Gordon Brown will pledge to “fight, fight and fight again” to keep the United Kingdom intact, warning today that the union is at serious risk due to Conservative Party attitudes and the rise of “narrow nationalism”.Speaking in Westminster Cathedral Hall this morning, the former Labour leader and Prime Minister will share his fears that the “unity and integrity” of the UK could be lost under the premiership of Boris Johnson.Brown is expected to point out that the Tories, at the urging of Nigel Farage, have falsely portrayed a no deal Brexit, an “act of economic self-harm”, as a “patriotic act”. He will outline his concern that the governing party will deploy an “English card” at the next election, which would contribute to the risk of the UK breaking up.The ex-PM will become the latest high-profile political figure to advocate the idea of citizens’ assemblies, suggesting that representative groups of citizens could be formed on a regional basis to tackle the problems raised by Brexit.Addressing the Fabian Society and Hope Not Hate, Brown will say: “Noticeable by its absence – even as we enter the third week of the contest as to who is to be our Prime Minister – is any serious debate on the existential question facing the United Kingdom: whether it can survive.“I believe the union is today more at risk than at any time in 300 years – and more in danger than when we had to fight for it in 2014 during a bitter Scottish referendum.“In jeopardy are both the unity and integrity of the United Kingdom and the shared values – tolerance, respect for diversity, being outward looking – that underpin what, for all its ups and downs, has been the most successful example of multinational co-operation anywhere in the world.”“In our long history, the overwhelming majority have prided ourselves in being patriots who love our country – not bitter nationalists who hate our neighbours, demonise foreigners, immigrants or other minorities and blame external forces for everything that goes wrong.“I fear for the unravelling of a community of mutual interests, common purpose and shared ideals. For the national debate is now more than about the kind of Brexit we want: it is about the kind of Britain we aspire to become.“A tolerant country must not now become an intolerant one. An outward-looking country must not now turn in on itself.“A fair-minded and inclusive people must not allow the vicious manufacture of division and the targeting of ‘enemies of the people’.“You can love your country without being made to feel you ever have to hate your neighbour. You can embrace a broad patriotism without subscribing to a narrow nationalism.“I want to argue specifically against the hijacking of patriotism by Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson, a political deception that has tried to present an act of economic self-harm – a no deal Brexit on October 31st – as a patriotic act.“I want to argue we need an informed region-by-region debate outside the Westminster bubble through the setting up of citizens’ assemblies on the problems raised by Brexit including immigration and sovereignty but many of which – the state of our manufacturing, the condition of our towns, and rising poverty and inequality – cannot be solved by Brexit.“And I want to argue for a progressive defence of the union showing that we – all four nations – are best placed to succeed in a harshly competitive global economy when we find ways to cooperate within one set of islands rather than engage in economic wars.”Tags:Nigel Farage /Gordon Brown /Labour /United Kingdom /Brexit /no deal /
0% This is one of several profiles of the people who make the Mission District what it is today. They are part of our My Mission Zine. You can buy a copy here. If you have trouble, just send us an e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org. When he turned 20, Roger Marenco discovered a vacant lot near his Mission District home and he got a wild idea.He assembled a team of artists and spent months trying to beat the Guinness World Record for largest mural, intending to paint a one-acre image on the face of the property.A developer started building apartments on the lot before the team could finish the mural. But Marenco was irrevocably hooked on the idea of collaborate art. A decade later, he started wrangling people to paint murals along a fence that his family shared with neighbors. After three years and almost 100 artist contributors, Marenco isn’t sure how much longer his project will continue. Nearby property owners plan to develop the land where the fence stands.When Marenco comes across kids marking the neighborhood with graffiti, he tells them, “Come on, stop tagging up that house. Just come over here and we’ll give you some space to actually do a mural, express your creativity.”