Oh my
********************************************
How dare Nancy Pelosi make any noise whatsoever about political corruption? The Hunter's Point Shipyard Redevelopment Project is one of the dirtiest political deals ever done, engineered by her step-son Laurence Fishburne, Lennar Vice-President, and San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsome's campaign manager. And, this is not just a dirty deal; it's also radioactive. Lennar is building the $100,000 Superfund Condos---that's entry-level housing in San Francisco--next to a 64-acre nuclear dumpsite full of fall-out from nuclear weapons tests in the Pacific, which the Navy dragged back here and dumped in the 40% Black, 51% Brown neighborhood populated largely by people who'd come north to work in the shipyard round the clock, because they needed the work and the U.S. government was determined to win the war. The Bayview neighborhood surrounding the Shipyard now has the highest incidence of breast cancer for women under 40 in the entire U.S.A., http://www.greenaction.org/hunterspoint/press/sfbayview092801.shtml---not only because of the 64-acre dump site next to the condos the City is paying Lennar to build, after giving Lennar the land, but also because of the top secret National Radiological Laboratory operating in the shipyard from 1945 to 1969.

Now Gavin Newsome, the Redevelopment Agency, and the usual cast of highly capitalized politicians and beneficiaries have "fast-tracked" the Bayview-Hunter's Point Redevelopment Project through the Board of Supervisors, pushing it to a vote this coming Tuesday, May 9th. They fast-tracked this legislation so fast that those of us fighting it are all scrambling and trying to catch our breath.

********************************************
http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2005/12/pelosi_calls_fo.html

A Newsom-Pelosi-Lennar connection?

Ever since Lennar/BVHP, a subsidiary of the nation's largest homebuilder, was designated Master Developer for the Hunters Point Shipyard by the San Francisco Redevelopment Commission, they've been dying to get started on the extremely profitable project of building 1,600 new homes right next to the Shipyard's radioactive, toxic Parcel E landfill, one of the most contaminated sites in the country. And Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi has been leading the charge to make it happen.

When Lennar first got the nod, Willie Brown was mayor, and San Franciscans learned that he had once had a business relationship with Lennar. What about Mayor Gavin Newsom?

Triumphantly, Mayor Newsom announced upon his return from a meeting in Washington with Pelosi in late March, "For the first time, we have the Navy's signature on an agreement that ensures the conveyance will begin shortly," according to the April 1 Chronicle ("Navy signs binding pact on first parts of shipyard"). Newsom was speaking of the conveyance of Parcel A, the part of the Shipyard where the new homes are planned, from the Navy to the City.

To make it happen, Congresswoman Pelosi, the Democratic "whip" in Congress, had had to call in the ranking Democrat on the House minority appropriations subcommittee, described by the Chronicle as "a big gun," because the Navy had been "having doubts about going ahead" with the transfer. "'I have been working on this agreement for more than a decade, and I am proud we are near our goal,' Pelosi said in a statement" made after the Navy signed off, the Chronicle reported.

Could Nancy Pelosi and Gavin Newsom have a personal interest in seeing Lennar succeed? Bay View Hunters Point activists noticed recently that a man named Laurence Pelosi was until very recently the senior vice president of Lennar Communities, another Lennar subsidiary and a component of Lennar/BVHP. Laurence Pelosi was the treasurer for Gavin Newsom's campaign for mayor last year. He is described in the press as Newsom's cousin, while Nancy Pelosi is related to Newsom through his aunt.

Activists are continuing to look into these intriguing relationships and will keep Bay View readers posted.
*******************************************
http://nucnews.net/nucnews/2004nn/0411nn/041110nn.htm
********************************************
This is all stuff from people who are to Nancy Pelosi's left. Want to bet the "big gun" was Murtha?

Today I sent the following to Naancy Pelosi

SUBJECT: Majority leader position

I would like to see someone NOT of the Class of '94 take this position. You chose Rahm Emanuel for DCCC chair over any tenured, older House member - a wise decision that worked beautifully. Surely, there's an untainted someone with the experience, character & drive to fill this position well.

The history of revolutions - large & small - is that victors inevitably adopt the ideas & methods of those they replace. Please ask yourself whether loyalty & power should be all-important in filling this key post.

I am a very concerned long-time Democrat, hoping my party doesn't fall into the same trap that brought the Bush empire down.

[It was my widow's mite.]

On this one, I generally agree, although it should be noted that the FBI chose not to prosecute suggesting there was not enough evidence of wrongdoing.

Murtha needs to say something about why he can now be trusted not only to do no more wrong but to reform the way Congress does business so that such chicanery becomes rare.

