Despite pleas from school, cell phone antennae get OK

by Ed Moy

The SF Planning Commission voted unanimously on Dec. 8 to approve plans for the installation of new AT&T cell phone antennae on the roof of the Bureau of Jewish Education (BJE), located at 639 14th Ave.

According to David Waksberg, the CEO at BJE, the Bureau has had a cellular antenna on the roof of its building for the past 14 years. To earn extra income, the Bureau wants to install new antennae on the roof in fake chimneys.

However, parents, faculty and administrators at the Lisa Kampner Hebrew Academy, located next door to BJE, have protested the proposed project, claiming the antennae will emit dangerous levels of radiation, which could compromise the health of the school’s students. About 80 people concerned about the project met in October.

Representatives from the school say they did not know there was a cell antenna on the roof next door, but object nevertheless to the proposed intensification of the project that the new antennae would bring.

“Last spring, when we were in negotiation with AT&T, all neighbors in close proximity were invited to an informational session. Only a handful showed up,” Waksberg said. “As we have had a cell antenna on our building for 14 years, we never imagined this would be a controversial move.

“When it came to our attention that the project provoked concerns among parents at the neighboring Hebrew Academy, we requested that AT&T revise its original plan, removing two antennas that were planned to be closer to the school and facing the school,” Waksberg explained. “As a result, the remaining antennas are at the far corner of our building (away from the school), facing east and north (not south toward the school). In essence, the new antennas are at the same location of our existing antennas (at the northeast corner of our building).”

Waksberg said an engineering firm that conducted tests to determine the level of radiation emitted from the new antennae determined that radiation outside the school at the point nearest the antennae would be at a level 20,000 times below the FCC standard.

Nevertheless, during public testimony at the Planning Commission hearing, several Hebrew Academy staff members and parents made pleas to reject the project because of potentially harmful affects on children from antennae radiation.

Waksberg told the commission: “We have no intention of harming the school. We have, with AT&T’s support, significantly changed our proposal in a way that we believe is not going to harm anyone at the school, and is supporting of the view that there is really no radiation going to be beamed toward the school.”

With the plan’s approval, those opposed to the project have 30 days to file an appeal with the SF Board of Permit Appeals and/or the SF Board of Supervisors to overturn the Planning Commission’s decision.

According to Lane Kasselman, spokesperson for AT&T, the project could be completed as soon as April or May of 2012, pending the approval of the building permit some 30 – 45 days after the end of the appeal process.

“Each Planning Commission meeting reviews and approves multiple requests for cell antennae construction,” Waksberg said. “These antennae are all around us and each person who claims to be concerned about the project uses a cell phone (which emits much more radiation to the user than the radiation they would receive from the antennae). No credible evidence has shown any health or safety risks.”

Doug Loranger, organizer of the San Francisco Neighborhood Antenna-Free Union (SNAFU), a grass-roots citywide coalition that focuses on the impacts of wireless facilities, stated he opposes the project, and that the school and nearby residents’ best recourse now is to appeal the installation to the Board of Supervisors on “land use” grounds, rather than potential health impact grounds.

Loranger said the World Health Organization has classified the kind of radiation the AT&T antennae emit as “Class 2B,” a possible human carcinogen. He also pointed out that since 2001, a total of 14 such “Conditional Use” appeals of wireless facilities have been decided by the Board of Supervisors in favor of residents and against various wireless carriers.

“Unfortunately, getting AT&T to voluntarily respect residents’ concerns about wireless facilities at sensitive locations and withdraw from these sites has about as much chance for success in San Francisco as convincing them to change the name of AT&T Park to Willie Mays’ Field,” Loranger stated.

Express Bus for N-Judah Extended Past Trial Period

By Jonathan Farrell

The bus shuttle express that was introduced to supplement the Muni N-Judah streetcar line this past summer has been extended past its six-month trial period. The bus picks up passengers in the Outer Sunset and takes them directly downtown, and vice versa.

Muni created the service because N-Judah streetcars were already at full capacity at rush hour when they arrived at Inner Sunset and Cole Valley locations. With Outer Sunset commuters riding the express buses, there is now room for those passengers.

According to the SF Municipal Transportation Agency (Muni), the N-Judah streetcar is the most heavily used light-rail line in the Muni system. It serves as a main artery of transit from Ocean Beach, at La Playa and 48th Avenue, to Fourth and King streets at AT&T Park.

The streetcar line has almost 40,000 people boarding daily.

As a working middle-class neighborhood, the Sunset relies on the N-Judah as its transit lifeline to the Financial District. Delays and “switch-backs” during peak commuting hours have caused problems and frustration for residents who use public transit.
The goal of the Judah Express Route is to provide residents in the Outer Sunset with an additional transit choice while helping relieve crowding. The morning bus operates every 10 minutes inbound from Ocean Beach starting at 6:30 a.m. on weekdays. The bus makes all 11 local stops along Judah Street between 48th and 19th avenues. Then, it continues nonstop to Bush and Montgomery streets in the Financial District. The last eastbound bus leaves Ocean Beach at 9 a.m.

