Aunty Sez - A San Francisco Treat

Anyone living in San Francisco knows that you can have what most would think is a good job, spend only for rent, utilitites, basic phone, food and transportation and still barely make it from check to check. There's no left over money to save, put into a 401K, or even prepare an Earthquake emergency backpack.

When I got this one bedroom 20 years ago it was $585 and I was making $14K working for the EPA as a GS4. The rent alone was half my income before taxes. 20 years later, my husband has a job that makes more than twice that much and our rent is still half our income before taxes.

Wages are either stalled or lower than they were back in the Dot.Com boom, but medical benefits have gone up 300%. Forget about owning property in San Francisco if you're middle class by national standards. Median cost for a one unit is half a million dollars and that's on the San Andres fault.

The Poor People's Economic Human Right's Campaign is committed to uniting the poor across color lines as the leadership base for a broad movement to abolish poverty. We work to accomplish this through advancing economic human rights as named in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights- such as the rights to food, housing, health, education, communication and a living wage job.http://www.economichumanrights.org/

Study: State is one of poorest in U.S.
HIGH RENT EATS UP BIG CHUNK OF INCOME

By Brandon Bailey
Mercury News
California's high cost of housing has given the state one of the worst poverty rates in the nation, according to an independent study that was welcomed by critics who believe the government's method of counting the poor overlooks many people.

Thousands of Silicon Valley residents, for example, are living in poverty even though they earn more than the official federal standard, according to researchers at the non-profit Public Policy Institute of California, who calculated the numbers after adjusting for local housing costs.

The study confirms what social workers and the working poor have known for years:

``If you're poor here, you're really poor,'' said Candy Capograssi, deputy executive director of the Santa Clara County Housing Authority, which recently had more than 70,000 people submit applications for a housing subsidy waiting list.

Critics have long complained that the federal government uses an outdated formula to calculate the official poverty standard, which determines individual eligibility for welfare and other programs, and is also used by the federal government when it allocates money to state and local agencies.

The formula is based on income levels and the cost of food, but does not take into account housing costs that vary greatly from one region to another, said Deborah Reed, who wrote the PPIC report.

For example, the federal poverty level for a family of four in 2004 was $19,157. But the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development estimated that fair market rent for a two-bedroom apartment that year in Santa Clara County was $21,852. That means a family earning $20,000 was above the poverty level, yet potentially homeless.

``There are people living just above the federal poverty level in California who are not doing as well as people who are officially living in poverty in Mississippi and Louisiana,'' Reed said.

Using the official federal standard, California has the 15th-highest poverty rate in the country, with 13.3 percent of its residents living below the poverty threshold.

But when Reed adjusted the formula to reflect the cost of housing, California's poverty rate rose to 16.1 percent. That gave it the third-highest ranking in the country, Reed said -- behind only Washington, D.C., and New York.

Using Reed's calculations, 15 percent of Santa Clara County residents live in poverty, compared with 12 percent nationally.

She also found that three California counties -- Monterey, San Francisco and Los Angeles -- have poverty rates comparable to some of the poorest counties in the country.

``The federal calculation doesn't fully capture the state's circumstances,'' Reed said. A more comprehensive measurement, she added, ``would give a better sense of the number of poor and degree of need.''

Local officials and others who work with the poor in Silicon Valley endorsed her argument.

They noted that eligibility for welfare payments, food stamps and Medi-Cal is based on the federal poverty standard.

``The fact that it doesn't get adjusted based on the actual cost of living means the same basic grant is going to go further in another county than it goes here,'' said Greta Helm, an official at the Santa Clara County Social Services Agency. ``We still get less bang for the buck.''

Other analysts note that the federal formula has been a political football for partisans on the left and right, as they argue about the quantity and need for various aid programs. Reed said her formula may not be a perfect measurement, but added that it's important to strive for a more accurate picture.

After adjusting for housing costs, Reed reported that California's poverty rate is higher than it was in the 1960s and 1970s -- in contrast with other parts of the country, which saw a decline or remain similar to the rates of the 1960s.

She cited several factors for California's high poverty rate, including more low-income immigrants and single-mother families. Low-income families in California saw their real income decline slightly since the 1960s, while the number of impoverished families with at least one person working had increased, she said.

Reed also found that adjusting the formula produced a different picture of poverty within California.