I would like to see Pelosi succeed in this, but I wish Murtha hadn't used the term "swift boating". That term has a meaning, and this ain't it.

As I said before, this is old news and stuff brought up by people to Pelosi's left in San Fran
********************************************
Mayor Gavin Newsom, as the chief executive officer of the City and County of San Francisco, took what is clearly discretionary action by entering into the Conveyance Agreement for the Hunters Point Shipyard with the U.S. Navy. The Conveyance Agreement set a specific timetable for giving the City a portion of the Shipyard – Parcel A – as well as giving commercial development rights to Lennar/BVHP, a private, non-governmental organization.

“For the first time, we have the Navy’s signature on an agreement that ensures the conveyance will begin shortly,” Mayor Gavin Newsom said when it was signed.

San Francisco Chronicle, April 1, 2004

... According to the article, the agreement came a few weeks after the Navy sent Newsom a letter saying it was having doubts about going ahead with a January 2002 symbolic agreement that was announced with potentially embarrassing fanfare in Washington by Rep. Nancy Pelosi, then-Mayor Willie Brown and Navy Secretary Gordon England. The Chronicle reports that Mayor Newsom met on March 31 in the Capitol offices of Pelosi, who is the House minority leader and a member of his extended family – she is the aunt of his cousin and campaign treasurer, Laurence Pelosi.

Also in attendance were Navy Assistant Secretary Johnson, Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein “and Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., a big gun brought in by Pelosi to convince the Navy the time for delays had passed.

“Murtha, the powerful ranking Democrat on the House military appropriations subcommittee, made it clear to the Navy that he wanted a binding agreement signed by Wednesday. Another meeting was held in Pelosi’s offices Wednesday, minus Newsom, and the Navy signed the accord,” the Chronicle’s Edward Epstein wrote.

Nancy, Gavin and Laurence

Nepotism is defined by Webster’s Dictionary as political favoritism based on family relationships. In an email to the Bay View, Laurence Pelosi verifies that he was a senior executive at Lennar in March of 2004 at the time his cousin, Mayor Newsom – at the behest of his Aunt Nancy – signed the Shipyard Conveyance Agreement. Lennar enjoys annual sales of $9 billion and has proven itself to be a corporation rich enough to “buy” Congresswoman Pelosi and her family, including Mayor Newsom, along with former Mayor Willie Brown and San Francisco’s cash-strapped Health Commission, its Planning and Redevelopment Commissions and the Board of Supervisors.

In December of 2002, in a public hearing before the Redevelopment Commission charged with civil rights violations and impingement on constitutional rights to access by media, the commission approved a Disposition and Development Agreement granting Lennar exclusive development rights for the Shipyard. Laurence Pelosi was a senior executive at Lennar at that time.

Laurence Pelosi is the son of Ronald Pelosi and Barbara Newsom. He is Gavin Newsom’s cousin and was the official treasurer for Newsom’s mayoral campaign. Laurence Pelosi is Congresswoman Pelosi’s nephew.

Local ethics law, San Francisco Campaign and Government Conduct Code section 3.212, governs political decision making involving family members. Section 3.214 requires disclosure of personal, business or professional relationships, and the Ethics Commission is authorized to investigate and enforce violations of law by Mayor Newsom as an elected City official.

Contributions to Gavin and Nancy

Additionally, section 3.206 governs financial conflicts of interest by City officers and employees, such as Newsom’s sponsorship of all 14 ordinances and resolutions passed by the Board of Supervisors governing the Shipyard redevelopment plan and environmental findings.

The April 2, 2004, San Francisco Chronicle features an article by Katia Hetter that mentions Darius Anderson, a principal member of a development firm negotiating for a redevelopment lease from the Treasure Island Development Authority in partnership with Lennar Corp. of Miami, which had also been granted exclusive development rights to the Hunters Point Shipyard. The Shipyard Conveyance Agreement, as a matter of fact, was set to be heard by the mayoral appointees on the Redevelopment Commission on April 20, 2004.

Anderson, a partner in Treasure Island Community Development, held a fundraiser in his Sacramento office to help Mayor Newsom retire his $400,000 campaign debt in early March of 2004. Newsom signed the Conveyance Agreement for the Shipyard on March 31, 2004. Newsom drew further media criticism when he waived ethics laws by appointing Supervisor Tony Hall to the Treasure Island Development Authority as its executive director.

