SF Politics and SF LifePosted by sasha at 27 Oct 2006 09:10 am
The coments thread on this post has made me wonder. Those of you who wish to elect Black because of dirty streets, what should Daly have done? I am having trouble understanding what Chris could have done to clean up the crap on Tehama Street, short of showing up with a shovel himself.
He’s not in charge of DPW, and lord knows he’s not in charge of the cops, so what should he be doing?
October 27th, 2006 at 9:59 am
Duh! If he were Bevan, he would have waded in there! Of course, he’d end up spending pretty much every day doing that, but you know, that’s why we have supervisors, right? To shovel garbage? Oh, right, legislation…you can leave that to Peskin.
It’s kinda crazy that SF is supposed to be such a “visionary city”, yet we can’t solve our own structural problems. That’s what our supervisors are supposed to do.
That’s why I support Daly, and why you should vote for Alix. They will actually work to solve the actual problems, rather than just applying band-aids.
October 27th, 2006 at 11:32 am
For starters he could have not blocked a ban on public defecation that would have required some case management and follow up for repeat quality of life offenders (Board of Supes 2002). He could have made sure that the incredible amount of public drug dealing that transpires on Sixth Street was made a priority for police and the DA so that wasted junkies were not so prevalent relieving on doorsteps because they were too stoned to make it to the public restrooms on the corner.
He could have recognized that packing all of the homeless shelters, SRO’s and “services” for the homeless into one neighborhood would require an increase in services from DPW and he could have lobbied and legislated to have that happen.
In fact he did none of these things. Instead he defends the “right” of people to pee and poop wherever they want, and has never met with the community to find solutions for what has become a major issue, in spite of multiple requests. He has formed an adversarial relationship with the mayor’s office, the police, DPW and Park and Recreation, the very departments that could help solve the problem, and he actively worked AGAINST a few different community efforts to form community benefits districts to take care of the problem. Why? Because he didn’t want these neighborhoods to become “gentrified”.
Perhaps a better question is “Why does Chris Daly think that in order to show he is a progressive he wants low income people to live in squalor?”
October 27th, 2006 at 12:03 pm
Have you asked your hero, Rob Black, as an aide to Supervisor Alioto-Pier, if he pressed and pressed *hard* to locate services and homes for the poor and homeless in Pacific Heights? If you haven’t, why not? It seems that is the crux of your despair, to get the less-well-off out of your neighborhood so you can enjoy the glory of gentrification, as you seem to beg for in your second-to-last paragraph.
I live in District 8 and walk down States Street to Muni Metro in the morning and on States Street there is dog shit every morning that I have to dodge. At night it isn’t so easy. Most people do clean up, but plenty don’t. Granted, it may not be as extensive as the shit you deal with, but I am not voting against Bevan Dufty because of shit. I am voting against him because he has been missing in action on the *major* issues that face this city. Are you really less concerned about the wave of evictions of the poor, elderly, disabled, and people with AIDS, who Bevan has ignored and Daly has championed? You can be sure Black will also ignore them as he is an assured vote in the pocket of the mayor and the real estate interests. Are you really so down on Daly, who does not have control over DPW while the mayor does, the very same mayor who endorsed Rob Black? It seems your assessment of the power of the supervisor of your district is off. You should be attacking Rob Black’s association with the mayor who has failed you by not cleaning up your street. What makes you think the lack of DPW services in your neighborhood isn’t part of the war being waged by the mayor, the Chronicle, and the massively funded PACs trying to get rid of Daly? Considering the tactics in this campaign, to me that is blatantly obvious. Why have you let yourself fall for it? Do you really think that having Rob Black as a supervisor, someone who has spent the last few years working for the benefit of the rich will all of a sudden care about the less well off?
October 27th, 2006 at 12:06 pm
Laura, you may personally mean what you say literally, but you must have noticed that in San Francisco, “pee and poo” rhetoric is a way of talking in code about purifying the city by cleansing it of poor people. It associates poor people with dirt in order to label both as ordure deserving to be washed away. It’s literally “eliminationist,” and it has extremely unpleasant historical resonances.
