California has a bold plan to reverse its cost-of-living crisis and stem the exodus of residents leaving the Golden State for regions like Florida and Texas. It has vowed to create 2.5 million new homes, one million of them affordable, over the next eight years. So, what’s getting in the state’s way? First on the list: the city of San Francisco.

The city by the bay has some of the biggest barriers to building housing. The state Department of Housing and Community Development wrote as much in a scathing first-of-its-kind report on Wednesday that painted the city as ground zero of the state’s housing crisis—and San Francisco’s mayor, London Breed, agrees. 

“The state sent a clear message that San Francisco needs to do better on housing,” Breed said in a Medium post. “No more delaying and denying the changes we’ve committed to make in our Housing Element to build housing faster.”

In its report, HCD argued that many local practices actually violate state law, while also citing a complicated permitting process, too much deference to local politicians, and skyrocketing construction costs.

“San Francisco has the longest timelines in the state for advancing a housing project from submittal to construction,” the report found. Just to get approved, or “entitled” in the city’s langage, takes 523 days on average, 50% more than the next-slowest jurisdiction. After the approval, it takes another 605 days—that’s nearly two years—to issue other building permits.

That’s thanks to local control, and a discretionary process that can override essentially any development, even those that conform to existing zoning regulations—meaning projects can be delayed by officials’ demands or by a single community member unhappy about some aspect of the development.

Following the report’s release, in a statement, California Gov. Gavin Newsom said: “California’s affordability crisis is one of our own making—the decisions we made limited the creation of housing we need. Nowhere is this fact more evident than in San Francisco.”

‘Affluent NIMBYs’ derail housing

“San Francisco is an outlier on housing approvals, in part because of how it applies a blanket discretionary review process to all building permits,” the report found. The city’s “housing approval processes are also notoriously complex and cumbersome, creating unpredictability and uncertainty,” it found—creating an environment where only seasoned developers have the know-how to navigate the process, while new ones don’t even try. 

While that crushes housing development, it also means the housing that does make it through is very expensive, as previously reported—because only luxury developers can afford the drawn-out process.

In theory, the community input requirement “allows groups without power to shape zoning to advocate for their neighborhood needs before a development is built,” the report says. But in reality, “‘affluent NIMBYs’ can, and do, weaponize these process requirements to block housing,” the report concludes. That leaves the city in the worst of all worlds: The existing zoning, which the report calls inequitable, doesn’t change, and little new housing is added.

Examples of such delays abound. Earlier this year, the city’s Board of Supervisors halted a plan to replace a single-family home in Nob Hill with 10 townhomes, in part over locals’ concerns about the shade the building would cast on a nearby park. And two years ago, supervisors delayed a nearly 500-unit building that was destined for a parking lot used by Nordstrom shoppers, the New York Times noted; now that Nordstrom has abandoned the city, it no longer needs the lot—and building costs have shot up so much the project is no longer financially viable. 

Other parts of the Bay Area face similar struggles. A 315-unit building in Lafayette, in the East Bay, is finally moving ahead after a 12-year delay in the courts. In nearby Atherton, a wealthy Silicon Valley enclave, residents including the billionaire venture capitalist Marc Andreessen and NBA superstar Steph Curry of the Golden State Warriors vocally opposed the construction of multifamily housing in the neighborhood on two separate occasions. 

Can San Francisco meet the state’s housing goals?

The report questions San Francisco’s ability to meet the state-mandated, and very ambitious, housing goals by the 2031 deadline. To keep pace, the city needs to build over 10,000 new housing units every year over the next eight years, half of them affordable. It’s only managed about 40% of that pace so far, the report found. This year, it’s been averaging a dismal one unit a day, the report found. 

Some housing advocates cheered the report. “For decades, San Francisco has flouted state laws regulating housing projects,” the pro-development advocacy organization San Francisco YIMBY said in a statement. “This report will obliterate local obstructionism in San Francisco, and SF YIMBY could not be more excited.” State senator Scott Weiner, who authored Senate Bills 423, 4, and 593, all of which were recently signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in an effort to reduce barriers to housing development, called the report “utter condemnation,” noting “18 policies & practices” that violate state law. 

If the city doesn’t shape up, HCD warns, it will face consequences—such as losing state funds, being fined by the courts, losing its authority to determine local land use and, most severely, the “builder’s remedy,” or the automatic approval of any project meeting certain requirements.

The city’s mayor made it clear that the state could decertify San Francisco’s housing element if it fails to build more housing—and if that were to happen, it would be “disastrous,” in her words. 

“This is in addition to the ongoing and very real consequences of not building housing, which we’ve been experiencing for years,” Breed said. “People will continue to be displaced from the city they grew up in. Workers will not be able to live here and work in our restaurants, shops, and offices. Families will leave the city when they can’t find enough space.”

The post California rips San Francisco housing coverage and ‘prosperous NIMBYs’ for blocking progress appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

Dollop Coffee in Chicago in 2016. | Photo: Shutterstock.

Two Chicago police officers walked into a coffeeshop last week and asked to use the restroom. They were informed that restrooms were for customers only.

The seemingly innocuous incident has been blown into a social media storm (perhaps in a teapot) that has been dubbed “Hurricane Restroom,” with critics threatening a boycott and wishing the coffeeshop harm. Some called it “Bud Light 2.0,” referring to the beer maker’s decision earlier this year to partner with a transgender social media influencer, which reportedly alienated a portion of its audience, also prompting calls for a boycott.

“It will be hilarious when you get robbed and no one wants to help,” wrote @arizonacardslover to Dollop Coffee in a post on X.

“We must all boycott @dollopcoffeeCo for once and for all! United we all stand a chance against the woke agenda folks! #BLM,” wrote Mauricio @ghosting199.

“Vile people. Vile company. Don’t come crying when lowlife criminals target your store and you call 911,” wrote Emmi1111* @MyfriendOliviaa.

The reaction prompted the CEO of the 14-unit coffeehouse chain to defend the policy in a post on Medium on Sunday.

Dollop CEO Dan Weiss said the staff’s recent interaction with the police officers was not political. The customers-only policy is designed to keep employees safe, he writes, because restrooms have been left a mess, with feces smeared on windows and walls and needles and other drug paraphernalia to be cleaned up—not by police officers, he makes clear, but the policy is to say “no” to non-customers because of “rushes and workloads and moments.”

For context, he adds, the barista had been asked 20 times by non-customers to use the restroom in the hour before the police officers arrived.

However, the police officers response, according to Weiss, brought politics into play and was “horrifyingly inhumane,” he wrote.

The officers returned to the coffeeshop twice with individuals they claimed were “homeless and drug addicted” and “harassed our staff members about them being allowed to use the bathroom,” wrote Weiss, though it’s not clear how workers were harassed. “These officers were offended that they were being treated like everyone else and they were bullying employees. And using unhoused and impoverished people to do so. It was disgusting.”

Weiss called Chicago’s housing, mental health, addiction, and police brutality issues “desperately critical.”

“I’m ready and willing to partner with the city as a business owner—but I won’t stand by and be quiet while people are mistreated by a few bored cops,” he wrote.

Chicago Police officials declined to comment except to say an internal investigation of the incident has been initiated.

To critics on X (formerly known as Twitter) who posted that they wished Dollop Coffee would be robbed, inspected, or broken into, and who threatened boycotts, he wrote, “Most of you don’t even live here. Most of you don’t think Black lives or trans lives matter. Most of you think Steve Bannon is hot and celebrate January 6th as a national holiday. Most of you don’t think women have the right to reproductive freedom. So how about you please fuck off.”

While footage and information is still being collected/assembled regarding Hurricane Restroom, one thing is certain. There are common, um- shall we say…themes to the accounts/users that have politicized this and chosen to “boycott” us over it. To them, we proudly say: pic.twitter.com/ghrwfOPgrm

— Dollop Coffee Co. (@DollopCoffeeCo) September 2, 2023

Dollop’s X feed also received many posts in support, mostly reacting to why the social media account stood up to those critics.

I tend to make my coffee at home because I’m a nerd about things like that but I’m all for community members who take a stand. I’ll be ordering from y’all ASAP. Keep fighting for our rights and don’t let the bastards grind you down!

