shot and killed by three members of CHP’s auto-theft task force in June of 2020 on Cherry Street in Oakland. On Monday, Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley publicly released the final report on the fatal shooting and said she agreed with its conclusion “that the evidence does not support criminal charges” against the officers.

READ MORE: Grieving Parents Make Tear-Filled Plea To End Gun Violence At San Francisco Rally

Salgado’s family and supporters gathered on the steps of the Rene C. Davidson Courthouse in Oakland. Attorney John Burris, who is moving ahead with a civil rights lawsuit over Salgado’s death, said there was no legal basis for the CHP officers to shoot into Salgado’s car.

“I think that report is a sham,” Burris said at the Tuesday news conference, adding he was disappointed but not surprised. “The decision is bittersweet because although disappointed with the decision it does allows us to go forward,”

The Salgado family said the officers involved in the shooting used excessive force, especially because Salgado was not armed. he added.

Salgado’s mother Felina Ramirez said through an interpreter Tuesday morning, “All I want is justice. I want justice for my son.”
She spoke through tears as she described never being able to see her son again.

Salgado’s sister, Amanda Majail-Blanco, says they’ve been waiting two years for answers – answers they say this report does not provide.

“We have to remember that this is an investigative report on cops investigating their own, and this shouldn’t be trusted,” said Majail-Blanco.

Prosecutors identified the officers involved as CHP Sgt. Richard Henderson and Officers Donald Saputa and Eric Hulbert. The CHP said at the time the officers were conducting a traffic stop on the Dodge sedan driven by Salgado when he rammed it against their patrols and they opened fire.

Salgado was struck at least a dozen times. His pregnant girlfriend was in the passenger seat and was wounded.

READ MORE: South Bay Fentanyl Dealer Sentenced To 8 Years In Prison For Selling ‘Killers In Disguise’ M30 Pills

Salgado was driving one of the Dodge Hellcats that was stolen a few nights earlier from a San Leandro car dealership during looting that happened around the George Floyd protests.

The report says when the officers pulled Salgado over and got out of their cars to talk to him, he tried to drive away, ramming their patrol vehicles twice. Thats’ when the officers opened fire, later saying they worried the Hellcat Salgado was driving could hit and kill one of the officers.

“The DA has said, ‘Well, I’m not really clear that that’s what happened, but right now I have nothing else to turn to.’ Why? Because there’s no video,” said LaDoris Cordell, a former judge and a former independent police auditor.

Cordell says video from body worn cameras would have taken away any doubt as to whether the shooting was justified. According to the DA, the cameras were not required by CHP policy.

“Had they had cameras on and activated, we wouldn’t be having this conversation, nor would the DA have any question about whether or not pressing charges, filing charges was the right thing to do,” says Cordell.

The 34 page report does leave the door open for criminal charges to be filed in the future “should more witnesses or evidence come forward.”

Katie Nielsen contributed to this report.

© Copyright 2022 CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. The Associated Press and Bay City News contributed to this report.

MORE NEWS: New COVID Cases Among States’ Highest As San Francisco Slowly Returns To Normal

The post Household of Erik Salgado Calls for Justice After Determination Not To Cost CHP Officers Who Fatally Shot Him – CBS San Francisco appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

Faced with a tight deadline, the South San Francisco City Council fulfilled its role in determining what it believed to be the duties and responsibilities of liaison officers for students on the city’s campus and left final approval of the agreement to the South San Francisco Unified School District.

“It’s not 100% what the school district or city might want, but that’s collaboration,” School Board Trustee Patricia Murray said during a special meeting of the school committee and city subcommittee on Monday prior to Wednesday’s city council meeting .

District and city officials have negotiated a letter of intent through campus police.

The intent of the MoU is to clearly define the role of SLOs on campus and when they should or should not be involved in student disciplinary matters. As outlined in the draft SLO approved by the South San Francisco City Council on Wednesday, July 28, campus staff must handle most disciplinary matters in-house, unless the Code of Education dictates otherwise.

With the fall semester starting on August 11, the district’s board of trustees was not confident that the two parties would come to an agreement before classes began and decided to put the SLO program on hold until an agreement was signed.

Despite the tight deadline, the trustees suggested that staff take ample time to draft a strong letter of intent while the board of directors focused on reopening campus safely. The Trustees also assisted in planning a special meeting to approve a final version of the document.