“Not a lot of people reach out to them,” he said of the troubled youths.Recently, the murals have followed the theme of “immigration” and before that they depicted women of power. Marenco said the next batch will be about gentrification and recent evictions in the city.Marenco said he’s within his legal rights to paint the fence because it’s his and other nearby residents’ shared property. But community members have added other accoutrements — tables, chairs and makeshift gardens — to the lot that contains the fence and runs along South Van Ness Avenue, between 23rd and 24th streets. Technically, they’re trespassing, but the lot’s owners aren’t currently using it for anything, he said.The owners have recently pushed back. A billboard on the premises announces that they intend to open a new grocery store to replace the defunct Delanos’s Market, which stands vacant in a corner of the lot. When artists painted beyond the fence itself, on the walls near the abandoned building, “within a few days, [the owners] just completely painted over it,” Marenco said.Now, he’s trying to persuade a local artist to add a new mural to the fence, depicting the gentrification and displacement that’s “happening in the Mission District, and all throughout San Francisco,” he said. “I’d like for it to represent the struggle that low-income people, and people of color, are going through.”That has made it harder for Marenco to get new artists to contribute to the wall because they don’t want their murals to get destroyed too.To say that Marenco is involved in his community is a bit of an understatement. In fact, I personally located him for this article by merely knocking on doors, asking residents who lived near the murals if they knew the guy who maintained them. “Oh yeah, my husband has his cell,” one person told me.Lately, Marenco has been embedding himself in another San Francisco sub-community: public transit workers.For two years, he’s been driving buses for Muni along the 38 Geary, 8 Bayshore and the 14 Rapid lines. “It’s a difficult job, mentally, emotionally, spiritually,” he said.The work has taught him the value of the city’s bus and lightrail system, which he called “the bloodline that gives life to this city.” But he bemoaned the working conditions: Muni drivers are under intense pressure from management to keep up with unrealistic transit schedules while navigating dangerously narrow traffic lanes, he said. “I absolutely hate it.”Last December, he ran for president of the Muni operators union, Local 250A. “I came close to winning” he said.He plans to run again. And if he wins, he says he’ll make some big changes. Tags: my mission Share this: FacebookTwitterRedditemail,0%
0% “We’ve heard 30 percent, you’re lying!” shouted Laura Guzman, director of homeless services at the Mission Neighborhood Resource Center.“Show us your books!” piped up Karl Beitel, a local activist and author. Podell declined, growing increasingly frustrated with a crowd that repeatedly called for him to build 100 percent affordable housing on-site or no housing at all.“I’ve listened to everyone’s complete lack of understanding for how housing gets built —” he started, before being cut off by jeers from the audience.“Hey, hey!” shouted Eddie Stiel, a frequent presence at housing meetings. Stiel stood up, waved his arms, and yelled “I’m stupid!” in an imitation of what he believed Podell thought.Tensions were further exacerbated at the meeting by a lack of Spanish translation, which was given ad hoc by Maria Zamudio of Causa Justa instead. That drew complaints from those sitting nearby that they could not hear the presentation, prompting more frustration. “This is a total disrespect to our community,” said Jim Salinas, a former labor leader and planning commissioner. Evette Davis, a spokesperson for Podell, took responsibility for the mistake and said she would be more than happy to host another meeting for the Spanish speakers.The Bryant Street development has faced strong opposition since last year. It was grouped with the so-called “Monster in the Mission” at 16th and Mission and given its own moniker then, the “Beast on Bryant.”That opposition has remained strong, despite attempts by Podell to appease opponents. His land dedication — a means of fulfilling his affordable housing requirement — bumped up the number of affordable units to be built on-site from 44 to 129. That move pleased the Mayor’s Office of Housing because it increased the total number of affordable units on-site.But it failed to impress those in the room on Wednesday because even with the land, the city would be required to finance the construction of those affordable units to the tune of some $31 million.That process would likely mean the affordable housing site would go up several years after the market-rate one, another point of contention. Land dedications have occurred just twice in San Francisco before — at 1296 Shotwell St. and 801 Brannan St. — and resulted in years-long delays both times. The Shotwell site was a dedication from the developers of Vida Apartments given to the city in 2013, with construction from non-profit developers scheduled to finish by 2019 — four years after Vida opened up to tenants. “So we’re going to be waiting eight plus years from when the luxury condos are approved before we get our community project?” asked Stiel. Mara Blitzer from the Mayor’s Office of Housing said the affordable housing could be built faster because it would be entitled, meaning