How San Francisco’s dirty permitting process enables corruption
Director of Public Works Mohammed Nuru and his accomplice Nick Bovis shouldn’t be the only ones indicted in this week’s FBI complaint.
Nuru’s arrest is an indictment of San Francisco’s entire planning system.
On Monday, news broke that San Francisco’s public works director was arrested by the FBI along with Bovis and linked to five schemes detailed in a 75-page complaint.
One of the outlined corruption schemes relates to a “multi-million dollar mixed use development” project.
Nuru and his daughter flew out to China in late 2018, according to the complaint. They stayed at lavish hotels owned by a billionaire Chinese developer free of cost.
And when they left? Nuru texted the developer: “Thank you very much for all your generosity while we were in China. We had a great vacation and my daughter had a wonderful time. I will do my very best to see that your project gets completed.”
Nuru first got in touch with this developer through the help of a permit expediter who the FBI alleges had also been bribing Nuru with international trips in exchange for help with the expediter’s projects.
The developer and permit expediter aren’t named in the complaint. It’s now believed, as reported by Examiner columnist Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez, that DEVELOPER 1 and CONTRACTOR 2 are Z&L Properties and Walter Wong of the Jaidin Consulting Group.
This complaint raises questions about San Francisco’s development process. What is it about The City’s permitting process that’s so complicated that developers need a permit expediter? Does our system itself enable corruption?
Real estate developers need a variety of permits before they can start new housing construction. This process is lengthy, expensive, and complicated.
The average time it takes to get through the permitting process in San Francisco is nearly four years, according to the UC Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation. There’s little to no consistency in the time frame of these approvals however. Some projects take as long as 14 years to be approved.
Again, these time estimates are solely for the approval process. The average San Francisco housing development takes over six years to erect including both permitting time and construction.
Any small error on one of these applications can set a developer back months.
For this reason, many large developers hire a permit expediter to oversee the approval process and make sure their project stays on track.
You can think of permit expediters as project managers with extensive knowledge of the industry. Permit expediters have experience working with almost everyone in City Hall, so they can anticipate bottlenecks before they appear.
The FBI complaint released on Monday isn’t the first time that San Francisco permit expediters have been embroiled in controversy.
In 2010, well known permit expediter Jimmy Jen was arrested for forging hundreds of documents that claimed his clients had completed steps in the permitting process that they hadn’t. Jen went so far as to create fake rubber stamps using the names of licensed engineers for these documents.
The City cracked down on permit expedition in 2015. For the first time, permit expediters on large development projects had to register with The City and report their compensation and any city officials they talked to.
“We are not saying that these activities can’t or shouldn’t occur. We are saying that it’s important for the public to know when they occur,” said then-Supervisor David Chiu. “That transparency is critical.”
San Francisco has a more complicated permit approvals process than other cities, which gives developers an incentive to cheat the system.
For example, the John Buck Company has worked on projects in both San Francisco and Chicago concurrently. Their Chicago project was fully constructed before their San Francisco project had received permits, according to Bisnow, a news organization reporting on real estate.
But developers continue to develop in San Francisco due to the high rate of return. Once projects are completed, developers can get away with charging higher rents in San Francisco than they can in other cities.
“It’s tough to get in, tough to get things done, but once you do, there is great stuff to work with,” John Buck Company Senior Vice President Evan Schwimmer told Bisnow in 2018.
Some of the additional steps in San Francisco’s permitting process were added by progressive supervisors in order to cut into developers’ high profit margin and extract community benefits. For example, San Francisco charges higher fees to use for affordable housing than other cities.
But other holdups amount to inefficient bureaucracy.
In Oakland, a permit application is handled by a single planner. But in San Francisco, a single applicant can be handled by three to six separate people, which makes it challenging for applicants to know who to go to with questions.
San Francisco also allows citizens more leverage to challenge new construction than other cities. After initial permits are issued, neighbors can hold up the project in appeals. Complaints as frivolous as “blocking views” are entertained.
Reforming these processes could help to mitigate corruption. If the process were more transparent, developers would be less incentivized to pay for a leg up.
