Green vs. "green" - Page 2

City seeks to evict the HANC Recycling Center after it crosses Newsom on the sit-lie ordinance


Residents have voiced complaints about the shopping-cart recyclers, some of whom are homeless. The Inner Sunset Park Neighbors (ISPN), which is petitioning Rec and Park to evict the recycling center, has a message posted on its website linking the shopping-cart pushers with "quality-of-life issues such as aggressive panhandling, drug use/dealing, and public safety." ISPN also charges that the recyclers swipe cans and bottles from rolling curbside bins. The neighborhood group had not responded to requests for an interview by press time.

Rhoads believes that if the recycling buyback program is removed, it would only encourage panhandling — after all, people already lacking basic resources would lose a critical source of income. "People will be very desperate," he said. According to the results of a HANC survey, one in six recyclers regularly turning up at the center to exchange bottles for cash sleeps outside.

The Recreation and Park Commission will discuss the possible HANC eviction at its Dec. 2 meeting. And since the recycling center is on a month-to-month lease, the 36-year-old green resource could soon suffer eviction. There's likely to be significant resistance, since the HANC Recycling Center has forged partnerships with urban-agriculture projects throughout the city.

It was a fiscal sponsor of the Garden for the Environment and donated several tons of cardboard for mulching at Hayes Valley Farm. The HANC nursery project has distributed plants to urban agriculture projects throughout the city, including school garden plots, urban habitat corridors designed to protect rare species, and the Mission Greenbelt Project, a network of sidewalk gardens in the Mission.

Details on the proposed garden resource center that would be installed in lieu of the HANC Recycling Center are sketchy. An artist's rendering of the plan, drawn up by the city's Department of Public Works, envisions an outdoor classroom amphitheatre, raised garden beds, a semi dwarf orchard, and a composting area. However, Guardian inquiries to Rec and Park requesting more specific details about funding and operation went unanswered by press time. 


I can't believe anyone with even a modicum of ethics would be so callow as to support this!

Sadly, corrupt union 261, which represents the gardeners in the park (!), has sold out to the right on this.....


Posted by George on Nov. 24, 2010 @ 8:23 am

No one needs a noisy, smelly "recycling" center in 2011. There is curbside recycling.

No, I don't care about "the homeless" and their endless whining that life isn't giving them everything for nothing. Actions have consequences and "the homeless" are experiencing them now.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 24, 2010 @ 8:55 am

Shouldn't you be busy getting ready to steal Christmas? You're like this amazing multitasker!

Posted by marke on Nov. 24, 2010 @ 9:17 am

you're a proto-fascist, leave san francisco now.

Posted by Guest on Dec. 03, 2010 @ 10:59 am

It is a question of "use" and safety. Many of the "visitors" do not come to the parks for the parks. They come with criminal intent and create an unsafe environment for the employees and park users. The facts are not debatable. Gaar (who is quite well off,) does not have a permanent "deal."

Funny thing is, the same people who rush to condemn (Laborers are corrupt?). generally have no tolerance for these types of "deals" on park land.

So, now it's a "green" thing?


Posted by Labor rep on Nov. 24, 2010 @ 9:44 am

Thurs. Dec 2nd 2pm City Hall , Rm. 416...the Rec & Park Commission will hear the recycling center issue as well as the Stow Lake Boathouse. Last chance to save our boathouse from being given to a New Mexico based souvenir chain and LLC who plan to gut the historic interiors for a large restaurant/cafe and souvenir shop.... there's so much wrong with this plan... especially that the current tenant, in his bid, offered $75,000/yr more rent and higher revenues from food/boat rental sales! So any argument about this being a good plan for the budget does not hold water!!!

Posted by Guest on Nov. 27, 2010 @ 12:03 pm

It seems like both groups have common ground and they can/should work together to deal with their differences without destroying the legacy of HANC recycling in San Francisco. The gardening movement needs to embrace recycling as one of its tenants, they have a lot in common with each other. The HANC center is a unique and valuable community resource that is accessible to all economic classes. I never see any recycling containers or garbage cans in golden gate park, just dirty dumpsters in corners. This center could be further integrated into the Park's master plan, so people know to go there after their picnics, parties and adventures in the park. It could be a model and resource for others in our nation and abroad that do not have recycling programs at all. For more information on the bottle bill : CRV works better than curbside in California!

Posted by My Garbage Film on Nov. 27, 2010 @ 1:27 pm

I have to get out my shovel get out from all the bull @#$*!

Posted by Guest on Nov. 29, 2010 @ 1:55 am

It's one of the few places where you can actually get paid back on your CRV. You do realize that it's actually a refund, right? When you buy anything eligible for CRV you're paying for it upfront and only getting it back later if you return it to an approved center. Curbside recycling is just a way for the trash company to come in and collect that from you for their own profit.

Having a convenient recycling center is still a necessity as long as CRV continues to operate in the manner it does. Ideally, every location that charges CRV on items sold should be required to offer redemption value for used containers, but until then we need recycling centers and there simply aren't any anywhere else nearby.

Posted by Belgand on Nov. 29, 2010 @ 10:15 pm

They even have machines for it now.

The deal is that the state gets to keep the difference between the cans redeemed those not.

So why change the law? It's a windfall for the state.

Posted by matlock on Nov. 29, 2010 @ 11:33 pm

There's another place within walking distance of the Haight that pays out refunds on CRV? I'd certainly like to know about it. I've always supported the HANC center because, well, I like them, but on a practical level all I really care about is getting my money back for my bottles and cans.

The reason to change the law is because the state has purposely created a system that will result in anything a CRV is charged on being hard to redeem. It's essentially just an underhanded tax designed to prey on people not being able to find a recycling center, not wanting to be bothered, and now just feeling that curbside recycling is more convenient.

Requiring anyone charging CRV to redeem it means that you've taken down the barrier that the state relies on to makes this scam work. Sure, some people will still find it inconvenient, but making it problematic to even try shouldn't be part of the agenda.

Posted by Belgand on Dec. 01, 2010 @ 2:49 am

Why hate the homeless or scapegoat HANC for quality of life issues? It's not about taking one side or another, being a scavenger or property owner. We are all people and all have our own beautiful qualities. If you can't deal, try Walnut Creek or Bore-inda. Because many do see the beauty at HANC recycling center. Stop and take a look. Along with the recycling facilities, it has NATIVE PLANT GARDENS right outside, all along the fence. And this is also a plant nursery, in fact, the only place people can buy SF native plants, which is a service for the public that many of us LOVE and appreciate!

Posted by Guest on Dec. 22, 2010 @ 1:49 am

Also from this author

  • Police provide explanation of Bernal Heights Park shooting at emotional town hall meeting

  • San Francisco's untouchables

    Is San Francisco trying to help the homeless -- or drive them away?

  • Draining the tank

    Students push UC system to divest from fossil fuels, joining an international movement gathering soon in San Francisco