“So many of my friends told me I was crazy for moving to San Francisco — it’s unsafe, it’s filthy, it’s going down the tubes,” she said. “My experience has been the opposite. The beautiful neighborhoods, vibrancy and positivity — that message isn’t getting out there.”

Bobby Pierce and his wife, Leanne, are raising their toddler, August, in the Richmond District, a San Francisco neighborhood popular with families for its proximity to Golden Gate Park, Ocean Beach and eclectic shops. Mr. Pierce, who grew up in rural Ohio, said people there like to criticize San Francisco for its fentanyl deaths, homelessness and economic struggles, even though those problems exist everywhere, including Ohio.

“When I was growing up, the meme of San Francisco was that it was this ungodly gay place, and before that, it was hippies,” said Mr. Pierce, 36. “It’s never had a nationally savory reputation, I suppose, which is maybe what draws me to it.”

James Falino, 28, a consultant for environmental nonprofits, said he moved to San Francisco from New York five years ago for its relaxed vibe, proximity to nature and thriving L.G.B.T.Q. communities. But when he visited New York over the summer and the topic of San Francisco came up, he immediately felt defensive.

When people learned where he lives now, they responded with a facial expression that he described as “aghast.”

Then came a whispered, “Are you OK?”

“I am,” he assured them. Again and again.

The post San Francisco Residents Bored with Metropolis’s Damaging Status appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

Portland has had a rough couple of years, and as a result its national reputation has taken a beating. The New York Times is no longer offering up paeans, as it did in 2014, to Portland hipsters: “bearded, on skateboards, brewing kombucha.” This is now the “Anarchist Jurisdiction.”

And yet people are still moving to the Rose City.

Where are these fearless newcomers coming from? As in those bygone days when everything about Portland was cool and charming, they’re mostly decamping from larger, more expensive cities in other states or from smaller Oregon locales, the latter likely being driven by the traditional migration of young adults to the closest ” big city” to make their mark on the world.

Portland, with about 667,000 people, is the 26th largest city in the US, up from 29th in 2010.

To give some shape to this continuing, if diminished, upward population trend, the rankings website Stacker has used US Census Bureau data to estimate the number of people who’ve moved to Portland in the past handful of years. Below are the top 10 metro areas “sending the most people to Portland.”

10.San Jose, Calif.

Residents moved to Portland 2015-2019: 2,173

9. New York City

Residents moved to Portland 2015-2019: 2,250

8. Corvallis

Residents moved to Portland 2015-2019: 2,368

7.San Diego

Residents moved to Portland 2015-2019: 2,803

6.Phoenix

Residents moved to Portland 2015-2019: 2,939

5. Eugene

Residents moved to Portland 2015-2019: 3,130

4. San Francisco

Residents moved to Portland 2015-2019: 4,217

3.Los Angeles

Residents moved to Portland 2015-2019: 5,101

2.Seattle

Residents moved to Portland 2015-2019: 6,251

1. Salem

Residents moved to Portland 2015-2019: 6,969

–Douglas Perry

dperry@oregonian.com

@douglasmperry

The post Portland’s status has been dented, however Californians, downstate Oregonians nonetheless transferring to Rose Metropolis appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

San Francisco City Hall is working on several fronts to restore its moral character this week, nearly two years after a widespread corruption scandal broke out.

On Tuesday, the Board of Supervisors unanimously voted to restrict the way officials can solicit donations for their preferred causes – a mechanism that federal prosecutors say has been abused by the San Francisco Public Works Department, which is at the center of their ongoing investigation.

“We absolutely have to pass this law today,” said Supervisor Aaron Peskin at Tuesday’s meeting, speaking of what he called “embarrassing and shameful behavior.” Matt Haney, co-author of the law, said the bill seeks to “reform a comfort that creates a culture of corruption”.

The new legislation prohibits elected city officials and department heads from soliciting donations to charities from “interested parties”, including lobbyists, and those seeking contracts and permits from the city.

But that’s not the only attempt to contain the town hall’s pay-for-play culture. On Friday, the San Francisco Ethics Committee, a panel of appointed members that assesses the city’s conflicts of interest, is expected to discuss a voting measure to be presented to voters and general guidelines on bribery, gifts, ethics training, and other prohibited conduct.

Both Peskin and Haney, the supervisors who campaigned for the measure passed on Tuesday, cited the public works scandal as the motivation for the new law. In that federal case, three Recology subsidiaries admitted conspiring to bribe former works director Nuru in exchange for helping raise garbage taxes. The company and its subsidiaries have also agreed to pay hefty fines to both the federal government and the city. Nuru, who was arrested in January 2020 and remains at the center of the ongoing city hall corruption scandal, is still awaiting trial.

In another example, the city’s ethics committee referred to former supervisor and Mayor Mark Farrell, who facilitated a $ 882,500 donation to the Parks Alliance, a powerful nonprofit of which Farrell’s wife serves as the chairman of the board.

