The Tenderloin Housing Clinic is a tax-exempt non-for-profit which is prohibited by the IRS from engaging in political activities. San Francisco gets around this by stating in its contracts that "No funds appropriated by the City and County of San Francisco FOR THIS AGREEMENT may be expended..." on political activities.
The Controller's Office recently did a financial analysis of the THC in response to the embezzlement conviction of its former employee. The Controller's Office has somehow determined that no funds appropriated by the City and County of San Francisco are used to support BeyondChron, which is an LLC of the THC, published by the THC, and is edited by two full-time employees of the THC. Basically, Shaw's salary does not contain any provisions for his work on BeyondChron and Paul Hogarth's salary only contains a small provision to work on BeyondChron. The THC claims it used profits from its legal division and the Galvin Apartments to fund BeyondChron and the portion of Hogarth's salary for his BeyondChron activities.
The problem with this is that the legal services division is primarily funded by CCSF and there are contractual provisions regarding the use of profits from CCSF-funded programs (AKA: Program Income). These provisions are restrictive in terms of how program income can be used. Specifically, the contracts state, "...provisions of this agreement shall apply to expenditures of program income". The grants from MOH and the HSA for legal services have no provisions for the use of any profits to fund BeyondChron and the most recent version of the THC's audited financial report (FY 2010) the THC indicates that rental revenue, including that from the Galvin Apartments are used to pay for management and operating the property" without ever mentioning allocations for BeyondChron.
If you read Beyondchron today, you will see that Shaw spent a bit of time at the Planning Commission yesterday. It was his intention to speak in favor of CPMC's proposed facility on Van Ness but apparently he had to leave before he could do so because the meeting ran from 10 AM to 8 PM. While the contracts with the City require the THC to keep appropriate records to document compliance with the political activities restrictions, these don't seem to be disclosable under the public records act and the City Attorney assigned to SOTF has fought such disclosure on behalf of the Controller's Office in front of the SOTF. The public is forced to rely on the findings of the Controller's Office without knowing what these findings are actually based on. There is no clear, non-influenced, independent way of knowing how Shaw's activities yesterday (or at any other time) were actually funded.
The City's current contracts with non-for-profits leave the door wide open for conflict of interest and raise serious ethical issues regarding the elected Board of Supervisor approval of grants and budgets, including line item restoration, for non-for-profits that engage in political activities. Quite simply, the City should not provide any funding to any non-for-profit that engages in political activities regardless of the non-for-profit's source of funding for its political activities.
The prohibition on political activities by non profits is documented in the THC grant agreement here. The IRS in 2007 issued this reminder to non profits not to engage in political activity and further IRS clarification on political activity for non profits (PDF). Numerous examples are cited on what is OK and what is not for a non profit, including running websites. The IRS also points out that even personal opinions are subject to the rules if they are published under the umbrella of the tax exempt organization. The IRS also doesn't make a distinction of a subsidiary like Beyondchron that the city of San Francisco has apparently been doing and considers it to be one and the same. It is the IRS that grants the non profit status in the first place, not the city
A disregarded entity is a business entity that is separate from its owner but which chooses to be disregarded as separate from the business owner for federal tax purposes. The IRS says,
"If a “disregarded entity” is owned by an individual, it is treated as a sole proprietor. If the “disregarded entity” is owned any any other entity, it is treated as a branch or division of its owner."
A sole proprietorship is not a disregarded entity, because the business is not separate from the owner.
Liability Issues for a Disregarded Entity
A disregarded entity is considered the same entity as the owner for tax purposes, but not for liability purposes. For more information on this subject, read this article in which attorney Robert Warwick discusses disregarded entity tax and liability issues
Here's the full video of what really happened at the San Francisco Board of Appeals, queued up to the correct starting time. KALW radio also has a story on it
What Tenderloin Housing Clinic and Randy Shaw isn't telling the public is that newly found documents have emerged that suggest that the Beach Motel was always a tourist motel since the 60's and that government bureaucracy and lost filings over the years have resulted in a zoning mess which Tenderloin Housing Clinic has been trying to capitalize on via lawsuits to convert the hotel into an permanent residential housing
The attorneys from both sides speak first and explain in detail exactly what's going on. Andrew Zacks, representing the owner, Patel, speaks first, followed by Tenderloin Housing Clinic attorney Steve Collier, followed by public comment. The entire video is 1 hour 21 minutes (queued from four hours of video)
I work at the Tenderloin Housing Clinic. The City Attorney's Office has told us that his cameras are illegal. And we are not -- I repeat, we are not -- evicting him right now.
[12] Posted by: paulhogarth | August 17, 2007 4:32 PM
Shortly after this was posted I received an email from Brock Keeling telling me that Noel Cisneros of ABC-7 news wanted to talk to me. It turns out that she wanted to talk to me about this specific statement that Paul Hogarth made on SFist. Noel had contacted the city attorneys office and they denied everything. Absolutely nobody had asked the city attorney about anything regarding the crime camera. Not Paul Hogarth, nor anyone at THC had ever contacted them about this issue, and the city attorney does not deal with such issues anyway (quite the opposite - the city attorney does deal with nuisance properties - which crime cameras help to document)
Paul Hogarth made it up.
Paul Hogarth lies
It was a complete fabrication.