October 27th, 2006 at 12:30 pm
Hey Laura, your critique is still misdirected. Since Newsom is responsible for overseeing the city’s homeless and housing services, shouldn’t HE be the one you’re criticizing for not redirecting DPW’s attention, another department that is directly under HIM?
And the drug dealing that you’re suggesting Daly should have prioritized? Isn’t the police under Newsom’s purview?
Anti-Daly supporters critize him for getting on Newsom’s case, but are you actually saying Daly didn’t sufficiently get in Newsom’s face about these things?
October 27th, 2006 at 1:19 pm
Wow you guys are amazing. I have never said anything about eliminating ANYONE, or even desiring gentrification. All I said is that I wanted it to be clean and safe, and I don’t equate that with gentrification. I think poor people deserve clean safe streets too. Perhaps more than anyone else. And, yes, poo means poo.
In fact Mr. D 8er, I live among more of the “unwanted and underserved” than you and if you knew anything about me you would know that I have worked very, very hard to bring services and quality of life to EVERYONE who lives here. I always love it when folks from far cleaner and more gentrified neighborhoods get on my case.
I find it incredibly offensive that anyone would suggest that it is ok that the streets down here should look like they do. Given that we have a higher percentage of low income, seniors and struggling folks than most other places we should be CLEANER, not dirtier. If you respect the needs of those who are strugling, who are immunocompromised, you would know what a problem it is to live among human waste.
We have seniors down here who literally walk in the middle of the street because the sidewalks are unpassable due to human waste and encampments. They are hard of hearing and have slow reflexes and are walking in the middle of the street! But it seems the solution you are proposing is that we should work on getting more housing down here in unsafe and unsanitary conditions and not worry ourselves with how people live once they are here. Such trivial details.
Newsom did not speak out against a ban on public defecation that would require desperately needed case management (yes guys, actual HELP)for people who crap on the street. Daly did that. Newsom did not try to block community benefits districts in which the “rich” property owners pay an extra tax for neighborhood cleanliness and beautification. Daly did that.
Given that Daly was a pioneer of allowing developers to meet their subsidized housing requirement by building off site and keeping poorer people away from the rich in totally artificial ghettos, I fail to see why you glorify his housing policies. I think mixed income housing is a rational, functional model.
A conspiracy theory about intentional filth in D6 to get Daly is not that appropriate given the facts. Daly has been in office six years and Newsom for two. The filthy streets began far closer to Daly’s rein than Newsom’s. It is not Newom’s job to advocate specifically for D6. That is Daly’s job, and he hasn’t done it very well.
October 27th, 2006 at 1:52 pm
No, you are wrong. Again. It is NEWSOM’s job to get your streets cleaned. I will ask again, why have you not hounded him about this issue? You are evading it and dumping on someone who the mayor is desperate to get rid of and who knows perfectly well that people in District 6 can be made to get riled up when services in District 6 are under par. You have to be incredibly naive to believe that his campaign managers don’t see that as a plus for Rob Black. I did not say more housing necessarily should be built for the poor in your neighborhood; I said why have you not demanded to know why more services and homes for the poor are not being built in the district Rob Black has served these past years?
And where did anybody say it was acceptable that your neighborhood should have flithy streets? What we have all said is that you need to go where the power is. The Board of Supervisors sets *policy*. The mayor *implements* it. When are you going to get that straight?
It is ludicrous to continue to bring up the issue of legislating against public defecation and who said what, as you misrepresent what transpired at the time. The bottom line is that the legislation passed, the police have the authority to do what was enacted, and your streets are still crapped on. So what good did the mayor’s “speaking out” about it do? You can be assured what is happening on your street, and what is not being done by the police and DPW, is fully in accord with what Newsom and his handlers want.
October 27th, 2006 at 3:03 pm
Laura, do we live in the same neighborhood? In the SoMa where I live, it is not physically possible to walk down the middle of Folsom Street except on the fourth Sunday in September. I have never seen a sidewalk become “unpassable” here. Where on earth are you talking about?
October 27th, 2006 at 3:59 pm
…well, I’m just back from the quite well-attended park opening, where I did introduce myself to Laura. Whereupon we agreed on several issues and had a friendly exchange of views about several more and I apologized for kinda-sorta calling her a N*zi earlier on this thread. It turns out we have been talking about different blocks South of Market, which explains a lot of the disconnect.