Among the 14 measures passed by the Board of Supervisors in December that were sponsored by Mayor Gavin Newsom and Supervisor Sophie Maxwell included in the Shipyard redevelopment plan is File No. 041536, introduced to the Board of Supervisors on Nov. 2, 2004, under the control of the mayor. It creates a graduated code compliance plan for non-residential buildings at naval bases transferred to the city, the Redevelopment Agency or the Treasure Island Development Authority.

Newsom violated Fair Political Practices Act statues as well as a 1995 law passed by San Francisco voters prohibiting campaign contributions from anyone bidding on or negotiating for a city contract or development lease if the recipient has a say in approval of the matter.

With the distinct odor of a bribe, Newsom announced he was the recipient of a $2.25 million grant from the U.S. Department of Defense to fund construction at the Shipyard in a press release issued by his office in May of 2004.

Newsom concretized his violations of federal, state and local laws in January of 2005 by signing into law as mayor the Hunters Point Shipyard redevelopment measures he sponsored before the Board of Supervisors and accepting, in an official ceremony, the transfer of Shipyard Parcel A from the Secretary of the Navy ... for one dollar.

********************************************
One big happy family, Nancy Pelosi, Laurence Pelosi, Gavin Newsom..............and John Murtha was just glad to help!

Murtha needs to say something about why he can now be trusted not only to do no more wrong but to reform the way Congress does business so that such chicanery becomes rare.

********************************************
Murtha didn't get prosecuted caused he ratted out his buddies. Do you really have any expectation he will say anything about why he should be trusted after ABSCAM??????

The liberal end of the blogosphere has decided to brand Steny Hoyer as the "bad actor" in this race and that the so-called bad blood between Hoyer and Pelosi is a two-way street. I would beg to differ. During the race for Minority Whip, Pelosi was the one who displayed public animus toward her opponent; in fact, according to a reputable source who was privy to a meeting held to establish the ground-rules for that election, it was Pelosi who, through her trademark clenched teeth smile,demonstrated her impatience and disdain for her opponent's desire to carefully examine the procedures that would be followed. The atmosphere in that meeting, from her side of the room, was, according to this source, nothing less than hostile. It is well known that once someone "crosses" her, she neither forgets nor forgives. Her involvement in this intra-party fight merely confirms this reputation. She is a masterful politician, but a character flaw of this magnitude could prove to be a drag on how House Democrats conduct the business of governing in the next two years. I hope I am wrong.

It's not a contest between Snow White and Mother Teresa. It's between two old pols. It would be nice if Snow White would actually throw her hat into the ring but that ain't gonna happen. ( Or at least there's no sign she's going to declare.)

So it comes down to which outcome is most apt to result in policies we favor.  Which is, the outcome which results in the majority leader who is most on Nancy's team rather than the one who's personally  most liberal.

Now that she's committed herself  we want  what she wants . Or at least we should. 

Considering how badly the Navy contaminated Hunter's Point, the way I see it, the City of San Francisco overpaid.

More and more this strikes me as complete BS.

You utterly destroy your own credibility when you say this:

Lennar enjoys annual sales of $9 billion and has proven itself to be a corporation rich enough to “buy” Congresswoman Pelosi and her family

That's a very serious charge. To make it without any evidence reveals you as a partisan hack who shamelessly smears people and has no regard for the truth.

But the facts also don't back up your statements.

I found a timeline of events for Hunter's Point.

Hunter's Point was shut down by the Navy as a shipyard in 1974 and then leased out, although I imagine it was hard to lease out given that it was "toxic" (your words).

So it makes sense that in 1993 -- more than 10 years ago -- Congress approved transferring the land to the city of San Francisco. This is long before Pelosi's step-son worked for Lennar or his cousin was mayor.

For some reason that is not explained, the details of the transfer were not worked out until recently.

In the meantime, San Francisco issued a "Request for Qualifications" for companies that could develop the area, meaning they went through a normal process.

Out of those that submitted, the city chose Lennar/BVHP to be the primary developer in 1999.

Therefore the conveyance in 2004 is merely approving the details of what had already been decided years before when Pelosi's step-son DIDN'T work for Lennar and when the step-son's cousin WASN'T mayor.

You've also shown no evidence of any kind of a financial benefit for Pelosi, Murtha, her step-son or his cousin or even that they had any financial stake in any of this.

Local ethics law, San Francisco Campaign and Government Conduct Code section 3.212, governs political decision making involving family members. Section 3.214 requires disclosure of personal, business or professional relationships, and the Ethics Commission is authorized to investigate and enforce violations of law by Mayor Newsom as an elected City official.