it could skip an environmental review process that can span two years. She said it would take about six months to find a non-profit developer and another two to three years to build after that.A fully-entitled project is also slated for 490 South Van Ness, however, and that has sat vacant for eight months, with non-profit developers waiting to hear back from the city on their submitted building proposals.Equally important to those in the crowd on Wednesday was the loss of so-called PDR space, which stands for “production, distribution, and repair” and is a widely used zoning in the eastern Mission District meant for light industrial and artist space.Previous tenants of the building — including an auto shop, arts space, and theater prop shop — made use of some 50,000 square feet of PDR. In the proposed project, that has been reduced to 11,000 square feet — and the majority of that is on the affordable housing site.The 80 percent decrease in PDR on the block was a major sticking point in a neighborhood that has seen large swaths of PDR space lost to office and housing.“What we’re seeing is a big loss of blue-collar jobs and artists space,” said Jonathan Youtt, a founding member of Cellspace, an arts organization previously in the building. Youtt said he would back height increases on housing — if it meant PDR on the ground floor.“Housing above, but keep 1-1 PDR below,” he said.Whether the meeting had any effect on the ultimate design remains to be seen. Davis said the team would have to “sort out what happened today and talk about it” before moving forward.The development is already scheduled to go before the Planning Commission on May 19, however, where it will likely face more resistance.Disclosure: Nick Podell is a reader member of Mission Local. Tags: Affordable Housing • housing Share this: FacebookTwitterRedditemail,0% Resistance to a proposed housing complex on Bryant Street was unyielding at a Wednesday night community meeting, at which opponents demanded that the developer reveal his expected profit from the project — which the developer said would be slim.“This is the lowest yield I’ve ever gotten,” said Nick Podell, the man behind 2000 Bryant St., a market-rate housing project that has been delayed for months due to opposition from Mission District groups. The development will span two sites. At 2000 Bryant St., 196 market-rate units and three below-market-rate units are planned. At the adjacent 2070 Bryant St., the developer will dedicate land on which the city can build 129 affordable units. That move was criticized last month for shifting the burden of construction onto the city.At Wednesday’s meeting, Podell said he expected a 5.8 percent return on investment from the first year of collecting rents, not taking into account the return for Junius Real Estate Partners, an arm of J.P. Morgan Chase that is funding the project.
Tags: Affordable Housing • community • displacement • gentrification Share this: FacebookTwitterRedditemail,0% 0% Using state law to address displacement locally, City Planner David Diaz explained how community organizers could implement the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, as a tactic to halt development projects. The law has long been a thorn in developers’ sides. “The adoption of the CEQA is a diamond of democracy,” said Diaz, explaining that under this law, developers are mandated to reveal a “true, comprehensive roster of issues” that are going to negatively impact communities in the long-term.In San Francisco, Diaz said communities should push for environmental review even of small projects to build the case that a lack of affordability leads directly an “undue regressive impact” for minority communities and small businesses.“We have to say that all these small actions over a two to four year period are having a devastating structural impact and that the city has to start to address it by revisiting the entire residential permitting process,” said Diaz. “The city should continue to have a real estate market but that market, in order to get building permits, has to self-discipline and has to respond to the affordability crisis.”Community organizing as well as documenting historic context are other crucial tactics in changing city zoning laws and putting in place protections to combat displacement, for which the Mission is “ground zero,” said Anne Cervantes, director and founder of the San Francisco Latino Historical Society.Cervantes hoped that the dialogue generated throughout the day would provide those in attendance with the “tools and connections” to building a statewide partnership and lay the foundation for launching legislative initiatives against displacement.“There is a network here of city planners, housing and community organizers with the tools we need to fight back,” said Cervantes.Other speakers shared their experiences organizing against displacement and preserving cultural heritage in their respective communities.Activist and arts consultant Josephine Talamantez, a native of San Diego’s Logan Heights, or Barrio Logan, spoke of activists’ struggles in placing San Diego’s Chicano Park and its murals on the National Registry of Historic Places. Founded in 1970 after a 12-day protest against a Highway Patrol Station that was planned to be built at the site, the park is a pillar in Barrio Logan’s Latino community and was built as a response to displacement caused by the construction of the San Diego-Coronado Bay Bridge and the community’s previous division by the construction of a freeway.