Bay Area
Mayor London Breed Announces Opening of Bayview Vehicle Triage Center
“We must take advantage of every opportunity we get, and all do our part to ensure that our unhoused residents have a safe place to sleep and regular access to stabilizing services,” said Mayor London N. Breed. “As we continue to move forward with our Homelessness Recovery Plan, we must find solutions for people living in their RVs or their cars and provide them with a path out of homelessness. I want to thank the California State Parks for their partnership and the residents of the Bayview for their support of this critical Center.”
New Center at the Candlestick State Recreation Area Boat Launch Parking Lot will deliver critical services to people living in vehicles
By The S.F. Mayor’s Press Office
Mayor London N. Breed and the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing (HSH) announced on January 21, the opening of the new Bayview Vehicle Triage Center (VTC) at the Candlestick Point State Recreation Area’s (SRA) Park Boat Launch Parking Lot. The new Center will provide a safe space to sleep and access to stabilizing services for people experiencing vehicular homelessness in close proximity to Candlestick Point SRA.
The City and County of San Francisco, together with the California State Parks and a task force of Bayview community leaders, proposed the development of a temporary VTC at the underutilized site in District 10 in March 2020. The authorizing resolution was approved by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and by the California State Lands Commission in October 2021.
“We must take advantage of every opportunity we get, and all do our part to ensure that our unhoused residents have a safe place to sleep and regular access to stabilizing services,” said Breed. “As we continue to move forward with our Homelessness Recovery Plan, we must find solutions for people living in their RVs or their cars and provide them with a path out of homelessness. I want to thank the California State Parks for their partnership and the residents of the Bayview for their support of this critical Center.”
The Bayview VTC will include up to 135 parking spaces for 203 people, 24/7 staffing and security, bathrooms, mobile shower facilities, potable water, and mobile blackwater pumping services.
Additionally, the Center will provide people living in their vehicles in the immediate area with access to services designed to help stabilize their lives through health care, housing, employment, or other interventions that meet their unique needs and lead to a permanent exit from homelessness. The Bayview VTC will be funded by Proposition C, which voters passed in 2018, and newly secured state resources.
“This vehicle triage center will improve conditions in the neighborhood for all by providing badly-needed services, security, and hygiene facilities,” said City Attorney David Chiu. “As an Assemblymember, I was happy to work with community groups to secure funding in the state budget for this site.”
“The Candlestick area has been under-resourced, neglected, and overrun with challenges for way too long. For years, our housed neighbors living in the Candlestick area have been calling on the City to tackle these very issues,” said District 10 Supervisor Shamann Walton. “All of our community members deserve to live in a neighborhood that’s clean and safe and our vehicularly housed folks deserve access to basic services like restrooms, electricity, and pathways to housing. This VTC is the first step towards answering the calls of all our neighbors in the area who deserve better.”
“With the Bayview VTC, we continue to develop innovative approaches to the growing issue of vehicular homelessness in our community,” said Shireen McSpadden, Executive Director, San Francisco Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing. “The purpose of the Bayview VTC is to offer stability to individuals and families and to provide a transition from living in vehicles to housing and services that offer an end to their homelessness.”
“As we continue to face tough challenges during these unprecedented times of the pandemic, State Parks is proud to partner with the City and County of San Francisco to help ease the homelessness issue in the Bayview community while providing quality outdoor recreation opportunities at Candlestick Point State Recreation Area,” said Maria Mowrey, Bay Area District Superintendent, California State Parks.
HSH will contract with nonprofits Urban Alchemy and Bayview Hunters Point Foundation to operate and provide services at the Center. Urban Alchemy and Bayview Hunters Point Foundation were selected jointly based on their success and demonstrated expertise working with people experiencing homelessness.
The proposed Bayview VTC is intended to be temporary, as the City has negotiated a two-year sublease for the Center with the California State Parks.
Alameda County
District Attorney Pamela Price Will Face Recall Election on November General Election Ballot
The Alameda County Board of Supervisors scheduled the recall election against Alameda District Attorney Pamela Price for November 5, coinciding with the 2024 General Election. The decision comes after weeks of controversy and drawn-out discussions amongst county officials, recall proponents, and opponents, and legal advisors.
