Rec & Park begins HANC eviction before Board vote

|
(25)
Ross Mirkarimi

Just as the Board of Supervisors was gearing up to vote at its Mar. 8 meeting on a resolution defending the Haight Ashbury Neighborhood Council (HANC) Recycling Center against eviction from Golden Gate Park, Sup. Ross Mirkarimi noted that the Recreation & Parks Department had already filed an unlawful detainer against HANC, the first legal move in an eviction process. "I think that only escalates the matter, in what I believe is an unprincipled way," Mirkarimi said.

"It's very unfortunate that we did have this unlawful detainer action being filed," Sup. David Campos noted. "I am hopeful that the city reconsiders that action."

Mirkarimi had originally drafted the resolution to urge Rec & Park to "rescind the eviction of the HANC Recycling Center from Golden Gate Park."
Board President David Chiu made a move to amend Mirkarimi's resolution, replacing the part about rescinding the eviction with some language calling for Rec & Park to "negotiate in good faith." Mirkarimi's resolution also requested the Rec & Park and the Department of the Environment to establish a "comprehensive Parks recycling program utilizing the expertise, volunteer base, and facilities of the HANC Recycling Center in Golden Gate Park."

Mirkarimi stressed the need for the city to assist HANC in finding a new location, and questioned how the loss of the recycling service offered by HANC could possibly be replaced by vending machines in nearby grocery stores. "We're going to have a people-traffic problem ... I guarantee that that problem's going to escalate exponentially," Mirkarimi said.

Mirkarimi's resolution passed 6-5, with Sups. Scott Wiener, Carmen Chu, Malia Cohen, Sean Elsbernd, and Mark Farrell dissenting. However, the District 5 supervisor acknowledged in his comments that Rec & Park is not accountable to the board, so the resolution may not have any effect on the outcome. "Let's keep in mind, decisions by Rec & Park -- it's one of two commissions citywide whose decisions are not appealable by the Board of Supervisors," Mirkarimi said. "They work as a parallel government." As things stand, Rec & Park commissioners are appointed by the mayor. Alluding to a charter amendment that would have changed that governance to include Board of Supervisors' appointees, Mirkarimi said, "I'm sure soon that that's going to come back."

Reached by phone, Rec & Park Policy and Public Affairs Director Sarah Ballard did not directly answer a question about why Rec & Park went ahead with the legal filings for HANC's eviction before the Board had a chance to vote on Mirkarimi's resolution. "We have plans to build a community garden at that site," Ballard said. "And we'd like to get started."

Eric Brooks, speaking on behalf of Our City, did not mince words during public comment. "This is an agency that is out of control, totally full of itself, and belligerent to the Board of Supervisors and toward the public when it comes to these issues," Brooks said. "I think it's really time for the Board of Supervisors to take strong action to democratize Rec & Park, to change the way that the Rec & Park Commission is constructed so that the Board has a majority of those selected -- until this agency can show that it's not a rogue agency."

Comments

Phil Ginsburg is a pirate of privatization.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 09, 2011 @ 4:23 pm

"Mirkarimi's resolution passed 6-5, with Sups. Scott Wiener, Carmen Chu, Malia Cohen, Sean Elsbernd, and Mark Farrell dissenting."

Thanks for providing who dissented. Corporatist Wiener dissented. I'd expect that from him.

Posted by Jorge Orwell 1984 on Mar. 09, 2011 @ 4:39 pm

So HANC lost its lease. They can find a new location, right?
After all, this was a temporary location from the get-go.

Plus, the lease has been month-to-month since 2001, so it's not as if they didn't know that this was coming down the pike for either 30 years or for 10 years.

One would assume that if they had been responsible business-owners, then they would have looked for other locations in the ensuing ten years before now.

And it may have escaped Mirkarimi's notice, but there *is* and has been a makeshift way that the homeless use to dump recyclables:

A pick-up truck with high sides on its bed pulls in to a street parking space every evening at a certain time. The folks with shopping carts line up and dump their goods into the truck for a price from the truck owner.

