Cyclists: Let the Backlash Begin (or Not)
Verizon Droid: Big Deal? Or Just Another Late Arrival Rival?
Car Thief Steals Vehicle To Get To Auto-Theft Trial
3rd Annual California Dreaming Same-Sex Ballroom Dancing Competition
Photo du Jour 501
Will it give us green power with reasonable rates? Will it give the board of supes a blank check? Will we ever get to see No On H star Carmen Chu gaze into camera all earnest-like again? Will Sean Elsbernd relent? We have no idea. But if you're feeling particularly Yes on H-y tomorrow, head over to Jack Adams Hall (19th Ave/Holloway St) at 9:45 a.m. for a Yes on H rally. It's way too early for us, but for those of you interested: be on the look out for "hundreds of students with a 12 ft. windmill dressed in green shirts, green hard hats, coveralls, and bearing signs supporting Prop H standing on campus across the street from the MUNI platform." You can't miss them.
Oh, and Aaron Peskin should be in there somewhere as well. Hence his adorable image.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
I wanted to support this, but when the BOS had a chance to do this on a small scale it turned into a political mess.
Some will recall the BOS nixed a chance to shut down the heavily polluting Mirant Power plant in SF and replace it with City owned environmentaly friendly gas peaker plants which would be limited in operation.
Well, they blew it. And my confidence that they could implement Prop H in anything resembling responsibility went with it.
Voting No on H is a gimme. Any notion that the City is going to improve the environment by purchasing the City power grid owned by PG&E while not having any plans/abilities to change the way the electricity is generated (wind/solar sound great - what NIMBY's backyard are you going to build that in?) nor provide transmission lines right away for any such new, cleaner means of generating electricity (again, what NIMBYs' backyards are you going to run transmission lines to get the clean energy from your expensive, newly built, city-operated wind farm/solar panel area to the City's power grid?).
This is another half-assed considered measure that has a snappy (misleading) sounding title, but has no plan for follow through - just like George W. Bush's attack in Iraq.
Besides the obvious (this isn't going to clean up the electricity generation side of things anytime soon), do you really want the Board of Supervisors to put the City into debt by billions of dollars without having any say in the matter? Haven't they already proven they can't get off their addiction to using the taxpayer's (YOUR) credit cards for pet projects that benefit the few instead of the most?
Also, if the City's losing revenues from traditional sources (sales taxes, state funding, etc.), what's going to stop them from RAISING rates to make up for budget gaps?
This is an irresponsible measure that should be clearly voted NO again by the voters of San Francisco. The fact that PG&E gave a LARGE donation to the NO on Prop 8 group makes me appreciative of PG&E, but even outside of that, this measure is DUMB. Vote NO on H!
I'm sorry, but until the city can effectively banish turds from the sidewalks and make the N-Judah run in a way that I can actually rely upon it to get me someplace in a halfway reasonable time, I will not vote for any measure that would give the BOS control over more of ANYTHING. Those morons can't even responsibly deal with what they already control.
Aaron Peskin would be a brazilian-givers nightmare. His crack and taint must be super-hairy.
The City does a good job with our water system. Hetch Hetchy water is some of the finest in the nation. The City also already provides something like 10% of our electricity. Muni, city hall, and a bunch of other stuff runs on clean Hetch Hetchy electricity. Amanda Witherell has a great article in this week's Guardian about what a clean public power system would like:
http://www.sfbg.com/entry.php?entry_id=7339
PG&E is a joke. They have the highest rates in the state and the most blackouts in the state. They've already spent 8 million of our ratepayer money on the No on H campaign. Maybe that's why they've raised our rates twice this year and want to raise them again next year.
I'm waiting to experience a blackout four years into my residency in San Francisco ...
I love Peskin.
Jeremy_ofSF has his facts wrong, but that's a trait of Proposition H supporters. First of all PG&E does not have the highest rates in the state. In fact there are California municipal utilities with higher rates. Second, ratepayers do not pay for PG&E's campaigns, stockholders do. As fot the city's water department, I guess Jeremy missed the story of how it had to borrow billions to take care of decades of deferred maintenance. And then he refers to an article in the Bay Guardian, the publication that told us to vote for Nader because there was no difference between Bush and Gore. So why would anyone listen to them?
the bay guardian is retarded...but they have to be, otherwise they'd have no readership.