The afternoon commute for the Judah Express going outbound begins at 4 p.m., picking up passengers at Montgomery and Bush streets on weekdays and making its way to the Sunset District while stopping at all stops between 19th to 48th avenues.

According to the SFMTA, the Judah Express has exceeded expectations. Since its pilot program implementation in June of last year, the express bus has increased ridership on the N-Judah line by about 2,000 passengers a week.

The SFMTA considers the shuttle express so successful that it is considering using it as a model for future service expansion.
According to Cammy Blackstone, a legislative aide to SF Supervisor Carmen Chu, there has been some talk about expanding the bus shuttle service to the Muni L-Taraval streetcar line, but Muni officials concede they do not have the money to do that at this time.
“Customer response was based on feedback we received through 311. A large majority of all responses were positive. Others indicated that they would like to see the time period extended, which we did,” said Paul Rose, a media representative for SFMTA. Rose said most responses were positive and many people wanted to extend the express service, which Muni did.

According to the report, in the initial planning phases for the shuttle bus express different groups within the Transit Division worked together to map out the route. A comprehensive customer information program was developed in which transit ambassadors were deployed in the initial days to introduce customers to the service. The express route along Judah Street is served by a dedicated fleet of Gillig motor coaches painted with a distinctive blue stripe along its top. The N-Judah Express logo is fixed on the bus’s exterior to alert riders of its arrival along the route.

Political consultant and transit blogger Greg Dewar sees the new shuttle bus as a good effort.

“It’s a smart public relations move on the part of the SFMTA and worthy of some applause,” he said.

But, Dewar pointed out that a shuttle is only a short-term fix to Muni’s overall transit failures serving the avenues. Dewar, who lives in the Outer Sunset not far from La Playa, knows the frustrations of residents as they struggle to rely on a transit line that has been plagued with troubles for years. To document those troubles, Dewar maintains a blog on the Internet called “The N-Judah Chronicles.”

“This shuttle is really a hack solution. It was never mentioned in the Transit Effectiveness Project (TEP), which is estimated at a cost of $3 million,” Dewar said.

For more information about the Judah Express Shuttle, visit the website at http://www.sfmta.com or call 311.

Lawsuit Filed for Taraval Marijuana Permit

By Jonathan Farrell

Supporters of a medical marijuana dispensary proposed for Taraval Street are disappointed that an initial permit approved by the SF Planning Commission in 2010 was later rescinded by the SF Board of Permit Appeals.
Opposition to the idea by the local community has been steady.

Supporters of the dispensary say the recent crackdowns by federal authorities has prompted them to “step away” from the effort. However, a lawsuit has been filed in SF Superior Court by Greg Schoepp to re-claim the original permit.
Schoepp, and Paul Hansbury, who worked on the effort, said much of the opposition to a medical marijuana (or cannabis) dispensary (MCD) proposed for 2139 Taraval St., near 32nd Avenue, is due to preconceived or misconceived ideas. Hansbury believes the process got stalled and “delays seemed predetermined because of local political games.”

Schoepp, who owns Crown Hardware on Balboa Street, declined to make any further comments due to fear of reprimands by the federal government.

While the effort has been thwarted, supporters like Hansbury and others say a medical marijuana dispensary is still needed for the western part of the City.

Many in the local community, especially along Taraval Street, disagree. Even SF Supervisor Carmen Chu sees the establishment of an MCD on Taraval as problematic.

“Even though the proposed site at 2139 Taraval met all the criteria, (including being more than a 1,000 feet from a school), Supervisor Chu respects the community’s wishes,” said Cammy Blackstone, Chu’s legislative aide.

Blackstone said the supervisor’s office received more than 4,000 letters and phone calls opposing the idea of an MCD on Taraval. Only 40 people contacted the supervisor’s office to support it.

Blackstone confirmed that complaints about the smell of smoke emitting from the site were reported, but Hansbury and others say such complaints are “a lie.”

“There is no adjacent wall from which the smell of smoke can be detected,” Hansbury said.
Neighbors say the MCD is not welcome because it would be located next to a church, tutoring center and within a short distance from the Parkside Branch Library and St. Ignatius and Lincoln high schools. The influence of a MCD, some officials fear, would only lead to more trouble in the neighborhood.

City officials have struggled to establish guidelines and enforcement policies for marijuana dispensaries.
Since Proposition 215 was passed by 56 percent of California voters more than 10 years ago, the controversy regarding the medical use of cannabis has raged on, with a conflict between local and federal law. Most of the concern centers on the increase of MCDs in residential areas.

