In 2008, D10 saw the highest overall vote in San Francisco in favor of Prop 8, upwards of
Sunday, October 3, 2010
A question that didn't get asked yesterday
I submitted a couple of questions to the forum yesterday, but one that didn't get asked was the one that I'd hoped would be. Here it is.
In 2008, D10 saw the highest overall vote in San Francisco in favor of Prop 8, upwards of65% 61% in some precincts in Visitacion Valley. In 2010, a Federal Court deemed Prop 8 to be unconstitutional, and its passage to have been fed by voter animosity toward the LGBT community. D10 has the highest density number of youth in the city, and by extension, likely the highest density number of LGBT youth. However, no services targeted at those youth exist in D10, leaving them to grow up in a district that is hostile to them and that makes them vulnerable to taunting, abuse, thoughts of running away, and suicide. The effects of growing up in an unsupportive environment have been born out by several gay teen suicides over the past couple of weeks across the country. What as supervisor can you do to help change attitudes and to bring social services for at-risk LGBT youth to D10, and especially to those areas of D10 in which they are most at risk, such as Bayview and Visitacion Valley.
In 2008, D10 saw the highest overall vote in San Francisco in favor of Prop 8, upwards of
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Brilliant question. It needs to be answered.
ReplyDeleteI have to take exception to the way this question is phrased and the assumption it makes about Vis Valley. First, although it’s true that most precincts in Visitacion Valley did majority vote “yes” on prop 8, no single precinct voted “yes” by 65%. The highest percentage “yes” that I found was 61%, most others were right around the 50% mark. Second, most of the BVHP and Portola also followed this pattern and voted slightly “yes” on 8 therefore Vis Valley should not be singled out.
ReplyDeleteAt least in Vis Valley the high percentage of youth is a direct result of, One: the high percentage of family households, Two: a higher person per household average (larger families), and Three: the Sunnydale single parent anomaly. Numerical this could mean that there are in fact more LGBT youth in D10 when compared to other districts, but the percent of the population would likely be the same as population as a whole. Also given the geographical extent of D10, the “density” of LGBT youth would likely be higher in other districts.
Irregardless, voting “yes” on Prop 8 does not equate to “a district that is hostile to them” and “an unsupportive environment”. That’s an extremely unfair, broad brush statement.
A better question would be to ask ‘why did a significant percentage of D10 vote “yes” on 8’ ? Understanding the ‘why’ might help some of the candidates understand the stark differences between Vis Valley, Portola, BVHP, and P. Hill.
here's my answer:
ReplyDelete1) reverse the trend of cutting services in d10 for youth, both in school and out of school. the budget cuts year after year are literally killing our youth, due to violence, HIV infection, stress, poverty, etc.
2) the arts, in particular, have always been a way to add value to school and youth services, and a great tool for social cohesion and breaking down racial and cultural barriers. El Sistema - a program in venezuela where every child learns to play an instrument - is a tremendous success in improving math scores, reducing truancy, and building better communities in low-income areas. we need that program here in d10.
3) heck yeah, these things are expensive. that's why we need to get more of our City budget to the people. we need things like a municipal bank and a new fair-share agreement with UCSF so our City resources work harder for us, and we need to use Redevelopment financing for REdevelopment of Bayview and Vis Valley, including social services, instead of new development on radioactive dirt at the shipyard.
@Joe, those are fair adjustments to the way the question is asked. Also, I shouldn't have said "density" when I meant sheer numbers. I believe there are something like 18,000 youth in our district, which the candidates often tell us is the highest number in any district in the city.
ReplyDelete@Mr Kelly, thanks for the response!
@Joe, while my number of 65% vs 61% is indeed off, and I apologize for that, there were two precincts in Vis Valley that were found to be around this level. My own in Silver Terrace was about 55%, and others around the district were similarly at or above 50%. However, only those two in Vis Valley were above 60%, so that was why I singled them out.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that the vote for Prop 8 across much of the southern 2/3 of the district, in which I live, could be an indicator of animosity and hostility that people who voted this way feel toward the LGBT community, as Judge Walker found in the recent court case. The cultures in this part of the city, traditional and macho, feel very much to me as though they skew toward being not accepting of a person being LGBT, and that it is somehow punishable. I have been warned, myself, by a young man at a MUNI stop, not to wear the clothes that I was (jeans and a pink polo shirt) because I risked being beaten up by doing so. He may have felt he was doing me a favor in warning me, and I took it as such, but his warning speaks of the real danger to LGBT people, and kids, in much of D10, and without local services to help kids deal with LGBT-realted issues, many kids will be left to flounder, get beat up, or worse.
Chris,
ReplyDeleteAt last year's Milk Club Dinner, Prop 8 came up and Eva Patterson, the keynote speaker addressed it...
"Until we do a better job of letting folks in the community, (African Americans, church goers, etc.) see, interact and understand that we are no different, we will lose the Prop 8 fight..." She also said that there is some good news, "The folks that are opposing us are dying off, and it will become easier every year... Eventually, we will win. It's only a matter of time..."