I'm familiar with these kind of rules and they only apply when there is something at stake financially. If nobody involves stands to gain monetarily, there's no need to disclose anything.

Among the 14 measures passed by the Board of Supervisors in December that were sponsored by Mayor Gavin Newsom ... It creates a graduated code compliance plan for non-residential buildings at naval bases transferred to the city, the Redevelopment Agency or the Treasure Island Development Authority.

Newsom violated Fair Political Practices Act statues as well as a 1995 law passed by San Francisco voters prohibiting campaign contributions from anyone bidding on or negotiating for a city contract or development lease if the recipient has a say in approval of the matter.

Creating a code for development is not the same as awarding a contract.

With the distinct odor of a bribe, Newsom announced he was the recipient of a $2.25 million grant from the U.S. Department of Defense to fund construction at the Shipyard in a press release issued by his office in May of 2004.

When you say Newsom was the recipient of a grant, you in fact mean the City of San Franciso, right??!!! He received it in his capacity as Mayor.

And again with the innuendo -- "distinct odor of a bribe." That's a serious charge to make without evidence and no one who makes such a charge in this way is credible.

He did his job as Mayor and won the city a grant for development and you accuse him of being a criminal.

YOU ARE DISPICABLE!!!!!!

What the fucking hell do I have to do to register a "4" "Excellent" for this comment?
After I select 4, what am I supposed to do to rate this comment?

Since the USG will be paying to clean it up and since anyone who develops there will get tax benefits for "brownfields" development I don't think so!

Pelosi is pandering to the Netroots with her support of Murtha after the "bipartisan" Bush love-in last week.

Purely lip service, IMHO, just like so many Dems gave to Ned Lamont after he won the CT-Sen primary.

Support Citizen Journalism - Visit ePluribus Media Today

Actually, I am not claiming that either Hoyer or Pelosi are bad actors in the current drama. Perhaps I inartfully illustrated a particular case in which she amply demonstrated her disdain for a colleague who felt he was within his rights to run in the race for Minority Whip. And the kind of animus she demonstrated while in the room seemed to grow as the discussion went on. The whole point of that meeting was to make sure that both sides understood that the election procedures were designed to ensure that no one candidate was advantaged -- mostly to mollify her and her handlers. If she was insulted by a careful examination of procedures that were specifically designed to make sure the election wasn't gamed in favor of either candidate, but rather to ensure that both sides would feel the nominating speeches, the balloting, and the counting, would be conducted in the most fair and ethical manner possible, then she must have had a huge chip on her Armani clad shoulder.

And no,the point is not that Hoyer would let something slide and that would make him an inadequate Leader. He is a nice guy and a gentleman, but he hasn't risen to the ranks he has in Democratic politics by being a wimp. The difference here might be summed up as follow: he appears to be a politico who might not forget, but he will forgive; unfortunatelh,it seems she does neither.

This is personal for her and I find it to be reminiscent of how Tom DeLay acted when he was crossed. Don't get me wrong, I would never put her in the same class or category as that lying, cheating, dishonest, cynical, scum bag, but he kept his lists and meted out punishment on an as needed basis. There is a big difference between telling Bill Jefferson that because he had a cool 10 Grand in his refrigerator freezer that he couldn't stay on Ways and Means, and telling Chris Smith that because he bucked DeLay's plan for funding veterans programs, that he couldn't be Chairman of the Veterans Affairs Committee anymore. But, there is an "I am right and everyone needs to get in line " attitude that is oh so reminiscent of the Republican MO of the last 12 years.

A dollar. One measily $1 bill. That gives you a problem? You need to get out more often my friend. Almost ALL WWII Navy and Army facilities which later became obsolete were sold to local development projects - for a $1. That dollar makes the title transfer legally binding and is a mere legal requirement. Off the top of my head I know of 3 such transfers.

1) Naval facility used to fabricate aluminum parts was sold - for a $1 - to a development agency in Spokane WA which then rented space to private companies who fabricated aluminum parts for industry.

2) The entire Freeport Center in Ogden UT. It was the Army's largest depot in the west in WWII. It was sold for $1 so private businesses could rent space in it's dozens of buildings. It was called the Freeport Center because it was (at the time) the only duty free port in the western U.S. (other than Tacoma WN which was also built on hand-me-down naval property).

3) The Naval Ordanance Yard in Pocatello ID where the guns for WWII battleships were made was sold for $1 to a local development agency that leased some of those monsterous buildings to a railroad engine refurbishing company, among others.

What gets me is if the Navy had sold Hunter's Point for millions, people like you would be raising hell over the Navy trying to profit over it.