If you read the comments at SFist via the Archive.org link, you'll see that others were getting suspicious about that statement as well. Five years later, I'm still waiting for a retraction and apology from Hogarth. I'm not holding my breath
Holding land and building owners accountable for blight and nuisance in San Francisco. The real and legal and historical definition of nuisance and forcing property owners to be responsible for their own property
This has never been mentioned before in San Francisco, but it has in many other cities since 1989. This is probably because many of the people writing about blight are themselves landlords, and don't want people to know about this, and instead try to divert attention to vacant buildings
The problems associated with Mid Market and the Tenderloin are not caused by vacant buildings themselves. Vacant buildings are merely a symptom of a deeper underlying problem caused by problem residents.
California and San Francisco have nuisance abatement laws which have recently been used by the city attorney to go after a liquor store in the Tenderloin. But this is just one single store and even the Bay Guardian is questioning the effectiveness of that. Look at the comments which mirror comments made for many years in publications
You are not going to 'raze the tenderloin' and start over. You are not going to bulldoze SRO's because those are protected by law, but you can make the landlords do something about the nuisance that often originates from their own buildings
Background
In 1989 a woman named Molly Wetzel and some neighbors went after a landlord on Francisco street in Berkeley because the place was a crack house, It's very simple, except that it turned out to be one of the largest civil cases and awards in California history (unprecedented judgement against a landlord in California)
Molly Wetzel then went on to form the organization Safe Streets Now!, which has since expanded to many cities across the country in various forms, but especially in California because California has a few extra nuisance abatement laws on the books
Violence. Noise. Garbage. Vandalism. Prostitution. Speeding Cars. If you've ever lived near a public nuisance, you know how distressing and disruptive its presence can be.
Many communities are traumatized by public nuisances, such as drug trafficking, and the crime and violence associated with these activities. Open drug markets flourish as neighborhood residents witness and endure the encroaching blight. Unfortunately, there aren't enough police and city resources to pursue every public nuisance in every neighborhood. However you and your neighbors can shut down the whole operation on your own by getting the property declared a "public nuisance" and, if necessary, taking the owner of the property to Small Claims Court.
What is a Public Nuisance?
A public nuisance, according to state law, is anything that is:
Injurious to health
Indecent to the senses
Unlawfully impeding free use of the streets
Obstructing free use of property so as to interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property
Why do we need Safe Streets Now!?
With Safe Streets Now! the residents come together to define the standards of conduct for their neighborhood and enforce those standards at the neighborhood level. Some people view this as a community policing tool while others see it as a neighborhood and resident empowerment tool.
Is Safe Streets Now! Going to Make a Difference?
We believe Safe Streets Now! will be a valuable addition to the ongoing work of the City's Police Department, Prosecutor's Office, Councilmembers and Field Representatives, the Neighborhood Outreach Team, and the Human Services and Recreation Department. In over 800 cases where the Safe Streets Now! program was used, 80% of the cases successfully closed down targeted properties without going to court. Additionally, all cases taken to court have also been settled in favor of the neighborhoods and the Safe Streets Now! program.
How does Safe Streets Now! Work?
Safe Streets Now! is a step-by-step process that residents can use to address public nuisances in their neighborhoods. In Pasadena, Safe Streets Now! will include a partnership between neighbors, police, city staff, and community-based organization representatives. Safe Streets Now! began in Oakland, California in 1989 and is a nationally recognized program.
Safe Streets Now! uses a State of California nuisance abatement law. This law is at the heart of the program. It affirms that residents have a right to fully enjoy the use of their homes in peace. The process for Safe Streets Now! is straightforward and includes the following steps:
Identify property creating the public nuisance.
Take notes on nuisance.
Phone each incidence to the police.
Write 'demand letter' to the property owner and threaten to take the owner to Small Claims Court if he or she does not correct the nuisance. (The majority of cases never make it to court, most landlords voluntarily remove the problem tenants from their properties after receiving the demand letter.)
Take the landlord to Small Claims Court. The plaintiffs (neighborhood residents) file a joint suit. It costs $75 (which can be waived) per plaintiff to file and each plaintiff can sue for up to $7,500. No attorneys may be used by either party in a small claims trial. Court dates are set within 30 days of the filing and judgments are issued within 30 days of the trial. Small Claims Court is swift and inexpensive.
What About Retaliation? Will I Be Safe?
Safe Streets Now! is a non-violent, non-confrontational way to rid communities of public nuisances such as drug and gang houses. Residents are safe because they will never confront or contact the gang members or drug dealers directly when documenting the problems. They contact other neighbors and the police by telephone. The demand letter includes a Pasadena Safe Streets Now! address, the name of the facilitator as the contact person, and will is sent directly to the landlord along with the residents' documentation.
Molly Wetzel's program Safe Streets Now has been so successful, that it prompted an in depth study funded by the US Department of Justice
There are even instructional videos on Youtube on how to organize and make landlords responsible
SRO (single room occupancy hotels) in San Francisco are NOT exempt from these nuisance laws, and neither are the non profits that run many of them. The same laws have actually been used in San Francisco before, at one SRO, except it was never identified by name until now
In 1995, Antoinetta Stadlman, who is now an employee of the same Randy Shaw used this same resource to gather several neighbors and go after the landlord and won several thousand dollars in court. This is mentioned in this article in the SF Weekly
What has never been mentioned before, is that Stadlman had originally talked to the same Molly Wetzel to help start the organization process after reading about her Safe Streets Now in the paper back in 1995. More than 15 years later, the same Antoinetta Stadlman, has recently identified and made public identical issues in Randy Shaws own buildings
Antoinetta Stadlman has lived in the Baldwin House hotel since 1991. By 1995, she was fed up with its condition. Clued in by a newspaper article to a law that allows neighbors to lodge nuisance claims against property owners who allow illegal or disturbing activities to continue unabated, Stadlman and 14 other tenants took Baldwin House owner Nick Patel to small-claims court and won $5,000 each, the maximum allowable under the law.