I think a number of the problems she blames on Chris Daly are really attributable to our city’s policy of herding poor people and unpopular activities into a few downtown neighborhoods, and we still disagree about whether all this dirty-sidewalks talk is symbolic or literal — but it always does help to talk these things out in person. At least we’ve established that we’re both real people who do live in the district. More productive conversations to follow later I hope.
October 27th, 2006 at 4:04 pm
Laura, how have you managed to conveniently identify some things are district-specific (and therefore Daly’s problem) and others as Newsom’s? Do you HONESTLY believe that, while Newsom is in charge of DPW, he is NOT also in charge of cleaning the streets of D6?
Do you HONESTLY believe that, while Newsom created Care Not Cash and promised that it would solve homelessness AND oversees the departments related to homelessness, he is NOT in charge of addressing homelessness in D6?
Do you HONESTLY believe Daly’s concern with benefits district and mixed housing was about keeping poor people separate from the rich and NOT about maximizing the amount of housing available for low-income and homeless folks and preventing gentrification?
October 27th, 2006 at 8:10 pm
Well guys,
You wanted facts and I gave you several. You wanted to know what I thought Daly should do and I told you. Your collective response is basically “It is all Newsom’s fault and Rob Black sux” This is precisely what I have always heard from Daly, “It is always someone else’s fault” and it just doesn’t fly anymore.
He has failed to make our district a clean, livable environment with adequate programming for kids and services for everyone else. He has spent far more time posturing than making anyone’s life better, except, of course, his own.
It is clearly not working well for him. At the opening of the park today (which, btw was incredibly cynical- opening the park far before it is ready and while it is still totally under construction just so that he can have a photo op before the election), only a few people were spotted wearing Daly buttons: the school children and Daly’s own father. There was anti-Daly chatter everywhere. At his own function, no less. Good luck Chris. May you bask in the glow of the bloggers here. I’m off to work on creating a better community. Martha, it was lovely to meet you and I hope that you will join me in my efforts to make SoMa a stronger community.
October 27th, 2006 at 8:42 pm
Well, I wasn’t wearing a Daly button and as you know I was there, and I hope you will likewise join me in my efforts to make SoMa a more humane community. Jim Meko, a Daly supporter, was likewise there and not wearing a button. Hence I have to presume not every Daly supporter was wearing the fact visibly.
October 27th, 2006 at 8:43 pm
Obviously Laura would prefer to fill the screen with scatalogical observations and one-sided rants.
The rest is off-topic–like the obvious question: what would lead ANYone to believe Black is going to help the majority of people who live in this district?
With a nonexistent track record, unknown agenda, and a lack of charisma in public forums, Black’s handlers figured it would be better if their candidate didn’t spell out who he is or what he’s for–except that he’s not the other guy. Hence, his 99% negative campaign has been all about blaming the incumbent, sidestepping positives, and keeping the scrutiny off himself.
Laura’s a perfect dupe for these tactics.
“Off to work on creating a BETTER community”? The hard work’s been going on for some time, but she’d never know…
October 28th, 2006 at 12:32 pm
Laura, you seem to think that when people point out that some issues fall under the job description of another elected official that it “just doesn’t fly anymore.” As a rule, do you generally criticize people for things that are not their role to fix, but since you can get away with it, you do it anyway?
NO supervisor is responsible for cleaning the streets of his district. The division of government provides that one body creates the legislation and other division oversees the day-to-day operations of the city. The day-to-day guy is Newsom. So, if people suggest you should be directing your criticism at him, it’s for a very legitimate reason.
I suppose Daly can be faulted for not passing legislation to require Newsom to do HIS job better so that Daly’s residents don’t have to suffer.
October 28th, 2006 at 3:22 pm
I would vote for Daly, if I lived in his district, but it is fair game to criticize him for not prioritizing a cleaner, safer neighborhood. I work with marginally housed and homeless folks in the TL, and many of them feel the TL and South of Market need to be cleaned up. Most poor folks don’t poop on the sidewalk, nor do most deal drugs– many are trying to remain clean and sober, or to minimize their substance use. The argument isn’t cleaning up the neighborhood versus gentrification. The neighborhood should be a safe and clean one for the poor people who live there, as well.
