Just off Market Street in downtown San Francisco lays the Civic Center stop for both BART and MUNI. It is well named, surrounded as it is by the San Francisco’s City Hall, the Ninth Circuit buildings, the California Supreme Court building (San Francisco), the symphony, the ballet, the most ass-kicking Farmers’ Market you will ever see (On Sundays and Wednesdays), and the University of California San Francisco Law School – my alma mater. Oh, and it is also a block away from the main federal building in San Francisco, hosting many of the Northern California federal courts, U.S. Attorney’s Office, among many other offices, now known as the Speaker Nancy Pelosi Federal Building. It is a busy and important area, one with a gravitas and pulse you can feel upon getting off – perhaps that is why it was such a fitting honor to name the building after Speaker Pelosi, and perhaps it is just that visibility that the Trump administration needed in order to attempt to arrange its sale. Yes, the federal government is looking to sell – then lease, the 19-story building that it’s used going back forty years. We all understand that there is only one change in circumstances behind this sudden urgent need to sell.
Moreover, it doesn’t appear as though the federal government is even going to spend an extra week looking to put together some sort of justification that makes sense. It seems resigned to the fact that this is what it is. As noted in a report from San Francisco’s own ABC7.com:
The White House is looking to sell the Nancy Pelosi Federal Building on 7th Street. The Trump administration says it will save money by avoiding maintenance on the building, selling the property, then leasing office space for federal workers.
Former Congresswoman Jackie Speier says it’s just about vengeance. “It’s another example of how he is coming after Democrats. He’s coming after California, and it’s all about payback,” Speier said, noting that the sales wouldn’t make sense.
It is about vengeance. If it made fiscal sense for the federal government to simply lease space from local real estate owners (Which in some circumstances, it might, but not here, where they already hold the title to the building), if the rationale made sense there wouldn’t be federal buildings dotting the landscape from sea to shining sea. Indeed, looking at the pathetic attempt at fiscal justification, if one bought into the rationale, no one would see any benefit to owning any real estate for any purposes. No, it is about vengeance and that makes it look that much more petty.
When one lives in a democracy, one accepts that civic infrastructure is going to get named after leaders from the opposing party, leaders to whom we might not feel all that sympathetic or supportive. I doubt that many here got behind anything that President Ronald Reagan did during his two terms. I also doubt that many here have much of a problem with naming the Washington DC airport “Reagan National” – he was a two-term transformational president, love him or hate him, good or bad, he left his mark and thus has his mark. That’s the deal in a democracy. You may wince when landing at “Reagan” but it is far better than the alternative.
The alternative is this. Petty personal squabbles becoming embarrassing petty action and then reaction. To be sure, the federal government is also looking to sell another court building in the Civic Center, and one in San Bruno, but there may well also be an agenda there, too. Does anyone sense that the administration may be trying to make it more difficult for the courts to go about their work? Especially in blue states? It would seem to be part of the problem, not proof that the primary motive isn’t a personal shot at Pelosi.
Former Rep. Speier hit the nail on the head:
“The lease will keep going up and you will end up paying the property taxes of the lessor, whereas you don’t pay federal taxes when you are the federal government,” she said.
Thus it is that the administration that espouses its obsession with government efficiency and saving “wasted tax dollars” just ensured that these offices will now have to include federal taxes when paying the rates of the lease terms. We should watch who the government lines up as potential buyers and walk that deal back, too.
But two can play this game. I really do think that it is time for New York City to strongly consider renaming a portion of its iconic “5th Avenue” to “President Barack Obama Ave.” It would only be fitting, would it not? No one of either side would argue that President Obama wasn’t himself transformational. To have the iconic Trump Tower have to list its formal address as 725 Obama Ave, New York, NY 10022 would honor Trump Tower, too, though that would never be admitted. It should be left to the great city, the one with the iconic airport? JFK? to rename one of its most visible and international avenues. I kind of hope we do not get into a tit for tat war such as this. But I do hope that New York City takes some initiative here, please? Maybe someday we’ll hear, “I could walk right out on Obama Avenue and shoot somebody and not lose a single vote… ”
God Bless: I can be reached at [email protected] and on Twitter-X at @JasonMiciak and please follow me on Bluesky.
Friends, we are struggling to make ends meet. It’s not just us, it’s industry wide. There are star hosts being bumped on MSNBC as we speak. (Joy Reid and Alex Wagner) So if you can afford a small donation or a monthly subscription, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Ursula
Too bad we can’t sell tRump. Oh wait, he’s already bought and paid for by Putin.
He is such a petty, spiteful little puke. Lord Farquadd in a crappy Navy suit.