Reforms could also allow for faster construction of housing in exclusionary neighborhoods. On average, permits in San Francisco’s wealthier neighborhoods take longer to secure, according to the Terner Center.
It’s clear that The City needs to take a second look at our permitting process.
But we’d be remiss to ignore a broader issue illustrated through the Nuru complaint.
The City desperately needs more housing, but in our current system, what gets built where is at the whim of private developers. Developers decide what to build where based on what will extract the biggest profit, not by where housing is needed in the community.
Only a long term vision that decouples housing development from the private market will eliminate the incentive to cheat the system to maximize profits entirely.
This is an compilation of Dianne Feinstein's history of corruption, all sourced and documented. Lots of information here. Let's get the light shining on this.
The Table of Contents below is to show you what you can expect to find in this PDF. You can click on the image to enlarge for easier viewing.
Or continue reading below.
Below I will
post points of interest from this PDF for you in case
you don't feel like reading it. While it does skip
around a bit in no apparent order, I do suggest you give
it a look as it is very link heavy with a LOT of
Information. Also know that oddly enough some of the
most damaging links have mysteriously disappeared off
the internet even after being cached and or
archived. I have also pulled some info from other
articles which I will link too when they come up.
Let us start with the beginning where oddly enough a coincidental murder had also occurred. Related? I have no idea. Like I said just a coincidence to start her career. I have added where this assumption has come from though.
Early political career
Prior to elected service, Feinstein was appointed by then-California Governor Pat Brown to serve as a member of the California Women's Parole Board. Feinstein also served as a fellow at the Coro Foundation in San Francisco.
President of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors
In 1969, Feinstein was elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, She remained on the Board for nine years. During her tenure on the Board of Supervisors, she unsuccessfully ran for mayor of San Francisco twice, in 1971 against mayor Joseph Alioto, and in 1975, when she lost the contest for a runoff slot (against George Moscone) by one percentage point, to supervisor John Barbagelata. Because of her position, Feinstein became a target of the New World Liberation Front, which placed on her windowsill a bomb that failed to explode. They later shot out the windows of a beach house she owned. She was elected president of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 1978 with initial opposition from Quentin Kopp.
On November 27, 1978, Moscone and supervisor Harvey Milk were assassinated by a rival politician, Dan White, who had resigned from the Board of Supervisors two weeks earlier. Feinstein was in City Hall at the time of the shootings and discovered Milk's body after hearing the shots. Later that day Feinstein announced the assassinations to the public. As President of the Board of Supervisors upon the death of Moscone, Feinstein succeeded to the mayoralty on December 4, 1978.
She Was there that Day
"Dianne Feinstein, who was then President of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, saw White immediately exit Mayor Moscone's office from a side door and called after him. White sharply responded with "I have something to do first."
White fled the scene as Feinstein entered the office where Milk lay dead. She felt Milk's neck for a pulse, her finger entering a bullet wound. Horrified, Feinstein was shaking so badly she required support from the police chief after identifying both bodies. Feinstein then announced the murders to a stunned public, stating: "As President of the Board of Supervisors, it's my duty to make this announcement. Both Mayor Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk have been shot and killed. The suspect is Supervisor Dan White."
White was convicted of the lesser crime of voluntary manslaughter. The verdict proved to be highly controversial, and many felt that the punishment so poorly matched the deed and circumstances that most San Franciscans believed White essentially got away with murder.
White was paroled in 1984 and committed suicide less than two years later.
The revolver used, serial number 1J7901,has gone missing from police evidence storage, possibly having been destroyed."
wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscone–Milk_assassinations
The Other Connection
While in the Mayor's office, Bruce Brugman, publisher of the top San Francisco weekly newspaper: The San Francisco Bay Guardian,
Documented and published nearly 100 corruption charges against Feinstein. Local law enforcement efforts, against Feinstein were nearly impossible, at the time, according to Bay Guardian staff because local politicians and authorities had been paid off by James Bronkema, David Rockefeller's “bag man” and John Molinari, the local mob “bag man”.
