Rethinking sewage plant’s renaming
By Melissa Griffin
Special to The Examiner | 10/2/08 9:51 AM
Proposition R on November’s ballot would rename the Oceanside Water Pollution Control Plant the George W. Bush Sewage Plant.
Proponents of this ordinance argue that this is the only fitting tribute for a man who has sacrificed so much of so many for so few.
Opponents argue that this wastewater facility is a model of efficiency, environmentalism and effectiveness, which makes it the exact opposite of GWB. (Perhaps Muni, The City’s voting machines or this year’s planned Halloween festivities would be more fitting fiascoes.)
I’ll admit: I really liked this proposition at first. And I still appreciate that, at the very least, it injects a bit of whimsy into an otherwise mind-numbing ballot. But upon further reflection, I have some concerns. First, what about the dedicated employees of the treatment plant? They’ll have George W. Bush name tags, business cards and telephone greetings. George W. Bush on softball jerseys and company picnic signs. What will they tell people they do for a living in hotel bars and at class reunions? I just don’t think I have the heart.
Second, do we really want to get into namesake wars with blue cities? Midland, Texas, can name their vending machines after Dan White if they want, but what if they decide to mock Harvey Milk? We have heroes, too.
Finally, it is no secret that the idea for Prop. R was hatched while a group of friends were having drinks. I’m worried about setting the dangerous precedent of making bar epiphanies into public policy. (Though I doubt it would be the first time, it would be the most obvious example.) Ideas my friends have come up with in bars recently include: a chain of all-in-one steakhouses/strip clubs, Rent-A-Puppy and corn-fritter-flavored ice cream. Making these sorts of things a reality should not be encouraged. Though there might be something to that ice cream idea …
The state of the nation is abysmal and Bush’s approval rating is so low that even his immediate family members appear to be turning on him. History will judge him accordingly. In the meantime, I’m not eager to unnecessarily give conservative pundits something to use to whip up sympathy for the president or antipathy for San Francisco. Amusing as it is, I’ll be taking a pass on Prop. R.
Healthy S.F. case is not going away soon
On Tuesday, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the validity of the employer contributions to The City’s universal health care system, called Healthy San Francisco. In doing so, it reversed an earlier district court ruling that the employer spending mandate violates federal law.
In light of Tuesday’s ruling, plaintiffs in the case — the Golden Gate Restaurant Association — can petition for an en banc hearing (which is just a fancypants legal term meaning all 9th Circuit justices would sit and hear the argument instead of just three) by claiming that the case is one of “exceptional importance.”
In the alternative, the GGRA can appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. To get the Supreme Court to take up the case, the GGRA is likely to argue either that the 9th Circuit’s recent decision (1) relates to an “important question” of federal law that should be settled by the Supreme Court or (2) conflicts with the decision of another U.S. court of appeals. In this case, there is a 2007 4th Circuit (Maryland) decision that is arguably at odds with the present ruling.
Either way, I don’t see the GGRA accepting the 9th Circuit’s decision without a fight, so we probably ain’t seen the last of this case.
North Beach plan all about retail
On Sept. 18, the Planning Commission held a hearing on Supervisor Aaron Peskin’s proposed North Beach Special Use District.
The plan passed by a vote of 4-2, with commissioners Michael Antonini and Bill Lee voting no. On Wednesday, a Board of Supervisors committee also approved Peskin’s plan, so it’s now on its way to the full board for approval. You may have read that the proposal would limit the number of new restaurants in the district to the number already in place by only allowing new eateries to open up in brand-new places or spaces that formerly housed restaurants. But the 312-page document does more than just that.
Aside from prohibiting the establishment of new walk-up ATMs, the plan expands the current controls in an area called the North Beach Financial Services Subdistrict, where financial services (read: banks) are prohibited. It adds “business and professional services” to the list of forbidden enterprises and enlarges this special district. What are business and professional services?
Accountants, architects, real estate brokers, etc. Aren’t these also services needed by North Beach residents? And wouldn’t we want to embrace small businesses of these types? Apparently not. The focus of the North Beach plan is retail, retail, retail.
I can see how all restaurants and no hardware stores do not a livable neighborhood make. But I majored in politics, so I’ll leave it to the economists to explain how these restrictions on nonretail — as opposed to incentives for retail — are supposed to reduce the number of shuttered storefronts in North Beach right now.
5 Comments
Reader Comments:
POSTED Oct 2, 2008
politicobob: "Convoluted camouflage of an indefensible, incompetent, president who lacked the mental capacity and moral courage to realize he was out of his league. ? The risk of humiliation of SF baseball teams as a basis for saying no to a memorial to the "waste" of nearly a decade of this country's resources? Bizarre. The San Francisco "spirit" might inspire employees to come up with creative names for such a team, such as "The ____-house Sheriffs. Would that other jurisdictions had the insight and courage to properly denigrate a man rivalling Buchanan, Harding, or Hoover for worst president EVER."POSTED Oct 3, 2008
Melissa Griffin: "@politicobob - Don't forget that the Treatment Plant is a model for waste treatment. And that's because of all the hard work of employees whose efforts would be forever maligned with Prop R. I'm all for naming something actually wasteful and dysfunctional after Bush."POSTED Oct 3, 2008
Sam: "Hey Melissa - You say Oceanside is a "model for waste treatment". Wrong! Every drop of effluent, treated to the bare minimum legal standards, is dumped in the ocean. A model plant would recycle much of that water, and use it for nearby irrigation. The plant follows the Bush philosophy, "dump on the environment". So it deserves to be named after the Bush Man."POSTED Oct 3, 2008
Sam: "And don't tell me about the awards the plant has won. They've come from the Bush Administration."POSTED Oct 6, 2008
Phil: "Sam-Sure, your model sewage treatment plant would be the best, but it also is the most expensive to build, operate and maintain. (Not to mention the additional land it would require.) At the time it was built, it was the best, and by today's standards, it still does a great job. At least all of our sewage is treated. Other cities just run their waste into the ocean directly. Why don't you dump on them? This is such an insulting measure. I know people who work there and they are demoralized and shocked that this actually made it to the ballot. Melissa, I can only hope other people like you see how this affects them. I'm hoping these extremists who are so consumed by their hatred of Bush don't win."