Bad lands.
Hanford, Washington; Oak Ridge, Tennessee;
the Savannah River, South Carolina; the Idaho National Engineering
and Environmental Laboratory — what do these places have in
common? They all contain vast nuclear weapons development sites.
According to the August 8 L.A.
Times, these and 105 other locations throughout the country are
too hot for unrestricted access. And they will be forever.
A National Research Council report charges that
the federal government has not made long-range maintenance plans or
even guaranteed funding to protect the public from exposure to the
radiation at these sites. Adds reporter Norman Kempster, "Since
some radioactive wastes remain dangerous for several thousand years,
the problem is analogous to a waste-management program established
during the Roman Empire. It is unlikely that the Romans would have
been able to foresee conditions in today's world, but their waste
products might still be poisoning the environment." California
sites include the Energy Technology Engineering Center near Simi
Valley, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory near San
Francisco, the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory near the UC
Berkeley campus, the Sandia National Laboratories facility in
Livermore, and the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center at Stanford
University.
Bad
quotes. Last Wednesday’s SF
Weekly carried an article by once-upon-a-time investigative
reporter Peter Byrne that identified two causes of San Francisco’s
present housing shortage — "political impediments to housing
construction and rent control."
"Political impediments," in a city that
habitually bends its Planning Code to encourage developers? What on
earth is Byrne referring to? Travel back a year ago, when Supervisor
Sue Bierman was attempting to rein in runaway live/work loft
construction. A scuffle on the stairway of City Hall elicited a
retort from Joe O’Donoghue, head of the Residential Builders
Association: "This incident demonstrates how left-wing
reactionaries, by gaining power, can put their right-wing
counterparts to shame in putting their own self-interests ahead of
the needs of renters, homeowners, schoolchildren, and all other
residents, who are no more to them than cannon fodder for
legislative quackery, of which Supervisor Bierman's legislation is a
prime example. Sue Bierman has been consistent in promulgating
similar draconian legislation over the years, which has resulted in
the housing crisis we have today." Powerful woman, that
supervisor!
To support the contention that rent control should
be phased out except for "elderly, fixed-income, and
impoverished tenants," Byrne quotes from Rent Control, a
scholarly study by W. Dennis Keating, Michael B. Teitz, and Andrejs
Skaburskis. A quick look at the book reveals that the citation is
selective, to say the least. In fact, Keating, Teitz, and Skaburskis
refuse to take sides in the debate, which they note has
"frequently turned shrill." As a way out of the present
nationwide dilemma, they describe a promising trend toward
"limited-equity cooperatives and nonprofit housing
corporations," such as San Francisco has begun to promote in
the Tenderloin and elsewhere. Uh oh! That’s part of the problem, O’Donoghue
says: groups that "have removed millions of dollars in taxable
properties, which could have contributed to vital city services,
from the tax roles by creating a tax-exempt niche for their
subsidized housing."