By Magaly Muñoz
The Alameda County Board of Supervisors scheduled the recall election against Alameda District Attorney Pamela Price for November 5, coinciding with the 2024 General Election.
The decision comes after weeks of controversy and drawn-out discussions amongst county officials, recall proponents, and opponents, and legal advisors.
Recall proponents submitted 123,374 signatures before the March 5 deadline, which resulted in 74,757 valid signatures counted by the Registrar of Voters (ROV).
The recall election will cost Alameda County $4 million and will require them to hire hundreds of new election workers to manage the demand of keeping up with the federal, state and local elections and measures.
Save Alameda For Everyone (SAFE), one of the two recall campaigns against Price, held a press conference minutes before the Board’s special meeting asking for the Supervisors to schedule the election in August instead of consolidating with the November election.
Supporters of the recall have said they were not concerned with the $20 million price tag the special election would’ve cost the county if they had put it on the ballot in the summer. Many have stated that the lives of their loved ones are worth more than that number.
“What is the cost of a life?” recall supporters have asked time and time again.
Opponents of the recall election have been vehemently against a special date to vote, stating it would cost taxpayers too much money that could be reinvested into social programs to help struggling residents.
A special election could’ve cost the county’s budget to exceed its current deficit of $68 million, which was a driving factor in the three supervisors who voted for a consolidated election.
“Bottom line is, I can’t in good conscience support a special election that is going to cost the county $20 million,” Board President Nate Miley said.
Many speakers asked Miley and Keith Carson to recuse themselves from the vote, claiming that they have had improper involvement with either the recall proponents or Price herself.
Both supervisors addressed the concerns stating that regardless of who they associate themselves with or what their political beliefs are, they have to do their jobs, no matter the outcome.
Carson noted that although he’s neither supporting nor opposing Price as district attorney, he believes that whoever is elected next to take that position should have a reasonable amount of time to adjust to the job before recalls are considered.
Reports of recall attempts started as soon as April 2023 when Price had only been in office three months.
Price and her campaign team Protect the Win have been adamant that the voters who elected her to office will not fall for the “undemocratic” practices from the recall campaign and they are prepared to put all efforts forward to guarantee she stays in office.
Bay Area
Radical Proposal to Limit the Power of Oakland’s Police Commission
Since February 2023, several stakeholders, including the Coalition for Police Accountability, began to work on amending the Enabling Ordinance of Section 604, Article VI of the Oakland City Charter. The Enabling Ordinance was approved by 83.19% of Oakland voters and established the civilian membered Police Commission (the Commission), the Community Police Review Agency (CPRA) and the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). The recent process to amend was focused on addressing some of the inefficiencies and disruptions that have occurred with the Police Commission and to establish guard rails and procedures to mitigate such issues in the future.
By Coalition for Police Accountability
Since February 2023, several stakeholders, including the Coalition for Police Accountability, began to work on amending the Enabling Ordinance of Section 604, Article VI of the Oakland City Charter. The Enabling Ordinance was approved by 83.19% of Oakland voters and established the civilian membered Police Commission (the Commission), the Community Police Review Agency (CPRA) and the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). The recent process to amend was focused on addressing some of the inefficiencies and disruptions that have occurred with the Police Commission and to establish guard rails and procedures to mitigate such issues in the future. Councilmembers Dan Kalb and Kevin Jenkins are the authors of this legislation which is still in process.
A counter proposal was presented by Councilmember Jenkins to drastically amend Article VI, Section 604 of the City Charter. The proposal would remove the selection process of the police chief from the Commission and give that power solely to the mayor. Currently, the Commission selects the candidates from which the mayor chooses the chief and presents them to the mayor who selects the final candidate. The proposal also moves the OIG to the Auditor’s Office. These proposals would rob the Commission and the OIG of independence from City Hall which 83.19% of Oakland voters sought in voting for Measure LL in 2016 and Measure S1 in 2018.
Our position is that the issues that have been raised about the hiring of the Chief, the appointment authority of Commissioners, and the scope of CPRA can all be incorporated into the ongoing collaboration of all the stakeholders working on the Enabling Ordinance. Those stakeholders are the two authors, the Coalition of Police Accountability, the Police Commission and the community members who have participated in this extensive work which has yet to be completed and approved by the City Council. The Charter is very clear that the Commission hires the IG and that the IG is supervised by the Commission. The ordinance cannot override that provision of the Charter.