During the council meeting on Wednesday, Councilor James Coleman also encouraged city officials to spend considerable time preparing the document, noting that officials will continue to respond to emergency calls.

“There is no rush and I want to make sure we are serving our students, our parents, and our community by adopting a well-researched and best possible coordinated letter of intent,” said Coleman called.

Alternatively, Mayor Mark Addiego, a member of the subcommittee who endorsed the drafted letter of intent, shared the urgency to reach an agreement before the students return to campus.

“I don’t want to be the political entity that drops the ball and ends with a suspended SLO program,” said Addiego.

Public requests

Councilor Buenaflor Nicolas said she felt the process was not hasty and said she saw no problem with the MOU as it was elaborated, suggesting that she was in “another universe” after being Heard the concerns of public speakers.

As with previous public sessions on SLO, a number of public speakers said they felt the officers made the students uncomfortable. Some urged the council to reject the MOU and keep the program on hold, while others called for the MOU to remove any language that helps foster strong relationships between the department and students.

On the public speaking side, Coleman said the district should limit social interactions with students and requested that courses that are normally run by the police force be run by other trained professionals. In line with Coleman, Councilor Eddie Flores said therapists and other local organizations better trained in mental health could be a resource for programming bullying.

Additionally, Coleman said he would like officers to be casually dressed and unarmed at closed events such as career fairs. In its draft, the MOU calls for SLOs to be dressed in accessible uniforms such as polo shirts and utility pants as often as possible, but allows officers to wear all tools for the use of force.

Police Chief Jeff Azzopardi rejected Coleman’s proposal, noting that officers are legally allowed to hide wearing on or off duty, including on school grounds. When asked to attend a paid event that the officer was not allowed to attend, he suggested that the officer decline “even if I try.”

“If the school district wants a policeman there, that policeman will be there and that policeman will be armed every time,” Azzopardi said. “I will not allow one of our officers to be paid in uniform or without a uniform and be on the street without a weapon.”

He acknowledged that off-duty officers are prohibited from carrying firearms in certain situations, such as when playing the San Francisco Giants’ games at Oracle Park. Councilors asked if the school district could put similar restrictions in place, which Azzopardi said he was unsure of about the legal parameters, but officials would stick to or choose not to attend school events.

Agreement areas

Azzopardi signaled a vote from the department to ensure students were discreetly handcuffed from campus if necessary, noting that only one student and one teacher had been arrested in the district in the past three years.

“Our goal for the future is not to have to take anyone out with handcuffs,” said Azzopardi during the subcommittee meeting on Monday. “My goal would be that no one would see anyone handcuffed.”

During the subcommittee meeting on Monday and the council meeting on Wednesday, he assured officials that he would reassign any SLO that the district was uncomfortable with on campus if they couldn’t come to an agreement.

Azzopardi also pointed out the legal restrictions that officers face when interrogating children aged 17 and younger. Starting in 2021, California law requires the department to contact the district attorney if it is interested in speaking to a minor, he said. An administrator must also be present at every interaction between officers and students.

In the interests of full transparency, Flores and Councilor Mark Nagales asked the MOU to explicitly state student rights while also outlining when a campus employee may or may not contact the police. Coleman also requested that the document highlight the complaints process for officers in the department.

“This is the first year that we are putting together a formal agreement document between this relationship and I would like to see it in detail,” said Flores. “The more details, the better.”

Since the document is a letter of intent rather than a binding contract, City Attorney Sky Woodruff told council members that either party can make changes if they see fit.

If either party violates any agreements in the MOU, each also has the power to terminate the agreement, Woodruff said. An annual review of the SLO program, required by the MOU, will also allow both government agencies to review how well the program and MOU are working in practice, said City Manager Mike Futrell.

“In the years to come, we can continue to refine this program to meet the intent we all need to have to do this successfully,” Futrell said during the subcommittee meeting on Monday.

With the unanimous support of the council, the draft MOU and proposed changes are now being sent back to the school district board of trustees, which can propose further changes before a final vote takes place. The next official board meeting will be on August 12th and a special meeting before the school’s return has yet to be planned.

sierra@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 106

The post Faculty officers transfer to South San Francisco Unified Faculty District for resolution | Native Information appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.