Supporters of the MCD noted that security measures, like the installation of surveillance cameras, etc., would be included for the proposed Taraval MCD. But residents and community leaders doubt this will deter potential crime.
Opponents question the extent to which marijuana is being used for medical purposes, namely pain-management. Marijuana has been used to help those getting chemotherapy treatments for cancer to alleviate nausea. Claims that marijuana helps relieve back pain, arthritis and other common pain conditions, like fibromyaligia, were noted.

But the validity of such claims is debated, with documentation being varied and inconclusive.

Those in favor of a MCD on Taraval say it would be operated like a pharmacy, not like a pot club. A doctor’s prescription would be required. But, what type of doctor? And in what form would the patient or recipient take the medicine? Marijuana can be administered in a variety of forms, not just by smoking. Opponents question the dosage and the duration of the prescription as with any drug. And, who will enforce and manage the cost of regulation?

Still, those in favor of a MCD on Taraval insist that people with ailments alleviated by cannabis find it unfair that they must travel a long distance to reach one of the 22 MCDs in the City.

While Hansbury said he has “lost heart and should step away,” he and Schoepp hope those opposed will see the medical benefits and reconsider their opposition.

Fight to Create Green Hairstreak Butterfly Habitat Continues

By Ryder W. Miller

In an effort to help create more habitat for butterflies in San Francisco, students from Hoover Middle School have been conducting habitat restoration in the Sunset District.

Kids In Parks has returned to Herbert Hoover Middle School for the fourth consecutive year to work on the Green Hairstreak Butterfly Habitat Restoration Project.

Much of the school work has been done during school days, but there has also been community work over the weekends. The site is at Hawk Hill, which is adjacent to Hoover Middle School, located at 14th Avenue and Rivera Street, on SF Unified School District property.

The primary goal of the project is to restore habitat for the Green Hairstreak Butterfly. The plan is to remove invasive plants and replace them with native species.

Nature in the City posts: “Discovered by modern science in the late 1800s from ‘the hills of San Francisco’ the Green Hairstreak (Callyphors dumetorum) is a small, nickel-sized butterfly isolated in three remaining remnant habitats within the City: Hawk Hill, the Rocky Outcrop overlooking the Sunset District and the coastal bluffs of the Presidio.”

“We are creating a native plant demonstration garden and an outdoor classroom,” said Jeffrey Brown, the lead organizer for the restoration project.

The educational aspect of the project is very important. Related topics include “watershed biodiversity,” “bird watching” and others.

Brown said the students present a Green Hairstreak Festival each spring, and maybe this year it will be open to the public.
Liam O’Brien, one of the compilers for the “San Francisco butterfly count,” said he thought the students should get credit for the work they have done.

“A truly wonderful amount of work has been done there,” O’Brien said.

Such projects can provide opportunities for students to learn things in non traditional ways by providing an impetus to explore a variety of disciplines. The project also teaches stewardship.

Sarah McConnico, the site steward at 14th and Pacheco, explained that it is important to note that even though they are active at sites during the winter months, they are careful not to disturb the sensitive areas, which are located around buckwheat. There is always the possibility that there are green hairstreak instars just below the surrounding leaf litter. Wikipedia posts that an instar is a developmental stage for arthropods, such as insects, between each molt (ecdysis) until sexual maturity is reached.
McConnico pointed out that it is this potential that gives them hope and propels them to move forward as stewards of the sites. They do their best to recreate the mosaic patchwork of upland dune communities that where present before urban expansion. McConnico said it is exciting when they are able to tell people about the butterfly and the habitat restoration that is going on right in their neighborhood. 



“We saw our first adult Hairstreak in the spring of 2010 at 14th and Pacheco. It was evident by the pristine nature of his wings. He had just emerged and was basking on a buckwheat leaf on one of the most blustery, cold days you could imagine for April. This glimmer of hope stands as an example of how it is possible to restore what has been lost and provide a habitat corridor for not only the Green Hairstreak, but other native biota that have been edged out,” McConnico said.

Signs have been ordered and the corridors being restored will allow butterflies to more easily fly from floral site to floral site in the City.

Assisting with numerous restoration projects in the City is SF Parks Alliance.

Sunset Votes for Miyamoto, Local Schools

By Thomas K. Pendergast

Sunset District voting statistics for the last election are similar to citywide totals, except for the choice of San Francisco county sheriff and a lot of support for Proposition H, the call for local schools which was narrowly defeated.

San Francisco Department of Elections numbers show Paul Miyamoto got 33 percent of the District 4 vote for the office of county sheriff, more than San Francisco Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, who got 29 percent. Chris Cunnie placed third, capturing 27 percent of the district’s vote.
In District 7, 38 percent of the ballots were cast for Miyamoto, Cunnie received 32 percent and Mirkarimi got 26 percent.

District 7 also had the distinction of producing the largest voter turnout in the City, with more than 50 percent of registered voters casting ballots. Of San Francisco’s total registered voters, more than 42 percent cast ballots.

