Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If WaWa is bailing, it's a failed city...

It shows that the city following developer greed screwed up Columbia Heights.

Now they're doing the same everywhere else .

Yes and no. The major and easily foreseeable screw up in Columbia Heights was the lack of public/open space, but even worse, they removed green space that would have provided community amenities and provided the opportunity for the neighborhood to be attractive to families. For example, behind the Tivoli used to be a community garden which made way for townhouses. They made zero provision for adding a garden back anywhere else. I have not been working to the area in a while, but before the development there were kids rising tricycles and big wheels on the narrow sidewalks on Park Rd. They could have added a beautiful park but instead gave the whole block to the DC USA development. Without a park and green space, what amenities does Columbia Heights have as a neighborhood that people want to spend time in or raise a family? It’s pretty obvious why the neighborhood is deteriorating. These arrogant urban planners and TOD maximalist housing people have a lot to answer for.

I am all in favor of green space but I think you’re delusional. There is a plaza, and tons of people are there all day. The violence isn’t coming from Target. I’d be curious to see the crime stats to prove your view.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If WaWa is bailing, it's a failed city...

It shows that the city following developer greed screwed up Columbia Heights.

Now they're doing the same everywhere else .

Yes and no. The major and easily foreseeable screw up in Columbia Heights was the lack of public/open space, but even worse, they removed green space that would have provided community amenities and provided the opportunity for the neighborhood to be attractive to families. For example, behind the Tivoli used to be a community garden which made way for townhouses. They made zero provision for adding a garden back anywhere else. I have not been working to the area in a while, but before the development there were kids rising tricycles and big wheels on the narrow sidewalks on Park Rd. They could have added a beautiful park but instead gave the whole block to the DC USA development. Without a park and green space, what amenities does Columbia Heights have as a neighborhood that people want to spend time in or raise a family? It’s pretty obvious why the neighborhood is deteriorating. These arrogant urban planners and TOD maximalist housing people have a lot to answer for.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If WaWa is bailing, it's a failed city...

It shows that the city following developer greed screwed up Columbia Heights.

Now they're doing the same everywhere else .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If WaWa is bailing, it's a failed city...

It shows that the city following developer greed screwed up Columbia Heights.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/06/how-san-francisco-became-failed-city/661199/

This article is written by Bari Weiss’s partner who is SF old money and family is worth over a billion.

And? Is it untrue?

A lot of it seems to be embellished. While I agree with the sentiment of malaise, I don’t think the diagnosis is completely correct. I would expect that the author would have much better insight into the social problems at her country club instead.

What’s your point? I have masses of family photos like this one. I still have a right to my opinion and we are not billionaires. You don’t have to live in a t-shirt, you know?

Anonymous wrote:If WaWa is bailing, it's a failed city...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/06/how-san-francisco-became-failed-city/661199/

This article is written by Bari Weiss’s partner who is SF old money and family is worth over a billion.

And? Is it untrue?

A lot of it seems to be embellished. While I agree with the sentiment of malaise, I don’t think the diagnosis is completely correct. I would expect that the author would have much better insight into the social problems at her country club instead.

Anonymous wrote:People should not be allowed to live in tents on public sidewalks.
People who threaten or harm others with dangerous weapons should be locked up.
People who walk into stores and grab things off the shelves without paying for them should be prosecuted.
Holding these opinions does not make one a racist or a republican.
So, so, sick of the sanctimonious progressives destroying the quality of life in DC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A big issue is SFPD. They stopped arresting for petty crime even before Chesa was elected. This is a theme throughout many cities in the US - the police work slowdown has been real, they stop arresting (except when there’s a gun, a body, or a protest), and that ends up leading to civilians feeling helpless.

A prediction: nothing will change with Chesa gone. SFPD is still pissed off at the Mayor, the council, and the citizens who ask for respect of their rights. How do you reign in a rogue police force?

+1. Police everywhere have pulled back from doing their jobs bc they don't like being criticized. I'm not sure how to fix it.

They pulled back because you don't waste time arresting people for crimes you know the city won't prosecute. If you read the article, you would have read the part where the police streets the same guy for like 15 felonies in 18 months. If the city isn't going to prosecute, why arrest? Progressives decriminalize everything, and then when things go to hell, they try to blame cops for not arresting. That's not how it works. You're getting exactly what you want by decriminalizing everything...lawlessness and anarchy.

This is a fantasy. SFPD is notoriously corrupt. In fact, public corruption is SF has been a general problem for 100 years and shows no signs of improvement. There will be zero progress in SF towards improving quality of life until there is progress on public corruption and SFPD is reformed.

Unfortunately for you, voters in SF believe otherwise.

Progressives have destroyed the city, not the SFPD. The results of the recall and the utter destruction of the liberal progressive agenda speaks for itself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“I used to tell myself that San Francisco’s politics were wacky but the city was trying—really trying—to be good. But the reality is that with the smartest minds and so much money and the very best of intentions, San Francisco became a cruel city. It became so dogmatically progressive that maintaining the purity of the politics required accepting—or at least ignoring—devastating results.

But this dogmatism may be buckling under pressure from reality. Earlier this year, in a landslide, San Francisco voters recalled the head of the school board and two of her most progressive colleagues. These are the people who also turned out Boudin; early results showed m that about 60 percent of voters chose to recall him.

Residents had hoped Boudin would reform the criminal-justice system and treat low-level offenders more humanely. Instead, critics argued that his policies victimized victims, allowed criminals to go free to reoffend, and did nothing to help the city’s most vulnerable. To understand just how noteworthy Boudin’s defenestration is, please keep in mind that San Francisco has only a tiny number of Republicans. This fight is about leftists versus liberals. It’s about idealists who think a perfect world is within reach—it’ll only take a little more time, a little more commitment, a little more funding, forever—and those who are fed up.“

This quote perfectly encapsulates the debate.

I was reading a Facebook post recently on the “New Hill East” Facebook group feed. It was from the director of a non profit dedicated to implementing restorative justice policies and her post was imploring residents of the city not to seek carceral types of punishment for crimes, but to allow restorative justice to simply have more time to work. To show itself and prove itself as a better means of justice than prison for violent offenders.

I shook my head. Not because I don’t think restorative justice could sometimes be useful, but because my immediate thoughts on the post were: “lady, car jackings and puppy stealing at gun point and violent crime is up by double digit percentages in the last few years and you’re arguing for, objectively, a more lenient form of punishment for violent criminals? I get that much of the uptick could be related the pandemic, but at the same time it could also criminals knowing that city has implement criminal justice reform policies that themselves seem to promote a climate of…lawlessness. If teens know they get a slap on the wrist and are released after they steal a car, they will do it. If a 26 year old “kid” knows that the recently implemented Youth Rehabiliation Act allows for heir criminal record to be shielded so they face less consequences, then that’s a pretty progressive criminal justice problem that seems like it would exacerbate crime.”

I was also annoyed because even though, I considered or I wanted to comment on her post, which good sense told me not to, being a Hill resident, and understanding how much blow back I would receive for questioning the progressive orthodoxy of these criminal justice reform policiies from tons of other members of the group who by and large sway liberal, me commenting just would have don’t nothing other than to “out myself” as some kind of moderate political monster.

It’s gotten to the point where rigid adherence to political ideology and purity tests are the norm. I would have been crucified for saying “maybe jail is a more appropriate punishment for car jacking than restorative justice”. But doing that would have branded me
Insensitive or worse. It’s weird. This is what Fox News means by cancel culture I guess. It’s a climate where you can’t feel free to question the prevailaong group think.