SF has a tendency to make it very expensive and complicated to do anything here, which means you need a lot of $$ to show up or stay here. It then reacts apoplectically to this reality by proceeding to make things yet even more expensive and complicated. (Repeat ad nauseum).
-
Show this thread
-
Kim-Mai Cutler Retweeted Randy Shaw
Randy at
@beyondchron has a good piece on how tech hasn’t really impacted neighborhood supervisor races at all over the last 20 years. People are pretty oblivious TBH.https://twitter.com/beyondchron/status/1148606673067683844?s=21 …Kim-Mai Cutler added,
1 reply 1 retweet 13 likesShow this thread -
But the reality is that the city needs tech jobs to grow its budget, which has increased by $3 billion or 37% in the last four years alone. But it doesn’t want to add the housing stock, which means population has grown by 2% in the same time period. https://sfbos.org/sites/default/files/Overview_of_2019-20_Proposed_Budget_Final_06-10-19.pdf …pic.twitter.com/H7eI2nblqZ
2 replies 2 retweets 18 likesShow this thread -
And obligations are growing fast enough, that even with that tech boom & growth, the city will still be running $644M deficits in the next 5 years. (It has roughly $10B in unfunded liabilities, both health/retirement.)https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/SF-taking-steps-to-avoid-projected-future-budget-13509714.php …
3 replies 2 retweets 15 likesShow this thread -
So given that no one wants to add housing but everyone wants budget growth, the city’s books get balanced on displacement of the middle/working class & tech gets blamed even though property owners (who have capped taxes) & city workers need it to keep a $12B budget in the black.
1 reply 5 retweets 18 likesShow this thread -
That’s why you see crazy stuff like this. Another planning commissioner on the same commission, Dennis Richards, is very excited about a building that will bring 5,000 workers to SOMA. https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/SF-approves-massive-office-project-first-in-13952756.php …pic.twitter.com/OdWjDnLyoG
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likesShow this thread -
But supporting enough housing to go with the 5,000 jobs in that building? Or state laws that compel the city build more housing? Nah. https://sf.curbed.com/2019/3/19/18271688/palo-alto-sb50-yimby-nimby-housing-california-wiener …pic.twitter.com/vJfLh5DsJk
3 replies 2 retweets 21 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @kimmaicutler
Mostly SF wants to keep commercial tax money from leaking into the East Bay, so even with the kabuki, maximal amounts of office space will be developed.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @woolie
It’s gonna go to the East Bay. It’s starting to happen w/ Square.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler
Square is a 300,000sf commitment when Google and Facebook are signing millions go square feet in SF.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Yeah so SF will have Big Tech, just the way Palantir took over Palo Alto and crowded out startups.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @cocovariant @kimmaicutler
It's about 30% cheaper, significant but ultimately office lease costs are not a make-or-break part of running a tech company.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes - 3 more replies
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.