This is a continuation of the long Rent vs Arts thread.

An excerpt from the SF Chronicle:

Read the full article

<font size = -2><center>(Edited by salzberg to fix link)</center></font>

<small>[ 08-11-2002, 15:12: Message edited by: salzberg ]</small>

Reports coming in from the scene of the protest:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Speaking of high rents and such, this regards the Dancer's Group building. There was a large protest on Tuesday, the evening of the eviction at Dancer's Group, which then turned into a squat scene. Apparently it is now being busted up right this very moment.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>And another:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Hey, someone should go down to Dancer's Group at 22nd and Mission ASAP this morning because people are being arrested for refusing to leave. There's a small group of supporters gathered outside there. The arrests already made KQED this morning and that's how I learned about it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow. <P>Hold the fort, Troops!<P>Do keep us posted.

Remember the Alamo! Don't forget Alcatraz!

From the SF Chronicle:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Police arrested 10 demonstrators who had camped out in a Mission District dance studio to protest the landlord raising the rent and evicting the studio. <P>More than a dozen officers descended on the Dancers' Group Footwork at 22nd and Mission streets about 6 a.m. Friday. They rousted 17 dancers and protesters and a pair of documentary film makers who were following the protest.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><B><A HREF="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/examiner/archive/2000/08/18/NEWS858.dtl" TARGET=_blank>Read the full article</A></B>

From Dancers' Group:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Hello all,<P><BR>Thanks to those who posted earlier today about the occupation of Dancer's<BR>Group Footwork and this morning's arrests. What a beautiful and inspiring<BR>week it's been!<P><BR>As one of the organizors of the Tuesday night action and occupation, I<BR>wanted to give you all an update on this past weeks proceedings.<P><BR>As some of you may know, the Dancer's Group studio has been a treasure of<BR>the local dance and arts community for 50 years. In March of this year,<BR>Pomegranite Design and Development purchased the building and subsequently<BR>raised the rent from 3,000 a month to $15,500 a month -- an absolutely<BR>impossible sum for any non-profit arts organization of Dancer's Groups size<BR>to afford. After a series of grueling negotions that led nowhere, Dancer's<BR>Group decided to leave the space.<P><BR>On August 15th, the last night of Dancers Groups legal tenancy, we held a<BR>Circus of Resistance attended by over 1,000 people. It was a fantastic and<BR>inspiring night for all of us. SF residents are so ready to mobilize...<P><BR>What followed was an occupation of the building by 20-30 people which ended<BR>this morning with 10 peaceful arrests. We immediately called the press and<BR>ended up with fantastic coverage on the nightly news of every major news<BR>station. Yes, yes! We are finally getting the word out that's it's not ok<BR>to continue clear-cutting the culture of this city.<P><BR>This action to preserve Dancers Group as a community art space available at<BR>affordable rates to artists and low-income folks was made on behalf of ALL<BR>the art spaces, non-profit organizations, small businesses, and long-term<BR>residents who have been heartlessly displaced during San Franciso's recent<BR>"economic boom."<P><BR>We hope this is just the beginning of us turning the tide and reclaiming<BR>space in this city that we love. Enough is Enough. THE RENT IS WAY TO<BR>HIGH! We think of this as a seed action and encourage all others<BR>threatened by eviction to stop going quietly...<P><BR>And Our determination to save Dancer's Group is far from over. We will<BR>have an open meeting tomorrow morning (sat) at 10:30 am at 848 Divisadero<BR>Street to discuss next steps. If any of you are interested in joining, you<BR>are welcome. Updates about the progress of the<BR>action will be constantly posted at <A HREF="http://www.848.com/action" TARGET=_blank>http://www.848.com/action</A>. <P><BR>I know there are many of you on this list who have been working tirelessly<BR>in recent months and perhaps even years on the issue of displacement in<BR>this city. Thank you! We would like to be in solidarity with you.<P><BR>Beyond the specifics of Dancers Group, I'm organizing a community meeting<BR>which will take place sometime next week to discuss ways in which we can<BR>collaborate and build a broader coalition to help us all reach our goals. I'm<BR>hoping we can create a space to share information, resources, experience,<BR>and tactics.<P><BR>If anyone is intersted in participating in this meeting, please contact me<BR>at leda@dnai.com<P><BR>In solidarity,<BR>Leda Dederich<P>CHECK OUT OUR WEB SITE AT <A HREF="http://www.ynpn.org" TARGET=_blank>http://www.ynpn.org</A><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><p>[This message has been edited by Azlan (edited August 19, 2000).]

Things are not as clear cut as they seem. Apparently, the new landlords who bought the building that housed the Dancers Group did it to save the studio. They had offered a break-even rent which unfortunately was still too high for the group. Here's an excerpt from the SF Chronicle:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>... things are so bad that the young couple who bought the delapidated, 80-year-old building in May - hoping to keep dancers as tenants in the studio space - got sick of being everybody's undeserving symbol of dot-com greed ...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><B><A HREF="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/examiner/archive/2000/08/19/NEWS5410.dtl" TARGET=_blank>Click here for Stephanie Salter's article</A></B>

Michael Scott Moore's opinion is very clear in this headline for his SF Weekly story:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Make Room for Art <BR>How to protect arts spaces during an economic boom (protests won't do it)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><B><A HREF="http://www.sfweekly.com/issues/2000-08-23/stage.html" TARGET=_blank>Read the full article</A></B>