Patel appealed the decision to Superior Court. In Superior Court, unlike small-claims court, lawyers are more or less required. Stadlman called around. A private lawyer said he'd take the case -- for $25,000, or 30 percent of the overall settlement. Stadlman thought that was too expensive, so she asked the Tenderloin Housing Clinic for help.
"Randy said he'd do it," Stadlman says. But not for free.
Specifically, Stadlman says, Shaw offered her a contingency-fee arrangement: We handle the suit for you, and we get 25 percent of the settlement, up to $20,000. And Stadlman is grateful for that -- "They gave me a $5,000 break," she says, comparing the THC's contingency rate to the private lawyer's. But still, she decided to continue looking for a lawyer who would take the case for free.
Shaw says the fees were necessary because of the amount of work the case demanded. Generally, when a lawyer takes a case on a contingency basis, he must win the case (or win a settlement) in order to be paid. If the lawyer loses, then neither the lawyer nor the law firm gets any money.
In the 17 years since 1995, Randy Shaw has become a landlord himself of sixteen different SRO's in the Tenderloin, Mid market, and Mission neighborhoods, so he would certainly know about this, since he was involved with it 17 years ago, but he has never mentioned this publicly in his beyondchron.org. The reason is obvious. Because Tenderloin Housing Clinic is the largest contractor in the city of San Francisco to house so called 'hard core homeless', many of them still on dope, and therefore a huge liability in a case like this. This is also why the City of San Francisco refuses to run these housing facilities themselves, because of the huge liability due to the nuisance...and instead contracts all of it out to private non profits
No competent attorney (Randy Shaw) in his right mind who runs such a large organization of high liability clients would ever admit this publicly, which is why you will never see this posted at beyondchron.org.
And now you know the real meaning of a massive 'containment zone' in the heart of San Francisco, funded by you..
(even worse is state privacy laws regarding welfare that applies to such non profits (State of California welfare and institutions code - reference > http://law.justia.com/codes/california/2010/wic/15633-15637.html) - as caretakers, which in itself is a highly questionable practice - simply dumping mental patients in SRO's)
This is just one part of the many buildings in San Francisco that could be a source of nuisance. It doesn't have to be in the Tenderloin, Soma, Mid Market or Mission problem areas, it could be anywhere in the city
The website to identify who the owners are of any property in San Francisco is the assessors office
Yep, it was San Francisco airport that started it all back in the 1980's. Ironic that it has almost never been mentioned in San Francisco itself. But since San Francisco leaders have spent over two decades moving 'the worst of the worst' out of outlying neighborhoods and into the Mid market and Tenderloin and Mission neighborhoods, it's not likely you'll ever hear more than crickets about this in the press
However, problems at the SRO's have been reported as with the undercover video scandal
According to SFPD’s Department of Emergency Management, police have been called to the Henry Hotel 143 times since early November, an average of just more than one call per day. Of seven residential hotels in the area The San Francisco Examiner inquired about, only one other, the Seneca Hotel, was the source of more calls: 287.
SEIU Local 87 continues to cost taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars each year in police and DPW services due to its unsupervised open-air commercial parking lot at Turk and Hyde. A variety of union officials over two decades have pledged to develop the lot, but no action has followed.
I spent several months in 2011 working with Local 87 officials to reduce problems on their site, but was ultimately rebuffed. Union officials deny any responsibility for owning a lot whose adjacent sidewalk provides a business place for drug dealers and requires DPW to send at least one truck every morning to pick up accumulated trash.
Although property owners are responsible for activities on the sidewalk in front of their property, union officials refuse to staff their lot. They told me they blame District 6 Supervisor Jane Kim and Mayor Ed Lee for the drug dealing adjacent to their lot, and suggested I pressure these officials and leave Local 87 alone.
You mean property owners and managers are responsible for the drug dealing in front of their buildings too?. Is that a fact? If that's the case that would mean Randy Shaw is responsible for the drug dealing in front of his own buildings. Like this one at 6th and Stevenson across from Dottie's True Blue Cafe. This is also described by Randy Shaw's own employees
That's Dottie's on the left in this video
Lemme guess, Randy Shaw would also be responsible if his own tenants were doing dope in front of his building and up and down Mid market too? I bet he would. That's a professional crack smoker there. Blue tape to protect the lips and everything
What if randy Shaw's own residents were getting the neighboring businesses/employees doped up on crack? Would that count too? I bet it would
The San Francisco Bay Guardian is questioning going after two liquor stores to solve the drugs problem in the Tenderloin even mentioning the very same Randy Shaw because he was a part of the reason those two liquor stores were targeted. How very ironic because Randy Shaw has another liquor store in this same building at 6th and Stevenson in the Seneca Hotel that does the exact same thing
People sell dope in front of the Seneca, around the side on Stevenson, in front of the Stop and Go, inside the store, inside the hotel, and then they go down Stevenson to smoke it in front of the new business in Mid Market that are there because of the Twitter Tax incentive, which the very same Randy Shaw helped to broker. So basically, your tax dollars are being used to help improve Mid Market, and bring down Mid Market, all at the same time.
