Saturday, December 1, 2007
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
King/Garvey...It's all about the choices we make
I interviewed five members of the Martin Luther King/Marcus Garvey Co-op. I felt saddened at the prospect of their housing co-op's future. There are 7 or 8 members of the board. Given the naturally occurring conflict (over this type of a decision) on how to proceed under the circumstances, it is not clear to me which one of two of the 8 board members are legally entitled to serve.
They are engaged in a game of real estate with some of the biggest pro's in the industry and based on past practices, they are entering into a high risk scenario that could cost them in future benefits. I think the board members will enter into a binding agreement with terms that will not be met in the future, resulting in the loss of ownership of their real estate. They may (in the future) own their co-op as a business but not their property. The following is the basis for my thoughts:
The board members are not housing or construction experts and although they do have two attorneys working with them, their corporate partners have attorneys, facility experts and a vast network of resources and "colleagues" to work for them. Metaphorically speaking, The King/Garvey Board members appear as minnows, while their partners appear as whales. I wonder if in nature, whales ever negotiate with minnows on any terms. I am also reminded of the children's animated film, (American Tail) in which a little mouse discovers a cat who has been in disguise (as a mouse) and the cat looks back at him and asks, "Who are you going to believe me or your own eyes?" The mouse is silent. In nature cats are natural predators to mice.
Human nature is at work here. Cultural norms are at work here. Some people have set up a system that always results in loss of ownership when certain people enter into system agreements. Everyone wants to be successful and make the right choices. Everyone wants to be perceived as someone who wants the best for their community. The problem is that when all of the facts and actuals are not presented, making the best decision becomes very, very difficult.
Is there some deception going on? More than likely, because the nature of business is often deceptive. For example. Why does roofing cost so much more today than it did yesterday? Are the materials used today so vastly different? Just what exactly has raised the cost of construction? There are a lot of complex factors that no one wants to bring to light because of the culture of making money. People don't often admit that the "dot.com" went bust because the sales projections were fictional accounts! They were ideas (stories) sold to buyers that did not produce anything! In our culture of making a fast million, there are always some losers.
The board members will have to close out the tendency to worry about external perceptions and each one will have to ask themselves is the information on the table accurate or is it an attempt to make money at their expense? Is someone selling them a wolf ticket and what is the price of the that ticket if they buy it?
Another unfortunate scenario for them is that they are being forced in the direction of entering into a high-risk agreement by their business partner. They really have been threatened. Sign!...or else!
On another note, I've observed some practices that seem to be a matter of habit. Certain people behave certain ways because it is "expected" of them. I see that at work here. Some people take on the role as "saviors" or "poverty pimps" (you choose which title applies) and they come to the "rescue" of other people and exact their payment out of an apparent third party (usually some government agency) and then take care of the poor, disadvantaged, at risk people. Other people take on the "receipient" or "I don't deserve more than I have" attitude and allow themselves to be "beneficiaries" or "taken advantage of" (again, you decide which title applies) It's hard to face the harshness of attitudes and practices, but if you take a cold hard look at behaviors in the past it's not something to shrink back from. In fact now is the time to face the challenges because economically the future doesn't look too good. Real estate in the future will be the difference between having a place to live and homelessness. It is because of the idea of real estate ownership, that there is so much homelessness.
There are some experts (community leaders) who should be advocating for them, but for reasons which just might be political remain silent. The silence is reminiscent of the kind where negative and rather nasty experiences prohibit would be leaders or advocates from saying anything. The reality is that we must all get along in order to survive, because when those in a weaker position speak up, those in the stronger position, wipe them out. The stronger will wipe out them out economically, politically/socially and then physically. That's been the politics so far.