Neva Chonin's article in the SF Chronicle begins:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>August will be remembered as the month San Francisco rediscovered the art of activism. Let's call it artivism, because we like to make up new words to confound our copy editors. <P>The Bay Area -- indeed, all of California -- is under siege by nouveau- riche pilgrims who apparently have little use for indie rock, dance clubs, dance studios, alternative art galleries, underground theater or one-screen repertory movie houses. <P>But San Francisco's arts community isn't taking this invasion lying down -- unless one counts going limp during arrest.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><B><A HREF="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/09/03/PK96027.DTL" TARGET=_blank>Follow this link for more</A></B>

The nationwide trend is reported by Chris Taylor in Time Magazine:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Dotcom-related price spurts in real estate aren't confined to the tech-heavy Bay Area. The cities with the highest rates of growth when it comes to technology companies--places like Phoenix, Ariz.; Denver; Boston; Portland, Ore.; Fort Worth and Austin, Texas--also happen to be the cities with the fastest-rising house prices. "This is no coincidence," says Ross DeVol, an economist at the Milken Institute in Los Angeles, a nonprofit think tank. "The indirect effect of [dotcoms'] being there is that landlords jack up the rates on everyone else. It's out of control."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><B><A HREF="http://www.time.com/time/magazine/articles/0,3266,52973,00.html" TARGET=_blank>More</A></B>

So is it the tech industry companies who can pay higher rents (at least for the few months they exist) or the landlords who ask these higher rents who are "the problem"?

I guess this just seems like pretty generalized finger-pointing. <P>Nina Chonin's comments in the SF Chronicle "The Bay Area -- indeed, all of California -- is under siege by nouveau- riche pilgrims who apparently have little use for indie rock, dance clubs, dance studios, alternative art galleries, underground theater or one-screen repertory movie houses" covers a little too much ground for me. <P>Don't these "nouveau-riche" (oh yes, old money or no money must be the only way to go) people buy art for their homes and offices (yes, the ones people used to dance in) records, and tickets to live theater and music performances?<P>I suppose one could then say that the people being dissected (I mean discussed) should have a special interest in the arts - well perhaps they do, but just aren't in positions to make the big decisions. Sometimes people don't see so well from way up there at the top of the pyramid.<P>I just don't think every person who works in the tech industry in the Bay Area should have to hang her head because of the way the real estate market is working.<P>This of course from someone who loves dance and lives far from the geographical focus of this (combatively titled) thread.

I agree with you Priscilla that dot.com workers and others who are benefitting from the boom in the SF Bay area should not have to hang their heads in shame. <P>It seems to me that this is an inevitable effect of the free market economy. Every system has its strong points and weak points and the dynamism of the US Economy over the past few years has been a great strength.<P>But the competition for finite resources in a time of boom means that some will lose out - people having nowhere to live or arts organisations losing their facilities.<P>The situation is different in the Europe. A rehearsal/class space which I know, Greenwich Dance Agency, has a subsidy of around £150,000 pa and perhaps more important the Landlord is the local Council, which gives much stability. However, in the future there may be competition from other not for profit organisations for the use of the building.<P>As has been discussed elsewhere, it seems to me that the US model for funding the arts seems to work well with the large, traditional arts, but less so for the small, contemporary artforms.<P>I support the peaceful demonstrations as it brings the problem to the attention of the authorities ans perhaps possible funders. It's sad to think of a San Francisco without any small-scale arts events, which are often the most exciting.

Knowing the USA landlords.......they are taking total advantage of even the dot.coms.<BR>Why should anyone be allowed to raise rent 400-500%?<BR>It is outrageous.<BR>Sure the dot.coms have money, but it is the landlords who are milking the situation.<BR>And in the end they will have to lower the rates, if they can not rent the spaces after the other companies leave.<BR>It is not just a manifestation of the dot coms.<BR>US landlords will try to get every cent they can out of a rental.<BR>And it makes no difference....it is called "what will the market bear?"<P><P>------------------<BR>bek<BR>CCA CREATIONS<BR>Website:<BR>http://members.tripod.com/~Casalino<P>

Here’s an article, giving a background context to the California’s economic situation, which I found helpful. It is taken form London’s ‘Financial Times’, which many believe is the best newspaper in the world. <P>Unlike most financial papers it takes a genuinely non-political pragmatic approach and ton the surprose of many supported the Labour Party in both the last two UK elections, baased on policy statements.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><BR>The regional recovery which started two years behind the rest of the US, in 1994, has left millions lagging behind. <BR>The gap between rich and poor is widening, housing is scarce and expensive, the state's poverty rate is 3 percentage points above the national level and worsening. <P>According to new statistics from the Fed, median family incomes in California slumped from 8 per cent above the national level in 1989 to 4.5 per cent below in 1998. As much as 50 per cent of this decline could be attributed to demographic changes: primarily the influx of unskilled immigrants, less well-educated and younger than the traditional workforce, the Fed suggested. <P>Another reason for the slump in the state's median income is the shortage of blue-collar manufacturing jobs and cheap housing which have traditionally offered a step up the ladder for newcomers to the US. <BR>According to the non-partisan California Budget Project, which monitors middle- and low-income earners, 40 per cent of jobs being created in the state offer poverty-line wages of $10 an hour or less.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Over to you Yanks to say if they have missed the point.<P> <A HREF="http://news.ft.com/ft/gx.cgi/ftc?pagename=View&c=Article&cid=FT3JJHUITCC&live=true&tagid=ZZZOMSJK30C&subheading=US" TARGET=_blank><B>The FT article on the California Economy</B></A> <P>The FT site is a law unto itself and this link may not last long.<P><BR><p>[This message has been edited by Stuart Sweeney (edited September 07, 2000).]