Through the cracks journalism
The latest catch.
By Elizabeth Lopatto : theverge – excerpt
The 2015 spending bill contains a provision that says no federal funds may be used to prevent states from enforcing their own medical marijuana laws.
Inside the fiscal 2015 spending bill — yes, the one that’s 1,603 pages long — is a measure that prevents the federal government from interfering with states that have allowed medical marijuana or allow the drug entirely. Federal agents are now prohibited from raiding marijuana retail operations.
Sound too good to be true? Here are the relevant sections:
Sec. 538. None of the funds made available in this Act to the Department of Justice may be used, with respect to the States of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin, to prevent such States from implementing their own State laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana.
Sec. 539. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used in contravention of section 7606 (“Legitimacy of Industrial Hemp Research”) of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Public Law 113-79) by the Department of Justice or the Drug Enforcement Administration…
As you can see from the above — taken from the text of the bill H.R. 83 — it’s not just medical marijuana users who can feel safer. The bill also protects hemp farmers; in Colorado last year, farmers harvested the very first hemp crop since the 1950s… (more)
Victory: Congress ends war on medical marijuana : sfgate.com
In a landmark moment for cannabis law reform, the U.S. House of Representatives approved a measure late Thursday night to de-fund the federal war on medical marijuana. The provision passed the Senate Saturday and went to the White House Monday, where it is expected to be signed by President Obama, bringing a halt to the three-year-long medi-pot crackdown in California and other states.
The Hinchey-Rohrabacher Amendment to the $1.1 trillion cromnibus spending bill blocks the use of Department of Justice funds to “prevent [medical marijuana states] from implementing their own State laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana.”
By Kurtis Alexander : sfchronicle – excerpt
Most city spigots, which, since the 1930s, have gushed water from Yosemite’s pristine Hetch Hetchy Reservoir, will start delivering the Sierra supply blended with a splash of local groundwater — by many measures, a far inferior sour
The local groundwater isn’t nearly as pure as the Sierra runoff, which is considered among the best water in the nation, and it sometimes contains unsavory, if not unhealthy, deposits.
But city officials say not to worry: The underground reserves are sufficiently clean and palatable, and will be blended with Hetch Hetchy water in small doses — between 10 and 15 percent — to assure a negligible change… (more)
By Zelda Bronstein : 48hills – excerpt
When the San Francisco Planning Department allows property zoned for Production, Distribution, and Repair – also known as PDR — to be converted illegally into offices, San Francisco loses more than precious light-industrial land. The city also forfeits hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars that would have gone to Muni and affordable housing.
That’s because new development—not only new buildings but also development that involves a change from a lower intensity use, i.e., PDR, to a higher one, i.e., offices—is supposed to trigger development impact fees.
Impact fees are charged on new development to offset the costs of public infrastructure and services that are created by new workers in those buildings.
And there’s evidence that city planners are repeatedly letting developers off the hook for those costs.
Developers are also using a little-known provision in the planning code to get discounts on the fees they have to pay to convert industrial buildings to office – providing, critics say, an incentive to wipe out what’s left of the city’s workspace for blue-collar jobs…
Speaking at public comment, land use attorney Sue Hestor called the Planning Department’s disposal of TIDF and the Jobs-Housing fee a “farce.” Noting that she’d helped to formulate both programs in the course of a “long struggle in the early Eighties,” Hestor objected to reducing the impact fees by subtracting the PDR fees. That practice, she said, effectively gives property owners “credit for demolishing PDR.”…
Responding to the commissioners’ questions about the netting out of PDR fees, Sucré said, “It’s not a discount.” His boss, Planning Director John Rahaim, repeated that claim, adding that “if there’s an existing use, there are certain impacts associated with that use.” The fee “is simply addressing the additional impact” of the new use—in this case, the “net difference” between the higher impact of office and the lesser impact of PDR. This, Rahaim said, is “standard operating procedure.”
It’s also what’s mandated by Planning Code Section 411.3(c)(2):
When calculating the TIDF for a development project in which there is a change of use such that the rate charged for the new economic activity catgeory is higher than the rate charged for the existing economic activity category, the TIDF per square foot rate for the change of use shall be the differences between the rate charged for the new use and the existing use.
I can’t find a comparable passage in the Planning Code about the Jobs-Housing fees. But Tables 413.6A and 413.6B indicate (after a fashion) that with a change of use from PDR to office, PDR fees are to be subtracted from the office fees… (more)
By Cory Weinberg : San Francisco Business Times – excerpt
San Francisco developers looking to build office towers in parts of the South of Market neighborhood could for the first time have to pay extra fees to help create new space for nonprofits in the area.
The impact fees — aimed to help nonprofits that have started to flee the city because of high rents — could be adopted as part of the Central SoMa Plan. That zoning plan will set new zoning rules and add millions of dollars worth of land value to the 10.5 acres around the future Central Subway line. (The $1.59 billion subway line now under construction will run 1.7 miles from SoMa to Chinatown.) But the fee plan under consideration will likely be controversial in the business community…
The planning department would also institute a mix of mechanisms to help nonprofits, including instituting development bonuses for office developers that protect existing community facilities. The plan could also incentivize developers to build new space for organizations that focus on production, distribution and repair, or PDR…
Giving teeth to affordable housing wishes
When voters approved Proposition K by a wide margin, they passed a measure that “attempted to ensure” that one-third of housing in the city is affordable. But it lacked regulatory enforcement. The planning department now appears to be taking up that goal as a mandate…
“What the city has done in past plans is, at a very aspirational level, talk about mixed-income and diversity of housing choices, and have had few actual mechanisms and no real strategy to get there,” he said. “You have to have a game plan built into the plan at the front end so you have more than just aspirations and cool ideas.”… (more)
By Joe Eskenazi : sfweekly – excerpt
An oasis of light emanates from the inky shadows at Sixth and Brannan in the South of Market district. It’s a few ticks shy of 5 a.m. on a Wednesday and every last person shuffling along the slick pavement has a story: hyperaggressive, lycra-suited joggers, diminutive women pushing shopping carts piled with rattling aluminum cans, unshaven men likely ejected from all-night diners when it grew clear the only thing they wanted was sleep.