However, that doesn’t mean I support Black. Daly is not perfect, but he is a passionate advocate for those who need advocacy the most, and has proven himself as an effective supervisor– for example, in the Trinity Plaza deal. What has Black done for the district?
October 29th, 2006 at 9:35 am
It appears that some of those replying for Chris might bear in mind that stating he was unable to address serious problems and that these problems were, in fact, the responsibility of others, are actually stating that Chris is ineffective at addressing these issues.
Perhaps a close supporter could whisper in his ear that the conditions on the street are serious.
NEWS FLASH: Elected leader claims that someone else is responsible for a problem. Supporters rally to blame someone else.
Sounds like Rumsfeld.
October 29th, 2006 at 11:21 am
Daly represents a district where the rest of the city sends its problems. He represents unpopular people who regularly get characterized as criminal in this town for being poor and/or having problems. Yuppie colonists move into poor neighborhoods and announce that the poor and sometimes troubled people who were here first offend their tender sensibilities and should be gotten rid of — heaven knows where they’re supposed to live instead. Daly tries to stand up for the rights and interests of poor people, which is never popular with the rich, nor with people who aren’t rich but whose optimism takes the form of identifying with the rich. Daly does what he can and gets stigmatized as abrasive. City agencies don’t like being told to treat poor people as respected constituents. Developers don’t like being told to provide affordable units. The police get sulky when they’re told to obey their own oaths to uphold the Bill of Rights. Because Daly hasn’t managed both to personally direct the entire city government and to cleanse the city’s poor neighborhoods of poor people, the colonists call him ineffective.
Bully drives smaller kid’s hand toward his face and asks, “Why are you hitting yourself?”
October 29th, 2006 at 12:11 pm
Really, … Yuppie colonists, …the Rich, .. (tools) of the rich, …sulky police.
And the poor are funding Chris’s campaign ?
I suggest that money comes with strings attached.
and what happens if (when) Chris decides to bail on the true believers who gather round his banner ?
But just label me (and any body else who raises a concern) a lick-spittle synchophant and get it over with.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:35 pm
I think you mean “sycophant.” A sycophant to whom, may I ask?
October 29th, 2006 at 7:56 pm
Dear Laura,
If you wish to live in a cleaner neighborhood why don’t you move to Pacific Heights or the Marina, where Rob Black currently works as a legislative aid?
I think the answer is that you cannot afford it.
If Rob Black succeeds in his radical anti-tenant agenda (he was an attorney for Nielsen Merksamer. Please look that up) the Mission district where you claim to live will be much much more expensive and you finally be spared the problems you are rightfully upset about, simply because you will have been evicted and forced to leave San Francisc0.
October 29th, 2006 at 9:24 pm
what I don’t get is why vehement Daly supporters act as if they have a stranglehold on conscience and are the only ones with the best interests of the poor in mind.
anyone who doesn’t support daly is a fascist? that’s a pretty far way along the bush/cheney “you’re with me or against me” line of thinking.
all of us who live in district 6 want what is best for the neighborhood. making platitudes about “ridding the city” of poor people and making symbolic statements regarding actual poop because some of us have to dodge it is just ridiculous!
And to Alan - I’m real sorry about you having to dodge the dog poop on your way to work. I guess I get to eat cake because I get to dodge the same 6-8 drug dealers and their customers every day, pretend not to see the people smoking crack in case they take offense, avoid any puddle on the street because they are most likely urine, and maintain a safe smell distance from those most in need - I’ve called the police and they tell me not to bother. I’ve written to Chris and he doesn’t respond.
Aside from not voting for him in the next election, I’m at a loss about what to do.
But I’m real sorry about the dog poop - that must suck for you.
October 30th, 2006 at 10:04 am
OK, then, when you moved into what sounds like the very poorest and most troubled block of this district (unless of course you’re exaggerating the street stuff), how did your own conscience prompt you to help your less fortunate neighbors?
Did you understand that, although (I suspect) you could afford to live elsewhere, you were instead voluntarily moving into a zone of tolerance where the rest of the city herds and ghettoizes people it doesn’t want in richer neighborhoods?