— Walter Driskell (@therealdriskell) September 3, 2023

Restroom access has been a recurring issue in many cities, as restaurant operators attempt to find balance between serving customers and safety.

How police officers are treated in restaurants has also become somewhat of a hotspot.

Many restaurants offer perks to police to encourage them to visit frequently with the hope their presence will deter crime and make both guests and workers feel more safe. But the presence of police can cause some to feel unsafe.

The guns police officers carry can also be an issue. The San Francisco restaurant Reem’s California reportedly last month got into a social media feud over a policy that banned police officers carrying guns from entering.

Members help make our journalism possible. Become a Restaurant Business member today and unlock exclusive benefits, including unlimited access to all of our content. Sign up here.

Lisa Jennings is a veteran restaurant industry reporter and editor who covers the fast-casual sector, independent restaurants and emerging chain concepts.

View All Articles by This Author

The post Chicagoland chain Dollop Espresso Co. defends customer-only restroom coverage appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

Oberflächlich betrachtet ist die Geschichte der US-Umweltpolitik von durchschlagenden Erfolgen durch entscheidende Regulierung geprägt. Es wird geschätzt, dass der Clean Air Act von 1970 die Luftverschmutzung insgesamt um 66,9 % reduziert und die Lebenserwartung eines durchschnittlichen Amerikaners um 1,3 Jahre verlängert hat.

Aber es ist auch eine Geschichte von „Einheitspolitik“ anstelle von Gleichheit und Gerechtigkeit. Obwohl die Umweltgesetzgebung die Gesamtverschmutzung verringert hat, hat sich die Belastung durch gefährliche Giftstoffe für Haushalte mit niedrigem Einkommen und insbesondere für farbige Menschen verschlechtert. Die Luftverschmutzung liegt in farbigen Gemeinschaften zwischen 10 und 15 % über dem Durchschnitt, und heute leben mehr farbige Menschen in „Zaungemeinschaften“ (Stadtvierteln in der Nähe von Einrichtungen mit hoher Schadstoffbelastung) als noch vor 30 Jahren.

Der letztjährige Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) ist ein weiteres weitreichendes Umweltgesetz – eine 369-Milliarden-Dollar-Investition, die die Emissionen bis 2050 voraussichtlich um bis zu 50 % reduzieren wird Obwohl es sich um eine Gruppe lokaler Planer und Praktiker handelt, die sich für die Umsetzung einer gerechteren Politik in ihren Städten eingesetzt haben, ist die IRA nicht in der Lage, Gesetze zum Thema Gerechtigkeit zu erlassen.

Denn der nachfrageorientierte Ansatz des Gesetzentwurfs – der auf Steuererleichterungen und Subventionen als Anreiz für die Eindämmung des Klimawandels setzt – bedeutet, dass die Klimaresilienz tatsächlich ungerechter werden und einkommensschwächeren Haushalten und farbigen Gemeinschaften schaden könnte. Aber wie in diesem Artikel untersucht wird, sind die Staats- und Kommunalpolitiker gut aufgestellt, um die Maßnahmen zur Bewertung und Durchsetzung der Gerechtigkeit während der Umsetzung des IRA zu stärken und so das Gesetz möglicherweise in Richtung besserer Ergebnisse für alle Gemeinschaften zu verändern.

Wie reparativ ist die IRA?

Anfang dieses Jahres haben wir eine reparative Haltung für die Klimapolitik dargelegt – Prinzipien für die Umweltpolitik, die auf der Schließung von Wohlstands- und Wohlstandsunterschieden zwischen den Rassen als Weg zur Stärkung der Klimaresilienz von Haushalten und Gemeinschaften basieren. Wir haben uns auf Wohlstand, Gesundheit sowie finanzielle Sicherheit und Wohnsicherheit konzentriert, da dies die Faktoren sind, die die individuellen – wirtschaftlichen und persönlichen – Kosten des Klimawandels erhöhen. Diese Faktoren vermitteln das Klimarisiko und können den Unterschied zwischen einer Katastrophe, die einen vorübergehenden Rückschlag verursacht, oder einer Verfestigung der Armut ausmachen.

Glücklicherweise nimmt die Biden-Regierung fortschrittliche Zivilklagen ernst, insbesondere im Bereich der Klimagerechtigkeit. Präsident Biden hat das Community Disaster Resilience Zones Act in Kraft gesetzt, kündigte die Finanzierung von 17 technischen Hilfszentren in Höhe von 177 Millionen US-Dollar an, um Gemeinden den Zugang zu Mitteln für Umweltgerechtigkeit zu erleichtern, und gründete das Büro für Umweltgerechtigkeit des Weißen Hauses, das bei der Entwicklung neuer politischer Ansätze eine entscheidende Rolle spielen könnte Emissionsreduzierungen durch inklusive Klimaresilienz ergänzen.

Neben dem Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) als zentraler Komponente der Klimaschutzpolitik der Regierung wäre es unaufrichtig zu sagen, dass die IRA keine Verpflichtung zu Gerechtigkeit und Gerechtigkeit beinhaltet. Es wird von der Justice40-Initiative unterstützt, einer Politik, die sicherstellen soll, dass mindestens 40 % der Bundesinvestitionen in die Klimapolitik in historisch benachteiligte und überlastete Gemeinden fließen. Die IRA wird außerdem durch aktuelle Verordnungen zur Reform der Regierungsstrukturen ergänzt, darunter Pläne zur Stärkung der Rassengerechtigkeit und zur Unterstützung unterversorgter Gemeinschaften in allen Regierungsbehörden.

Darüber hinaus sieht das Gesetz mindestens 45,95 Milliarden US-Dollar für Umweltgerechtigkeitsprogramme vor, darunter 10 Milliarden US-Dollar an Wettbewerbszuschüssen. Mit etwa 12 % der IRA und 3,4 % der IRA und IIJA zusammen bleiben diese Umweltgerechtigkeitsverpflichtungen hinter der Justice40-Initiative zurück (siehe Abbildung 1). Dennoch ist es keine Kleinigkeit. Diese Programme werden durch das Screening-Tool für Klima- und Wirtschaftsgerechtigkeit geleitet, ein vom Council on Environmental Quality geleitetes Kartierungstool, das Bundesbehörden und Kommunalverwaltungen dabei hilft, bedürftige Gemeinden anhand ihrer Anfälligkeit für Klimarisiken zu identifizieren.

Obwohl dies alles in die richtige Richtung geht, verfolgt die IRA immer noch einen einheitlichen Ansatz. Wir haben bereits darüber geschrieben, dass das Gesetz Gerechtigkeit nicht wirklich berücksichtigt und insbesondere die Kodifizierung eines Prozesses zur Bewertung von Investitionen im Hinblick auf Gerechtigkeitsergebnisse umgeht. Wie genau ein erfolgreiches Umweltgerechtigkeitsprogramm aussehen wird, ist unklar; Der Mangel an Leitlinien der IRA dazu, wie erfolgreiche Programmergebnisse definiert, gemessen oder aufrechterhalten werden, stellt eine erhebliche Lücke dar, die die Bewertung und Verfeinerung der Fortschritte bei der Gleichstellung zu einer Herausforderung machen wird.

Dies alles geht zu Lasten des Transformationspotenzials der IRA. Das Risiko besteht darin: Ohne eine Strategie, die Rassengerechtigkeit berücksichtigt, kann die Klimaschutzpolitik zu einem Vehikel werden, das unbeabsichtigt die Wohlstands- und Wohlstandsunterschiede zwischen Rassen vergrößert, selbst wenn es zu Emissionsreduzierungen führt. Dies war die Geschichte der Umweltpolitik in den USA, und ohne Maßnahmen besteht die Gefahr, dass sie auch zur Geschichte der Klimapolitik wird.

Die Vorteile der IRA werden nicht neutral verteilt

Die Verteilung der Bundesmittel und ihre Auswirkungen auf die lokale Umweltverschmutzung und Klimaanfälligkeit sind wichtiger als die Reduzierung der Gesamtemissionen, wenn es darum geht, wie farbige Gemeinschaften vom Klimawandel betroffen sind. Da die Hinterlassenschaften rassistischer Politik die Verwundbarkeit systemisch auf bestimmte Orte und Gemeinschaften konzentriert haben, kann ein verteilungsneutraler Ansatz die zugrunde liegende Ungleichheit zementieren. Es stimmt zwar, dass die IRA die Dekarbonisierung auf nationaler Ebene vorantreiben wird und dass bundesstaatliche Gerechtigkeitsbestimmungen dazu beitragen werden, einige ungleiche Ergebnisse auszugleichen, Ungleichheit ist jedoch immer noch in den Schlüsselmechanismen des Gesetzes verankert.