Basically, when they see their sons and daughters in a loving, caring family, raising healthy children and being great parents, the issue falls away. People need to see they are not threatened by this and that we tend to hate what we don't understand.
Eric
@Joe, I agree that the best solutions come from understanding the "why's." I personally see gay marriage as a civil rights issue, and agree wholeheartedly with Judge Walker's ruling that the State has no legitimate interest in denying a marriage license to same-sex couples. I also believe strongly in the separation of church and state. But we can't deny that religion plays a larger cultural role in Bayview and Vis Valley than in other parts of San Francisco. I suspect this is a big reason why Prop 8 got more votes here than elsewhere. Would love to hear from some Prop 8 supporters on this.
ReplyDeleteSecond, we need to look at the obvious income disparity within our district. We had more peace in our community when everyone was working. The Shipyard used to provide enough jobs for 50,000 residents - when people worked side by side, they got to know each other. We can work toward that again if we focus Redevelopment funds on economic development, and use smart land use policies to create more public spaces. This is where our next Supervisor can make the biggest contribution to unity in our community - making sure we do not become simply the bedroom community for Mission Bay. We need job-generating land use policies, so people can work together, shop together, eat dinner together, see shows together. We were once united by our working class roots and we can be that way again.
@Tony, love the El Sistema idea. Having a common goal is the best way to bridge cultural divides. Our youth need a full range of options for success: music, art, sports, entrepreneurship. And as I said at the Potrero Hill Dem Club forum, we need to pay as much attention to what happens outside the classroom as in. Meeting the needs of our LGBT youth is a perfect example of where the School Board and the Board of Supervisors need to work together to meet our district's unique LOCAL needs. Also, as we switch to neighborhood school assignment, we adults need to be more engaged in our schools than ever. Have you signed up to read to students? Coach an after school sport? Teach music or art?
However, we need to be clear about what is and isn't possible with Redevelopment. First, the Shipyard and the Bayview Project Area B are two separate project areas; funds aren't interchangeable between them. Second, tax increment funds are generated from property taxes on new construction. In other words, there are no funds to be spent until the buildings are built. The developer fronts the cash for the construction and earns their profit on the back end many years later. So, it's wrong to imply that we have $4.5B sitting around that has been allocated to development instead of social services. Third, a direct spend on social services would be illegal. Under current law, the Redevelopment agency can spend tax increment funds on only three things: infrastructure, economic development, and affordable housing. Meaning, Redevelopment can pay for bricks and mortar, e.g., a new school building, but not on the related programs, e.g., arts programs in schools. I've been advocating for my four years of service on the Bayview Project Area Committee that Redevelopment spend more money on economic development. This is a real and legal source of funding available to us right now, without any detrimental effect on the General Fund or social services. I hope you'll all join me in that call.
To show how the facts can be twisted, it’s been said that the African American population voted a certain way in regards to Prop 8. Yet the demographics of the Vis Valley precincts that voted “yes’ are not heavily African American. Surprisingly, Vis Valley largest population of African Americans (by precinct) is found in Sunnydale, which voted 56% “no” on Prop 8. This is roughly the same for housing projects in Hunter’s Point.
ReplyDeleteI do realize that you are speaking from a personal perspective…therefore you can
use the raw data as a “indicator of animosity and hostility”, but someone on the opposite side of the issue can use the exact same data as an ‘indicator of family values’. I don’t think either position can be fairly substantiated without further analysis. It does make sense to offer the widest array of services to youth within the district/ neighborhood with numerically the most youth, but that decision should be based upon a deeper analysis of the topic.
Kristine and I just spoke off-line about various models of redevelopment, so I'll just mention here that I think that the described limitations of redevelopment in Bayview don't seem to match what redevelopment has done and is doing in other cities, or even in other redevelopment areas in San Francisco. So I wouldn't dismiss opportunities to use the power of Redevelopment financing to create/restore/rebuild social services, in the name of 'soft infrastructure.'
ReplyDeleteMay I bring up the elephant in the living room? And please forgive me for speaking in generalizations. But it is my understanding that it is particularly difficult for LGBT'ers in the Black Community - especially men. I would imagine that when economic difficulties are added, it adds more pressure to the males in that community to find an acceptable role and being gay isn't acceptable.
ReplyDeleteMy apologies if I am not being articulate. It is a difficult issue and I want to be respectful.
I guess what I am thinking is that so many of the males are incarcerated that there is tremendous pressure for those who are not to be "men" (in the historical/traditional/1950s definition).
Long post short - I believe that any bias/bigotry/prejudice is made worst by poverty and lack of exposure one experiences through a good education.
This has been an interesting thread to review. My two-cents is that schools, libraries, parks, and other public spaces need to enforce a "radical kindness" doctrine, in which bigotry and ill-behavior of any kind simply isn't tolerated. We all need to feel safe expressing ourselves, which is an odd thing to have to say in a city like San Francisco. Come to think of it, perhaps we should start with our political system...
ReplyDelete