If you don’t want visibly poor and troubled people to live on Sixth Street or in the Tenderloin, where does your lively and compassionate conscience tell you they ought to live instead?
Or perhaps you would like to try and reduce the problems around you by joining an effort to build more affordable housing, help improve conditions in existing low-rent buildings, and reduce poverty by promoting measures such as a living wage?
In that case there’s a fellow you should talk to. His name’s Chris Daly.
October 30th, 2006 at 10:25 am
My own conscience tells me to figure out where the services are, who the most responsive people to call are, and who to avoid because they are crazy and since Reagan, nothing can be done about that.
I live on one block, but I must walk down the same 6 blocks to get to work every day - why would I exagerrate about how bad my neighborhood is? What is to be gained by that? You’re so smug - you must live in a nice place and have a car. I can’t afford a car, which is why I have to live close to where I work.
I could afford to live somewhere else - not anywhere in SF, certainly. Probably would have to leave CA. Don’t plan on doing that, thanks for offering to let me leave though. That was very nice and elitist of you.
I’m sorry, when did drug dealers and crack smokers become the “visibly poor?” I thought they were criminals? Perhaps I am wrong about that, but selling and smoking crack is still illegal, isn’t it? And I don’t appreciate being intimidated by these guys as I walk by. This is my neighborhood too - although you would like me to leave, I won’t, smug elitist that you are.
I mentioned in my first post that I’ve attempted to contact Chris. Several times. When he doesn’t respond, I write again. I get no answer or a snippy response referring me to someone else who says “there’s nothing we can do.”
What part of that don’t you understand? I suspect you don’t want to understand it.
Like I said before, you seem to think that you have cornered the market on compassion. You can say things don’t exist, but just because you say it that doesn’t make it true.
October 30th, 2006 at 12:36 pm
My friend, you and Laura and I live in the same district. I do not see the intensity of criminal stuff and aggravation that you see, and I not only live here but have worked as an advocate (mainly on foot) for many years with people living in some of the most troubled buildings of this district. Maybe you and I simply live on different blocks but maybe we have different levels of expectation about living in an urban downtown area.
I cannot understand how you think it is ‘elitist’ to stand up for poor people. Presumably, then, you think it’s ‘populist’ to stand up for the educated, well-paid elites who have moved into this district recently, and the condo converters and the opponents of rent control?
One of the most durable political rules of thumb is to watch out whenever a powerful majority co-opts the language of the underdog.
October 30th, 2006 at 1:01 pm
It’s as if they all had the same talking points:
(1) ignore or belittle Daly’s achievements;
(2) never explain why Black would be better–in fact, don’t talk about him at all—as in, what has he actually done, and what does he propose to do?
Better still: avoid admitting you’re a Black supporter (as in the case of “Laura” who hilariously announced her departure to work for a “better” community, then returned to venomous posting 24hrs later).
So Suze, Laura et al: stay shrill. You’ve got a reserved table waiting for you at Cafe Tourette. Just don’t expect others voters to listen.
October 30th, 2006 at 1:10 pm
You live South of Market. I live in the Tenderloin. The tenderloin is more densely populated with a higher per capita count of parolees and other such.
You are not elitist for standing up for poor people. You are elitist for telling me, a rather poor person, that if I do not like living in the one neighborhood where I can afford to live, that I should leave so that I will no longer be offended by the drug dealers, criminals and those in dire need of help.
It seems to me that you have a greater interest in keeping these people in the TL so they are not pushed to your neighborhood.
Further, you claim that since you don’t see something, it cannot possibly be happening. Open your eyes.
Why don’t you just move to Berkeley? They love blind, unthinking knee jerk liberals there. Let the rest of us think with our heads AND our hearts - these problems are too big for you to understand.
Fuck you and your idiotic elitist “I know what’s best for you” attitude. And Theo - fuck you too.
October 30th, 2006 at 1:14 pm
Laura’s real. At the park opening, she was working on a fundraiser to put a Burning Man-derived statue in the park and inviting people to sign up for future park cleanup days (yes, I signed up). She does seem to like and care about the neighborhood. I just think Black and the people behind him aren’t as benevolent as she would like to believe.
