Blame anti-development activists
What is important for people to know is that San Francisco’s housing crisis is not the fault of the tech industry or developers. The main cause of the housing crisis is the so-called housing activists who try to block market-rate housing and thus stop affordable housing from being built. That is because developers are required as a condition of building market-rate project to either build 12 to 20 percent affordable units or pay The City 20 percent of project costs so it can do so.
Thus, in vigorously opposing virtually all market-rate housing, these so-called housing activists by definition undermine the affordable-housing cause.
So the next time you hear of some activist group trying to stop market-rate housing, know you are seeing the real cause of San Francisco’s housing crisis.
➤ “$75 million is going to SFMTA infrastructure,” The City, Sunday
Stop wasteful SFMTA spending
Where is all the money going?
Too much of this money pit is going to the Central Subway at the cost of other areas of transit.
The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency just placed ads for upper management positions at more than $100,000 per year to manage such new development priorities.
The SFMTA is allowing developers to dictate transit policy (see Parkmerced, the Warriors’ arena and development on corridors including North Beach).
The SFMTA is not looking seriously at alternatives that benefit the largest spectrum of commuters (the public trust is being eroded by private interests).
Like the Bay Area plan, the SFMTA needs alternatives on the infrastructure ideas and systems, especially from the tech community.
We build up the housing first. Transit should be the priority and build-out should happen prior to the housing, not vice versa.
Member, San Francisco Tomorrow and Parkmerced Action Coalition
➤ “CCSF enrollment takes big hit,” The City, Wednesday
Support CCSF by taking a class
Jonah Owen Lamb’s story — with its screaming, front-page headline — provides a few current statistics about a situation that isn’t new to anyone who has been following the fight between City College of San Francisco and what some term the “rogue” accrediting agency, the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges.
It would be useful, though, to refer to the larger context in stories of this sort: a few sentences sketching the continuing fight of college allies — including key elected officials — to reverse the ACCJC’s abrupt ruling (which it based largely on fiscal issues that already have been addressed), which includes three lawsuits against the embattled agency (by The City, union and community). The fight also includes a state audit of the ACCJC’s finances; an official Department of Education letter citing several violations of its own rules and conflicts of interest; and planned testimony before the DOE in Washington, D.C., next week, when it deliberates on whether to grant the accreditors another five-year term.
Worth noting, too, are continuing volunteer outreach efforts to distribute printed spring class schedules (which have only recently become available), informing Bay Area residents of all ages that they can help save CCSF from threatened downsizing by signing up now for a class — credit or noncredit (semester begins Jan. 10). This simple act — of education and defiance — can support legal challenges in motion, and ensure that City College remains open to all and thriving, for many years to come.