It's a quite a bit more than just a 'conflict of interest' here
The San Francisco mid-Market revitalization of the Peruvian economy continues full steam ahead
A Tenderloin Housing Clinic resident of the Seneca hotel, one of Randy Shaw's own clients, keeping guard for the cops while somebody behind him is smoking it up
This is an open letter addressed and sent to Randy Shaw over one year ago on January 4, 2011. It was written by one of his own front desk staff and details very well how Shaw's own policies are affecting the Tenderloin, mid Market and Mission neighborhoods. This letter specifically talks about the Seneca Hotel, which is at 34 6th Street, and is literally next door to the new Dotties True Blue Cafe at 28 6th Street
Randy Shaw has never publicly acknowledged any such issues within his own Tenderloin Housing Clinic, and in the year since receiving the letter, has instead written articles on his own THC funded Beyondchron publicly blaming everything from redevelopment to labor unions for the crime and drugs in the area. This letter was completely ignored by Randy Shaw. There was no acknowledgment, no reply, nothing from anyone at Tenderloin Housing Clinic, the largest city funded housing non profit in San Francisco
Since this letter was sent, there has been no change in any of the policies within Tenderloin Housing Clinic and the situation has gotten steadily worse as it affects the surrounding communities. Nearly every one of Crackheads of the Day originates from in front of this same building described in the letter, with some being THC's own residents
Antoinetta W. Stadlman
OmbudsLady The Baldwin House# 234 74 Sixth street
San Francisco, Calif., 94103 Phone 1415-552-4803 Fax 1415-552-2629 email antionetta@mindspring.com
January 4, 2011
To: Randy Shaw
Safety Issues at the Seneca
Inner Security gate:
Years ago there was an inner iron gate located right near the Front Desk through which people had to be buzzed through. This is a necessity to maintain building security, but unfortunately it was removed sometime after THC took over operation of the Seneca. I recall pointing out the security risks to Drennen (remember her?) of not having the inner gate, and her response was along the lines of "But we don't want that, it makes the place look like a jail." And just this last month I was discussing this matter with Dave, the Seneca's current manager, and he said re-installing the Inner gate wouldn't happen, "because THC thinks it looks like a jail." This rationale is so utterly lame that it would be laughable if it were not allowed to trump the basic safety realities we face. Whether an Inner gate makes the place look like a jail is true or not is irrelevant, the reality is that the inner gate is essential for Hotel security. Unfortunately, it is this sort of feelings-based "fuzzy thinking" that seems to prevail and leads to the perpetuation of this and all the other problems discussed in this letter. At any rate, regardless of how people feel about it, its lack is a huge hole in our security, and it needs to be replaced. And I hear that Housing wants to get rid of the security gate at the Mission Hotel even though this was installed at the command of Karen Carrera, the City Attorney who was dealing with the swamp that the Mission was in the months preceeding THC's takeover of the place back in '97. Completely wrong direction to go.
II. Distraction issues
As should be well know to anyone involved with SRO hotel management, the general scene of drugs and overall misbehavior which is part of Sixth Street, will easily come in off the street and into the Hotel unless strong vigilance is raised to keep it out. For this reason, the primary purpose of the Front Desk is to keep those involved in this activity OUT of the Hotel. To be aware of who is coming and going, the Front Desk needs to generally be in an undistracted state, and this is quite impossible at the Seneca. In addition, to our regular sign in visitors in and out, we also have to deal with a morass of trivia, represented in part by the following list of forms that we have to deal with.
Television Sign up Sheet
Service Providors Tracking Sheet
Seneca Hotel Package log
Kitchen Station Sign up sheet
Hotel Contractor/Inspector log
Fire Watch Sheet
Spare Key Sign-Out Sheet
In addition, there are four classifications of visitors.
Each of these needs to be tracked somewhat differently, and, adding to the cunfusion, the Consecutive Overnights do not need to sign in and out; they can come and go as if they live there. And many do essentially live there, if one has both Extended as well as Consecutive Overnights, people are "visiting" for twenty days and nights a month. This is likely a safety issue in its own right, as of course none of these visitors get the background check that tenants do. So all this requires organizing out of an often endless flow of in and out traffic, who lives here and who doesnt,(there's always a few new tenants, new faces to further confuse things) which visitors need to sign in and out and which don't, etc. All the above, combined with the lack of a back-up gate make it impossible to effectively keep people from sneaking past the Front Desk and into the Hotel.
III. Enabling Drug and Prostitution Activity:
The removal of any practical downside to a tenant's violation of the visitor rules has led to a situation where it is even more impossible to control who comes into he Hotel, When such violations happen, tenants get "written up" and at some point put on a 30 Day No-Visit list. However, this has recently had any effectiveness removed. As you can see in the attached meeting notes, we cannot refuse to sign in someone, even if we know that they do not intend to visit the person who is signing them in, but are going to the room of someone who is officially on the 30-Days No-Visit list. In addition, this having to sign people into room we know they really aren't going to also extends into visitors seeking to stay overnight with a tenant who has exhausted their monthly allocation of overnights. Along with this, I see would-be visitors come to the Front Desk, not knowing the room number or last name of who it is they wish to visit. Again, these have been signing in with willing tenants, who sometimes clearly do not know them,(sometimes a dollar or two is exchanged for the favour) once signed in they head upstairs and are free to roam the halls, knocking on doors, etc. Finally, tenants can come down and sign their visitors out, without the visitor being present, for all we know the visitor is still up somewhere in the building. The cumulative effect of all this is that it has become impossible to consistently be aware of who is actually in the building and to ensure a reasonable degree of physical safety.