“We were at one point in the 40s and 50s the second largest barrio on the West Coast with about 20,000 residents,” said Talamantez. “But after the freeway and the bridge were built, we went down to less than 5,000 residents.”Talamantez said that Barrio Logan’s issues are similar to those faced by San Francisco’s minority communities, including the Mission, but that local strategy will have to take a housing crisis into account.In the Mission, the 24th Street corridor was recognized as the Calle 24 Latino Cultural District in May 2014 because community members and merchant merchants wanted to to preserve 24th Street’s Latino legacy. But the recognition is a “a good thing and a bad thing,” said Talamantez.“Preservation at one point has to be tied in with housing,” said Talamantez. “What’s a community? It’s not just about preserving the structures, the buildings. It’s about preserving the people.”Diaz, the city planner, said that one way to address the housing crisis is to implement the environmental review strategically to “force the city to require developers to build affordable housing on site.”As the workshop concluded, Cervantes suggested legislation at the state level to halt Ellis Act evictions.“Another tool that we need for the other communities is a moratorium on the Ellis Act,” she said.Erick Arguello, who heads the Calle 24 merchants association, also attended the workshop and spoke to the need for a statewide effort to protect housing for minority and working class communities.Along with City Planner Claudia Flores, Arguello discussed the Mission Action Plan 2020, an effort between city agencies and community groups aiming to offer solutions to the affordability crisis with strategies such as tenant protections, housing preservation, and building new affordable housing. The plan is expected to be presented in June or July.“We need to address housing,” said Arguello, adding that learning about the strategies of other neighborhoods is valuable in building “a broader coalition here in the neighborhood, the city and statewide.” Leaders from three different communities razed by displacement shared their experiences and offered ideas on policy-based strategies to thwart gentrification in a day-long workshop hosted at the Mission’s Galeria de la Raza on Monday.Though separated by hundreds of miles, the struggles of Los Angeles’ Boyle Heights, San Diego’s Logan Heights, and San Francisco’s Mission District run parallel, agreed community activists, preservationists, and city planners from each of the these neighborhoods who convened to discuss what has worked — and what needs to happen next — in keeping these communities in tact.“I see stark similarities in these communities,” said panelist Carolyn Vera, an activist fighting the gentrification of Boyle Heights. “I hope to see connections form on how we can try to organize, create strategies, and use urban planning policies to promote equitable and livable neighborhoods for low-income communities.”These strategies could come in the form of organizing, community planning, or cultural preservation. Titled “Displacing Gentrification,” the workshop came as part of the California Preservation Foundation’s 2016 statewide conference, with a number of events and workshops taking place throughout the city from April 16-20.
As John Halet, 21, and Marcello Palazzo, 22, moved to a shadier location underneath some trees on the western edge of Dolores Park on Friday, Halet grabbed their trash — a beer can and a plastic food container.“I’m gonna go throw this out,” he told Palazzo.But there was no trash can on the nearby path, by the bridge to Church street. Halet looked up from his phone, seemingly perplexed. Then he resigned himself to walking all the way down to the cans on Dolores street, past another congregation of young people at a picnic table, bobbing their heads to hip hop, and a man ringing the bells of his ice cream cart on the sidewalk. This walk took Halet a while, partly because he had injured his toe, so he wore a medical walking boot and was limping. Tags: dolores park Share this: FacebookTwitterRedditemail,0% 0% Halet, who is from San Mateo but visits the park regularly, said he was surprised by the scarcity of trashcans. “I thought there’d be more up here,” he said, pointing to the nearby path. “But the pisser’s a nice addition.”Temperatures in the Mission reached the high 70s on Friday, and, as often happens on sunny days, Dolores Park filled with its usual characters. There were dogs roughhousing. There was a couple flying kites by the playground. There was more than one shirtless man reading a book. And plenty of folks had brought out their wine, beer and food.It’s hard to catch people littering. Halet failed