They are engaged in a game of real estate with some of the biggest pro's in the industry and based on past practices, they are entering into a high risk scenario that could cost them in future benefits. I think the board members will enter into a binding agreement with terms that will not be met in the future, resulting in the loss of ownership of their real estate. They may (in the future) own their co-op as a business but not their property. The following is the basis for my thoughts:
The board members are not housing or construction experts and although they do have two attorneys working with them, their corporate partners have attorneys, facility experts and a vast network of resources and "colleagues" to work for them. Metaphorically speaking, The King/Garvey Board members appear as minnows, while their partners appear as whales. I wonder if in nature, whales ever negotiate with minnows on any terms. I am also reminded of the children's animated film, (American Tail) in which a little mouse discovers a cat who has been in disguise (as a mouse) and the cat looks back at him and asks, "Who are you going to believe me or your own eyes?" The mouse is silent. In nature cats are natural predators to mice.
Human nature is at work here. Cultural norms are at work here. Some people have set up a system that always results in loss of ownership when certain people enter into system agreements. Everyone wants to be successful and make the right choices. Everyone wants to be perceived as someone who wants the best for their community. The problem is that when all of the facts and actuals are not presented, making the best decision becomes very, very difficult.
Is there some deception going on? More than likely, because the nature of business is often deceptive. For example. Why does roofing cost so much more today than it did yesterday? Are the materials used today so vastly different? Just what exactly has raised the cost of construction? There are a lot of complex factors that no one wants to bring to light because of the culture of making money. People don't often admit that the "dot.com" went bust because the sales projections were fictional accounts! They were ideas (stories) sold to buyers that did not produce anything! In our culture of making a fast million, there are always some losers.
The board members will have to close out the tendency to worry about external perceptions and each one will have to ask themselves is the information on the table accurate or is it an attempt to make money at their expense? Is someone selling them a wolf ticket and what is the price of the that ticket if they buy it?
Another unfortunate scenario for them is that they are being forced in the direction of entering into a high-risk agreement by their business partner. They really have been threatened. Sign!...or else!
On another note, I've observed some practices that seem to be a matter of habit. Certain people behave certain ways because it is "expected" of them. I see that at work here. Some people take on the role as "saviors" or "poverty pimps" (you choose which title applies) and they come to the "rescue" of other people and exact their payment out of an apparent third party (usually some government agency) and then take care of the poor, disadvantaged, at risk people. Other people take on the "receipient" or "I don't deserve more than I have" attitude and allow themselves to be "beneficiaries" or "taken advantage of" (again, you decide which title applies) It's hard to face the harshness of attitudes and practices, but if you take a cold hard look at behaviors in the past it's not something to shrink back from. In fact now is the time to face the challenges because economically the future doesn't look too good. Real estate in the future will be the difference between having a place to live and homelessness. It is because of the idea of real estate ownership, that there is so much homelessness.
There are some experts (community leaders) who should be advocating for them, but for reasons which just might be political remain silent. The silence is reminiscent of the kind where negative and rather nasty experiences prohibit would be leaders or advocates from saying anything. The reality is that we must all get along in order to survive, because when those in a weaker position speak up, those in the stronger position, wipe them out. The stronger will wipe out them out economically, politically/socially and then physically. That's been the politics so far.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Poetry for Social Awakening
Joseph Stegner, reminds me of a modern day Alan Ginsberg. Ginsberg wrote the controversial poem Howl. Stegner, no doubt like Ginsberg is hopelessly bound to his duty to write the truth of human experience in prose and to spread it wherever he travels. He hopes to enlighten people to a deeper recognition of our common human spirit.
Sometimes the truth he observes isn't beautiful. He seems sad when he is forced to share the awful scenery behind his poetic expressions. He is an idealist in an angry and often mean spirited society. He seems to hope in the midst of doubtful experiences that someday "we will all just get along!"
Stegner is brave enough to look at life without blinders or rose colored glasses, but he is also mindful enough to see motivators. Although Stegner has observed some of the worst human encounters, he manages to probe the issues through the eyes of our common human soul to bring understanding of perspectives through his work.
If you want to read his poem, look for a copy of the Western Edition! Its somewhere in the Fillmoe!