Erstens vergrößern nachfrageorientierte Richtlinien, die das Chancengleichheitsrisiko nicht kodifizieren, die Resilienzkluft, indem sie einkommensschwache Gemeinschaften und farbige Gemeinschaften zurücklassen. Dies liegt daran, dass die finanziellen Anreize im Gesetzentwurf auf Hausbesitzer ausgerichtet sind – typischerweise Bewohner mit mittlerem bis hohem Einkommen, von denen die Mehrheit weiß ist. Darüber hinaus haben andere auf das nahezu vollständige Fehlen von Bestimmungen zur Verringerung der Faktoren der Gefährdung hingewiesen, darunter Wohnsicherheit, gleichberechtigter Zugang zur Gesundheitsversorgung und die Verbesserung der Bereitstellung und des Zugangs zum öffentlichen Raum. Eine stärker reparative Politik würde Bestimmungen für Mieter und Menschen in unsicheren Beschäftigungs- und Wohnungsverhältnissen umfassen und so die zugrunde liegenden Wohlstandslücken angehen, die diese Gruppen anfälliger für die Auswirkungen des Klimawandels und Katastrophen machen.

Zweitens werden nachfrageseitige Maßnahmen ohne restriktive angebotsseitige Regulierung (d. h. den Ausstieg aus der Nutzung fossiler Brennstoffe) die Förderung fossiler Brennstoffe verlängern, wodurch farbige Gemeinschaften weiterhin übermäßigen Schäden ausgesetzt werden. Ölkonzerne erzielten im Jahr 2022 Rekordgewinne, und nach der russischen Invasion in der Ukraine schossen die Verbraucherpreise in die Höhe und Unternehmen weiteten ihre Bohrprojekte in den USA aus. Große Hersteller haben ihre Verpflichtungen zur Emissionsreduzierung bereits verdoppelt. In diesem Zusammenhang öffnet die IRA die Tür zur CCUS-Technologie (Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage) – ein Ansatz, den Kohle- und Gasproduzenten unter anderem deshalb unterstützen, weil er die Fortsetzung der Verbrennung fossiler Brennstoffe ermöglichen würde. Die wahrscheinlichsten Standorte für diese Infrastruktur sind Gebiete, in denen die Gemeinden bereits durch die Verschmutzung durch Öl- und Gasraffinerien überlastet sind – beispielsweise entlang der Golfküste, wo bereits große Entwicklungen geplant sind. Diese Kombination ist eine schlechte Nachricht für viele Gemeinden an vorderster Front, die es sich nicht leisten können, länger auf strengere Kontrollen lokaler Schadstoffe zu warten.

Einige Kommentatoren, darunter auch unsere Kollegen bei Brookings, haben argumentiert, dass sich diese Kompromisse für beschleunigte Klimaschutzmaßnahmen lohnen, mit der Begründung, dass unvollständige politische Maßnahmen besser seien als gar keine. Wir argumentieren jedoch, dass das Versäumnis, eine inklusive und gerechte Politik umzusetzen, ein größeres soziales Risiko mit sich bringt, als nur einige zurückzulassen, da eine regressive Politik eine negative Rückkopplungsschleife aufrechterhalten kann, die die Wirksamkeit der Klimapolitik selbst untergräbt. Der Grund, warum internationale Entwicklungsagenturen zunehmend integrative Klimaschutzmaßnahmen unterstützen, liegt nicht darin, dass sie moralische Akteure sind, sondern darin, dass es sich um eine kluge Klimapolitik handelt. Die sozialen Kosten des Klimawandels – d. h. die Auswirkungen auf die gesamte Wirtschaft, vom Wohnungsbau bis zur Gesundheitsversorgung – sind in finanziell weniger sicheren und ungerechteren Ländern tendenziell höher, da diese Faktoren die Klimarisiken verstärken (siehe Abbildung 2). .

In den USA, wo Rasse häufig einer der größten Prädiktoren für Klimaanfälligkeit ist, ist es logisch, einen Ansatz für Klimaschutzmaßnahmen zu verfolgen, der auf Rassengerechtigkeit basiert. Aber die IRA beantwortet einige der entscheidenden Fragen, die wir in unserem Bericht über reparative Klimapolitiken aufgeworfen haben, nicht. Wie wird Rassengerechtigkeit in der Milderungs- und Anpassungspolitik kodifiziert? Wie gewährleistet es Fortschritte bei der Umweltgerechtigkeit bei der Umsetzung? Wie wird diese Politik rassistisch bedingte Lücken in der Klimaresilienz verringern?

Die Umsetzung auf staatlicher und lokaler Ebene könnte die IRA zu gerechteren Ergebnissen führen

Diese Einschränkungen der Klimagerechtigkeit bedeuten, dass die IRA durch lokale und staatliche Maßnahmen unterstützt werden muss, um bessere Chancen auf gerechtere Ergebnisse zu haben.

Ein guter Anfang für beide Regierungsebenen wäre die Zusammenarbeit mit Gemeindepartnern in gefährdeten Regionen, um den Zugang zu den unterschiedlichen Klimafonds zu vereinfachen. Traditionell unterinvestierte Gemeinden haben aufgrund mangelnder Ressourcen und Fachkenntnisse in der Regel Schwierigkeiten, Zuschussfinanzierungen zu erhalten. Investitionen in gemeindenahe Organisationen durch Initiativen wie lokale Aktiennavigatoren können dazu beitragen, dass die Mittel dorthin fließen, wo sie am meisten benötigt werden. Neue Richtlinien, wie die kürzlich angekündigten Community Disaster Resilience Zones, bieten die Möglichkeit, gemeinsam mit Gemeinden an vorderster Front Resilienzstrategien zu entwickeln und aus den Fehlern früherer Richtlinien wie dem Programm „Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities“ zu lernen, das vor allem wohlhabenden Küstengemeinden zugute kam .

Ebenso wichtig wird sein, wie die IRA mit lokalen Richtlinien interagiert, bei denen es offiziell nicht um das Klima geht, die es aber dennoch beeinflussen, etwa in den Bereichen Wohnen, Beschäftigungsmöglichkeiten, kommunale Infrastruktur und Erschwinglichkeit von Dienstleistungen, die die Anfälligkeit für das Klima verringern. Unsere Kollegen haben gezeigt, wie die Interaktion der IRA mit anderen politischen Maßnahmen – einschließlich des IIJA und makroökonomischen Faktoren – die Ergebnisse des Gesetzes beeinflussen wird, aber auch seine Wirksamkeit bei der Lösung von Rassenunterschieden bestimmen wird.

Das Ausmaß, in dem Kommunalverwaltungen gerechtere Ergebnisse planen können, dürfte uneinheitlich sein, da Städte in einigen der am stärksten gefährdeten Regionen entweder weniger bereit sind, sich für Klimagerechtigkeit einzusetzen, oder durch regressive staatliche Maßnahmen behindert werden. Dennoch geben einige Regionen ein positives Beispiel, indem sie ergänzende Initiativen zur Rassengerechtigkeit anführen, die die Auswirkungen der IRA auf die Widerstandsfähigkeit verstärken werden. In Boston, Rochester, NY und San Francisco wurden Task Forces für Reparationen eingerichtet. Kürzlich war Evanston, Illinois, die erste Stadt in den USA, die ihren Bewohnern direkte Wiedergutmachung gewährte, und Los Angeles County hat Land im Wert von 20 Millionen US-Dollar an die Nachkommen einer schwarzen Familie zurückgegeben, die es ihnen als bedeutendes Eigentum gestohlen hatte. Andere Städte, darunter New York und Chicago, testen Verfahren zur Einbeziehung der Gleichwertigkeitsbewertung in die Planungsprozesse für neue Infrastruktur.

