YES on AYES on C NO on H YES on K
No endorsement for Mayor
YES on AYES on C NO on H YES on K
No endorsement for Mayor
I LOVE SAN FRANCISCO: Celebrating our Urban Environmenta Fundraiser/ART CONTEST for the San Francisco League of Conservation Voters
TUESDAY, JULY 31, 2007 at 111 Minna
DETAILS: San Francisco is a wonderful combination of urban and natural beauty which we love. Help us celebrate life in our favorite city by joining the San Francisco League of Conservation Voters on TUESDAY JULY 31st at the 111 Minna art gallery for our Second Annual "I Love San Francisco" Art & Fundraiser. The theme will be "Celebrating Our Urban Environment." In addition to the art contest (which you'll help judge!), there will be food and drinks, and of course local environmental activists and politicians. Join us & support our work!
WHAT: I LOVE SF Art Contest/Fundraiser for the San Francisco League of Conservation Voters WHEN: TUESDAY, July 31st, 2007 - 6:30-10:30PM HOW MUCH: $10-$25 Sliding Scale OR BECOME A SPONSOR (free admission) WHERE: 111 Minna Art Gallery (111 Minna Street btw Mission & Howard on 2nd St in SF) WHO: You, the SFLCV Board, and many others! BE A SPONSOR: Please consider sponsoring our fundraiser at the Street Steward ($100), Neighborhood Protector ($250), or City Champion levels ($500). Sponsors will be publicly thanked at the event & will be admitted free (+1).
We had a briefing tonight from Julie Kirschbaum of the MTA. The project aims to develop an action plan for SFMTA that will, amongst other things, improve performance, promote financial stability, provide faster more convenient service. You can find interesting data and more thorough information on the Transit Effectiveness Project website. There is also an online survey to take, a mailing list, and information about public meetings and briefings like the one we received tonight.
The Better Streets Plan will create a unified set of standards, guidelines, and implementation strategies to govern how the City designs, builds, and maintains public streets and rights-of-way. You can be part of the process. Public meetings being in April of 2007. For more details see the SF Better Streets website.
All around the world, popular museums are situated in public parks with wonderful results for both the museums and the parks. But here in San Francisco, the venerable de Young Museum is waging an intense and irrational battle to prevent more San Francisco families and visitors from enjoying Golden Gate Park -- even at the expense of its own reputation and financial well-being. Our organizations are baffled.
The museum's leadership is doggedly fighting a community proposal called Healthy Saturdays, which would extend the popular Sunday recreational space in the Park to Saturdays on a six-month trial basis.
Why would the de Young fight this when its own figures show that museum attendance increases on car-free Sundays in the Park?
Why, when a recent City study (available at www.goldengatepark.org) shows that car-free space does not significantly affect parking availability or traffic in the neighborhoods, and doubles Park usage, boosts local business, and helps drive traffic to (and pay off debt for) the de Young's unfilled 800-car garage?
Why, last Spring, did the de Young spend thousands to send misleading letters to its members, falsely claiming that Healthy Saturdays would "severely compromise" access. Dozens of disgruntled de Young members pointed out that the letter did not mention that the garage is accessible from outside the Park, and that visitors have front-door, drop-off access every day. (See a copy of the letter at www.goldengatepark.org)
And how much of its members' donations are being spent on the de Young’s high-powered lobbying & PR firm to attack Healthy Saturdays?
All of the highjinks and mistruths are especially baffling given the de Young's past endorsement of the concept. In 2000 the museum supported and funded Proposition G, which called for car-free Saturdays just like Sundays after the garage was opened, which it now is. According to their ballot argument, de Young leaders wrote that the Saturday proposal "Ensures access to the de Young Museum for all San Franciscans including families with children, seniors and the disabled; (and) ensures the maximum enjoyment and minimum inconvenience to Park users."
At times the de Young has claimed that it is fighting out of concern for disabled access, but their tactics suggest otherwise. Why did they not actively support Supervisor Jake McGoldrick's legislation, which passed unanimously last year, to add more accessible parking, drop-off zones, and a free accessible tram in the Park on Sundays? (These same accessibility improvements are included in McGoldrick's proposal for the Healthy Saturdays trial.)
And why are museum leaders suggesting that the car-free space be moved out to the West end of the Park, far from transit, the parking garage, and local businesses? The de Young’s chief fundraiser DeDe Wilsey has even offered to pay for "improvements" such as concession stands and bathrooms out there. (Let them eat cake...or at least have access to hot dogs and a port-o-potty.)
Finally, if the de Young were working in good faith to improve its own attendance and revenue (we all want a successful de Young Museum), why would this partially publicly-funded museum deny city officials’ requests to make their attendance figures public, relenting only after a Guardian reporter filed a Freedom of Information Act request? The figures, when they were begrudgingly shared last year, showed a boost in de Young attendance on car-free days – which of course brings us back to our original question:
Why is the de Young fighting so intensely against its own interests and those of Golden Gate Park visitors?