On the other hand, the Inner Sunset neighborhood (part of District 5) gave Mirkarimi 46 percent of its votes, while Cunnie received 27 percent and Miyamoto got 23 percent.
San Francisco voters gave Mirkarimi the office with 38 percent of their ballots, while Cunnie got 28 percent and Miyamoto got 27 percent.

Jason McDaniel, an assistant professor of political science at San Francisco State University, said there are several factors that account for this, one of which is the name recognition of Mirkarimi, which worked both for and against him.

McDaniel said Mirkarimi is generally seen as a “progressive” politician. In a liberal city like San Francisco this perception generally helped him, but in the west side – which McDaniel describes as less progressive, with higher income levels and more moderate or conservative voters – it was not an advantage.

But not every voter may have heard of either candidate or had any pre-conceptions about them.
McDaniel suggested that Miyamoto’s name might have been a “voting cue,” which gave him “pan-ethnic Asian voting appeal.” In districts with large Asian populations, Miyamoto’s name alone could have been just the edge he needed.

“If you combine the sense of upper income and more moderate voters, plus you include ethnic considerations, I think that explains that,” said McDaniel of Miyamoto’s good showing on the west side.

The other electoral contest that defied the overall city trend was the district’s strong support for Proposition H, the school district student assignment measure that, as a policy statement, asked the SF Unified School District to change its student assignment system to give local neighborhood schools priority, instead of the current lottery system in which geography is just one of several factors.
Proposition H was defeated by a razor-thin margin, with 50.03 percent of San Francisco voters rejecting it and 49.97 percent in favor.

In District 4, it received 67 percent of the vote. In District 7, it got 60 percent. But, it was rejected in the Inner Sunset neighborhood with 53 percent voting against it.
Corey Cook, an associate professor of political science at the University of San Francisco, said he is not surprised that the measure did better in the Sunset than the rest of the City.
Cook said that throughout San Francisco only one in six voters have school-aged children, which might explain the Inner Sunset’s rejection of it because residents there tend to be younger and single, or at least without families.

“A lot of voters don’t have a kid in school so they have no idea what this lottery system is and how it works,” Cook said.

Throughout most of the City’s west side, however, voters are much more likely to have kids in school and so they are more likely to understand how assigning students to schools actually works compared to those without school-age children. If you combine that with the quality of neighborhood schools on the west side, which, Cook said, are generally considered some of the best in the City, then it is easy to see why the measure did well here.

Cook attributes voter confusion to the way the ballot measure was written because it was not clear how it would change the current lottery system, which does take into account the desires of parents for schools close to home.

“I found H to be utterly confusing in terms of how the voters looked at it,” he said. “They would use the same arguments for both sides, whether they were voting yes or no. They were confused about what the current school assignment system does and how (Prop. H) changes what we have now. It was unclear to many of them if they would be forced to send their kids to neighborhood schools.”

In all other respects the choices of district and west side voters resembled the rest of the City, although with some variations.

Incumbent and appointed Mayor Ed Lee won his first election by garnering more than 30 percent of the citywide vote; Supervisor John Avalos placed second with 19 percent and City Attorney Dennis Herrera came in third with 11 percent.

In District 4, Lee got 44 percent of the vote, state Sen. Leland Yee came in second with 11 percent and Avalos got 10 percent. Citywide, Yee came in fifth with 8 percent of the vote.
In District 7, Lee received 35 percent of the vote, Avalos placed second with 11 percent and Herrera placed third with 10 percent.

In the Inner Sunset neighborhood, Lee just barely topped Avalos, receiving slightly more than 25 percent of the vote while Avalos got just under the same percent. Herrera placed third with 13 percent.

In the district attorney’s race, incumbent George Gascon won with 42 percent of the citywide vote, David Onek placed second with 24 percent and Sharmin Bock was third with 21 percent.
Gascon also won in District 4 with 44 percent of the vote, Bock placed second with 24 percent and Onek placed third with 14 percent.

In District 7, Gascon won with 46 percent of the vote, Bock placed second with 19 percent and Onek third with 16 percent.

Proposition A, a $531 million bond measure to fund repairs at SFUSD school facilities, passed with 71 percent of the vote citywide. In District 4 it passed with 60 percent. In District 7 it passed with 63 percent.

Proposition B, a $248 million bond to fix potholes and repave streets, passed decisively with 68 percent of the vote citywide. In District 4 and District 7 it passed with 58 percent of the vote.
Proposition C, the pension reform measure pushed by Mayor Lee and city worker unions, passed with just under 69 percent of the vote citywide. In District 4 it passed with 66 percent of the vote and in District 7 it passed with 65 percent.

A competing pension reform measure, Prop. D, lost the citywide vote with 66 percent voting against it. In District 4 it lost with 63 percent and in District 7 it was rejected by 62 percent.
Proposition E, which would have amended the City Charter to allow the Board of Supervisors and the mayor to amend or repeal ordinances and policies that the voters have approved, lost citywide by 67 percent. In District 4 it lost with 69 percent voting against it and it lost in District 7 with 68 percent against.