In ähnlicher Weise verfolgen einige Staaten Richtlinien, die unbeabsichtigt oder absichtlich zu besseren Ergebnissen für farbige Gemeinschaften führen. Gute Beispiele sind strengere Vorschriften zur Luftverschmutzung, wie die Gesetze von New York und New Jersey, die umweltschädliche Entwicklungen in überlasteten Gemeinden verbieten, und Maßnahmen zur Verbesserung bezahlbaren und nachhaltigen Wohnraums für Mieter, wie das vom American Rescue Plan finanzierte Whole Home Repairs Program in Pennsylvania.

Obwohl diese Fälle nicht als Anpassungspolitik gedacht sind, zeigen sie einen Anstoß für eine stärker reparative Politik und nicht nur für einen einheitlichen Ansatz. Das entstehende Büro für Umweltgerechtigkeit des Weißen Hauses sollte diese lokale und staatliche Dynamik zur Kenntnis nehmen. Eine gerechtere und gerechtere Klimapolitik mit messbaren Fortschritten bei der Umsetzung könnte Strukturen schaffen, die Emissionsreduzierung mit Programmen zur Stärkung der Anpassungsfähigkeit und zur Verringerung von Klimaresilienzlücken verbinden. Darin mangelt es der IRA, aber zukünftige Richtlinien müssen es nicht sein.

The post The US can’t obtain environmental justice by way of one-size-fits-all local weather coverage appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

An image from an ad by the Republican National Committee against President Biden shows images generated by artificial intelligence. The proliferation of AI-generated images, videos and audio poses a challenge to policy makers. Republican National Committee Hide Caption

toggle caption

Republican National Committee

An image from an ad by the Republican National Committee against President Biden shows images generated by artificial intelligence. The proliferation of AI-generated images, videos and audio poses a challenge to policy makers.

Republican National Committee

This week, the Republican National Committee used artificial intelligence to create a 30-second ad imagining what President Joe Biden’s second term might be like.

It depicts a series of fictional crises, from a Chinese invasion of Taiwan to the shutdown of the city of San Francisco, illustrated with fake images and news reports. A small disclaimer in the top left states that the video was “created with AI imagery”.

The ad was just the latest example of AI blurring the line between real and apparent. Fake images of ex-President Donald Trump tussling with the police have been circulating in recent weeks. So does an AI-generated image of Pope Francis in an elegant puffy coat and a fake song with cloned voices from pop stars Drake and The Weeknd.

Artificial intelligence is getting better and better at mimicking reality, which raises big questions about how it can be regulated. And as tech companies give anyone the power to create fake images, synthetic audio and video, and text that sounds convincingly human, even experts admit they’re stumped.

“I look at these generations several times a day and I have a very hard time distinguishing them from each other. It’s going to be a tough road ahead,” said Irene Solaiman, security and policy expert at AI firm Hugging Face.

Solaiman is focused on making AI work better for everyone. It also involves thinking a lot about how these technologies can be misused to generate political propaganda, rig elections, and create fake stories or videos of things that never happened.

Some of these risks already exist. For several years, AI has been used to digitally insert unknowing women’s faces into porn videos. These deepfakes are sometimes targeted at celebrities and sometimes used to get revenge on private individuals.

It underscores that the risks of AI are not only in what the technology can do, but also in how we as a society respond to these tools.

“One of my biggest frustrations, shouting from the mountaintops in my area, is that a lot of the problems we see with AI aren’t technical problems,” Solaiman said.

Technical solutions are struggling to keep up

There is no silver bullet to distinguish AI-generated content from human-made content.

There are technical solutions such as software that can recognize AI outputs and AI tools that watermark the images or text they produce.

Another approach uses the clumsy name Content Provenance. The aim is to make it clear where digital media – real and synthetic – come from.

The goal is to let people easily “identify what type of content it is,” said Jeff McGregor, CEO of Truepic, a company that works on digital content verification. “Was it made by a human? Was it made by a computer? When was it made? Where was it made?”

But all of these technical answers have flaws. There is still no universal standard for identifying real or fake content. Detectors don’t capture everything and need to be constantly updated as AI technology advances. Open source AI models must not contain watermarks.

Laws, regulations, media competence

For this reason, those working on AI policy and security say a mix of responses is needed.

Laws and regulations need to play a role in at least some of the highest-risk areas, said Matthew Ferraro, an attorney at WilmerHale and an expert on legal issues surrounding AI.

“It’s likely to be non-consensual deepfake pornography, or deepfakes of election candidates or campaign workers in very specific contexts,” he said.

Ten states already ban some types of deepfakes, mostly pornography. Texas and California have laws banning deepfakes targeting candidates for office.

Copyright is also an option in some cases. This is what Drake and The Weeknd’s label, Universal Music Group, has invoked to get the song, which embodies their voices, from streaming platforms.

When it comes to regulation, the Biden administration and Congress have signaled their intention to do something. But as with other technology policy issues, the European Union is leading the way with the forthcoming AI law, a set of rules intended to set guidelines for the use of AI.

However, technology companies are already making their AI tools available to billions of people and integrating them into apps and software that many of us use every day.

That means, for better or worse, sorting fact from AI fiction requires people to be more savvy media consumers, although it doesn’t mean reinventing the wheel. Propaganda, medical misinformation, and false claims about elections are problems that predated AI.

“We should look at the various ways to mitigate these risks that we already have and think about how we can adapt them to AI,” said Arvind Narayanan, a computer science professor at Princeton University.

This includes efforts like fact-checking and asking whether what you’re seeing can be corroborated in what Solaiman calls “people literacy.”

“Just be skeptical, review anything that might have a major impact on your life or democratic processes,” she said.

The post AI-generated deepfakes are transferring sooner than coverage can : NPR appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

In 2000, the San Francisco Health Commission made harm reduction — a philosophy that advocates for making it safer to use drugs rather than criminalizing those who do — an official public health policy. It’s an approach with roots spanning from the Summer of Love in 1967, to the beginning of the AIDS pandemic in the 1980s, to the present-day fight to open sites in San Francisco for people to use drugs safely.

Vitka Eisen, president and CEO of HealthRIGHT 360, poses for a portrait at the medical clinic in San Francisco on March 9, 2022. HealthRIGHT 360 is a health care provider for lower-income and otherwise marginalized Californians. (Beth LaBerge/KQED)

Inside a ‘hippie’ clinic, health care was a right

The Haight Ashbury Free Medical Clinic opened its doors in 1967, committed to an ethos where health care was a right, not a privilege. Tens of thousands of flower children and teenage runaways were flocking to San Francisco to “drop out” of everyday society and experiment with drugs, sex and rock ‘n’ roll.

The clinic offered people who used drugs health care at a time when the city’s health department worried compassion would encourage the hippies to stay. It provided a safe space for people dealing with bad trips and heroin withdrawal and, later, for veterans returning from Vietnam with post-traumatic stress disorder.

Founder Dr. David Smith said it was illegal for physicians to treat people with substance use disorder with prescription drugs in the 1960s. Clinic volunteers were so worried police would shut the clinic down if people used drugs inside that the door was painted to read: “No dealing!/No holding drugs/No using drugs/No alcohol/No pets/Any of these can close the clinic/We Love You.”

When the Summer of Love ended, many people went home, but generations of people searching for meaning stayed behind in San Francisco, where the hard drugs moved in and people’s health care needs overwhelmed the clinic.

This painted door marked the entrance to the Haight Ashbury Free Medical Clinic. (Courtesy of David Smith archives)

“More than three years of life in the Haight, once the flower pot of America, now shattered into fragments of terror and despair, a ‘behavioral sink’ of pathologies feeding off the pill and the needle,” read a 1971 New York Times piece.

Still, the philosophy of the clinic — not only that health care is a right but also that addiction can be treated with medicine — persisted.

“It was harm reduction before there was such a term. It was never like, ‘When are you going to get your shit together?’ It was always, ‘Hey, can I see what’s going on?'” said Vitka Eisen, who was a patient at the Haight Ashbury Free Medical Clinic, as it was called in the 1980s.

The clinic smelled of patchouli, and a counselor walked around in a leather fringe jacket, Eisen recalled. She would go to the clinic before visiting her family in New York because she didn’t want to be strung out on heroin when she went to see them. She’d pick up a “kick pack” of medicine to fight stomach cramping and nausea, and to help her sleep during withdrawal.