The truck then drives to a big recycling place - say, 3rd Street - and dumps the consolidated recyclables - for a price, again.

~~~~~~~~~~~
The proposed lege for the Rec&Park Commission called for 3 mayoral appointees, 3 supervisoral appointees and an independent.

~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh, and yeah, right-o, Guest: Ginsburg is a "pirate of privatization!"
Have you seen the CSFN newsletter, the Northside Newspaper, and the Westside Observer? They rake him over the coals!

Posted by CRS on Mar. 09, 2011 @ 4:58 pm

Geez, guy! I could prolly do a Google search find your quips from your myriad rants and diatribes you pass off as "reporting". You don't deserve a press pass.

And, NO, that location was NEVER temporary but if it were, then it would have been place somewhere more centralized in GG Park where it could carry out its VOTER APPROVED MANDATE as noted in the RPD Master Plan according to what is now CITY LAW.

So, take your sour grapes and leave town already. They're beginning to smell of rotting meat.

Good riddance.

Posted by Mist of the City on Mar. 09, 2011 @ 10:44 pm

Thank you very much, Rebecca Bowe, for providing an update on this very important issue for our community.

I think this is a civil, reasonable, sensible, intelligent and intellectual decision on the part of Rec and Park.

This action is in alignment with the haters (of which I am one) of homeless and poor people.

Have I told you that a homeless person called me a "homosexual" and told me "you're going to burn in hell?" Have I told you that story before? I'll repeat the story several more times later on here in the future.

Let's be reasonable and push against Homelessness Inc and the nonprofit political complex.

Let's push against unreasonable and uncivil males. Have I told you I'm a feminist even though I refer to females as "Miss?"

Let's rise above Ad hominem attacks.

Let's support Rec and Park in their actions no matter whose rights are trampled on and no matter what legalities are violated. Let's not support those progressives that I am crazed about from the moment I wake up until I go to sleep.

Let's be reasonable and sensible and continue our corporatist, spiral downward to the right.

Posted by Arthur's Nightmare on Mar. 09, 2011 @ 5:19 pm

Thanks, Rebecca, for an excellent article. I, for one, always enjoy reading your work.

Has anyone looked at the overall approval rating of the supes, as a body, recently? To the best of my recollection, it hasn't gone above 50% in a long time. In fact, it has gone down below 40% or so in recent years, as I recall.

They pass resolutions all the time, about everything all over the globe. This latest resolution happened to deal with an SF matter. So they're getting more focused.

However, their opinions (as opposed to their laws) don't count much with most San Franciscans. Why should they?

Their most important function is to provide the city with entertainment value. We all know that, right? It's an old SF tradition.

They were better at doing that when Chris Daly was a member. However, it appears that David Campos is trying fill the void created by Daly's departure.

Campos did a pretty good job of that recently, thanks to the ridiculous demo he held at City Hall, trying to get himself appointed Interim Mayor.

So I would say he's full of promise as a successor to Daly's laugh mantle.

Hopefully, he will continue to speak out vocally on the HANC recycling project. He's off to a good start so far.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Mar. 09, 2011 @ 7:54 pm

"Who Cares What The Supes Think About Anything?"

YOU DO! Otherwise you wouldn't spend all the time you do talking about them and spamming this and other sites with your repetitive posts and pretty words as a self-appointed "intellectual."

Posted by Arthur's Nightmare on Mar. 09, 2011 @ 8:29 pm

Thank you, Arthur, for repeating your familiar rants once again.

Your comments remind me of the time I once met a small time local political hack at City Hall back in the 80's.
I invited him to look through my telescope, but he refused.
This fellow reminded me of the ancient followers of Chryssipussy, the Greek Vaginal Philosopher, and I told him so.
He then proceeded to call me a homophobe and flopped down on the sidewalk!
I kid you not.
It reminded me of a Monty Python flick!
Not only was he far too doctrinaire to recognize his own fallacy, he was a member of a vestigial sect.
Also, he was in denial.
I feared he might be inclined towards violence because he was a male, and males are the source of all violence, everywhere, in every single human society.