But this place — this place is a story…
Strip away the trappings of exoticism, however, and the Flower Mart presents a deeply typical San Francisco tale. In the predawn hours especially, it feels like a self-contained little realm. It’s anything but.
Superficially, this place looks much as it did a generation ago; some of the same faces even peer out from behind the forests of hydrangeas. But, in that time, the flower business has transformed. The Mart is an anachronism in a town where anachronisms are now perceived as a market inefficiency. It’s one of the last industrial outposts in San Francisco, a sprawling, ramshackle hangar in the heart of SOMA, the burgeoning showcase of tech and imminent home to mushrooming office towers emblazoned with the gibberish names of companies defining the city’s 21st-century economy.
The Flower Mart isn’t nearly as valuable as the land beneath it (and the air above it), which, like so much of the city, is primed to house yet another high-rise tech fortress…
The Flower Mart was, for decades, composed of two organizations existing side-by-side: The San Francisco Flower Growers Association (the “Italian side”) and the California Flower Growers Association (the “Japanese side”). In October, Kilroy Realty, Inc. officially acquired the Italian side and is on the cusp of doing the same with the Japanese side. As such, a plum parcel in perhaps the world’s most desirable real estate market has fallen into the hands of one of the city’s newest, most prolific — and most aggressive — developers….
The Flower Mart is a repository of traditional, working-class jobs in a town rapidly shedding both tradition and working-class jobs. And, like everyone else, registered voters here like flowers, nearly as much as they like puppies and kittens. The universal appeal of flowers would be pretty persuasive if it landed on the ballot.
Seizing on this possibility, the city’s most prominent critics of high-rise development and tech ascendance could put the whole thing to a vote, calling upon the electorate (yes, you) to settle a spectacularly complex, high-stakes, and emotionally supercharged development proposal. Again… (more)
Displacement of our lifestyles is the problem San Francisco residents face. Who benefits from taking our homes, jobs, cultural venues and historical treasures? Citizens better figure that out and quit listening to everything they say if they want to change the pace of displacement.
Oakland will not work anymore as the panacea, as real estate values in Oakland are now the fastest growing in the country, if you believe the media. Displacement is the enemy. Let ‘s all agree to fight it and then figure out the methods.
By Nato Green : sfweekly – excerpt
David Campos and David Chiu are fighting over Tom Ammiano’s seat in the California Assembly with the intensity of a retiree from Iowa parallel parking a stick shift between two motorcycles on a San Francisco hill for the first time.
Election narratives assume that the Assembly is a more prestigious office than supervisor, but how many voters have the foggiest notion what an assemblyman actually does? I have lobbied several failed bills at the state Capitol, so can share my participant-observer ethnography of how the sausage is made. The voters of San Francisco can then make an informed decision of who is most qualified for the duties of this specific job.
The first thing to know about how the sausage of public policy is made is that it is made entirely of lips and nether parts. To call the Capitol a cesspool would be demeaning to cesspools. Lobbyists spend all day lurking unventilated, fluorescent-lit halls, waiting to pounce on unsuspecting legislators sneaking to the bathroom. People agree to any minor amendments when they have to pee. You can always tell how powerful a lobbyist is from the price of their lobbyist’s suit, which is directly proportional to their smell. Brooks Brothers and body odor? That must be the Western States Petroleum Association!
Or the only way to get your way is to buy your own lobbyists. If we took all the money we were handing to the legislators, because we can never buy them, and hire our own lobbyists, we might get better results. That or start a third party.
By Kurtis Alexander : sfgate – excerpt
… The historic statewide drought has struck especially hard along the southern San Mateo County coast. While other parts of the Bay Area are served by big water agencies with steady if shrinking supplies, most of the homes and small farms here, less than an hour’s drive from Silicon Valley, rely on creeks and wells, many of which have stopped flowing.
That’s left scores of people struggling mightily to get by with little or no water.
“People don’t think there are rural communities on the San Francisco Peninsula that have run out of water,” said Chelsea Moller, project coordinator with the San Mateo County Resource Conservation District, which is trying to help families shore up their water needs. “I think they really get overlooked.”… (more)
This is one of the most distressing stories we have seen in the news lately. Please read it and comment on the source. We witnessed a lot of similar problems in the Valleys as we drove up Route 5 last weekend. There were also a lot of signs by the side of hte road deriding the politicians for mismanaging the water system.
It is hard to know who, if any human is to blame, and even harder to know what the answer is. Clearly we need to stop inviting more people to move to the desert until we solve the water crisis.
That message needs to get to Sacramento and the so-called water rich cities. Where is the sharing spirit when it comes to sharing water resources? Willie Brown is right. The Sharing Economy is a business deal, period. There is no benevolent spirit inherent in it. If something isn’t done soon, we will not be eating local food. Our food will be coming from outside the state, and in many cases, outside the country.