“After the seventh or eighth time, I was like, ‘I can’t do this anymore,’” she said.

She got treatment at Walden House, an addiction and mental health treatment program in San Francisco, and said she never used drugs again. Now she runs the treatment provider HealthRIGHT 360, the umbrella organization that includes what is known today as the Haight Ashbury Free Clinics.

‘Carrying bleach was like having aspirin’

The philosophy of harm reduction spread internationally when activists and caregivers sought ways to reduce suffering and health risks during the AIDS crisis in the ’80s. Volunteers handed out clean needles and encouraged cleaning needles with bleach.

Maia Szalavitz, the author of “Undoing Drugs: The Untold Story of Harm Reduction and the Future of Addiction,” says she was addicted to cocaine and heroin at the time. She was unaware that sharing needles put her at risk of contracting HIV until 1986, when she met Maureen Gammon, a volunteer with the San Francisco-based group Mid-City Consortium to Combat AIDS.

Maia Szalavitz, author of ‘Undoing Drugs: The Untold Story of Harm Reduction and the Future of Addiction,’ in the 1980s. (Courtesy of Maia Szalavitz)

“She told me I shouldn’t share, but if you have to share, clean the needle with bleach and then with water,” Szalavitz said. “Shooting up is a pretty compulsive thing, so I immediately incorporated this into my compulsive routine and she probably saved my life.”

Gammon said carrying bleach was as common as having aspirin.

“People just had [bleach], and it was not unusual to go into a corner store or taqueria or bar and ask for a bottle of beach and be able to get it,” Gammon said.

Inside the Ambassador Hotel

The AIDS crisis also forged a new generation of physicians, said Joshua Bamberger, an associate clinical professor of family and community medicine at UCSF.

He began his residency at San Francisco General Hospital in 1989, and said all his energy and focus went into caring for men who were dying of AIDS.

“Much of my work was really holding men in my arms as they died,” he said. “And as awful as that was, it also created an era of physicians and other healers who bonded over the important things in medicine, which isn’t necessarily slinging medication but providing love and care for people who are really suffering.”

Some hospices refused to take in people who had a history of drug use, or had clauses saying they’d only accept people on the condition they’d been sober for six months before being referred. But the people who needed to be referred often had two or three months left to live.

So, many people found refuge at the Ambassador Hotel, an SRO in the Tenderloin run by gay rights activist Hank Wilson beginning in 1978. It became one of the few places where AIDS patients who used drugs could live without having to die on the streets. In the 1996 documentary “Life and Death at the Ambassador Hotel,” the site is described as a model in harm-reduction housing.

“The Ambassador was sort of a de facto AIDS hospital,” said Bamberger, who did rounds there, providing care alongside community members and friends of those dying. “When treatment options were limited, and [people] didn’t have a home, the Ambassador was a place where they could land.”

Val Robb, a nurse at the Ambassador Hotel, said she had to learn the culture of the people who stayed there. Many people who used drugs were distrustful of a health care system that considered them not worth treating.

“I started speaking the language more, which is, ‘Let me work out a deal. You need me to do this. I want you to do that,'” Robb said. “I need you to go to the doctor. If you go to the doctor, if you let them examine you, then let’s get you some codeine. It wasn’t like, ‘I’m Nurse Nancy doing this thing for you.'”

There were times Robb had to go against what she knew about health, such as offering guests cigarettes if they would let her examine them. But she said she still had to draw the line.

“Another guy, he says, ‘Val, I’m trying to get high, and my partner couldn’t hit the vein. Can’t you?’ I said, ‘No, I’m a nurse with kids and a license, I can’t do that,'” she recalled.

It took years before the city approved or funded some of the harm-reduction practices happening underground. The AIDS crisis hit its peak in San Francisco in 1992, and the following year Mayor Frank Jordan declared a state of emergency and announced that San Francisco would back a program to give clean needles to people who used drugs.

‘Call it Lazarus in a hypodermic’

Meanwhile, naloxone, the medication used to reverse overdoses, was still only widely available in medical settings. Rachel McLean, the outreach worker, said she and others attended a conference on drug policy reform in 1999 where an Italian man gave a presentation on naloxone.

“None of us could even understand what he was saying because his accent was so strong. But we understood that he said that in Italy, community health workers give out naloxone on the street,” she said. “And all of us, our minds were just blown by that.”

At the conference, Dan Bigg with the Chicago Recovery Alliance brought a duffle bag full of naloxone.

“And people would just come and take it, and that’s how underground naloxone started in San Francisco,” McLean said.

Naloxone education material used in San Francisco from the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. (Courtesy of Joshua Bamberger)

“It’s a mission that’s part Che Guevara, part Mother Teresa. The guerrillas aren’t doctors. Nonphysicians, obviously, are barred by law from handing out prescription drugs — it’s a felony that can carry up to 10 years in federal prison,” reads a 2003 article from A.C. Thompson in The San Francisco Bay Guardian on a visit to a San Francisco needle exchange site where volunteers were distributing naloxone. 

Critics said providing people who used drugs with naloxone, more commonly known by the brand name Narcan, would encourage drug use. Clinicians worried about liability if people had an adverse reaction to the naloxone, or if they died even after naloxone was used.

While studying at San Francisco State University in the same year as the conference on drug policy reform, McLean was assigned to write a paper analyzing a public health problem. She drafted some ideas based on the knowledge she had absorbed from the community, and proposed opening safe injection rooms, testing drug supplies and training people who inject drugs in administering naloxone.

Rachel McLean looks through her archive of flyers, zines, educational information, and research on harm reduction at her home on March 10, 2022. A photo of friend and colleague Pete Morse can be seen, as can a zine about Matty Luv, singer of the San Francisco punk band Hickey, who passed away from a heroin overdose in 2002. (Beth LaBerge/KQED)

Soon after turning in her paper, McLean graduated from college, quit her job as an outreach worker and went to Mexico for six months, burned out by the trauma. But she would sometimes wake up at night to scribble notes about what an overdose prevention program would look like.

“The fire was still there,” she said.

Members of a so-called “heroin subcommittee” created by the city to address overdose deaths ended up calling McLean. They had read her paper, and asked McLean if she would implement some of her ideas.

With a $30,000 annual budget, the Drug Overdose Prevention and Education (DOPE) Project began in a makeshift office in McLean’s kitchen in 2002. She started making phone calls to overdose prevention workers, and put together a curriculum to teach drug and alcohol treatment providers, sheriffs and deputies, the probation department, homeless shelter staff, and others how to reverse overdoses through rescue breathing. Without naloxone widely available, rescue breathing was something anyone could do to reverse overdoses, with some training.

Heroin overdose deaths plummet

Alex Kral, then a researcher with the Urban Health Study at UCSF, conducted a pilot study with other researchers in 2001 to 2002, training 24 people to use naloxone. There were 20 overdoses during the study. Trainees reversed all of them, 15 with naloxone, and most of those with an additional rescue method. The researchers presented the findings to the county’s public health director.

“We said, ‘Look … you’ve got people dying of overdoses and you’re not able to do anything about that,'” said Kral, who is now an epidemiologist with the nonprofit health research institute RTI International. “‘Why don’t you do something about it?’ And [the director] said, ‘Yeah, let’s do it.'”

One year later, the San Francisco Department of Public Health partnered with the DOPE Project to distribute naloxone at syringe-exchange programs, SROs, reentry programs and other sites in the community.

Joshua Bamberger, who oversaw the program with San Francisco’s DPH, said heroin overdose deaths dropped “unbelievably down,” plummeting from a peak of 155 in 1995 to 10 in 2010.

An altar includes a candle from a memorial for Pete Morse on the mantel of Rachel McLean’s home on March 10, 2022. (Beth LaBerge/KQED)

“Nothing’s gonna reduce death to the extent that getting 10,000 doses of naloxone out there in San Francisco in the early 2000s will ever do,” Bamberger said.

McLean, who now works for the state health department, still keeps a picture on her mantel of Pete Morse, who was at the forefront of bringing naloxone to the streets of San Francisco. He died of a drug overdose in 2007.

“I think about him all the time. I want to make sure that his contributions are remembered,” McLean said. “I don’t want to say that it broke my heart the most because I don’t want to compare it to all of the other deaths, but it’s still with me.”