Sometimes the truth he observes isn't beautiful. He seems sad when he is forced to share the awful scenery behind his poetic expressions. He is an idealist in an angry and often mean spirited society. He seems to hope in the midst of doubtful experiences that someday "we will all just get along!"
Stegner is brave enough to look at life without blinders or rose colored glasses, but he is also mindful enough to see motivators. Although Stegner has observed some of the worst human encounters, he manages to probe the issues through the eyes of our common human soul to bring understanding of perspectives through his work.
If you want to read his poem, look for a copy of the Western Edition! Its somewhere in the Fillmoe!
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Western Addition Resident Runs For Mayor
Quintin Mecke: Why He’s
Running for
Mayor
by Kathy Perry
It was interesting to learn that Quintin Mecke, (a Western Addition resident) was running for Mayor against incumbent, Gavin Newsom. 10 years ago, Mecke was a U.S. Peace Corps volunteer serving in Niger West Africa working to combat the growing deforestation and erosion from the Sahara desert. After his U.S. Peace Corps service, Mecke moved to San Francisco.
Mecke was introduced to San Francisco politics when he became involved with Tom Ammiano’s campaign for Supervisor in 1998. Later, through Ammiano he met Matt Gonzalez and worked on his campaign for Supervisor in District 5. Mecke debated with then Supervisor Newsom on his “Care Not Cash” proposal. At the time, Mecke was working on another proposal addressing homelessness. Mecke also worked with Gonzalez’ Mayoral campaign followed by Mirkarimi’s campaign for Supervisor. A few years ago he began working and organizing around violence issues. I wanted to know why he was running.
Mecke began the discussion with observations around public safety. “Several years ago when the homicides were striking, and the rate was actually less than what it is now. There was a huge discussion at City Hall, all sorts of drama back and forth. (There was) Community Connect and all this kind of conversation, I watched the Newsom administration run around and (paraphrasing) ‘oh we’re going to have these meetings, we’re going to change things, community policing’ and all these conversations...(he paused) and nothing happened.” I acknowledged that beat cops came out of it, Mecke reminded me, “As you know, that (mandated beat cops) came from Ross! What is interesting is that it really speaks to the fact that there is a disconnect. Ross felt he had to legislate action because no action was happening.”
He continued, “The administration is not asserting any pro-active stance on public safety. The fact that (Supervisors) had to mandate the police department is really kind of stunning!” He cited that the Mayor didn’t support Proposition A in June of 2006, a violence prevention-funding proposal, and that Newsom had vetoed foot patrols not once but twice. “For me at least and (from) working in the community, I live in District 5, we’ve had two or three day time shootings here on Divisadero! Its unprecedented! The violence has increased to a point where it’s really quite amazing! There is not a comprehensive approach or strategy aside from beat patrols.”
I asked if he thought that he could get a handle on the violence if he were elected. “There is a combination of things I think that need to be done. I certainly have worked intimately with the police department and know many of the Captains in the command center. I think many of them are good folks doing good work, but I think we need to re-envision policing a little bit. I think the fact that the community and the police department has so little trust between each other and that they can’t get witnesses for even things like Ella Hill Hutch (a shooting-homicide that occurred at a community center). I mean, talk about the overall symbol of the fact that there were folks in that room that knew (or saw) exactly who it was. They (the shooter) walked in and did it, and turned around and walked out.”
I asked what he thought was the reason ing behind the community silence. Mecke answered, “Probably, first and foremost is fear.” I asked what he was going to do about that as Mayor. He answered, “You can’t legislate trust. They (the community) need to see that the police department wants to build trust. They (the city) need to grow that process of treating the community as though it’s not isolated. The fact that this City doesn’t even flinch when things happen in the Western Addition or Bayview or Visitacion Valley...We are at 91 homicides in the middle of October and the City is having no conversation about it. As you know, over 60% of the victims are African-American. If we were talking about any other population it would be a crisis, an epidemic, there would be press conferences, there would be all sorts of things. If this was Pacific Heights, but we’re not!” I asked what he would do to change things. Mecke said, go back to community policing, change the relationship between the community and the police department, invest in the community through neighborhood programs and address the conditions in public housing, which are horrendous.