When Management becomes aware that drug dealing or prostitution is going on in a particular room, it may take months to evict that individual. So that their activities do not add further disruption in the Hotel during his time, it is imperative to disrupt their "business activity" to the maximum extent possible. This means a flat "'No Visitors" for such parties. Not just for 30 days but for the remainder of the time they are resident in the Hotel. And if they say this is against the Uniform Visitor policy, all Management needs to do is to tell the offending tenant that they are welcome to contest your decision at the Rent Board-if, of course they are willing to defend their drug or prostitution activity. 1 can guarantee you, none will want to confront you at the Rent Board, and Management's decision will remain in force. Failure to take action like this while knowingly allowing people to engage these activities is enabling and facilitating it, pure and simple, and we need to stop this.
If you go down to the Seneca, at virtually any time, from first light to well after midnight, you will see half a dozen or so people hanging out on the street in front of the Hotel. At times camp chairs have even been brought in and appear to be just sitting around. Most of these people are former residents or visitors of the Seneca who have been Evicted or 86d. They are also part of the Sixth Street drug scene, as they were of the Seneca's back before they were Evicted or 86d. Of course she reason they are continually out in Front is the presence of their drug buddies still resident in the Hotel. This arrangement needs to be broken up. the Seneca needs to get Stay-Away orders on these people, to shut down this drug-link between the street and various residents of the Seneca.
Another issue that facilitates this activity is that we now accept virtually any type of ID. The worst of this is that we now have to accept jail. prison, and jail "hospital bracelet" IDS. A lot of the jail issues on Sixth Street are behind drug activity; it should be abundantly clear that allowing someone in the building that is just out of jail is probably NOT a good idea for the overall safety and well-being of the Hotel, Yet another issue is the fact that earlier restrictions on requesting overnight visitors are all now gone.
Originally, a tenant wanting an overnight would have to inform the Front Desk of his fact by Noon of the day in question, and would have to supply the name of the intended guest. Now, Noon has been moved up to 900 P.M., and, worse, no name need be furnished, the tenant merely needs to "reserve an overnight."
IV.
Quality of Tenants + Worthlessness of Screening:
The following experience I had at Seneca pretty much speaks for itself.
I was working alone at the Seneca and around 6:OO P.M., Tamara, the Manager called. She asked me to "keep an eye" on a new tenant, someone who had just moved in that day. I asked what the issue was, why this heads up? Tamara said that when they were doing the background check the tenant's previous landlord informed her that the reason she evicted this person was because the individual had set fire to their unit. I asked Tamara what possessed THC to rent to this person in light of this information, and Tamara said that since the previous landlord wouldn't write this on paper, she couldn't prove it, and they couldn’t refuse rental.
Renting to someone you know has a recent history of Arson? This is bat shit crazy. Since when do you have to have a reason for not renting to a particular individual, let alone have to prove anything. Why does Housing consistently adopt the responsibility of justifying every negative decision they have to make? They are Management and that alone is sufficient justification. This perceived need to self-justify everything is a substantial overall hindrance to operations anyway, but when it permits a kmown Arsonist to home a tenant, well, this is just scary.
V. Self-Defence Issues:
Unfortunately, part of the reality that any of us working in the SRO Hotels has to deal with is the occasional aggressive or violent tenant or visitor. Several times in the past year we have had irate individuals jump over/come behind the Front Desk, one of these incidents happened while I was alone on duty However, there is a "zero-tolerance' regarding making any physical contact with tenants / visitors. Just how much this actually would be applied to someone defending their self has never been made clear, but there is certainly real doubt; when the tenant jumped over the Front Desk and hit me with the roll of paper; I was told "You're lucky you didn't have to hit him." If this zero tolerance policy extends people coming behind the desk or assaulting staff, we are essentially being denied the right to defend ourselves. Certainly, I could see a staff person injured in such an incident claiming in the inevitable personal injury lawsuit that would ensue that they felt inhibited from defending themselves as they would get disciplined for this by THC, and that this contributed to the extent of whatever injuries they sustained.
V Loss of Institutional Memory:
These problems have been worsening and metastasizing for years. Seeing the degree of turnover at various levels of management during this time, it appears that a lot of this problem involves the lack of any real institutional memory. As new people come to work in the policy-making levels of the housing operation, each wants to "do" something "'for the tenants"; the latest policy-makers are unaware that they are adding more on top of what their predecessors have done, and the cumulative effect over the years of this process goes unrecognized, until the operation devolves into the dysfunctional morass it is today.
What needs to be done:
Not all this can be done immediately, some things will require changes to the Uniform Visitor Policy, others may require changes in tenant leases, for others a 30-Day Notice should suffice, but at the minimum:
A. Reinstall the Inner Gate in the Seneca over by where the old safe is currently located. The layout needs to be so that someone coming aboard talks to the Front Desk, signs in or whatever first, THEN is buzzed in through the Gate.
B. Quit accepting any ID not specifically mention& in the Uniform Visitor Policy, especially jail, prison and hospital bracelet IDs, or xeroxes of any IDs.
C. Get rid of the Extended and Consecutive Overnights. It is impossible to keep any track of visitors when some are essentially living here for twenty days a month, where some need to sign In and out and others don’t.
