Greens call for Rent/Mortgage Moratorium

SF Green Party Calls for Moratorium on Rent and Mortgage Payments

In the midst of the world’s greatest viral pandemic in modern times, the San Francisco Green Party is supporting calls to halt rent and mortgage payments until people are able to return to work and recover their economic stability.

This unprecedented mass shutdown of normal operations is leaving many already on a tight budget struggling to make ends meet and in order to avoid a more serious crisis, relief must come immediately.

Furthermore, this relief must not be just a delay of payments but a cancellation, as people cannot be reasonably expected to be able to make up for months of lost work whenever this is over.

Our specific call is for our home of San Francisco, but we believe similar action should be taken statewide and nationwide.

A Green New Deal for San Francisco

The "Green New Deal" has long been a key part of Green Party platforms.  The idea was first popularized by European Greens in 2006, and was introduced to the US by various Green campaigns, including Howie Hawkins for NY Governor in 2010 and Jill Stein's campaigns for President in 2012 and 2016.  It's a major plank in Hawkins' campaign for President as a Green in 2020.  Progressive Democrats have also picked up the idea: Congressperson Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has her own version, as does Senator Bernie Sanders.

 

 

What would a Green New Deal look like for San Franciscans?  The SF Green Party believes that implementing the following policies would set San Francisco on a path towards a more sustainable, ecosocialist economy, and we urge San Francisco politicians to enact as many of these as possible without waiting on the state or federal government (or other countries) to rescue us from our current trajectory of ecological collapse.

 

  • Social housing - public housing for San Franciscans of all income levels, as proposed in the SF Community Housing Act.

  • SF Municipal bank, which will offer deposit accounts and loans to San Franciscans, capitalized by removing all SF funds from commercial banks.

  • Municipalize PG&E, towards 100% carbon/nuclear/dam-free energy.

  • Municipal utilities must give hiring preferences to people from areas subject to environmental injustice.
  • Reparations for historical victims of environmental injustice in the SE quadrant.

  • Lower voting age to 16, so those impacted by climate change cannot be dismissed.

  • Ban on new construction at elevations likely to be flooded within 100
    years.

  • Anti-speculator measures - housing as a right, vacancy/flipping fees.

  • Improved Medicare for All San Franciscans.  No co-pays, no deductibles, no out of pocket costs when you need care.  Eyeglasses, dental, mental health and long term care is included.

  • Fully fund eviction protection measures.

  • Free rent for Treasure Island residents.

  • Save Free City College, no class cuts.
  • Toxic cleanup - radiation, heavy metals, gas tanks, etc. BV/TI focus.

  • Subsidies to replace fossil fuel infrastructure (e.g., gas lines in old houses) with renewables.
  • Transit tax on large corporations, on parking spaces in new office and residential projects, on Uber/Lyft/other fake taxis, and on private shuttle buses.

SF Supervisors Report Card 2017

How Green is Your Supervisor?

This is our report card for the SF Board of Supervisors in 2017. It shows the most important votes in 2017, from a Green Party perspective, and whether each supervisor supported or opposed our position. Some of the votes are on amendments to legislation. Compare to our 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, and 2012 report cards.

 

2017 was a "go along to get along" year, with few votes breaking down along traditional "progressive" vs "conservative" lines. With conservatives firmly in control of the City, really bad legislation was passed with near unanimity, while potentially good legislation was watered down to the point of ineffectiveness. The lack of progressive leadership at the Board is reflected in the worst scores we've given in years.

 

Note that some votes in early January that we thought were very important, such as Free City College and the Alex Nieto Memorial, were repeat votes on issues that we already scored in 2016, so we didn't score them again this year.

 

Key:

Supported Green Party position
Opposed Green Party position
Absent (Excused)

 

  D 1: Sandra Fewer D 2: Mark Farrell D 3: Aaron Peskin D 4: Katy Tang D 5: London Breed D 6: Jane Kim D 7: Norman Yee D 8: Jeff Sheehy D 9: Hillary Ronen D 10: Malia Cohen D 11: Ahsha Safai
Public Employees Testifying Under Oath Y N Y N Y Y Y N N Y Y
Natural Areas Plan Y Y Y Y Y - N Y Y Y Y
Gag Affordable Housing Developers N Y N Y N N N Y N N N
Local Income Tax Y N Y Y N Y Y N Y Y Y
Jung to Arts Commission Y Y N Y Y N Y Y N Y Y
Density Bonus Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y
Airbnb Settlement Y - Y Y Y Y Y Y Y - Y
DeJesus to Police Commission Y - Y Y Y - Y Y Y Y N
Eviction Reporting Y N Y N N Y Y N Y N N
Fake Fossil Fuel Divestment Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Street Box Fees Y Y N Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y
Bike "Chop Shops" N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y
Neo-McCarthyism Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Wells Fargo ATMs N Y N Y Y N Y Y N Y Y
Recreational Cannabis N N Y N N N N N Y N N
Presidio Terrace Y Y N Y Y N N Y N Y Y
Overall Score 44% 0% 63% 13% 19% 57% 50% 6% 56% 27% 19%

Read more: SF Supervisors Report Card 2017

SF Supervisors Report Card 2018

How Green is Your Supervisor?