Ex-Guardian staff have suggested that associates of one of those two Feinstein financing clans had, possibly arranged the George Moscone assassination in order to position Feinstein for higher office.
Gubernatorial election
In 1990, Feinstein made an unsuccessful bid for Governor of California. Although she won the Democratic Party's nomination for the office, she lost in the general election to Republican Senator Pete Wilson, who vacated his seat in the Senate to assume the governorship. In 1992, she was fined $190,000 for failure to properly report campaign contributions and expenditures associated with that campaign.
Some Other Things she was up to
Feinstein worked with Senator Harry Reid on the Cleantech Scams. Together, by helping White House staff and financiers manipulate the program, they made over $50 Million in personal profits taxpayer expense.
Feinstein's husband had financial interests in the railroad property adjacent to the Tesla and Solyndra buildings. Feinstein later got him the entire California high speed rail contract.
The Feinstein family owned the construction company which Tesla and Solyndra, used. They were given no-bid contracts
Feinstein and her husband worked with White House staff under Rahm Emanual and Silicon Valley campaign financier John Doerr and associates involved with Kleiner Perkins to conduit bribes, and campaign financing, as stock warrants and positions.
Feinstein associate: Roger Boas, was arrested for involvement in a child prostitution ring for political pedophiles, and for embezzling money for the Moscone Convention Center construction
The Feinstein Family held war profiteering contracts in Afghanistan, Bolivia and other regions which held the exclusive mining contracts for Solyndra and Tesla chemicals.
After Solyndra was raided by the FBI and went bankrupt, costing taxpayers over half a trillion dollars in losses, the Feinstein Cartel used the tax write-off losses to make a profit, via tax form manipulations on the tax-write-off losses from the Solyndra crash.
Gary D. Conley, a Bay Area solar and Hydrogen company CEO, whistle-blew on the corruption at Tesla and Solyndra and was later found with a bullet in his head behind a Northern California Air Force base. His family, and friends, charge that is death was “suspicious.”
Feinstein's family and associates held stock in Tesla, Solyndra and other “Clean Tech” companies, which they acquired at key pre-announcement points, most likely based on insider information and the payola from bribes provided as stock warrants.
(There is much more to this in the PDF which can be found on pages 3-4.)
A Curious Snub to The Clintons (found at this link not in the pdf: https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Dianne_Feinstein
When coming into office Feinstein distanced herself from the Clinton administration. She voted against the North American Free Trade Agreement and opposed the 1993 Clinton Health Care Plan. Feinstein was re-elected in 1994 by a 47%-45% margin, in what was one of the most closely watched elections that year.
Corruption Issues
After Feinstein's unsuccessful gubernatorial race in 1990, she was fined $190,000 for failure to properly report campaign contributions.
In 2003, Feinstein was ranked the fifth wealthiest senator, with an estimated net worth of $26 million. By 2005 her net worth had increased up to $99 million. Her 347-page financial disclosure statement draws clear lines between her assets and those of her husband, with many of her assets in blind trusts.
In January 2009, the issue was raised whether Feinstein violated Senate ethics rules to avoid appearances of conflicts of interest when she introduced legislation that gave $25 billion to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. to help finance an FDIC proposal to avoid home foreclosures by promoting loan workouts and increasing federal loan guarantees. Just before the FDIC had signed a contract with CBRE, her husband's firm, to unload foreclosed properties for prices higher than industry averages. Spokesmen for the FDIC, Feinstein and CBRE said there was no connection between the legislation and the contract and that the couple didn't know about CBRE's business with FDIC until after it was awarded.
A Russian Connection
As mayor of San Francisco, Feinstein issued an official city proclamation in support of the World Festival of Youth and Students, held in Moscow. The event was organized by the Soviet-controlled World Federation of Democratic Youth and was supported by the Communist Party USA in 1986.
Feinstein traveled to Moscow that same year as part of a trade delegation of 450 U.S. businessmen and public officials.
A little over a year later, on Jan. 27, 1987, Soviet Consul General Valentin Kamenev presented Feinstein with a Soviet streetcar: “A streetcar named desire.” Also present at the ceremony was Viktor Zhelezny, deputy chief of public transport for the Russian Republic.