D. Plug up all the loopholes in the visitor situation, as described in Section 111 above.
E. Get some Stay-Away orders and eject the crowd of druggies (former Seneca residents and visitors) from in front of the Hotel.
F. Get rid of the plethora of sign-in and tracking sheets listed in Section I.
G. End the practice of allowing tenants to sign out their visitors when we have no idea if the person has actually left or is still hiding out in the Hotel.
H. Make tenants requesting Overnight Visitors do so by 12:Noon, and supply the intended visitor's name, the practice of reserving" an unidentified Overnight has to be ended.
I. Institute a permanent visitor ban on tenants you have reason to believe are engaging in drug or prostitution activity.
J. Get rid of the appeal process for visitor and other purely personal issues. Visitor issues must be resolved quickly and on site. The highest level of appeal should be the site Manager of the relevant building. They are the only ones who will know the people and the situation involved,and who have the ability to make a reality-based decision. The problem with the appeals is that those hearing the appeal don't how those involved or the situation, but they DO know that they have fundamental philosophical problems with the simple fact that there are visitor rules and restrictions at all ,and this leads to distorted decision-making.
K. Work with our new Supervisor, Jane Kim, to hit a sort of re-set button on the Uniform Visitor Policy and end the annual circus where the Policy is amended every year at the Rent Board. This is an entirely rigged game, and has allowed the original policy, bad as that was, to be constantly watered down, further hampering Management's ability to control the situation while at the same time mandating things such as the Consecutive Overnights, which are a serious problem.
VIII. Conclusion:
-
As you may recall, back in the Fall of 1998, when the Seneca was still under private control. the management was so atrocious that some basic improvements had to be made before THC could Master-Lease the place. For this purpose, you had introduced me to Dr. Mahendra Dave so that he could bring me aboard the Seneca to try to get a handle on the worst of the problems there. This was done; I worked at the Seneca for some months, during which the key troublemaking tenants were identified and evicted. Other problems were sufficiently addressed, and so THC was able to take over the operations of the Hotel. You also set me up with the owners of the Mission HoteI for a like purpose back in the Spring of 97. All this worked out well, but if 1 restricted my options in dealing with these basic issues as THC Housing restricts theirs. none of this would have been possible, nor would I have been able to dean up Baldwin House as 1 did back in '95 and 96. Altogether too many policies and practices actively enable precisely those activities that it is the primary responsibility of Management to abate, For some reason, Housing seems completely infected with a world-view and values system that is entirely incompatible with the safe and functional operation of an SRO Hotel. Certainly any Management that has serious moral and ethical problems with doing things like telling someone they can't have a visitor, something that is really SRO Management I01 level stuff, is going to be severely compromised in carrying out even routine functions. And since it is THC-wide policies that are to blame for all this, it is logical to assume that these problems are present in all the hotels. not just the Seneca. As it is to-day, the Seneca at least is a textbook example of how NOT to run an SRO Hotel. It also should be noted that the on site Managers, Dave, and Tamara before him, and the onsite Managers of the other hotels are not ta blame for any of this, the problem originates from higher up in the organisation.
Since all these problems are self-imposed, here should, other than some procedural issues, be nothing tangible blocking any of the recommendations above. The real problem is that wing to discuss this stuff with Housing is like trying to argue about religion, logic will get you nowhere as the rationale underlying this has long since become doma, from which Housing seems unwilling to remove its focus.
At any rate, I can formally attest: That under the current conditions, it is impossible to operate Be Seneca with an^ assurance of aenerrtl safetv. It is physically impossible to control who gets in the building, and until we rid ourselves of all the extraneous agendas that have being piggy-backed onto the basic one of running the Hotel, nothing will change. Finally, it has to be accepted that an SRO is NOT a "regular apartment", and that attempting to treat it like one will only lead to a bad end.
as referenced in the Chronicle. It happened at the corner of 6th and Stevenson, which is in front of one of Randy Shaw's buildings (Tenderloin Housing Clinic). This is the on the same day the same same Randy Shaw is accusing other property managers in the TL of being negligent while claiming to clean up the TL himself
This video doesn't show the murder, but it does show a black car backing down the alley at 5:30 mark and then the police show up a few minutes later and going down the alley with a flashlight looking for the weapon and asking the trash recyclers if they saw anything
there's a fairly decent chance that this black car belongs to somebody who has been parked in the alley for a month, 24/7, and fraternizing with the local crackheads, including Randy Shaw's own clients at the Seneca, at all hours of the night, every night. There's a pretty good chance this person was nearby even if it isn't the same car
With Tenderloin Housing Clinic residents, also at 3am just a couple days ago
Randy Shaw and Tenderloin Housing Clinic recently filed lawsuits against hotel operators and described it in his article. The lawsuits contain two parts, one is about the Hotel Conversion Ordinance and the other is about the North of Market Special Use District and Planning Commission Code
What Randy Shaw doesn't mention is that the terminology used in the second part is described as 'nuisance'. Randy Shaw via his THC attorney is essentially saying that 'tourists are a nuisance'. Nowhere is this word mentioned in his press release/article
this is the except from one of the lawsuits (700 Jones, THC v Fard)
This is the legal definition of a nuisance in California
Anything which is injurious to health, including, but not limited to, the illegal sale of controlled substances, or is indecent or offensive to the senses, or an obstruction to the free use of property, so as to interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property, or unlawfully obstructs the free passage or use, in the customary manner, of any navigable lake, or river, bay, stream, canal, or basin, or any public park, square, street, or highway, is a nuisance.