Mecke explained that some of the housing unit conditions were so bad that if occurring on private property, would be considered illegal. Because the property is on federal property there is deference. “That doesn’t mean we should accept any of these conditions!” He expressed dismay at the fact that San Francisco has a homeless population and concurrently has boarded up public housing units. Mecke acknowledged that federal funding for public housing has diminished. “We need to very creatively think outside of the box.” He continued, “I think the Mayor had said earlier this year that HOPE SF (Public Housing funding) was going to be a bond issue. They were going to go to the voters. Very quickly, they looked at the initial polling and said, we can’t go to the voters it might not work out! He needs to put his political capital to use!
That is what is confusing to me! I’m not quite so sure what he (Mayor Newsom) believes in. Regardless of the poll numbers, you need to take a stand to at least tell people that this (HOPE SF) is something the City needs to do. Not just look at the poll numbers and say oh its 60/40, I guess we’ll back off. That’s not leadership in my mind. Leadership is putting yourself out there on certain issues even when its not necessarily a clear win. You have to struggle for that win.”
I asked if he would make radical changes in Mayoral appointments, Mecke was very clear, “Yeah, I think especially around issues that we know are pressing. That would range from homelessness to public health and public safety. You want to have commissioners that reflect your values. We have a very commission driven city government where a lot of the commissioners make a lot of decisions. Whether it’s redevelopment or others, we need to make sure that who is on a commission is not just simply there politically, but that they are really adding value. We should not just reappoint them because they’ve always been there.” Mecke explained that the City should move beyond some past practices. Citing the planning commission as example, Mecke said we still trust the market as if it’s going to cure everything. He believes focusing on the quality of life in neighborhoods is important.
I asked how he would represent business interests both large and small. “We often lump the business community together as one entity. I don’t think that small businesses or locally owned small businesses are represented by the Chamber of Commerce or the Committee on Jobs. Those are multinational corporations that are downtown and have very specific interests about their profit margin. I don’t think the conversations they are involved in effect small businesses. Embracing the small business folks and making sure that we can support them, through micro-lending or other ways is important .”
Mecke says that big businesses missed the boat on the issue of formula retail. What neighborhoods wanted was to have a choice. Mecke says the City recently sent business representatives to look at model practices around dealing with homelessness but did not send social service representatives or social workers.
Citing the various needs of different neighborhoods. I asked how he would meet and balance the cultural needs of the entire city. “You can make an effort to bridge some of those gaps. But from my view of leadership, sometimes it’s okay to say that you are not going to be able to. Sometimes at the expense of balance, there are certain populations that disproportionately bear the brunt of some things. If there is one group that is opposed to changing anything, then leadership means that you have to advocate for things that need happen. Balance in all sense is good, but if you have a history of imbalance then at some point you have to push the other way to right things. I think that in San Francisco the current administration has been very risk averse. It (Newsom’s administration) tries to just please people versus leading. Leading at some time is going to cause friction.” He says that it helps to know what the vision of an administration is.
I asked him to share with me his top five priorities. “Affordable housing, public safety, homelessness, muni and our school system.” Mecke said that the public is led to believe that homelessness is the fault of those who are homeless but he says it is counter to what he finds in the shelter system.
Mecke inspects homeless shelters. “I’ve met veterans from Iraq and after four years of a horrendous war these people are coming home with post traumatic stress disease (PTSD’s) their families can’t manage them, the federal government is not going to take care of them. They are ending up here or in other cities on the street in homeless shelters. Victims of Katrina, people with healthcare problems, people who have had medical issues, those are stories (not being told) we are not saying that these people are experiencing homelessness. They didn’t start off homeless! We need to make sure the homeless shelters have a standard of care, which it doesn’t. If you or I needed shelter for a night, depending on where they sent you would determine the conditions you would encounter." Mecke says that some places offere beds and blankets while others only offer a floor.