Keith
Kinky Friedman shoulda got elected - they really "don't make Jews like Jesus no more".

You're the one spinning and you know it.

The Congress had voted to hand over the property to the city of San Francisco in 1993 long. The development company was chosen by a separate process in San Francisco that Pelosi didn't control.

You've shown no evidence that the nephew benefited financially in any way whatever.

You've shown no evidence that the mayor granted anything of value to anyone who gave him campaign contributions.

The mayor has no financial tie to the company in question.

There is absolutely nothing to see here but the smoke you keep blowing.

Spin, spin, spin, spin, spin.

Pelosi pressures Murtha to force to Navy to hand over property that happens to benefit her nephew who's the campaign treasurer to his cousin who's the mayor who gets campaign contributions from him and his friends who'll benefit when the property is handed over and their company can develop it.

Oh no. Nothing to see here. Move along now.

Nice try!

Nice try trying to sink this with a zero rating when you have no facts to counter with. Only spin

That's why I reposted.

J. McCutchen

"Newsom"

Now Gavin Newsome, the Redevelopment Agency, and the usual cast of highly capitalized politicians and beneficiaries have "fast-tracked" the Bayview-Hunter's Point Redevelopment Project through the Board of Supervisors, pushing it to a vote this coming Tuesday, May 9th.

Supervisor Daley that you?

Looks as if it might be a cut and paste from his blog except that Daley would have spelled the Mayor's name correctly

J. McCutchen

Moreover, development rights to Parcel A Hunter's Point were awared to Lennar in 1999. Newsom took office 1/2004

He was a Supervisor at the time

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/01/13/BAGVGAPELH1.DTL&hw=newsom+lennar+redevelopment+supervisors&sn=006&sc=608

Don't overlook other considerations, Perhaps:

1) Pelosi doesn't care if Hoyer wins, but wants him to recognize that he'd better stay in line or get voted out in two years.

Or:

2) She's pushing for neither to win. In a stalemate, both may be rejected, permitting another better choice.

As to the charges of Murtha's corruption, it's just like the Clintons. The prosecutors try everything but can't dig up evidence worthy of prosecution. So the cloud hangs around but all there's evidence of is Murtha refused a bribe.

Kevin Hayden

I gave you a zero because you're accusing people of illegal activity on the basis of mere association and in contradiction to the facts, which I have outlined several times and which you continue to ignore.

You've made statements that are defamatory and potentially libelous and therefore, I think TPM Management needs take a look at it.

I used to be a newspaper reporter and if I tried to publish the things you're saying in the way you're saying them, my newspaper's lawyer would have had a fit. That's why I think TPM needs to look at your statements and consider removing them.

Progressives should not be blinded by Murtha's critique of the war. Jack Murtha is the Penatgon brass's mouthpiece on the hill. He's more closely associated with the generals and admirals than any other congressman.

He's certainly not a peace-nik and doesn't support downsizing our military and diverting badly needed resources to domestic needs.

What he wants is what the institutional serving military want -- out of Iraq. He reflects the inside the Pentagon view that was ignored by Rumsfeld. The frustrated generals found their voice with Jack Murtha.

But, now Bush is set to change course on Iraq. The Baker commission is going to propose "re-deployment" and political engagement of both Iran and Syria to try and "stabilize" Iraq.

Expect Jack Murtha to be a strong proponent of this. But, it's clearly not going to work.

It's too late AFTER the Titanic has hit the iceberg to "change course." You can change course all you want to but that water is still going to pour in and sink the ship.

Nothing we do now is going to forestall a bloody ending for the Iraq war. Democrats need to avoid having to take the blame for Bush's war!

But, once again I fear Democrats will rush in to try and claim some credit from what they fondly imagine will be a winning strategy, only to have it blow up in their faces again. There's just this fantasy that somehow bringing in the "responsible adults" like Baker and can Scowcroft be far behind will save us.

We've been down this road before, remember? Withdrawals that aren't really withdrawals as a publicity stunt, together with phony measures of "progress", etc.

Except at the end of the day it's still a bloody mess and we're either stuck there indefinitely, or we get out. Either way it's not going to be pretty. Democrats can't allow themselves to be blamed for steering the ship into the iceberg!

If you had noted the context that I presented at the beginning of these posts you'd see that most of the accusations come from the Green Party and other people to the left of Pelosi in the Bay Area.

They aren't my statements, but there does seem to be a cozy relationship between Lennar, L. Pelosi, N. Pelosi and Gavin Newsom doesn't there?

And I think you need to change your attitude about censorship, partner