This is our report card for the SF Board of Supervisors in 2018. It shows the most important votes in 2018, from a Green Party perspective, and whether each supervisor supported or opposed our position. Some of the votes are on amendments to legislation. Compare to our 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, and 2012 report cards.

 

Key:

Supported Green Party position
Opposed Green Party position
Absent (Excused)
New Supervisor

 

  D 1: Sandra Fewer D 2: Mark Farrell / Catherine Stefani D 3: Aaron Peskin D 4: Katy Tang D 5: London Breed / Vallie Brown D 6: Jane Kim D 7: Norman Yee D 8: Jeff Sheehy / Rafael Mandelman D 9: Hillary Ronen D 10: Malia Cohen D 11: Ahsha Safai
Interim Mayor MF - MF LB - MF MF LB/MF MF LB LB
Oppose "Pay to Play" Y Y Y N N Y Y N Y N Y
Secret POA Negotiations Y Y Y - Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Real "Question Time" Y N Y N N Y Y Y Y Y Y
Oppose Citywide Rezoning Y Y Y N N Y Y N Y Y N
Oppose Bribery Y N Y N N Y Y N Y N N
Wiener Conservatorship N Y N Y Y N N Y N Y Y
Police Commissioners N Y N Y Y N N Y N N Y
MTA Budget N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Support Prop 10 Y N Y N Y Y Y Y Y N N
MTA Ad Contract Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Eliminate Parking Minimums Y N Y Y Y Y N Y Y N N
Free City College Y N - - Y Y Y Y Y - Y
Overall Score 77% 0% / 17% 75% 9% 0% / 60% 69% 62% 13% / 60% 69% 25% 23%

Read more: SF Supervisors Report Card 2018

Resolution in support of Midtown Tenants

SF Green Party Resolution in support of Midtown Tenants

 

The San Francisco Green Party opposes the proposed demolition of existing homes at Midtown Park. In addition, the San Francisco Green Party supports Midtown residents’ decision to ask for the removal of Mercy Housing as the City’s leaseholder of the property.

In 2007, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors resolved the following guiding principles to afford Midtown residents the opportunity for housing sovereignty: 1) prevent displacement, 2) involve tenants, 3) protect long-term affordability, 4) explore alternative ownership structures, and 5) ensure safe, sanitary, and decent housing. The proposed demolition does not honor this resolution which was passed unanimously by the Board of Supervisors and signed by former Mayor Gavin Newsom. The proposed demolition, in fact, will result in the violation of all of the above guiding principles.

Midtown residents have detailed a problematic relationship with Mercy Housing and as such are aggrieved. Mercy Housing has received these grievances from residents and residents have stated that Mercy Housing has not acted in good faith to address them. These grievances include the following: 1) Reduction of security staff, 2) Creating adverse conditions for seniors—prohibitions from moving to ground-floor apartments, 3) Entering apartments without notice and permission, 4) Unresponsiveness of Mercy on-site manager, 5) Increases in fees for Parking allotment/tow threats, 6) withholding vacant units from seniors and family members on wait-list, 7) “Change of tenancy” threats which would result in rent increases, 8) Deferred maintenance—broken fixtures, mold, improper disposal of renovation debris, 9) failure to keep adequate records, 10) failure to abate nuisance from pests, 11) misuse of property—tenancy by Mercy Housing staff, and 12) harassment—after hours notification/communication.

Midtown was built in response to the razing of the Fillmore—Western Addition in the last Redevelopment era. Residents whose homes were taken by the City using eminent domain were given few relocation options. Midtown Park was one. The last vestiges of the community that was forcibly relocated by Redevelopment remain at Midtown. That community was given assurance that they could buy in and secure their homes for the future. Others have joined them in their endeavor to build and maintain a healthy and vibrant community and work to develop their full potential as such.

Demolition of homes to create “affordable housing” will directly and indirectly displace residents at Midtown. Mercy Housing has proven to be unwilling to address residents’ current concerns while entering into a profitable future agreement with the City. The City and Mercy Housing should not be in the broken social contract business.

The San Francisco Green Party supports the residents of Midtown in their endeavor to keep their homes and to continue to work to maintain and enhance their sense of community and quality of life.