Amending the Charter is not the vehicle that should be used to make amendments. The proposed Enabling Ordinance should be given a chance to effect positive change before making radical and undemocratic revisions.
For further information, please contact the Coalition for Police Accountability by reaching out to Mariano Contreras at puralata1@gmail.com.
Bay Area
Oakland International Airport Will Now Be Called ‘San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport’
The Port of Oakland Commissioners voted unanimously to rename the Metropolitan Oakland International Airport to San Francisco Bay Oakland Airport at their board meeting last week. Despite a six-week battle with San Francisco leaders, residents and even Oaklanders, the Port remained steadfast in their decision to change the airport name in order to bring more revenue to Oakland’s economy.
By Magaly Muñoz
The Port of Oakland Commissioners voted unanimously to rename the Metropolitan Oakland International Airport to San Francisco Bay Oakland Airport at their board meeting last week.
Despite a six-week battle with San Francisco leaders, residents and even Oaklanders, the Port remained steadfast in their decision to change the airport name in order to bring more revenue to Oakland’s economy.
The Port reassured all parties that the airport will continue to have its OAK three-letter code and ‘I Fly OAK’ phrases, to minimize confusion among travelers.
“Our Board came to these discussions with a shared love of Oakland and a desire to see our city and airport thrive. Since our initial vote, the Port has met with dozens of community leaders and stakeholders and heard their concerns. We are moving forward with a commitment to honoring our past while building a stronger, more inclusive future,” Board President Barbara Leslie said in a statement.
The Board had delayed their decision by a month in order to listen to community members’ concerns about the name change. Bay Area residents accused the Port of trying to rewrite history and hide their current problems with public safety and crime behind a big tourist attraction.
The Port stated that their intention is to boost the number of people who fly into Oakland, which will allow for travelers to get to know the city and spend their money in the local businesses.
According to reports, Oakland Airport (OAK) is the closest major airport to 58% of the Bay Area population.
In the days following the announcement for change consideration, San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu filed a lawsuit against Oakland to protect San Francisco.
The lawsuit argues that Oakland airport’s attempt to “unlawfully incorporate” the San Francisco trademark leaves the city with no choice but to sue for trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition.
San Francisco city leaders and Oakland residents have insisted that the new name will create confusion and chaos for travelers who are not familiar with the area or the distinction between the two airports.
The Port has since responded with a countersuit of their own, asking the courts to rule that their name change does not violate San Francisco Airport’s (SFO) trademark.
The counterclaim says that the Port “seeks to increase awareness of Oakland Airport’s geographic location on San Francisco Bay among potential travelers and thus increase passenger traffic at Oakland Airport, create jobs, and boost economic activity in Oakland and the wider San Francisco Bay Area.”
Two days before the Port meeting, Chiu sent another letter to the Port offering to collaborate with Oakland to find alternative names for the airport and avoid litigation.
Oakland Port Attorney Mary Richardson said in a statement the following day that the Port is willing to partner with SFO to bring as many options as possible to travelers and have an open dialogue on how to move forward, but ultimately will still change the Oakland airport name.
The ‘San Francisco Bay’ rebrand has already made its way to the airport’s website and physical changes such as signage will be coming in the following months. The name swap will cost Oakland about $150,000.
-
City Government2 weeks ago
Court Throws Out Law That Allowed Californians to Build Duplexes, Triplexes and RDUs on Their Properties
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of April 24 – 30, 2024
-
Community4 weeks ago
Oakland WNBA Player to be Inducted Into Hall of Fame
-
Community4 weeks ago
Richmond Nonprofit Helps Ex-Felons Get Back on Their Feet
-
Community4 weeks ago
RPAL to Rename Technology Center for Retired Police Captain Arthur Lee Johnson
-
Alameda County2 weeks ago
An Oakland Homeless Shelter Is Showing How a Housing and Healthcare First Approach Can Work: Part 1
-
Activism2 weeks ago
S.F. Black Leaders Rally to Protest, Discuss ‘Epidemic’ of Racial Slurs Against Black Students in SF Public School System
-
Business4 weeks ago
Black Business Summit Focuses on Equity, Access and Data