By the federal standard, the San Francisco Bay Area and Sacramento are both considered to have relatively low poverty rates, compared with Los Angeles County and the San Joaquin Valley.

But after allowing for the costs of housing, she found the number of San Francisco residents living in poverty had nearly doubled. The number in Santa Clara, Alameda and Santa Cruz counties also grew sharply. The Sacramento area, however, remained at about the same level.

Even though this blog entry is dated 4/19/06, I'm writing it on 4/18/06. Got to figure out how to get the date right on this blog.

Today is the 100th anniversary of the 1906 earth quake that shook central California. The sirens woke me up at 5:12am. Some of the programs on TV in San Francisco call it "Quake of the Century - One Hundred Years Later"... hmmm does that mean we are due for another one right soon? I'd say we are.

1906 Earthquake Centennial Alliance


It's weird to live in San Francisco. When I walk down town I can't help but look up at the glass covered sky scrapers. When all that glass rains down during the next big quake it's estimated that there'll be a pile 6 feet deep from curb to curb all through the financial district. I think of the next big quake when I ride the BART under the San Francisco Bay. Not much you can do but pray and hope you die with a prayer on your lips and God on your mind.

The Moscone Center is a first aid center and it's half covered with glass, that's good thinking.

Our bridges are built on bay fill which will jiggle and shake and basically turn to liquid. Liquification took place during the 1989 quake. 80% of all business damage happened South of Market. South of Market used to have canals where boats would sail into the city. Those canals were filled in and businesses built over them.

In 1906 the Spin Doctors didn't want to loose out being the economic center of the west to everyone lied through their teeth, saying there were less than 500 people who died and most were from the fire. SF's archivist emeritus, Gladys Hansen, wanted to get the names of those who died and stopped counting at 3,000 names. If you write to "The Death Lady, San Francisco" she'll get your letter.

Were the new buildings built better? Nope, in fact the building code was relaxed to speed up the rebuilding of the city.

The Great Quake: 1906 - 2006 Check that link to read more about the past, present and future about living on the edge of the world.

Some people think that San Francisco was the only city that suffered damage in 1906, untrue. Just like New Orleans wasn't the only place that had damage due to Katrina. San Francisco wasn't the only place that shook until the buildings fell down. If you look at the shake map you'd see that hundreds of miles north and south of San Francisco shook hard in 1906. Other faults, like branches on a tree, kicked into action in response. Check the red areas in San Jose. Now think of Silicon Valley and the businesses there. The economic damage will be as severe as the physical damage.

Watch Earth Rock and Roll in New Simulation of 1906 Quake
Geologists recreate the event and animate the tremendous shaking that caused damage 200 miles away. The purpose: to warn of the next Big One.

Are most people prepared? Nope. Do most people think about it much? Nope. Are there thousands of unreinforced brick buildings where people are living and working? Yes. Are hospitals, schools, public buildings built right over the fault line? Yes. Will thousands die in the next big quake? You betcha.

Dance of the Olone Indians. They would sing "We are dancing, We are dancing, We are dancing on the edge of the world."



Seems as if we're still dancing on the edge of the world.

Katrina showed us that we can't depend on FEMA. If the big quake should happen after 30 days of rain, like we just had, the mud slides would clog what roads were still level.

Most of the police and fire fighters live outside of San Francisco because it's too expensive for them to live in the city where they work. I'll bet money that most doctors who work in San Francisco live outside of San Francisco. Hospitals only have a couple of days worth of supplies, should they withstand the next big quake.

San Francisco Neighborhood Emergency Response Teams
That's why I applaud Neighborhood Emergency Response Teams and the volunteers who are getting training. It'll be these folks, should they survive, who will be administering first aid, putting out fires, coordinating with what's left of the city government.



85% of home owners here in the bay area do not have earth quake insurance, most say it's too expensive. But what's the cost of starting out from scratch? Folks with insurance in the hurricane areas are still having to pay mortgage on homes that blew away or face ruined credit. Renters need to think about this as well as the deductible is only $700 and the cost of earth quake insurance is going down.

Fellow Californians, prepare your earthquake kit and if you have one update it. Volunteer to your nearest NERT group. Get a friend or family member who lives out of state to be the point of contact because long distance phone service will work when local phones will not. Then you might have a little better chance of surviving this dance on the edge of the world.