So I suggested he move beyond the spirit of dogmatic fundamentalism and open himself to the rational investigation of life and reality.

I still see this half famous political figure from time to time, because he is now part of a nomadic group of territorial males who make their homes up and down the coast, and I never fail to engage him in a spirited issue-focused debate.

This is all due to the fact that I am a migratory attention addict, refusing services and bent on colonizing public attention for my own use.
I routinely urinate and defecate on this community with my pseudo-intellectual babble and I will continue to do so until they carry me out of my rent controlled apartment, the victim of a corporeal explosion traceable to the instability of a head filled with weapon-grade smugness and bitterness.

Posted by Aneurysm Eventual on Mar. 09, 2011 @ 8:43 pm

Ross Mirkarimi and David Campos have changed the focus of the debate over HANC's recycling center. Previously, the issue was the appropriateness of the center.

However, these two supes are in a huff that the Parks Deptartment acted before the supes weighed in on the matter. They are complaining that Parks should have waited until the supes made their opinion known.

So the issue has now become the importance of the opinions of the supes.

They can't win on this issue. Nobody gives a hoot about the supes' self-inflated sense of their own importance. In fact, many voters resent it.

There's nothing progressive about self-defeating tactics.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Mar. 09, 2011 @ 9:36 pm

C'mon, Evans! You know you are just red-baiting the issue. Can't even get a column of your own that you are relegated to post in the comment section of your arch-rival Guardian?! You have to beg to be quoted by your croney, CW Nevius, (get yourself a real name! Who uses initials anymore? Only 50's billionaire CEO's which you are not) in his corrosive column that does nothing but embarrass himself and you across the city. I somewhat pity the guy he can't get over himself.

Get a life or get out of town.

Posted by Mist of the City on Mar. 09, 2011 @ 10:52 pm

For his consummate mismanagement of Rec and Park.
Ginsburg has created a situation in which Rec and Park is bleeding money worse than ever, while offering less services to the public.
Along with his bungling of the Stow Lake boathouse giveaway to an Arizona corporation, his attempting to put commercial businesses in the middle of Dolores Park, closing a recycling center/plant nursery, charging money for admission to a publicly funded botanical garden, working to fill Golden Gate Park with parking meters and his own little private police army, and trying to close the public out of our own public spaces in the evening, this troll has made enemies of many, many San Franciscans.
We love this city and the parks belong to us.
Not Phil Ginsburg and Mark Buell, who should both be replaced as soon as possible, for the good of San Francisco and our public spaces.

Posted by Aneurysm Eventual on Mar. 09, 2011 @ 10:47 pm

According to the article by Rebecca Bowes, the progressive supes not only resent the fact that Rec & Park did not wait until the supes delivered their opinion about the recycling center. They also resent the fact that they have no legal control over Rec & Park.

But if the progressive supes acknowledge that have no legal control over Rec & Park, why should they expect Rec & Park to wait until the supes weigh in with their opinion? Would the school board expect Rec & Park to wait until the school board weighed in with an opinion?

There's nothing progressive about self-contradictory thinking.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Mar. 09, 2011 @ 11:09 pm

His plans to privatize our public parks do not benefit the people of San Francisco.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 09, 2011 @ 11:17 pm

We have at least seem to have given up openly on the Newsom revenge angle, that was just infantile, yet comical and paranoid.

This is about NIMBY's moving into the neighborhood and complaining about something they moved in next too. Which makes the progressive whining about this so interesting and odd, since we have so many progressobot carpet bagger a-holes like Mirkirimi and Campos, who moved here wanting to tell us all how to live at every turn. Like farts your own are OK.

What is it about this that has set off this studied self righteous outrage of Guardiannaughts?

You born again Christian like moralist, have got your way, the city recycles the hell out of things, and now this operation has past it's prime. Yet the revolutionaries hate change?