Proposition F, which would have changed lobbying rules, lost the citywide vote by 56 percent. In District 4 it lost by 59 percent and in District 7 it lost by 55 percent.

Proposition G, which would have raised the city sales tax by one-half of a percentage point, lost the citywide vote by 54 percent. In District 4, it was defeated by 61 percent and in District 7 it lost by 63 percent.

University to Decide Fate of UC Hall, Oldest on Campus

By Ed Moy

The University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) held a community planning workshop on Nov. 16 to discuss options for the re-development of the UC Hall site at the Parnassus Campus, including the potential for its retrofit and reuse.

According to UCSF, the original long-range development plan called for the demolition of UC Hall, both because of seismic safety requirements and to help bring the campus closer to its space ceiling, which – in addition to campus boundaries – was established by the UC Regents in 1976 to control growth at the campus.

The UC Hall structure is not up to current seismic standards for withstanding an earthquake, and if the building is to continue being used, it must be retrofitted to meet current seismic standards.

Since 1996, several surrounding buildings at the campus have been demolished, including the old central services, generator, heating plant, laundry storehouse, and medical research sites.

New buildings that have been erected or rebuilt include Aldea Housing, Aldea Center, Kirkham Child Care Center, Parnassus services building, central utility plant and Regeneration Medicine Building.

Built in 1917, UC Hall is the oldest building standing on the UCSF Parnassus campus. The building currently houses offices, labs, clinics and classrooms.

UC Hall currently stands as a six-story building located on the south side of Parnassus Avenue, between Third and Fourth avenues. It was constructed as UCSF’s first teaching hospital. The steel and concrete structure was designed in the Beaux-Arts style by local architect Lewis Hobart and originally occupied 141,700 gross square feet. Various additions to UC Hall, including an elevator tower on the west wing, have increased the overall building’s square footage to 146,900 gross square feet.

UCSF Community Relations Director Barbara Bagot-Lopez stated that a study group made up of members of the UCSF Community Advisory Group has been meeting with UCSF staff over the past several months to research, analyze and discuss various options, which will be made available for review during public meetings with the local community before decisions are made.

At this time, UCSF’s current timetable calls for further analysis with a developed “preferred plan” ready by the end of 2012, which would then be presented to the general public along with holding an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) scoping meeting. The project would move on to the release of a published draft EIR at the end of 2013 along with further public hearings, leading up to a published final EIR in 2014. Then, UC Regents would vote on the final EIR.

Issues surrounding the proposed retrofit and reuse of the site include financial costs, historical preservation value, seismic standards, traffic, energy and use sustainability, and future faculty office needs.
To be kept informed about UCSF projects, call 476-3206.

Task Force looks to redraw Richmond District voter lines

by Thomas K. Pendergast

On Nov. 15, the task force assigned to redraw San Francisco’s neighborhood district lines heard from citizens about putting the Seacliff neighborhood and Lake Street back into the Richmond District, or District 1.

With the advent of district elections more than a decade ago, the City was carved up into 11 supervisor districts, each having about the same number of residents. In the Richmond, the north side of Lake Street and the Seacliff neighborhood were both placed into the adjoining District 2 (Marina District and Pacific Heights).

In the last decade, San Francisco’s total population rose 3.7 percent, from 776,733 to 805,235. The South of Market area got most of the new residents, however, all districts must by law be within one percent of their mean average, plus or minus, so district lines are likely to be redrawn to account for the new city residents.

A Redistricting Task Force has been comprised, which is now holding a series of public forums to gather input from citizens and other interested groups concerning the redrawing of supervisorial district lines. The task force must have the district lines redrawn by April 15, 2012.

Karin MacDonald said she works for the private consulting firm Q2, which was hired by the SF Department of Elections to advise the nine members of the task force.

She gave a presentation to them at the San Francisco County Fair Building to explain the process. At that time she brought up the term “compactness,” meaning avoiding strange or awkward-looking district lines, often the result of gerrymandering.
“When you tell people ‘redistricting,’ that’s what people think about, usually, it’s just lines that look really strange that they don’t necessarily know how to explain. So, compactness is trying to get around weird-shaped districts,” MacDonald said.
She suggested that the easiest way to achieve compactness is to use “the eyeball approach.”

“If it looks funny, then it probably has some explaining to do,” she said. “This is a really good thing to keep in mind, if you have a district that looks funny then you better be prepared to explain it further.”

Mike Sullivan, 52, of San Francisco went before the task force and explained the issue of Seacliff and Lake Street further, at least as he sees it.

“When I think about compactness and a real gerrymandering, one line drawing from the last time around that really jumps out is the grouping of Seacliff with District 2. I think that fails the eyeball test and I think more logically it would be lumped in with District 1,” he said.