The commission found that a registered lobbyist contacted Farrell on behalf of telecommunications giant AT&T back in 2016, the same day Farrell was enacting tenants’ internet service laws. A month later, the lobbyist contacted Farrell about the regulation. The lobbyist’s company, which worked for AT&T, made a payment of $ 5,000 to the Parks Alliance at Farrell’s request, the commission found.

The Parks Alliance accepted anonymous donations of between $ 1.5 million and $ 3 million or more from 2016 to 2020, according to an analysis by the nonprofit earlier this month. Connie Chan, another supervisor who drafted the city law, passed Tuesday, requested the report from the Bureau of Budgetary and Legislative Analysis.

Anonymous donations allow a donor to win an official’s favor without the public knowing about it, Chan told The Examiner. A company or other powerful donor could then benefit from the official’s actions without sufficient transparency, Chan said.

Farrell, who left city government to work for a venture capital firm, didn’t respond to requests for comment.

The Parks Alliance said in a statement to The Examiner that it had taken a number of steps to increase accountability. “We look forward to working with The City on more sensible guidelines that will provide greater transparency and enable us to continue supporting and improving San Francisco’s parks and public spaces,” said the nonprofit.

When asked by The Examiner, AT&T said that the ethics committee’s report “draws conclusions and seeks to find links between unrelated events. We have not directed our advisors or anyone else to contribute on our behalf. “

San Francisco’s new law, aimed at reforming the practice of charitable giving at the request of a public official – known as “due payments” – marks an advance The City has failed to make for years. In 2018, the head of the ethics committee resigned in the middle of a meeting because he could not limit donations.

These types of donations have taken many forms over the years. Nuru and other public works allegedly requested solicited payments into various Parks Alliance accounts and then used the money for parties and other personal uses, federal prosecutors say.

And big tech companies and investors have legally donated millions to Mayor London Breed’s most popular charities at their request. In December 2020, Airbnb founder Joe Gebbia donated $ 2.5 million at Breed’s behest to All Home, a nonprofit that campaigns against homelessness, according to an ethics committee report submitted by the mayor. In addition, Gebbia gave a total of 25 million US dollars to non-profit organizations that were fighting homelessness, as Breed announced in a press release. “I would like to thank Joe Gebbia for his incredibly generous support of these organizations,” said the mayor at the time.

The mayor said in a statement to The Examiner that she has worked with charities and philanthropists to promote causes such as housing and youth work. “The mayor reports to the ethics committee charitable funds, which ensure transparency by specifying the amount of the funds, the donor, the recipient organizations and the purpose of the funding.”

Gebbia and Airbnb have not commented on the donation. But Gebbia said at the time that he was “proud to support the work of Rising Up-Larkin Street Youth Services and All Home that are making the lives of so many people better”.

Some say the supervisory board vote will come on Tuesday after damage has already been done. “It’s a day late and a dollar short,” San Francisco ethics commissioner Larry Bush told The Examiner, noting that he was speaking for himself, not the commission. “Much of what happened to Mohammed Nuru could have been prevented.”

San Francisco isn’t the only one struggling to regulate ordered payments. California regulators in October approved new transparency requirements for solicited payments from unidentified donors – including $ 1 million paid on behalf of Governor Gavin Newsom last year, a Los Angeles Times investigation found.

And the ethics committee says the issue of ordered payments is only part of what town hall needs to address. On Friday, the commission plans to discuss a proposed voting measure in June that would regulate gifts to individuals and departments and outline general ethical guidelines.

Commission auditors said an example of what needs to be contained is the airport commission, which “allegedly accepted $ 1,018,000 in gifts from non-urban sources.” The commission found that 86 percent of that money came from airport operators or tenants. The largest donor, who provided $ 99,000, was a contractor who signed a $ 1.1 billion construction contract with the airport, the commission found.

The airport commission told The Examiner that it followed the city’s rules as the events were a fund set up by the board of directors known as the Airport Capital Improvement Promotion and Event Fund for such donations.

City hall insiders say the legislative and reform efforts are also aimed at sending a broader message. “We have to stop this culture of pay-to-play,” supervisor Connie Chan, a co-author of the city law passed Tuesday, told The Examiner.

Efforts expected Friday to put another ethics reform on the ballot could continue that mission, ethics commission officials said. “This reform package represents a holistic approach to improving the ethical culture of the city government. As we approach the biennial anniversary of the federal corruption allegations against Mohammed Nuru, this move is a way for the San Franciscans to make ethics a priority for The City and for The City to regain public confidence, “Patrick Ford, who is a senior policy and law advisor, told The Examiner.

The reform efforts spurred on this week have lasted for years and are aimed at repairing scars that have been placed on the town hall’s ethical reputation. Some saw it coming.

“I hope we have another opportunity to look back at this sometime in the future,” Charles Marsteller, former director of the Bay Area Chapter of Common Cause, a non-partisan, non-governmental, nonprofit told the Ethics Committee in 2018. ” It could come after a number of major corruption scandals. “

Shortly after these comments were made, former commission chairman Peter Keane announced disgusted with San Francisco’s failure to regulate the practice of solicitation.

jelder@sfexaminer.com

The post San Francisco’s Metropolis Corridor works to revive tarnished fame appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.