Top Dem Senator Gets Busted in Massive Corruption Scandal
Partisan hack and national disgrace, Dianne Feinstein is at it again only this time she is sticking it to the American people rather than the CIA.
The U.S. Senator from California is looking to make out like a thief thanks to her husband’s, Richard Blum, lucrative contract with the U.S. Postal Service.
Richard Blum’s company, CBRE, somehow was awarded a contract to be the sole real estate company to handle the sale of 56 USPS buildings.
Blum is said to be making $1 billion in commissions off the deal and is a member of CBRE’s board and served as its chairman from 2001 until 2014.
Feinstein, herself worth $70 million says there was no impropriety, as she has nothing to do with the USPS decision. (H/T pagesix.com)
The senator was in the news recently after releasing a heavily partisan report on CIA “torture” methods and black sites.
The report only had Democrat input and not a single interrogator from the CIA program was questioned.
The timing of the release of the report came into question as well.
Feinstein was stepping down from her post as head of the Senate intelligence committee after the heavy losses by Democrats in the mid-term elections.
Senator John McCain replaced Senator Feinstein as the chairman of the Senate intelligence committee.
Link for story above: https://web.archive.org/web/20170322223237/http://conservativetribune.com/top-dem-senator-busted-1/
This video below gives a very good run down on her Husband and his dealings with the Postal Service if you are interested
Yes Funny enough according to this article found HERE written in 2015, Diane was actually compared to being like Trump! See for yourself!
Politico is reporting that at least 50 pro-immigration groups have written a letter to both Feinstein and Sen. Barbara Boxer explaining that a measure stripping sanctuary cities of their power will cause fear among illegal immigrant communities.
Some advocates have compared
Feinstein to Donald Trump, who became a target of immigrant
activists after he called some illegal immigrants rapists
when he announced his bid for the White House.
"Feinstein's bill is trying to get us to the point where we
continue to generate fear at the local level," Cristina
Jimenez, managing director of United We Dream, told
Politico. "She is basically … joining the Donald Trump
bandwagon."
Can' lose that Federal Money now can we?
According to Politico, Feinstein's measure is considered milder than what Republican lawmakers are offering. The California Democrat told Politico that the reason she wanted to write a bill targeting sanctuary cities is to have a counterbalance to what Republicans have authored — which threaten to keep federal funding from cities who won't comply with federal authorities.
One last note of dealings for you. The continuation of this story can be found on pages 30-33. I will get you started.
How The Democrats Ate Their Own Children
When U. S. Senators Harry Reid and Dianne Feinstein realized they could each make billions of dollars, Personally, via their family stock holdings and campaign funds, they didn't waste a minute stabbing their own constituents in the back to get at that cash.
California and Nevada Green Car Companies, Solar Companies, Energy Technology Companies, Green Builders and Transit Companies were hacked off at the knees because they competed with the stock assets that Reid and Feinstein had acquired in their kick-back deals.
These other applicants were all "GREEN COMPANIES": supposedly the Democrat's favorite things. It doesn't matter, though, how green your company was, if it was in the path for the green cash from Tesla or Solyndra. Two of the favored companies who paid the kick-backs to federal officials.
Is the argument from Feinstein's office that: "there just wasn't enough money left at the Department of Energy" true? No, it is a 100% out-right lie. The Federal GAO, the people that watch for corruption, state that there has always been, and still is, billions, and billions and billions of dollars, set aside EXCLUSIVELY for these companies, that was never used. In Fact, there was always more than enough money to fund every single applicant.
Staff from ZAP Motors, Redwood Solar, Aptera and dozens of other companies have specifically stated that Harry Reid, Dianne Feinstein and their Chief’s of Staff, personally wrote to them, spoke with them and lied to them.
Under Eric Holder, Feinstein and Reid buddy Eric Holder, refused to take any action. Now it is Lynch's turn.
Harry Reid sabotaged the applicants for Department of Energy Funds if they competed with Kleiner Perkins companies who were funding the campaigns of Reid and Feinstein.
Continue this story on page 30 of this PDF