Margie Hom-Brown, a member of the Planning Association for the Richmond, told task force members she would also like to see the previous boundaries reinstated.

“Ten years ago, the Richmond was cut off of one little portion of the neighborhood that was always considered the Richmond. This is an opportunity to restore the boundaries to what they were before the division 10 years ago,” Hom-Brown said. “One of the reasons that it makes sense is we share a lot of facilities of interest.”

Jonathan Lyens, a fiscal and policy assistant with the mayor’s office, agreed with Hom-Brown about common interests in the area, such as public transportation.

“We have shared values and shared public resources, including public transport lines like the #38 Geary, #2 Clement, and #1 California,” Lyens said.

He suggested that people living on Lake Street and in the Seacliff are likely to shop on Clement Street and Geary Boulevard.
“These are the things that you really need to look at,” Lyens said.

Richmond District Supervisor Eric Mar told the task force that he was on the task force that set the current boundaries. He further explained why they are where they are now.

“When you eyeball something sometimes you don’t get the whole historical and cultural context of an issue,” Mar said.
A former community organizer in the Chinese community, Mar said he considered not just the ethnic makeup of the district but also factors like socio-economic status.

“So, I looked at tenants versus homeowners,” he said. “Areas where you have multi-million dollar homes might not fit in with other areas, where you have heavily immigrant, working class and low-income populations. It’s going to dilute the voter population of lower-income, working class people when you lump in a highly-likely voter population of mostly older people with multi-million dollar homes.”

Chris Bowman told the task force he was a mayoral appointee on the previous task force.

“I heard the argument: Where do people in the Seacliff go to shop or go to dine? No, they don’t go to Clement. No, they don’t go to Balboa,” Bowman said. “They might go to the Balboa Cafe on Fillmore, but, they also go to Union Street, they go to Chestnut Street, they go to their part of Pacific Heights and Presidio Heights, where there is some commonality of interests.”
Bowman, a Republican, gave yet another reason for keeping Seacliff in District 2.

“It’s twenty-one, twenty-two percent Republican. The Richmond’s now 10.5 percent Republican. So there are strong arguments to keep the (Seacliff as a part of District 2) lines the way they are.”

After the meeting a member of the task force, Eric McDonell, said they will be holding a series of meetings in the coming weeks in various parts of the City to get public input on redistricting issues. But, they won’t start making decisions until after the New Year in January.

Soccer field plan would have significant impacts

by Ed Moy

The San Francisco Planning Department released a long-awaited Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Beach Chalet Athletic Field Renovation on Wednesday, Oct. 26.
According to the Planning Department, the draft report is “meant to identify and assess any environmental impacts of our proposed renovation of the Beach Chalet soccer fields.”
“The DEIR found a significant impact to historical resources from the project,” stated environmental planner, Sarah B. Jones. “All other impacts were found to be less than significant, or could be mitigated to that level. The DEIR considers several alternatives, including an off-site alternative at West Sunset and two versions of the modified project that could reduce the impact to historic resources. The DEIR is an informational document and it doesn’t make any recommendations regarding the merits of the project or the alternatives.”
The DEIR is available to the general public as a pdf file on Rec. and Park’s website (www.sfrecpark.org) or the Planning Department’s website (www.sf-planning.org).
Topics covered in the DEIR include aesthetics, cultural resources, biological resources, hazards and hazardous materials and air quality.
A public hearing on the DEIR will be held at City Hall, Room 400, on Dec. 1. Public comments will be accepted until 5 p.m. on Monday, Dec. 12.
The Rec and Park Depart­ment’s fact sheet states the DEIR found that renovation of the Beach Chalet Athletic Fields will create a single “unavoidable significant impact” to the site’s value as a historic resource. The report determined that replacing grass with synthetic turf, installing field lighting, adding on-field spectator seating and creating concrete pedestrian paths around the fields would alter the Beach Chalet Athletic Fields’ existing features, which convey historical significance. However, Golden Gate Park’s designation as a historic place on the federal, state and local levels would remain unchanged as the park has many features which will continue to convey historic character and significance.
The Beach Chalet Athletic Field renovation project came under fire late last year when area residents complained about the environmental impacts of the potential installation of artificial turf. Neighborhood residents also expressed concerns about the installation of night lighting that would allow games to be played until 10 p.m.
According to the City Fields Foundation (www.cityfieldsfoundation.org), a non-profit group that has been raising money to replace grass fields with artificial turf, the synthetic materials have been installed and are in use at several fields across the City. The Foundation says the lower maintenance costs and increased playing time it offers make it a sound choice.
The $8.9 million renovation cost for Golden Gate Park would be partially shared by City Fields, which has already helped to renovate several aging facilities in the City.
“Renovating Beach Chalet with lights and synthetic turf will eliminate all dangerous gopher holes and more than triple the amount of play on the fields,” states City Fields Foundation on its website. “Currently, the fields host 4,738 hours of annual play. The proposed renovation will add 9,582 hours of new play each year. The renovation will also make the facility much more family-friendly and inviting for all – athletes, spectators and park visitors.”
According to Connie Chan, deputy director of public affairs for Rec and Park, a 2004 study found San Francisco would need to add 35 soccer fields and 30 baseball/softball fields to meet demands due to a lack of access to athletic fields in the city. Rain is often a main culprit in the loss of usable athletic fields.
“Since 2006, SF Rec and Park and the nonprofit City Fields Foundation have worked to address this challenge by renovating select city athletic fields with synthetic turf and field lights,” Chan stated. “We are proposing to renovate the dilapidated Beach Chalet Athletic Fields in the western end of Golden Gate Park with synthetic turf, field lights and other amenities because Beach Chalet is one of three primary ground sports fields in San Francisco that are unfortunately in abysmal condition, often closed and lacking spectator seating.”
Chan stated that with the release of the DEIR, public comment will be accepted until Dec. 12.
Submitted public comments will be addressed in a “comments and responses report,” which will be released and considered by the Planning Commission in the spring of 2012.
“The Planning Commission is ultimately responsible for certifying that the DEIR is accurate, adequate and consistent with the requirements of state law,” Chan stated.
For more information on SF Rec and Park’s response to the DEIR, go to the webpage at http://216.121.125.82/BeachChaletAthleticFieldsDraftEnvironmentalImpactReportFactSheet.aspx. To download the SF Planning Department DEIR, go to the city’s website at http://www.sf-planning.org. The report is also available for public review and comment on the Environmental Planning website at http://tinyurl.com/sfceqadocs. Hard copies and CDs are also available at the Planning Department’s information center at 1660 Mission St., first floor.  Referenced materials are also available for review at the Planning Department’s office at 1650 Mission St., fourth floor.

