CASA Compact video clips

For all you out there who want to learn more and share details about the CASA Compact, here is the link to the page that should set you up with more than you need:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL_BuJGc-hEs6XaV9ys8Cg0utnt9mrnLt5

 

 

Advertisements

Housing crisis plan discussed in luxury; Marin supervisor not sold on proposed solutions

By Richard Halstead : marinij – excerpt

CASA has three main objectives: to increase housing production at all levels of affordability, preserve existing affordable housing, and protect vulnerable populations from housing instability and displacement.

The committee has come up with 10 actions to achieve these goals: a just-cause eviction policy, an emergency rent cap, access to legal counsel and emergency rent assistance, removal of regulatory barriers to accessory dwelling units and tiny homes, minimum zoning for housing near transit, improvements to state housing streamlining laws, public land for housing production, streamlining of the local housing approval process, new revenue to implement the compact, and creation of a “Regional Housing Enterprise” to manage and allocate the new revenue.

Under the current version of the plan, taxpayers would contribute $400 million in the first year through a new quarter-cent sales tax and another $100 million by approving a five-year general obligation bond.

Property owners would contribute $100 million through a new vacant homes tax of 1 percent of assessed value and another $100 million through a new $48-per-year parcel tax.

Developers would contribute $400 million through two new fees linked to new construction. Employers would contribute $200 million through a new gross receipts tax and another $200 million through a new employee head tax.

Local governments would contribute $100 million through a 20 percent revenue sharing agreement from future property tax growth and $200 million through a 25 percent contribution from revenue set aside for redevelopment.

MTC critics are circulating a video outtake from a CASA meeting in October that has MTC’s Heminger saying, “I doubt that you could put five of these suckers on the same ballot and expect to pass any one of them. So I think No. 1 we’re going to have to be selective. No. 2, as I said earlier some of these may not require voter approval. That is indeed helpful if that is true.”

Hall said, “They’re boasting they can do this without putting it to a vote, and then they’re meeting at a luxury resort to talk about it. I find it counter to democratic values and transparency.”

Susan Kirsch of Mill Valley, founder of Livable California and a vocal critic of Plan Bay Area, said, “CASA is not a group that has had representation from community leaders.”.. (more)

Will our large city communities have to rely on the outlying suburbs and rural area legislators to protect us from the overly heavy hand of the state over our local planning and zoning and rights to determine our taxes? It is beginning to appear that that is the case.

Thanks to Assemblymember Damon Connolly for pushing back on CASA / MTC / Scott Wiener and SB827 one-size fits all policies. Note that this is one of many articles that expresses disapproval of the choice of venues for this CASA presentation.

 

Bicyclists Boycott Bernal Businesses Seeking Removal Of Bike-Sharing Stations

by Todd Lappin :  hoodline – excerpt

photo by zrants

An effort by some merchants along Mission Street in Bernal Heights to seek the removal of a new Ford GoBike station on 29th Street triggered a strong response from local bicyclists, with some saying they plan to avoid businesses that oppose the bike-share program.

Last week, the Examiner reported that the MIssion-Bernal Merchants Association (MBMA) asked the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency to immediately remove a new Ford GoBike station installed in front of the UPS Store at 60 29th Street between Tiffany and Mission.

Bernalwood has confirmed that MBMA also raised concerns about the new bike-share stations on Valencia at Cesar Chavez and in Precita Park, as all three stations fall within MBMA’s membership “blueprint area.”

The association claims it wasn’t properly notified about the installation of the new stations, with most merchants only learning about them when notices went up a few days before installation began.

At least one other Bernal neighborhood organization echoes the complaint about notification…

In a statement sent to Bernalwood, MBMA president Eden Stein and co-coordinator Ani Rivera said:

“MBMA’s request to SFMTA is to immediately remove/suspend the Ford Bike Share Program on 29th Street and a comprehensive analysis (study and survey) to be conducted to determine if the program is suitable, desired and safe in any future identified locations.  In addition, we also request that SFMTA include in its outreach MBMA’s input when decisions and designs are being made that will affect any aspect of the MBMA corridor.”… (more)

RELATED:
KQED broadcast a program on the Ford GoBikes and their affiliations with a public/private corporate arrangement that uses public funds and is backed by Ford to ensure this program will “succeed” whether or not it makes any money. The point is not to make money. The point is to remove public use of public property by selling or leasing it to private entities. Nobody asked the taxpaying voters if they want to sell or lease their rights to use public property.

Bay Area Citizens sues Plan Bay Area

By Neal J. Riley : sfgate – excerpt

Critics of a regional plan to encourage development and growth in areas with easy access to mass transit filed a lawsuit in Alameda County Superior Court on Tuesday.

Plan Bay Area was approved last month by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Association of Bay Area Governments after a contentious three-year process involving dozens of public hearings. Its goal is to satisfy state legislation that requires plans to accommodate the more than 2 million people who are expected to move into the Bay Area between now and 2040, while at the same time lowering overall greenhouse gas emissions.

The petitioner, a group called Bay Area Citizens that says the plan will hurt their property values, is being represented in court by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a Sacramento conservative organization…

The lawsuit alleges that Plan Bay Area violates the California Environmental Quality Act by omitting alternatives to its plan to steer 77 percent of future growth near “priority development areas,” including places like Mission Bay in San Francisco, Oakland’s Jack London Square and downtown San Rafael, Walnut Creek and Fairfield…  (more)

We shall see how powerful a group is formed when the far right and the far left agree to fight on the same side of a libertarian issue. There is much distrust of Plan Bay Area by both sides of the political spectrum. ABAG and MTC have managed to do what Congress and the Administration have failed to do. They have united the tea party and occupy around a common goal.