to notice he was being watched by a reporter. Most others picnicking on Friday all attested to being good citizens, but then again, it’s hard to know. The park regularly gets trashed – so much so that District 8 Supervisor Jeff Seehy has proposed legislation that would raise fines for littering in Dolores Park from $192 to $1,000. Many park goers on Friday spoke in favor of the higher fine. Madison, 22, who declined to give her last name, was sitting on the hill facing Mission High School, sipping mixed drinks with some friends from out of town. She said she always makes sure she cleans up after herself.But even when people want to do the right thing, the lack of trash cans in the park might contribute to the littering. The bins are located around the perimeter of the park, leaving out the western edge, which tends to garner some of the largest crowds.One woman hovered near the stairs to the bridge when someone from her group yelled at her, “We have trash bags. You’re not going to find a trash can.”The woman returned to the gathering of about 20 people on a work outing. Amid the tarp they had set up in the grass was a paper bag they used to gather their garbage, which they planned to throw out when they left. Henry Chen, a member of the group, thought this was a reasonable solution to the Dolores Park trash problem.“It seems logical,” he said.Most people in the park on Friday seemed to make an effort to clean up after themselves. But Palazzo, who was sitting with Halet, thinks there needs to be more of a collective effort to keep the park clean. Once, he said, he witnessed a group leaving mounds of trash behind. Appalled, Palazzo went to pick up the trash himself, and the litterers made fun of him for doing so.Max, 24, who also declined to give his last name, was visiting his friend Hunter from Laguna Beach but used to live in the area. “A couple years ago, no one did that,” he said. Then he reconsidered and, backtracking, admitted he had probably littered in the park. “Most definitely,” he admitted. “I will definitely say yes.” Halet also owned up to leaving trash in the park when he was younger. “When I came here in high school and got drunk, I probably was stupid and did it,” he said.Down the hill from them, closer to Dolores street, a picnicking trio sat in the grass surrounded by the remains of their lunch — wrapped sandwiches from Bi-Rite Market, a tub of guacamole, cans of beer and water bottles.“I think it’s ridiculous to leave trash here,” one of them, who gave his name as David, said.His lunch mate, Jeff, agreed. “Fuck people who leave trash here,” he said. “I don’t care what happens to them.”And true to their words (or maybe because of our conversation), as they departed about an hour later, this reporter watched them from afar. They did not leave a trace.Updated Saturday, May 20th. Indeed, either SF Rec and Park cleaned up late Friday night or picnickers picked up after themselves. By early Saturday morning – before 6 a.m.– the park was in pretty good shape.Photo by Lydia ChávezPhoto by Lydia ChávezBins ready for another day. Photo by Lydia Chávez
On the evening of June 5, officers rolled up to 2443 15th St. after a 911 caller reported her son’s father, a man named Thomas Ragsdale, had “been making statements regarding people looking to kill him and his family” and was armed with “a shotgun and other weapons.”The door to the home was answered by Ragsdale’s mother, 76-year-old Martha Alfaro, who went downstairs to fetch her son from his room. The police couldn’t help but notice that Ragsdale was wearing a pistol on his hip. One of the officers patiently informed the armed man “he was just going to remove the handgun for his safety and ours.” When queried if there were any more weapons in the house, Ragsdale answered in the affirmative. This was very true.For some reason, the police evidence photos of what they discovered aren’t all in focus, but you can still make out what’s there: guns, guns, guns, and more guns. “Strewn about the room” were nearly half a dozen pistols, a shotgun, and three rifles, including an AK-47 that, in its unmodified state, is not legal to possess in California. There was a ghostly white bulletproof vest. And then there was the ammunition: Nearly 50 magazines, many of them larger than legally allowed, and a militia’s worth of loose bullets and cartridges piled into ammunition box after ammunition box in the garage. All told, there were nearly 28,000 rounds of ammo found on-site (that is not a typo).