Prescriptions at Walgreens could end

by Aaron Goldsmith

Some west side neighbors may no longer be able to use Walgreens drugstores after Dec. 31 of this year if they participate in prescription drug programs run by Express Scripts, Inc. (ESI).

At issue is a contract dispute between the retail pharmacy and ESI, the pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) for many government and private health plans. According to Walgreens, ESI is insisting on contract terms that will make it unprofitable to serve patients in ESI plans.
The loss of Walgreens as a participating pharmacy will hit senior citizens in some Medicare Part D plans especially hard, as well as active and retired military covered by TRICARE and employees in some employer-provided health plans, like Anthem Blue Shield.

Walgreens has 68 retail pharmacies in the San Francisco area, many of which are open 24 hours. Ten stores are located within easy access of Sunset and Richmond residents, from West Portal to the outer Sunset, Parkside and Richmond districts. Details about exact locations are available at the website http://www.Walgreens.com.

“A vast majority of our pharmacy customers live in the neighborhoods adjacent to our stores in the City and stop by often. Walgreens is committed to serving local needs with unique services like San Francisco’s only 24-hour community pharmacies,” said Shawn Houghtaling, a San Francisco district pharmacy supervisor at Walgreens.

Pharmacies like Walgreens are filling in the gaps in access to health care by offering a variety of expanded health-care services, such as flu and other immunizations shots, in addition to filling prescriptions. According to the website http://www.Napb.org, pharmacists play a key role in helping seniors make effective use of their medications through one-on-one counseling about prescriptions, side effects and drug interaction.

Because of Walgreens services, numerous locations and convenient hours, their departure from ESI health plans could result in serious pharmacy access issues.

Seniors age 65 and older fill more prescriptions, on average, than younger age groups, according to data from the Department of Health and Human Services, so any change in pharmacy care will affect them. On San Francisco’s west side, many seniors have mobility issues or rely on public transportation to get their shopping done, so it may be inconvenient for them to find a new pharmacy.

For example, ESI’s pharmacy locator suggests that when Outer Richmond residents can no longer use a Walgreens pharmacy their closest options are the La Playa Safeway and a CVS store on 32nd Avenue near the Palace of the Legion of Honor – each location is at least one mile away.
In the Outer Sunset, several local pharmacies on Noriega and the pharmacies at Lucky’s, off Sloat Boulevard, or the Noriega Safeway will be the neighborhood’s only fallback options. In any case, a short walk turns into a $2 Muni ride and a transfer to another line to reach a pharmacy.

Walgreens is advising seniors who wish to continue to have their prescriptions filled at their stores to select a Part D plan, which includes Walgreens, during Medicare’s annual sign-up from Oct. 15 through Dec. 7.