Regarding affordable housing Mecke mades a good point, “We are pricing people out and we are losing any portion of the middle class that we think still exists! Rent control is the last stand in this town for any affordable housing.”
For more information go to:
www.qformayor.org
Running for
Mayor
by Kathy Perry
It was interesting to learn that Quintin Mecke, (a Western Addition resident) was running for Mayor against incumbent, Gavin Newsom. 10 years ago, Mecke was a U.S. Peace Corps volunteer serving in Niger West Africa working to combat the growing deforestation and erosion from the Sahara desert. After his U.S. Peace Corps service, Mecke moved to San Francisco.
Mecke was introduced to San Francisco politics when he became involved with Tom Ammiano’s campaign for Supervisor in 1998. Later, through Ammiano he met Matt Gonzalez and worked on his campaign for Supervisor in District 5. Mecke debated with then Supervisor Newsom on his “Care Not Cash” proposal. At the time, Mecke was working on another proposal addressing homelessness. Mecke also worked with Gonzalez’ Mayoral campaign followed by Mirkarimi’s campaign for Supervisor. A few years ago he began working and organizing around violence issues. I wanted to know why he was running.
Mecke began the discussion with observations around public safety. “Several years ago when the homicides were striking, and the rate was actually less than what it is now. There was a huge discussion at City Hall, all sorts of drama back and forth. (There was) Community Connect and all this kind of conversation, I watched the Newsom administration run around and (paraphrasing) ‘oh we’re going to have these meetings, we’re going to change things, community policing’ and all these conversations...(he paused) and nothing happened.” I acknowledged that beat cops came out of it, Mecke reminded me, “As you know, that (mandated beat cops) came from Ross! What is interesting is that it really speaks to the fact that there is a disconnect. Ross felt he had to legislate action because no action was happening.”
He continued, “The administration is not asserting any pro-active stance on public safety. The fact that (Supervisors) had to mandate the police department is really kind of stunning!” He cited that the Mayor didn’t support Proposition A in June of 2006, a violence prevention-funding proposal, and that Newsom had vetoed foot patrols not once but twice. “For me at least and (from) working in the community, I live in District 5, we’ve had two or three day time shootings here on Divisadero! Its unprecedented! The violence has increased to a point where it’s really quite amazing! There is not a comprehensive approach or strategy aside from beat patrols.”
I asked if he thought that he could get a handle on the violence if he were elected. “There is a combination of things I think that need to be done. I certainly have worked intimately with the police department and know many of the Captains in the command center. I think many of them are good folks doing good work, but I think we need to re-envision policing a little bit. I think the fact that the community and the police department has so little trust between each other and that they can’t get witnesses for even things like Ella Hill Hutch (a shooting-homicide that occurred at a community center). I mean, talk about the overall symbol of the fact that there were folks in that room that knew (or saw) exactly who it was. They (the shooter) walked in and did it, and turned around and walked out.”
I asked what he thought was the reason ing behind the community silence. Mecke answered, “Probably, first and foremost is fear.” I asked what he was going to do about that as Mayor. He answered, “You can’t legislate trust. They (the community) need to see that the police department wants to build trust. They (the city) need to grow that process of treating the community as though it’s not isolated. The fact that this City doesn’t even flinch when things happen in the Western Addition or Bayview or Visitacion Valley...We are at 91 homicides in the middle of October and the City is having no conversation about it. As you know, over 60% of the victims are African-American. If we were talking about any other population it would be a crisis, an epidemic, there would be press conferences, there would be all sorts of things. If this was Pacific Heights, but we’re not!” I asked what he would do to change things. Mecke said, go back to community policing, change the relationship between the community and the police department, invest in the community through neighborhood programs and address the conditions in public housing, which are horrendous.