Randy Shaw is saying that the mere existence of tourists in the Tenderloin neighborhood of San Francisco is offensive to the senses and demands compensation. The tourists don't have to do anything. They just have to be in the wrong place. This the same Randy Shaw who complains publicly on the same blog about the Tenderloin being a containment zone. The irony would be amusing if it wasn't so insulting. Even more insulting is that Randy Shaw gets public money to conduct Tenderloin historic tours presumably for the very same tourists he finds so offensive
Here is a copy of one of the lawsuits at 700 Jones. Three others filed are nearly identical in form
Here's an example of a real 'nuisance'. One of Randy Shaw's own clients grabbing the tip jar at Mythic Pizza on 6th Street. Mythic Pizza went out of business because of this nuisance
The former senior property manager for Randy Shaw's Tenderloin Housing Clinic, James Holland, has been convicted of embezzlement and the article is in The Chronicle
You can see photos and video of James Holland, at tenderloin Housing Clinic headquarters, while he was still property manager here
However, it is the top two comments that are most telling. In fact James Holland himself was cornered in a court deposition that is also very telling about the way Randy Shaw and Tenderloin Housing Clinic operates
The whole "non-profit" sector in San Francisco is a half a billion dollar criminal enterprise, with money stole from taxpayers.
Reply Reply
Recommend (5)
Disapprove (1)
Popularity: 4
Share | E-Mail | Permalink [Report Abuse]
The entire organization should be held accountable. They're all thieves and liars. There's no such thing as affordable housing. Taxpayers end up coughing up their money to fund these ridiculous organizations who claim to be helping people. Helping them so much that you can walk by any one of their properties and see loitering, drug dealing, and downright filth. It's called neglect and exploitation. James Holland, I hope you burn for your crimes. And, that goes double for the rest of you who haven't yet been caught.
Reply Reply
Recommend (4)
Disapprove (1)
Popularity: 3
Share | E-Mail | Permalink [Report Abuse]
This so- called power broker trying to co-op the occupy movement with his writing. The Occupy movement demands: We are against the dictatorship of the profit addicted corporations over American society, We are against racism and for working class unity just to name a few. We know the works of people like yourself, Daz Lamparas and SEIU1021, etc.
San Francisco's standard provisons of all contractors with the city, in part
Article 18.10 of this legally binding agreement, entitled, Prohibition on Political Activity with City Funds states, "In accordance with San Francisco Administrative Code Chapter 12.g, no funds appropriated by the City for this Agreement may be expended for organizing, creating, funding, participating in, supporting, or attempting to influence any political campaign for a candidate or for a ballot measure. Furthermore, this same article states, "In the event Grantee, or any staff member in association with Grant, engages in any Political Activity, then (i) Grantee shall keep and maintain appropriate records to evidence compliance with this section, and (ii) Grantee shall have the burden to prove that no funding from this Agreement has been used for such Political Activity. Grantee agrees to cooperate with any audit by City or designee in order to ensure compliance with this section
My personal understanding from having been resident at the Boyd Hotel at 41 Jones Street, is that the Lee Campaign has access to the internal resident files of the Tenderloin Housing Clinic. The THC is a Randy Shaw operation, and recipient of many tens of millions of dollars from the City's Care-not-cash Program. The THC, as Mr. Shaw's operation is known in the Tenderloin has over 22 SRO Properties. Those thousands of tenants all have Tenant Reps who were pressured to be advocates for Jane Kim in her 2010 Supervisors Race funded partially by a $10,000 dollar campaign contribution by Willie Brown. Enrique Pearce ran the Kim Campaign with funding and strong Chinese Community support from Rose Pak and operates the same operation that has committed the voter frauds and felony election frauds, by people who have been collecting ballots from the Chinese Community on Stockton Street, in the news. I have personal friends who have asked me, how the hell did the Ed Lee campaign get their unlisted phone numbers? For Jane Kim and Ed Lee to use the internal private client records of the recipient Non-Profits, such as the THC, for voter fraud is beyond unethical. Any investigation into the THC Tenant Reps, who work at and are compensated by the SRO Collaborative will yield more evidence of fraud, ballot tampering, and organized pressure on the poor people for their votes so as not to loose programs. Mayor Lee, like Mayor Newsom before, both cut deeply into the programs for the poor, and the poor are in real fear. What I see is the link between the offices of Jane Kim at City Hall, the offices of Ed Lee as Mayor, and Rose Pak as well as Mr. Pearce and the others from the Kim for Supervisor in District 6 Campaign. Willie Brown is in the middle of this, and the District Attorney needs to recuse himself from this investigation and turn the whole case over to the Feds. There is too much Official Corruption in the Official Family for the DA to be impartial here.
The 2010 federal non profit 990 has been filed for Tenderloin Housing Clinic. This covers the year 2009 and is not available until nearly 18 months later in 2011. It is listed as the 2010 990 at Guidestar and is filed in 2010 with the IRS. The previous 2009 990 is available here >>
On the 990 this is located in Part VI, Governance, Management, and Disclosure, line 5
Line 2: Clarifies that, if two officers, directors, trustees, or key employees of the filer serve in similar positions with another tax-exempt organization, that involvement does not create a reportable business relationship between the two.
Line 4: Explains that the filer must report significant changes to its organizational documents on its Form 990, Part VI and in Schedule O, rather than in a letter to EO Determinations.
Line 5: Modifies standard for determining if diversion is material and must be reported on line 5.