Richmond author documents space race: facts and fantasy

by Thomas K. Pendergast

Her family can trace ancestors back to pioneers that settled around the Eugene Oregon area in the 1840s, and she grew up with a strong sense of western lore. As a child, however, author Megan Prelinger’s earliest memories were of the Apollo moon landings on television, plus episodes of “Gunsmoke” and “Star Trek.”
Perhaps, as she browsed a collection of old aerospace industry trade magazines from the early days of the “space race” while sitting in her Richmond District apartment in 2006, it was inevitable she would notice certain connections between cowboys, or pioneers, and space exploration.
The articles were mostly about different projects that various aerospace companies were working on and industry trends, yet the advertisements told a very different story, in which science fiction fantasy dominated.
Two recurring themes of the advertisements showed images of commonplace domestic scenes on some other planet or in future space stations. Frequently, they used a strong western motif.
“It’s not just the domestic environments but also the transference of the sense of the west and westward expansion onto outer space,” said Prelinger. “Like, settling space, it’s about using visual imagery to make space exploration feel natural, inevitable and an extension of things that we’re already doing. And, natural like it’s going to be comfortable when we get there and space is going to somehow warmly receive us.”
She also noticed that the idea of peaceful space exploration was being used as a recruiting tool for companies that had little to do with peace, yet everything to do with building missiles for expanding US nuclear war capabilities.
In 2010 the end result of these insights was the publication of her book “Another Science Fiction: Advertising the Space Race 1957 – 1962,” by Blast Books. It’s a slickly produced, glossy-paged documentation of a grand mixing between the realities of a brave new technological world and the scientific fantasies of future possibilities.
“Most of the research, development, manufacturing and funding was focused on weapons systems and a relatively tiny percentage of federal funding for rocket and missile development really got applied to NASA, the first civil space exploration. Think about the Cold War military. It was nothing compared to that,” she said.
While the articles informed her of the reality, the advertisements were about something else entirely.
“In each of the ads there was a picture and the picture was often of a fantastical landscape. The artist maybe imagined a spaceship that did not yet exist. The imagery is a real fantasy space but … the very copy in the ad itself says ‘actually what we’re recruiting for is we need engineers to work on the titan missile and ICBM projects and Nike, Zeus rocket programs.’ What they’re showing is astronauts heading to Saturn or something like that and I was thinking hmmm, there’s a discrepancy there.
“The advertisements are their own body of literature and they’re like science fiction. They’re telling stories. They’re spinning ideas about the future. … And I thought ‘wow somewhere there’s got to be a really beautiful book that’s been done about this artwork. I’m going to see if I can find it.'”
She went online and tried to find a book about aerospace advertising artwork from the Cold War era but found nothing. She asked in bookstores but no one knew about such a book.
“I decided that it actually had not been done and it needed to be done and that I was going to do it. That was my “Eureka” moment.”
Prelinger first discovered San Francisco when she visited City Lights bookstore as an 11-year-old girl, while on a family road trip to Mexico. She lived in the Richmond District briefly in 1985, then after graduating from Reed College with a BA in anthropology, she moved back to the district in 1993.
She met her husband Rick in 1998. The next year they married and moved into the mid-district house where they still live.
In the same room where she was inspired to write the book, she recently talked about the Cold War period and the space race.
“The ads don’t directly reference the Cold War because they tend to be about a fantasy space, about technology and peace and space exploration,” she explained. “The reality was that people didn’t know how many warheads the Soviet Union had and they didn’t know what the space capacity of the Soviet Union was going to be. They just knew that the U.S. had to be on top. Later, intelligence found out that back when we thought we were behind in the ‘missile gap,’ that we were actually ahead but we didn’t know that. We had a sense of being behind and having to just work as hard as humanly possible to close the gap and have the largest nuclear arsenal.”
Prelinger thinks the ads also served to create a cultural mythology and to show off in front of their competitors.
“I think they thought that the space mythology was a very powerful recruitment tool and at the same time … the space mythology really will come true and it’ll get funded and they’ll get the jobs.”
All of this was being fueled by a pervasive fear of nuclear war that was an ever-present fact of life for many during the Cold War.
“I had some awareness of it even when I was six, seven, eight, Watergate era,” she recalled. “I remember thinking when Watergate happened ‘does this mean we’re all going to get killed in a nuclear war if we don’t have a good president?’
Many ideas in the advertisements are obviously prototypes for today’s high-tech weaponry, like flying drone planes that spy and cruise missiles. Other ideas seem downright laughable today.
“I think it’s an interesting look at the rapid pace of the change of technology,” she said. “We think technology is moving fast now but it was also moving really fast back then. Stuff that was very real in 1965 had been complete fantasy in 1955. So, there really were a lot of ideas, especially in the 1950s. Technology moved so fast in the 25 years post war that people really did tend to over-imagine what might be possible.
“Another Science Fiction: Advertising the Space Race 1957 – 1962” is available at http://www.Amazon.com, the Booksmith on Haight Street, Green Apple Books on Clement Street and online at http://www.anothersciencefiction.com. For more information, send an e-mail to megan@prelinger.net.