The fentanyl overdose crisis

Naloxone has become a key tool in reducing overdose deaths nationwide. For years, it helped stave off the worst of the opioid crisis in San Francisco. But geography also helped for a time. On the West Coast, black tar heroin was the most common type of heroin, and that black color made it more difficult to hide white-powdered fentanyl inside.

Still, the number of people who injected drugs in San Francisco — mostly heroin — more than doubled early in this century, from 10,158 in 2005 to 22,000 in 2012.

By 2017, fentanyl had crept in to begin its rampage. That year, the city reported 36 deaths linked to fentanyl. That jumped to 90 in 2018. In 2020, the number of fentanyl-related deaths skyrocketed to 518.

An estimated 650 people overdosed and died in San Francisco last year, a spike driven by fentanyl, according to data from the San Francisco Medical Examiner’s Office.

Data on fentanyl-related and non-fentanyl-related overdose deaths from the San Francisco Department of Public Health and San Francisco Medical Examiner’s Office. (Chart by Matthew Green/KQED)

“I lost so many people to just fentanyl,” said Joel Webber, who goes by Turtle. He sat on a curb recently near Hotel Whitcomb, a city-run hotel on Market Street. People regularly gather nearby to use or sell drugs.

Webber said he received methadone treatment for 22 years, then started using fentanyl when he stopped his methadone treatment.

“If I could, I would blow up every f—ing fentanyl lab up with a button and end it. I’d get sick, but I’ll take it,” Webber said. “I just want it gone.”

Drugs like fentanyl are unlikely to disappear, and that means the city will need to try new strategies to prevent overdoses. A river of naloxone is not enough to confront the crisis, said Keith Humphreys, an addiction researcher at Stanford University School of Medicine.

One dose of naloxone often is not enough to reverse a fentanyl overdose.

“Maybe we can’t make fentanyl use safe,” he said. “Let’s say you make it twice as safe. It’s still just so deadly it just overwhelms the capacity of what we know how to do.”

Community and trauma in harm-reduction work

In 2021, President Joe Biden became the first president to make expanding harm reduction one of his drug-policy priorities. But people still argue that harm reduction encourages drug use. Several city leaders in San Francisco have criticized an overreliance on harm-reduction services and a lack of abstinence-based treatment options.

Kristen Marshall and the Dope Project team pose for a portrait during Overdose Awareness Day in 2020. The event gathers providers and community members to hold space for those lost and celebrate people still with them. (Courtesy of Kristen Marshall)

Kristen Marshall was the program manager for the DOPE Project until last winter.

“When you do this work, it’s your life, even if you try to fight it. It’s a lot of grief, it’s a lot of pain, it’s a lot of trauma. And that breaks a person down,” she said. “It feels really hard for me as someone who is in this position when suddenly people are like, ‘Well, this is your job. If overdose prevention is your job, what do you do? Harm reduction must not work.'”

Still, because of the vast supply of naloxone in the community, people are reversing more drug overdoses, many fentanyl-related, in San Francisco than ever before. The DOPE Project reported 81 overdose reversals in 2006. In the year 2021 alone, the group reported 8,985 reversals. Many of those overdoses were reversed by people who use drugs. In comparison, San Francisco police, who by then were carrying naloxone, reversed 144 overdoses in 2021.

Reporting data from the Drug Overdose Prevention and Education Project, as documented in a San Francisco Department of Public Health report. (Chart by Matthew Green/KQED)

Marshall said the larger question she keeps asking herself is what happens after overdoses are reversed.

“So they go to treatment, then what? Where’s their housing? So they go right back outside,” she said.

She believes overdose prevention efforts will inevitably fall short until root causes such as poverty, racism and isolation are addressed.

“We’re giving people Narcan and saying, ‘Live, live, live, live — you have to live,’” she said. “The question that I want to ask everyone is, ‘What are we living for? What is there for people to grasp?’”

The post From the Underground to Public Well being Coverage: A Historical past of Hurt Discount in San Francisco appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

San Francisco’s omicron surge is ending.

COVID-19 counts are falling off rapidly, and while hospitalization numbers have yet to see a decline, intensive care unit numbers appear to have peaked.

City officials said that the number of cases peaked on Jan. 8, a trend that follows other Bay Area counties. Hospitalization totals typically lag cases by a week or two, so a decline there can be expected in the coming days.

Even though raw hospitalization numbers exceed last winter’s surge, experts say those figures exaggerate the severity of the current wave, as they include both those who were hospitalized for COVID-19 and those who were hospitalized for other issues and then tested positive for COVID-19 , but might have only mild or no symptoms.

Some health officials say that ICU figures are a better representation of the true burden on hospitals, and the most recent data suggests the city has seen its peak at a level similar to last summer’s delta variant-driven wave but well below last winter’s wave.

With the surge ending, San Francisco officials have started to signal a policy shift going forward.

“Our goal is no longer to prevent every case of COVID,” San Francisco Department of Public Health Director Dr. Grant Colfax said in a statement Jan 20. “Instead, our goal is to prevent the worst outcomes of the disease, such as hospitalizations and deaths, and to do this while keeping essential services open, like schools and hospitals.”

“We know how to protect ourselves: vaccines, booster shots, testing, and soon we expect more widely available therapeutics,” tweeted Mayor London Breed on Jan. 20. “As we adapt to living with COVID, these tools will continue to be critical to keeping our city and our economy running, and our residents safe.”

Interestingly, Breed’s list of “tools” did not include masks.

The state of California is enforcing an indoor mask mandate that will run through at least Feb. 15, and under California law, all counties must abide by the more restrictive state order. When the state order is lifted, San Francisco is one of several Bay Area counties that have a set of shared criteria for lifting the mask mandate.

At least one of those counties — Marin — plans to break ranks and scrap the case rate criterion once the state order is lifted.

“We’d be looking at hospitalizations as our primary indicator, and importantly, hospitalizations ‘for COVID,’ where it’s directly attributable to the virus,” Marin County Health Officer Dr. Matt Willis told SFGATE.

It is unclear whether San Francisco and other Bay Area counties plan to continue to abide by the case requirement.

Other policies, such as school mask mandates and quarantines, are set by the California Department of Public Health and would have to be softened at the state level before they can be softened locally.

The post Omicron is fading in San Francisco; metropolis mulls coverage pivot appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

Amazon’s signature smiley blue logos are spreading across southeast San Francisco’s industrial landscape. And not everyone is happy about it.

The second most valuable company in the world, Amazon has been gobbling up space throughout the southeast corner of the city, taking advantage of zoning meant to preserve blue-collar jobs in a market in which housing and office space has typically generated higher revenues.

At 888 Minnesota St., at the foot of a slow street and across from Esprit Park, Amazon has established an UltraFastFresh logistics center. A half-mile southeast at 435 23rd St., just to the south of the Potrero Power Station, a large sign outside a 75,000 square foot warehouse says “welcome Amazonians.” And further to the south, at 749 Toland St., Amazon has a 112,000 square foot delivery hub.

But Amazon’s biggest and most controversial incursion into San Francisco is a proposed 725,000 square foot delivery hub at 900 7th St., a six-acre rectangular parcel in Showplace Square Amazon bought for $200 million. For decades that site was home to garbage trucks, a fleet of 300 that each morning would rumble out onto the streets of Showplace Square at an hour the streets were still dark and most city residents still in bed.

Now the trash trucks are gone — the garbage company Recology relocated them to Brisbane — but a proposal from the new property owner is causing consternation from neighbors who say that a heavy industrial use no longer fits in a creative neighborhood that has evolved into a mix of housing, design and artist spaces, light “advanced” manufacturing and an expanding California College of the Arts campus.

Amazon plans to expand into San Francisco by turning this location at 900 7th St., and others, into facilities for the company.

Samantha Laurey/The Chronicle

David Meckel, senior adviser to the president at CCA, said three daily shifts of 400 workers would generate 2,800 car trips, in addition to the 70 Amazon trucks that will be coming and going from the facility. The traffic could create a pedestrian nightmare for CCA’s 1,600 students as well as for residents at 888 7th St, a 224-unit that overlooks the future Amazon site.