Line 11: Describes the conditions the filer must meet to answer Yes when it e-mails board members a link to its Form 990.
Line 15: Defines conflict of interest for compensation arrangements.
Line 18: Explains when a filer may check the box for Another’s website.
This embezzlement allegedly involved the Galvin Apartments at 781 Brannan. Since James Holland was fired in 2009 according to The Examiner, this means that Randy Shaw and Tenderloin Housing Clinic became aware of the embezzlement during 2009 and the period for which this 990 covers.
The 2009 (2008) 990 shows the Galvin Apartments rental revenue at 371,000
the 2010 (2009) 990 shows the Galvin Apartments rental revenue at 359,000
This is a drop of 12,000 between 2008 and 2009. Yet it is reported that the embezzlement was 29,000. Is this under reporting?. There could be a strategic reason
In the latest 2010 990, this 'diversion of assets' line was NOT checked
This very well could be illegal and false reporting on federal tax forms
(10-12) 17:42 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- A former employee of the Tenderloin Housing Clinic has been charged with embezzling $29,000 in tenant rent money from the San Francisco nonprofit, police said Wednesday.
James Eugene Holland, 41, of San Francisco was fired from the nonprofit two years ago following allegations of theft, said Randy Shaw, the organization's executive director. Holland was arrested Oct. 6 and charged with grand theft, embezzlement from an employer and forgery, police said. He is being held in lieu of $300,000 bail.
The clinic operates the city's largest housing program for homeless adults. Holland collected rent payments from the low-income tenants, many disabled or elderly, and allegedly deposited the money into his personal account, police said.
In one case, Holland placed a tenant in clinic-managed housing without telling the nonprofit and had the rent money sent to his post office box, police said.
The allegations did not involve any properties connected to the Tenderloin Housing Clinic's city contracts for housing, Shaw said.
The only building that Tenderloin Housing Clinic has that does not involve city contracts is The Galvin Apartments at 785 Brannan. Mr Holland wasn't just an employee, he was the Director of Property Management for Tenderloin Housing Clinic, one of the senior jobs
This is a video of James Holland outside THC headquarters 2 years ago during a protest against Randy Shaw. Holland was fired shortly after this video was made
This comment in the Chronicle pretty much mirrors what Holland himself says in the deposition. James Holland actually started out as assistant manager at the very same Seneca Hotel in 2003
antijemima
6:53 PM on October 12, 2011
THC runs brothels and SRO's in the TL and Mission. The run the Seneca Hotel on 6th which is supposed to be "supported housing" but it's one of the filthiest, dangerous, horrible places that you will ever see. They have phony baloney programs like 'harm reduction' that enable them to turn a blind eye to what's going on in their hotels. The city turns a blind eye because at least these people are somewhat housed and don't have to dealt with on the street.
But on the subject of the individual that stole; the whole organization is a ripoff.
Tenderloin Housing Clinic is a corrupt organization. Like someone else said, they turn a blind eye to most things that happen on their property. Most of the employees were hooked up with jobs because they knew someone on the inside. The tenant services coordinator positions always go to ghetto black women who do nothing but sit on their a*s while work piles up on their desk. I've seen first hand at how horrible this organization is so I'm not even surprised about this ex employee.
And next door you can see your tax dollars at work subsidizing crack dealers working and living in the Hotel Union. Geary and Hyde is notorious... not for architecture. And why is crack only in the TL? It's called graft and corruption. Be glad you don't pay mega bucks to live in The Castle and deal with human feces at your front steps. Seriously this is my 'hood and the Hotel Union needs to be shut down.
Here is the federal law that can potentially send Randy Shaw to prison. If that ever happens and Shaw is convicted, every SRO in the city will clean up it's act. An example of a landlord 'knowingly renting' to a drug dealer would be one of the Patels admitting before the Rent Board that most of my tenants are drug dealers, or notification of such via certified, return receipt requested, registered US mail
(a) Unlawful acts
Except as authorized by this subchapter, it shall be unlawful to -
(1) knowingly open, lease, rent, use, or maintain any place,
whether permanently or temporarily, for the purpose of
manufacturing, distributing, or using any controlled substance;
(2) manage or control any place, whether permanently or
temporarily, either as an owner, lessee, agent, employee,
occupant, or mortgagee, and knowingly and intentionally rent,
lease, profit from, or make available for use, with or without
compensation, the place for the purpose of unlawfully
manufacturing, storing, distributing, or using a controlled
substance.
(b) Criminal penalties
Any person who violates subsection (a) of this section shall be
sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not more than 20 years or a
fine of not more than $500,000, or both, or a fine of $2,000,000
for a person other than an individual.
(c) Violation as offense against property
A violation of subsection (a) of this section shall be considered
an offense against property for purposes of section
3663A(c)(1)(A)(ii) of title 18.
(d) Civil penalites
(1) Any person who violates subsection (a) of this section shall
be subject to a civil penalty of not more than the greater of -
(A) $250,000; or
(B) 2 times the gross receipts, either known or estimated, that
were derived from each violation that is attributable to the
person.
(2) If a civil penalty is calculated under paragraph (1)(B), and
there is more than 1 defendant, the court may apportion the penalty
between multiple violators, but each violator shall be jointly and
severally liable for the civil penalty under this subsection.
(e) Declaratory and injunctive remedies
Any person who violates subsection (a) of this section shall be
subject to declaratory and injunctive remedies as set forth in
section 843(f) of this title.
previous page