Is this about class, like everything with them is? I can agree with that some, the NIMBY yuppies moving into many areas are awful. But change to suit the entitled isn't really a game that progressives are strangers to.

Whats the real issue here?

Mirkirimi's worried that people will be using the machines that recycle cans? That idiotic dodge is up there with "enforcing laws already on the books" when it came to sit lie.

Red herring after red herring.

Posted by matlock on Mar. 10, 2011 @ 3:20 am

Oh thats funny.

Progressive relation of reality is reaching Jimmy Swaggart proportions.

Posted by matlock on Mar. 10, 2011 @ 3:24 am

The 'Our City' that the article refers to is a local nonprofit grassroots organization in San Francisco, which operates along the same lines as Ralph Nader's Public Interest Research Groups (or PIRGs) doing direct public outreach to voters and residents, and organizing public pressure campaigns on local politicians. We push for progressive environmental, consumer and social justice issues, as well as candidates - but on a local level rather than primarily statewide or nationally like the PIRGs do.

(I am also a very active volunteer for the San Francisco Green Party and almost always make my public remarks on behalf of both groups at City Hall as they usually take very similar positions on issues.)

Our City is one of the two grassroots organizations (the other being SF Peoples Organization or SFPO) which both spun off of the 2003 Matt Gonzalez for Mayor campaign. Our City now has over 4,000 supporters in San Francisco. We take no grants or corporate donations, and are solely funded by small individual donors. Therefore Our City is able to advocate pretty aggressively for change at City Hall without fear of our funding being pulled by the City government, because we don't get any such funding. This enables us to more easily get up in the face of agencies like Rec and Park and call them to the carpet for being bad actors, and so we just did... ;)

Posted by Eric Brooks on Mar. 10, 2011 @ 4:31 pm

The 'Our City' that the article refers to is a local nonprofit grassroots organization in San Francisco, which operates along the same lines as Ralph Nader's Public Interest Research Groups (or PIRGs) doing direct public outreach to voters and residents, and organizing public pressure campaigns on local politicians. We push for progressive environmental, consumer and social justice issues, as well as candidates - but on a local level rather than primarily statewide or nationally like the PIRGs do.

(I am also a very active volunteer for the San Francisco Green Party and almost always make my public remarks on behalf of both groups at City Hall as they usually take very similar positions on issues.)

Our City is one of the two grassroots organizations (the other being SF Peoples Organization or SFPO) which both spun off of the 2003 Matt Gonzalez for Mayor campaign. Our City now has over 4,000 supporters in San Francisco. We take no grants or corporate donations, and are solely funded by small individual donors. Therefore Our City is able to advocate pretty aggressively for change at City Hall without fear of our funding being pulled by the City government, because we don't get any such funding. This enables us to more easily get up in the face of agencies like Rec and Park and call them to the carpet for being bad actors, and so we just did... ;)

Posted by Eric Brooks on Mar. 10, 2011 @ 4:43 pm

That would be a true public service, saving our city parks from their mismanagement and privatization.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 10, 2011 @ 9:02 am

I think not. This is wrong in so many ways, but typifies what is happening in our town. Privatization and gentrification. Public resources being given away, or sold for a dollar. The 'haves' taking more and depriving the 'have nots' of what little they still have. Of the 40 plots proposed, 25% are reserved for 'special use'. Brilliant, that means 30 people with the luxury of time enough to cultivate organic arugula and frisee can monopolize the space. I'm outa here.

Posted by Pat Monk.RN. on Mar. 10, 2011 @ 9:58 am

The key point is not enough discussed. Gavin wanted some good old fashioned "payback", for past frictions with HANC, over non-related matters, ...AND because HANC Recycle Center is the last man standing in the SF garbage tussle, ...in opposition to Recology, ...as Recology sees it. (It is very good to be the ONLY SHOW in town, no? Kill HANC Recycle Center, and that is what Recology is. So, of course, Recology will deny any connection to this murder plot. ...