“To me it’s not about Amazon, it’s about the intensity of the use,” said Meckel. “I’d have the same concerns if it were FedEx or UPS. For me it’s about urban design.”

Will Roscoe, who lives at 888 7th St., said the pollution and traffic would worsen air quality in a neighborhood in which freeways and Caltrain already generate high levels of particulate matter. About a decade ago, Roscoe, who works for a nonprofit, was evicted from a building in the Western Addition. He feels like the Amazon project will once again force him to move.

“Hundreds of people now have come in to make this their neighborhood and this just really turns the clock back to a massive usage that is antithetical to a livable neighborhood for people with children, seniors,” he said. “It’s contrary to that.”

But while a busy distribution center may feel out of sync with Showplace Square’s current vibe, it is in fact just what city zoning calls for. And Recology only decided to sell the site after neighbors had rejected an earlier 2018 plan to build about 1,000 units of housing there.

At a pre-application meeting at the site on June 27, 2019, a packed room of Dogpatch and Potrero Hill residents lambasted the idea of ​​building housing on the site. One called it a “a land grab and giveaway to developers.” Another resident said San Francisco suffered from a “PDR crisis” — PDR stands for production, distribution and repair — and that the property should remain zoned for industrial uses. One attendee called it “a bad project,” while another argued that “housing is not needed in the neighborhood.”

If the vocal opposition was intended to give Recology cold feet, it worked. Recology first cut the number of proposed units in half. Then, facing an uphill approval process that was likely to drag on three or four years, not including delays from environmental lawsuits common in San Francisco, the rubbish company gave up and sold the six-acre site to Amazon.

“We received an offer and determined it was in Recology’s interest to accept it,” said Eric Potashner, the Vice President & Senior Director of Strategic Affairs at Recology.

While the housing plan would have required a series of zoning changes and conditional use authorizations, Amazon’s proposed 57-foot high warehouse is consistent with the Eastern Neighborhoods land use plan adopted in December of 2008 after a decade of debate. The site is part of a block of parcels roughly bounded by 7th Street, Division Street, Potrero Avenue and 16th Street, that were zoned for industrial uses.

Ken Rich, who was project manager at the Planning Department for the Eastern Neighborhoods rezoning, said the city tried to strike a balance between protecting industrial jobs and creating room for new housing. The plan has generated thousands of new housing units in Dogpatch and Potrero Hill. It has also prompted property owners at sites like 1 DeHaro, 100 Hooper and 150 Hooper to build PDR spaces for advanced manufacturing.

The Eastern Neighborhood Plans goal of protecting light industrial jobs on a swath of land that would otherwise have been gobbled up by tech office and housing developers has done what it was intended to do, according to Anne Taupier, director of development at the Mayor’s Office of Economic and workforce development.

“A clear set of rules to play by were established and it really hasn’t changed since then,” said Taupier. “We think it has worked and is continuing to work.”

The opposition to Amazon’s 7th Street plan is motivated not just by land use issues but by the company’s track record of crushing unionization efforts and reputation for grueling work conditions, according to JR Eppler, a board member with Potrero Boosters.

Eppler said that neighbors around 888 Minnesota St. have had success over the last year working with Amazon on issues like traffic, parking and security. Friends of Jackson Park is in talks with Amazon about the company possibly contributing funding to badly needed improvements. But the labor issues are harder to negotiate, he said.

In a recent SF Standard article two San Francisco Board of Supervisor members, Aaron Peskin and Shamann Walton, suggested that the city had been overly receptive to Amazon’s project and less than upfront with residents and other stakeholders about the project.

Taupier said Amazon is at the very beginning of its approval process and there would be ample time for residents and elected officials to shape the project.

“We are going to have conversations with Amazon about supporting our local small businesses, including our brick and mortar retail businesses,” said Taupier. “We will make sure they understand that San Francisco has expectations that if you are going to do business here you are going to be part of the community.”

In the meantime the empty rectangular lot feels like an island in a neighborhood that has moved on. To the north is the condo building at 888 7th St., which houses many senior Chinese immigrants. To the south on Hooper Street is headquarters for Adobe and a new SFMade building that houses a roster of manufacturing businesses including robotics groups, a distillery and a fabricator of everything from drapes to bags to hydrogen tanks for the automobile and industrial markets.

Scott Mason, a San Francisco commercial real estate broker who specializes in industrial properties, said Amazon is among a select group of well-funded users who qualify for PDR sites but have far deeper pockets than the typical family run auto body or plumbing supply company. He said mom and pop PDR companies needed to make a city like San Francisco function can not compete in a market dominated by Amazon.

“Your every day smaller company in San Francisco is having a tough time,” he said. “The venture-backed tech-driven company can pay more per square foot because they are not working off a regular balance sheet.”

Stephen Maduli-Williams, Amazon’s manager of economic development policy, said construction at the old Recolgy site would not start for 18 to 24 months. He said there would be retail at the site and Amazon would work with local residents and businesses to determine what sort of goods might be sold. He said the company is looking into how Amazon could support Jackson Park.

“We intend to use this time to listen to and engage all of our neighbors and stakeholders, with the goal of reaching a shared vision not only for the project, but to also create long lasting partnerships” he said.

For Dogpatch and Potrero residents there is an increasing sense that Amazon “has the neighborhoods surrounded,” said Eppler. Roscoe said he is concerned that some neighborhood groups will successfully squeeze Amazon to fund various needs, leaving residents to live with the trucks with the blue smiles coming and going.

“Nobody speaks for our building,” said Roscoe. “We don’t want it. Nobody I’ve talked to is like, ‘Oh yes, good idea.’ The others in the coalition are going for community benefits — but what community benefits could they give us? Free gas masks? Lifetime cancer screening? The benefit we need is to not be subjected to traffic and pollution.”

JK Dineen is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: jdineen@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @sfjkdineen

The post Amazon is exploiting San Francisco’s zoning coverage to plot an enormous enlargement within the metropolis. Some locals aren’t blissful appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

After running the pioneering office of transgender initiatives in San Francisco for four years, Clair Farley announced her departure on Thursday as the first and only head of the city’s transgender department.

Farley and the office she ran both made history.

The office is the first and only city council of its kind in the U.S. and has led several key equality initiatives and programs for transgender, non-binary, and LGBTQ residents, including those focused on housing and guaranteed income, the city divided in a press release with.

Farley described her time as executive director of the office in a statement as “the honor of a lifetime” and told The Chronicle that her mission will continue as she steps down to focus on new opportunities and her health.

“It is so important that we continue to sit at the table to make sure the needs of our communities are met and to build trust with the local government so that we can continue to be a model city for the rest of the country,” she said Thursday in an interview.

Farley was first hired in November 2017 by former Mayor Ed Lee, who hired prominent transgender rights advocate to succeed retired Theresa Sparks as senior advisor on transgender initiatives.

More from Shwanika Narayan

As director of the Transgender Initiatives Bureau, Farley is credited with increasing funding for critical transgender and LGBTQ community services ranging from housing to health care, arts and culture to violence prevention and economic development leadership.

She formed the city’s transgender advisory committee, which focuses on addressing the priorities of the local trans community. Last year her office launched Our Trans Home SF, the nation’s first residential and rental subsidy program for transgender adults. The residential program now includes a three-story apartment building with 14 residential units with a shared kitchen and common areas.

That year, Farley secured a $ 2 million grant and used it to launch the country’s first guaranteed income program for low-income transgender people, which is expected to attract up to 150 people with monthly payments of up to US $ 1,000. US dollars when it starts in early 2022.

In a press release announcing Farley’s departure, Mayor London Breed praised her work for keeping the city “at the forefront of expanding LGBTQ rights and policies,” while Supervisor Rafael Mandelman, who represents Castro District, Farley described San Franciscans as “a fantastic advocate for transgender and non-binary people.”

Pau Crego, who served as Farley’s assistant director, will lead the office while the city searches for a permanent replacement.

Prior to running the Transgender Initiatives Bureau, Farley worked at the SF LGBT Community Center for more than a decade. Her work there included promoting economic development programs with a focus on employment, housing, small businesses and financial strengthening of the LGBTQ community.

Farley told The Chronicle that her next chapter will include reshaping national policies on transgender issues and providing advice on trans inclusion in the media and private sector. She said her personal experiences with chronic health problems “made worse by the pandemic” inspired her to campaign for safe, inclusive and affordable health care across the country.