Mecke explained that some of the housing unit conditions were so bad that if occurring on private property, would be considered illegal. Because the property is on federal property there is deference. “That doesn’t mean we should accept any of these conditions!” He expressed dismay at the fact that San Francisco has a homeless population and concurrently has boarded up public housing units. Mecke acknowledged that federal funding for public housing has diminished. “We need to very creatively think outside of the box.” He continued, “I think the Mayor had said earlier this year that HOPE SF (Public Housing funding) was going to be a bond issue. They were going to go to the voters. Very quickly, they looked at the initial polling and said, we can’t go to the voters it might not work out! He needs to put his political capital to use!
That is what is confusing to me! I’m not quite so sure what he (Mayor Newsom) believes in. Regardless of the poll numbers, you need to take a stand to at least tell people that this (HOPE SF) is something the City needs to do. Not just look at the poll numbers and say oh its 60/40, I guess we’ll back off. That’s not leadership in my mind. Leadership is putting yourself out there on certain issues even when its not necessarily a clear win. You have to struggle for that win.”
I asked if he would make radical changes in Mayoral appointments, Mecke was very clear, “Yeah, I think especially around issues that we know are pressing. That would range from homelessness to public health and public safety. You want to have commissioners that reflect your values. We have a very commission driven city government where a lot of the commissioners make a lot of decisions. Whether it’s redevelopment or others, we need to make sure that who is on a commission is not just simply there politically, but that they are really adding value. We should not just reappoint them because they’ve always been there.” Mecke explained that the City should move beyond some past practices. Citing the planning commission as example, Mecke said we still trust the market as if it’s going to cure everything. He believes focusing on the quality of life in neighborhoods is important.
I asked how he would represent business interests both large and small. “We often lump the business community together as one entity. I don’t think that small businesses or locally owned small businesses are represented by the Chamber of Commerce or the Committee on Jobs. Those are multinational corporations that are downtown and have very specific interests about their profit margin. I don’t think the conversations they are involved in effect small businesses. Embracing the small business folks and making sure that we can support them, through micro-lending or other ways is important .”
Mecke says that big businesses missed the boat on the issue of formula retail. What neighborhoods wanted was to have a choice. Mecke says the City recently sent business representatives to look at model practices around dealing with homelessness but did not send social service representatives or social workers.
Citing the various needs of different neighborhoods. I asked how he would meet and balance the cultural needs of the entire city. “You can make an effort to bridge some of those gaps. But from my view of leadership, sometimes it’s okay to say that you are not going to be able to. Sometimes at the expense of balance, there are certain populations that disproportionately bear the brunt of some things. If there is one group that is opposed to changing anything, then leadership means that you have to advocate for things that need happen. Balance in all sense is good, but if you have a history of imbalance then at some point you have to push the other way to right things. I think that in San Francisco the current administration has been very risk averse. It (Newsom’s administration) tries to just please people versus leading. Leading at some time is going to cause friction.” He says that it helps to know what the vision of an administration is.
I asked him to share with me his top five priorities. “Affordable housing, public safety, homelessness, muni and our school system.” Mecke said that the public is led to believe that homelessness is the fault of those who are homeless but he says it is counter to what he finds in the shelter system.
Mecke inspects homeless shelters. “I’ve met veterans from Iraq and after four years of a horrendous war these people are coming home with post traumatic stress disease (PTSD’s) their families can’t manage them, the federal government is not going to take care of them. They are ending up here or in other cities on the street in homeless shelters. Victims of Katrina, people with healthcare problems, people who have had medical issues, those are stories (not being told) we are not saying that these people are experiencing homelessness. They didn’t start off homeless! We need to make sure the homeless shelters have a standard of care, which it doesn’t. If you or I needed shelter for a night, depending on where they sent you would determine the conditions you would encounter." Mecke says that some places offere beds and blankets while others only offer a floor.
Regarding affordable housing Mecke mades a good point, “We are pricing people out and we are losing any portion of the middle class that we think still exists! Rent control is the last stand in this town for any affordable housing.”
For more information go to:
www.qformayor.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)