October 30th, 2006 at 1:19 pm
Suze, I’m sorry you are so offended, but if you truly can’t afford other neighborhoods than the TL, then you probably depend on rent control, and the crowd behind Black would like to get rid of rent control. They are not looking out for your interests. They are not even interested in your interests. They are interested in pushing rent-controlled tenants like you and me and TenderNob out of this district and replacing us with condos.
October 30th, 2006 at 1:33 pm
I repeat, fuck YOU and your elitist “I know what’s best for you” attitude. You’re not sorry I took offense, you meant for me to take offense. Quite the semantic trick to apologize without apologizing - too bad I’m not stupid enough to fall for it.
Rent control isn’t going anywhere and your threats are simply alarmist, pull out the rent-control boogey man. Rent control was here well before Chris Daly. It will be here long after he’s left for greener pastures.
I guess that’s one of your lawyer tricks. Or maybe you learned that from Chris himself? I wonder if that ever works? It must since you are constantly pulling it out of your bag o’ tricks.
Just because I cannot afford to live anywhere else does not mean that I must live in squalor. Got it? Your picture of your street looks pretty nice - how would you react if a bunch of drug dealers suddenly took up residence on your corner? You’d react exactly how I do - you’d be mad. You’d call the police and the mayor and your city supervisor. And suppose they all ignore you and point fingers at each other? What do you do? You remember. And at your next opportunity, you vote against them. It’s the American way.
October 30th, 2006 at 1:40 pm
It happens a dealer moved into our building last year. We worked with the landlord to get the dealer out of our building. After some trouble the dealer was evicted. It didn’t change my politics. Why should it?
October 30th, 2006 at 2:40 pm
you intentionally misrepresent my arguments. another lawyer trick.
I do not believe that the 6 - 8 dealers that stand on the corner (not one, but many and not in any building, but on a public corner) live in this neighborhood. This neighborhood is where they ply their trade.
my politics have NOT been changed. my confidence in the ability and willingness of my city supervisor to lend a hand HAS changed. that’s why I’m voting for anyone but chris.
October 30th, 2006 at 8:34 pm
Ah, you mean the BART-commuter drug dealers. Yes, it’s so interesting to hand out flyers at BART entrances on election-season evenings and watch who else begins to hang out at the tops of the stairs near the end of the commuter rush.
But aren’t they pretty squarely a job for the police?
Sorry you don’t like lawyers, btw. Maybe you should meet more of the public-interest variety.
October 30th, 2006 at 9:04 pm
I’ve known quite a few good lawyers. They all employ the same tricks as you to win. Are you even aware of how condescending your posts sound or are you completely immune to it because you are so used to people acquiescing about your ultimate correctness?
Martha, they agree with you to shut you up.
That’s not the way to sway people, Martha.
And I’m talking about the dealers that hang out on Ellis and Jones, not anywhere near the BART station. Which of course, you won’t acknowledge because you haven’t seen them. And you don’t see them because you don’t live in this neighborhood. So of course, they must not exist and I am making them up to attempt to make Chris Daly look bad because I am a mean old meanie who is - what - actually concerned about quality of life issues? mean old suze, that’s me.
I’m really not sure what you are talking about with the BART station, but it’s safe to assume that it’s more misinterpretation, misdirection and intentional bitchy slant to try to trick others into agreeing with you.
We argue about the same things over and over - I called the police, they didn’t help. I called the mayor and my city supervisor, they pointed me back to the police. I’m now looking to elect someone who is willing to help. When mayoral elections come, Gav will have some answering to do. Right now, it’s Chris’ turn.
As I said before, what is so difficult to understand about that?
October 30th, 2006 at 9:23 pm
I’m glad you’re willing to spread responsibility for policing the Tenderloin farther than one elected official. In this conversation, that’s progress.
October 31st, 2006 at 10:55 am
See, that’s just bitchiness AND it’s what I’ve been saying the whole time. The fact that you finally recognized that is what I have been saying is the progress. On your part.
That bright light that is blinding you isn’t the truth, it’s your own ego.
November 2nd, 2006 at 1:41 am
I’m Black all the way. My neighborhood is basically unliveable now; I’m near 16th and capp. Sure it always had it’s share of prostitutes and homelessness but now it’s like a michael jackson thriller video.
Time to change things up a bit and see if things improve.