For 40 years, more people have enjoyed the car-free portion of JFK Drive on Sundays than any other part of the Park. Why is a six-month-trial to expand this popular program so threatening to the de Young?
By Amandeep Jawa, League of Conservation Voters; Rick Galbreath, Sierra Club, SF; and Leah Shahum, SF Bicycle Coalition. For more info., see www.goldengatepark.org
San Francisco has a climate action plan. You can read it on the SFGov website. We've 5 more years to reach the proposed goals of the plan. A 20% reduction in emissions by 2012. Its a meaty read, but how can we, you and I, us San Franciscans, actually put it in to action.
Congratulations to all who worked hard for both local, state and federal elections. By and large, the environment looks to be a winner. Environmental groups and activists worked hard to defeat Prop 90 and representatives like Richard Pombo, to reelect local candidates like Chris Daly.
If you are interested in finding out how our endorsements work, or wish to bring an issue or a candidate to the board, please contact michelle -at- sflcv.org
2006 November Elections
When: Tuesday, September 5th from 5:30-7:30 p.m.
Where: Varnish Fine Art, located at 77 Natoma Street between 1st and 2nd
Streets in San Francisco.
Jerry McNerney is the Democratic candidate in California's Eleventh Congressional District, which begins just on the other side of the East Bay Hills. He is running against Rep. Dick Pombo, America's top wildlife villain and one of the 13 most corrupt politicians in Congress. Jerry McNerney stands for integrity: truth about Iraq, common sense about public finance and healthcare, protecting the environment, and support for education and jobs in Congressional District 11.
This will be a special opportunity for you to meet Jerry and contribute to his campaign. The first 40 drinks are free, but bring your checkbooks to help Jerry unseat America’s top wildlife villain!
September 5, 2006
05:30 PM - 07:00 PM
Varnish Fine Art
77 Natoma St.
San Francisco, CA 94105
We are very dissappointed in Mayor Newsom's recent veto of the Healthy Saturdays initiative, and are dismayed by the De Young Museum's misleading attack on the proposal -- which after all is a trial, not a permanent fixture. The veto survived today (May 23) thanks to the usual supects on the board.For a good round up of the issues, and what you can do about it, check out the Bike Coalition's Golden Gate Park page.
When collections from gas sales tax increases faster than other taxable items, transit funding gets a boost (throught a complicated formula) to help cover its higher costs of fuel and accomodate higher demand. These funds are split between state and local agencies (through the State Transit Assistance Program). Or that is transit funding SHOULD get a boost, but over the last two decades, most of this money has ended up in the general fund. Our Governor's budget proposal is no better, and over the next 10 years, will divert and estimated $4.1 billion spillover funds away from transit.
No. Proposition A allocates $10 million more from the City's General Fund for the next 3 years to violence prevention and intervention services. We are opposed to this on good government grounds. While we are not opposed to any of these services in general, this seems a poor way to legislate.
Yes. Proposition C changes the appointment process of the Transbay Joint Powers Authority -- giving the Board of Supervisors 2 appointments. The TJPA is responsible for the designing, building and operating of the Transbay terminal in San Francisco. This proposition continues a process of giving some powers of appointment to the Board of Supervisors.
We have not taken a position on Prop B or D.
For California State Initiatives and Candidates, please see the California League of Conservation Voters.
Many thanks to all those who came out for the fundraiser, and especially to our sponsors. We'd also like to thanks the artists who brought their work out to show what they loved about our City, and still more thanks to our great DJ: Chris Galvin. Turned out to be a fine little success. Next year, we hope we can make it even finer. We hope you all had a good time. More thanks and praise here.
The comment period for Doyle Drive is now open, and closes March 1st. More details here. SFLCV supports the parkway option with some caveats.
For a quick background, Doyle Drive is the stretch of road that connects the Marina to the Golden Gate Bridge. The current structure is 70 years old, and is considered seismically unsound, as well as no longer meeting highway standards. This project is now ending phase 2. Phase 3, design is slated to last through 2008, with construction starting 2009 and ending 2012(?). Costs for the various proposed designs and variations (details on their website) range from ~500-750 million dollars (with roughly a third apportioned to each city, state and federal authorities).
I attended the public comments in the Presidio. A good percentage of the speakers were opposed to the Parkway option on account of the buildings it would cause to be removed. Most requested additional time for the comment period, and the desire to see a parkway option that was less damaging to the historic nature of the Presidio.
Some of the local neighbors disbelieved the traffic studies for the parkway option. I was puzzled that some felt the non-parkway option was the more beautiful option, until I realized their viewpoint was that of a car driver rather than someone in the park. Other neighbors were adamantly opposed to a parkway design option that would remove the YMCA pool building.
Various enviros spoke in favor of the parkway option, as did SPUR, all with (naturally) a few caveats for further study.
One member of the community, a victim of head on collision on Doyle Dr, spoke eloquently about just needing to get on with it, that enough people have died.
You can submit your own comments here.
Sign up for Email List & Get Updates...
email: firstname.lastname@example.org facebook: www.facebook.com/sflcv