“The pandemic has reminded us of the importance of health care and community access,” Farley said.

Breed signaled that Farley’s life’s work would continue to benefit the city.

“Clair Farley was and will continue to be a passionate advocate of the San Franciscans of all backgrounds and our transgender residents in particular,” Breed said in her statement.

Shwanika Narayan is a contributor to the San Francisco Chronicle. Email: shwanika.narayan@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @shwanika Instagram: @shwanika

The post San Francisco’s first transgender division head departs, will look to tell nationwide coverage appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

Why is homelessness increasing in California but decreasing in every other state in the country? California is home to more than 151,000 people who are now homeless across the state – a 31% increase from 2015 – according to the Independent Institute, a public research and education organization.

The flagship of homelessness in California is the San Francisco Bay Area, where housing and homeless crises will not be resolved until policymakers and service providers stop relying on conventional approaches that don’t work, says the Independent Institute.

“The cause of this tragic surge is mainly due to failing state and local government policies fueled homelessness, ”says the Independent Institute. “That includes channeling funding almost entirely to Housing First, a unified approach to homelessness. Applying this approach to every homeless person in California would be prohibitive ($ 75 billion) and studies show Housing First does not reduce homelessness. Meanwhile, an immense government regulation regime for housing is preventing and hampering the construction of any housing, which is fueling the affordable housing crisis. “

Homelessness increased in CA while it decreased in all other states. (Map: www.beyondhomeless.org/our-work/

“Homelessness across the country decreased from 647,000 in 2007 to about 568,000 in 2019 (a decrease of more than 12%), and in California it continued to increase, from about 139,000 to over 151,000 in the same period (an increase of almost 9 percent), “the institute’s Beyond Homeless reports.

And the San Francisco Bay Area is Ground Zero:

“In San Francisco, homelessness has increased 17% since 2017 (31% if you use a broader definition that includes those in prisons, hospitals, and inpatient treatment centers). During that time, homelessness rose 40% in San Jose and 47% in Oakland. “

However, the Independent Institute doesn’t just point the finger – it proposes well-researched solutions in a new report. The institute thoroughly analyzes the causes of homelessness, criticizes current homelessness and housing policy and gives realistic recommendations for solving the housing and homeless crisis.

Beyond Homeless: Good Intentions, Bad Outcomes, Transformative Solutions, by Mary LG Theroux, Adam B. Summers, Lawrence J. McQuillan, Jonathan Hofer, Hovannes Abramyan, and Scott Beyer, examines housing policy and concludes that California’s housing crisis will be resolved must, not just for the homeless, but for all Californians. The report also shows that significant progress can be made in eradicating homelessness before housing expansion.

The Globe spoke to Mary Theroux, co-author of the report and director of the Beyond Homeless initiative. Theroux has also been a member of the Board of Directors of the Salvation Army for many years, which advocates the services of addicts, those in need and many others.

Theroux said the report doesn’t expect the government to fix homelessness or provide funding, but it does require government approval for redevelopment projects aimed at affordable housing.

“Homelessness is complicated, and the causes are unique to each individual,” said Theroux. “So a one-size-fits-all approach will never be effective. But this is how homelessness will continue to be addressed. “

The report found:

• The most common self-reported cause of homelessness was job loss (26 percent)
• Alcohol or drug use was the second most common reason (18 percent)
• Eviction (13 percent)
• Thrown out after an argument with family or friends (12 percent).

This is no surprise in San Francisco, California, one of the most expensive housing markets in the country.

The report takes up the flawed “Housing First” policy of the Obama administration. “By dictating Housing First as the universal solution to homelessness, government agencies have effectively cut public funding for programs with alternative approaches. This has been particularly punishing for the type of longer term support programs that have been shown to help the homeless reach their full potential. “

State and local governments are failing to adequately address the homelessness crisis by simply allocating more and more funds to it. “Governments across California are spending record amounts of taxpayers’ money on homelessness, but the problem continues to grow. This suggests that the failure to adequately tackle homelessness is not due to a lack of government programs or insufficient taxpayers’ money, but rather to poorly designed strategies and programs with the wrong priorities. “

“In San Francisco alone, the city spent $ 365 million on homelessness in fiscal year 2019-20, an 84 percent increase over the past six years. With the addition of funding from state and state governments, along with contributions from private corporations, foundations, and the approximately 100 Bay Area nonprofits that provide services to the homeless, the total comes closer to $ 1 billion a year. “San Francisco has 873,965 inhabitants.

The Independent Institute highlights successful programs that get the homeless off the streets, provide comprehensive services and treatments, and help bring many back into a productive society.

Recommendations include:

• Abolition of prevailing wage laws that increase average construction costs for affordable housing projects by 10 to 25 percent – and increase total project costs by up to 46 percent;
• Optimize or Eliminate CEQA;
• Revision of the laws on the preservation of monuments;
• Minimize development impact fees;
• Easing zoning restrictions, removing limits to urban growth and improving property rights;
• Eliminate the requirements for inclusion zones (affordable housing) and rental controls.

You can read the report on Beyond Homeless.

The Independent Institute also has an accompanying documentary, Beyond Homeless: Finding Hope, which will be released in early 2022.

The post New Report on San Francisco Homelessness Supplies Actual Coverage Options appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

Courtesy Libby Modern ’95

“I’m interested in how these projects turn into small experiments,” says Modern

Libby Modern ’95 wanted to know what their neighbors would need to ditch their phones for the weekend. In 2017, she took an old library card catalog to her art studio in Lancaster, Pennsylvania and painted it mint green. Every drawer – or every tiny telephone hotel room – had a number that corresponded to a pink hotel keychain on the wall. Nearby were brochures offering advice on how to survive the weekend off-grid and buttons that read “Please be patient” that your neighbors can wear if they look lost without Google Maps. She called the project “Phonotel”.

Some people really wanted to give up their phones. Others, she says, “would have this laundry list of reasons why they couldn’t.” But eventually most of them gave in. They were surprised by the experience. “It was about addressing the problem of how we’re increasingly on our screens and can’t really exist without them,” says Modern. “How do we get people to understand this? How do we get them to realize that they are only following these rules? ”

Modernity’s answer to such questions is almost always art. The Princeton history graduate worked for a graphic design firm in San Francisco before opening her own design studio for environmental and social justice companies. She began the community engagement work that now defines the installations that were born in her Lancaster studio, which she called Modern Art.

Read more about Tiger of the Week

“I’m interested in how these projects become small experiments,” she says, “then (there) there will be a direct passage to a certain policy.”

Her latest project, slated for autumn, involves redesigning the town hall meeting. Does the local government listen to its residents? Do residents pay attention to officials? Modern formed a group of local artists and other creative types to attend city council meetings and translate them into paintings and performances for the community. It’s an experiment that is about “having a meeting instead of just sitting there,” she said. “This starts a conversation to figure out how we’re going to think about moving these meetings to another form that is more productive.”

Modern was also behind an interactive installation for the local public library entitled “Don’t Forget How to Read”. Visitors were encouraged to bring a book to Modern’s curated reading corner, which is in the gallery’s window. In a quiet, subtle way, their project conveyed the library’s simple message: to showcase the joy of reading. Soon after, a number of stores across Lancaster jumped in and offered to swap their mannequins for an armchair and reading lamp.

By the fall, Modern plans to unveil their latest solo project, a collection of paintings and videos depicting the fictional story of amphibious mathematicians finding a way to breathe underwater. Earlier this year, the city’s building committee asked if Modern could design 35 vinyl banners to cover the fences of a construction site in central Lancaster. they wanted to cover the eyesore with art. Modern returned to the committee with printing of the upcoming installation. Each panel, she said, displays a vignette from the story along with clues to help solve the mystery of a character’s disappearance.

“You can go by and get parts of the story,” she said. “People find it very confusing, but just the right amount of confusion. Confusion that leads to curiosity. “She hopes that this will give them more in return.

Below are images courtesy of Modern from “Let’s Suppose These Things Are Like the Truth: A Strange Account of the Meliflutions,” the site fence installation that tells the story of amphibious mathematicians.

The post Libby Fashionable ’95 Is Transferring Public Coverage With Artwork appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.