By chance I ran into local gay activist Michael Petrelis in the Castro yesterday evening, and he alerted me to the fact that a meeting of the Castro Community Benefit District (CBD) board was about to commence (in the community room at the Bank of America on 18th & Castro).
Petrelis, a somewhat well-known local gadfly, told me that he is seeking to have various flagpoles including the big one at Castro and Market which usually displays a large rainbow flag, reclaimed as public property. According to Petrelis, the flagpole has for the past few years been controlled by the Merchants of Upper Market and Castro (MUMC). Ceding control over public property to a merchants group does to me sound like a dubious arrangement, even though MUMC is presumably providing some funding for upkeep of flags and such, and I told him I agreed it is an issue worth pursuing.
Anyway, I went and checked out the meeting. CBDs, for those unfamiliar, are quasi-governmental jurisdictions that collect money from local merchants to pay for various services and "improvements" in their geographic areas, such as beautification, security, anti-graffiti efforts, etc. I believe that setting up a CBD requires a majority vote of merchants in the area to be covered, and that the CBD can then collect special taxes from all merchants in the area (whether they voted for the CBD or not).There were about half a dozen guests present, along with two SFPD officers, and around 15 board members. I took the opportunity to speak up several times, and Michael Petrelis wrote me a very nice personal note about doing so ("Thanks so much for being you and speaking up tonight. You are so terrific!" ...) and let me know he'd be mentioning me in his blog, which in fact he did:
http://mpetrelis.blogspot.com/2012/03/only-in-sf-sexscort-dancing-pig-cops.html
The flag issue did not come up while I was there (I didn't stay for the entire meeting), but it nevertheless turned out to be interesting and worthwhile. Petrelis appears to be playing a very vocal role there as a Sunshine advocate, not entirely unlike the role I've been playing on the Libertarian Party of California Executive Committee, i.e. dogging the members about adhering to good governance practices of transparency and accountability. Although he doesn't sit on the Community Benefit District's committee, it appears he's been having some success -- the chair announced at the beginning of the meeting that public comment would be allowed on every item of discussion, something which it seems had not formerly been the case, and he is pressing for the disclosure of various other information.
Unfortunately Petrelis doesn't go into any detail on his blog about what I said. During announcements, I mentioned that the local chapter of the Sex Workers Outreach Project commemorated International Sex Work Rights Day on March 3 by doing a visibility event at Powell and Market, holding signs and passing out fliers, and that the Erotic Service Providers Union has a benefit event coming up on April 14 (see attached flier). The opportunity to mention these things in a public context was particularly gratifying given the presence of the police officers, who are among those most needing to hear the message that sex work is an established part of our community.
In response to the board's point-person on graffiti abatement, who had said they expect a bunch of signs and stickers and such to be posted around March 21(?) related to some protest or something about some warlord in Uganda, I said I personally considered raising community awareness about Uganda, where the legislature has been discussing a law that would allow the death penalty for homosexuality, to be more important than having a pristine neighborhood, and that the CBD should not be spending any money to remove stickers or fliers about this.
The item had come up in regards to how the group was going to allocate its budget, which sounds substantial (I kind of zoned some of that discussion out, but they were references to hundreds of thousands of dollars), and so in addition to the above point, I raised the larger concern that the CBD should be considering the wishes of those from whom the money is coming as to how they want it spent, especially those from whom funds are being collected involuntarily.
Finally, as Michael notes, I tried to back him up on the Sunshine stuff. In particular, the group's chair had mentioned that board members should not respond to public comment, to which I responded that as a member of the public, I would like to hear what board members may have to say in response to points I raise, and that whether I did or not, it was an abridgment of their freedom of speech to prohibit them from responding.
I didn't get any feedback from anyone else at the meeting, so I have no idea what the board members thought of my input, but they certainly heard me. I would encourage other libertarians and freedom supporters to try to seek out and participate in local community meetings and forums of this sort, and to speak up strongly and repeatedly at them for our values, as this will help expose others to a pro-freedom point of view and make it part of the conversation.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
(Attachment flier.jpg is missing)