RecPark is merely carrying out the order of Gavin, so the key is that the new Mayor should be independent enough to tell HIS RecPark Commission to hold a factfinding hearing to look at it "de novo", and to find a replacement site that would do all the good that the current site does.

jack barry

Posted by jackbarry99 on Mar. 10, 2011 @ 10:16 am

I'm glad this argument is back, a good conspiracy theory should never be let go of.

I do wonder though, how do we know this is all on orders from Newsom?

What does Newsom hold over the park people? When he isn't in office Newsom is still pulling the strings? And what does it all have to do with the Knights Templar?

Posted by meatlock on Mar. 10, 2011 @ 11:23 am

The move to close down HANC's recycling center did not originate with former Mayor Gavin Newsom. It's the result of neighbors and residents of the Haight who see how the center undermines the Haight. Newsom responded to their concerns only belatedly.

The HANC center is an instance of city-backed enabling for a culture of addiction.

Most of the recyclers are addicts and alcoholics. They pilfer the garbage of residents of the Haight, take their booty to the recycling center, get paid in cash, use their profits to buy drugs and alcohol for themselves, and then pass out drunk and stoned on the sidewalks.

They have come to view residents' garbage as their own turf, with a sense of entitlement on their part. They strew garbage on the sidewalks when pilfering. After they get stoned and drunk from their profits, they urinate and defecate on sidewalks, assault passers-by, set fires, and destroy parks.

The city should not enable addiction. It should not empower the destruction of neighborhoods and parks.

Supe Ross Mirkarimi sided with HANC because the organization still has clout in the city's nonprofit political complex.

But he is foolish to overlook a larger pattern:

The nonprofit political complex is on the wane. The city can no longer afford to dump half a billion dollars a year into nonprofits, with no standards of accountability and performance in place.

Mirkarimi hopes to become sheriff. The person who holds that position oversees a staff of 1,000 and has a large budget. He or she should have some sound management sense, and not bend to pressure from nonprofits.

Mirkarimi's bending to HANC raises questions about his qualifications on that score.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Mar. 10, 2011 @ 10:40 am

"It's the result of neighbors and residents of the Haight who see how the center undermines the Haight. "
-Arthur Evans on Mar. 10, 2011 @ 10:40 am

Was there some kind of vote?
How many "residents of the Haight" actually support this eviction?
My guess is about 20 very vocal nimbys, out of thousands of Haight residents..

Posted by Guest on Mar. 10, 2011 @ 2:37 pm

No privatization.
The parks belong to all the people of San Francisco.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 10, 2011 @ 11:56 pm

There's nothing progressive about narco-nomads purity.
There's nothing progressive about Harvey Milk drugs and/or alcohol.
There's nothing progressive about a progressive alternative threatening.
There's nothing progressive about threaten alcohol.
There's nothing progressive about self-righteous narco-nomads.
There's nothing progressive about warlord dogmatic sect.
There's nothing progressive about San Francisco Bay Guardian Harvey Milk Club.
There's nothing progressive about "enemy" Red Queen.
There's nothing progressive about preach to the choir boss.
There's nothing progressive about aimless seething progressive cauldron.
There's nothing progressive about wicked always.
There's nothing progressive about the drug dealers warlord.
There's nothing progressive about have relieving themselves.
There's nothing progressive about worthless fucking piece of shit the gang who couldn't shoot straight.
There's nothing progressive about perturbed dogmatic sect.
There's nothing progressive about Ruth R. Snave crime.
There's nothing progressive about Critical Mass dogmatic sect.
There's nothing progressive about trash has his feet off the ground.
There's nothing progressive about impunity urine-soaked.
There's nothing progressive about tranquilizer Critical Mass.
There's nothing progressive about articulate heedless.
There's nothing progressive about the progressive sect's dogma progressive.
There's nothing progressive about sect poo.
There's nothing progressive about Bay Guardian have.
There's nothing progressive about worthless piece of shit preposterous.

Posted by marcos on Mar. 11, 2011 @ 9:15 pm