It's actually a bit more complicated for SF. The measure had 55% voter approval, but it needed 66% to pass. All in all I think San Franciscans said that they're in favor of such a ban, and I imagine that the numbers would have been different in a different election cycle with higher turnout, or had the bill been written a bit differently. I think (and my understanding is a little unclear here) that the SF measure was using the money from the tax to fund specific projects, and because of that it required a higher approval threshold.
@garli Loans! At least that's what my friends at UCSF medical school did in order to pay for housing near to school. Thankfully apartments are much cheaper out towards SFSU, but students have to pack into apartments like sardines. It's also a commuter college so a lot of students drive and take public transit in. UCSF is graduate only, which thankfully reduces the housing impact somewhat, though they do offer limited housing. And USF has on campus housing thankfully. The Academy of Art in San Francisco has been illegally converting properties they own into rentals that are not zoned for housing. They keep getting found in violation with the city, but they have such a cushy relationship that they are never fined or reprimanded.
@ATF Thanks for the info! I'll see if I can find it.
I haven't had a chance to read the linked article yet so I'm going to be that jerk that comments before reading, but here we go. I'd love to see a renewed conversation in the United States about our mental health care system and what we can do to fix it. That convo started a bit after the shootings in Sandy Hook, but the reality is that we have lots of citizens that need care and are not getting it. I know that we had a really horrible track record with mental institutions, which is why by and large they have been shut down, but there are lots of people in our communities that require both short term and long term guardianship and care and there are few options and many of these people end up on the streets. It's really shameful and makes me super sad.
@Mike Dang it's a shame to see the paper go. I didn't agree with many of their policies on rent control, I suppose one could argue that their perspective has helped get SF into the mess it's in now, but it was great to have an independent, honestly left leaning media establishment in town. And their Best of the Bay recommendations were amazing.
It's actually the SF Guardian that is shutting down, not the Chronicle :)
Ah green! I love colored wedding dresses. The dress I bought for my wedding was a Vera Wang also came in grey and I saw it in that color first and fell in love. I sort of wish I was bold enough to get it in that color. It was the first dress I found online that I loved, the first one I tried on, and I wish I would wear it every day. http://chicvintagebrides.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Vera-Wang-2012-Wedding-Dress-Grey-Charcoal-Back.jpg I also had a visiting designer in the shop when I tried on gowns, and it was awkward to give feedback on the dress because of course he loved it, and you want to be polite but also just move on.
Because I am a crazy person I am enrolled in a Nail Tech program on top of my day job and I swear 60% of what we learn is what nasty diseases you can contract and pass along to customers and how not to do so. Tips for not getting a flesh eating bacteria: 1. you get what you pay for. Cheap salons don't pay their techs or clean their implements (metal stuff can be cleaned, files should be used once, and foot scrapers are actually illegal in most states), and giving these shops your business drives low wages and bad working conditions 2. Please think twice about getting a pedicure in a place that has spa tubs. They're really hard to clean out and that's where all the nasty bacteria lives. It might seem weird, but shops that place a plastic bag around a pedicure tub aren't being cheap, they're being sanitary! Finally I wouldn't worry about the UV lamp thing (at least for gel manicures), there are plenty of studies that say they are totally fine for use because your exposure is very low.
@MrDean I think your comment illustrates my frustrations with the current state of affairs in the Bay Area. I don't think that everything needs to be mutually exclusive, though perhaps I am being naive here. I don't see why we couldn't commit to building more rental stock in SF, and in the Bay Area in general around public transportation while working simultaneously to reform the Ellis Act and protect seniors/vulnerable people from eviction, or at least use some of the housing stock the city government holds as a safety net for these groups should eviction occur.
@NoName I would have to disagree. Yes, SF is an odd mix of waterfront landfill + bedrock in earthquake territory, and on top of that the city is only 7x7 miles and that means housing concerns here are particular. However, it's essentially a glorified suburb currently and I think all communities here could benefit from increased density. What that density looks like, and how's it's developed is another question - especially so we can avoid erasing neighborhoods like the Western Addition debacle that removed so many african americans from SF. I do believe that those social aspects could be respected while allowing for greater density. At least then people who get Ellis Act evicted would have a place within the city to move to once losing a rent controlled space.