(The police subsequently visited the home, with Alfaro’s permission, to search for six more guns registered to Ragsdale. They didn’t find them.)This is a concerning amount of firepower to randomly store in your room and garage—but even more so considering what Ragsdale said next. He told the officers that his neighbors wanted to kill him and his adult son, and he could hear their voices through his bedroom wall as they hatched a murderous plot.Police contacted the elderly, female neighbor. She did not know Ragsdale. She did not want him dead. Ragsdale’s adult son claimed “the neighbors were not out to get him and his family and it was all in his father’s head.” Ragsdale’s mother said she feared for her son’s safety because “she believed he was hearing voices” and worried he would harm himself or others. The mother of Ragsdale’s child claimed Ragsdale was “suffering some type of mental illness” and also worried he’d harm himself or others.Ragsdale was placed on a 5150 mental health hold and transported to San Francisco General, where he was subjected to a mental health evaluation. But by June 9, a doctor informed the SFPD that Ragsdale was ready to be transported out of the mental health ward and taken to County Jail No. 1. There he was booked on 13 misdemeanor counts of possession of high capacity magazines and a count of possession of an unregistered assault rifle—a felony. Subsequent paperwork, however, indicates all 14 of these charges were discharged, pending further investigation. He was free by June 13.The police have not yet publicly named Ragsdale as the man who held them at bay for 15 hours and, allegedly, shot a woman at 2443 15th Street. But that was the home he lived in with his 76-year-old mother, Martha Alfaro, and the SFPD has divulged that the man they took into custody was, like Ragsdale, 52 years old.The Medical Examiner confirmed to Mission Local that the woman killed on the scene was, indeed, Martha Alfaro, Ragsdale’s mother, who told police she was concerned that her son would harm himself or others. The SFPD has also confirmed that the alleged shooter is Alfaro’s son.So, it seems clear what has happened here. What’s less clear is why. And how.In 1972, the California Legislature passed the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, which was subsequently signed into law by Gov. Ronald Reagan. With the stroke of a pen, the forcible institutionalization of the mentally ill became far, far more difficult. It’s hard not to argue that this was one of the most consequential pieces of legislation in state history. That’s apparent for anyone who walks through a major city or takes public transportation. It certainly played no small role in the goings on at 2443 15th St.Prior to Lanterman-Petris-Short, the insistence of three family members and a nod from a psychiatrist and judge could likely have had Ragsdale indefinitely committed to a mental hospital, whether he liked it or not. But the state has pulled a 180 when it comes to the civil rights of the mentally ill.The state now “bends over backwards to protect potential detainees,” says Mort Cohen, a law professor at Golden Gate University and perhaps the state’s foremost authority on the constitutional rights of institutionalized people in the health field. “The system,” he continues, “is now geared to protect the individual who is being detained.” That, as it works out, protects the detainee “to a greater extent than the individuals who might be at risk.” Or, as UC Berkeley psychology and psychiatry professor Stephen Hinshaw put it, “This is a great civil right. [But] the people who might need help the most cannot get it.”As such, Mission Local has learned that on June 9, city mental health officials’ efforts to have Ragsdale detained for more than 72 hours were derailed by a mental health hearing officer, who did not feel probable cause had been met to keep him in custody. With his case then shunted from the mental health to the criminal side, a similar outcome transpired.“When the gun charges were initially forwarded to our office for a charging decision,” says DA spokesman Max Szabo, “we requested further investigation as to whether or not the guns were lawfully registered.”For the mentally ill, gun owners, and, as it turns out, mentally ill gun owners, individual liberties are valued more than the potential safety and well-being of others. The DA’s office claims it did not have probable cause to charge Ragsdale without definitive proof he did not own the offending guns and magazines prior to the date they were declared illegal. He was subsequently freed.The police may yet provide that proof, but the point now seems somewhat moot. Whether Ragsdale is the man responsible for his mother’s death will be a matter for the legal system to decide. But the gun that killed Martha Alfaro was not one of the ones collected by police; Ragsdale’s problematic trove of weapons is still sitting in storage at a police station.“The hard look back,” sums up Cohen, “is not unusual. Judges often release people without any requirement of bail and they go off and shoot somebody.”In Ragsdale’s case, “you can say they made a mistake. Or you can say they protected his rights.” Or, you could say both. Tags: SFPD • shootings Share this: FacebookTwitterRedditemail,0% Cops took a man’s guns and nearly 28,000 bullets. His family claimed he “heard voices” and was a danger to himself and others. He was free within days. Now he’s the prime suspect in a woman’s shooting. What happened? 0% OnJuly 31, police resolved a tense, 15-hour standoff at 2443 15th St., but not before an elderly woman was shot to death in the home and her potential assailant, a 52-year-old man, purportedly turned the gun on himself and was spirited to San Francisco General Hospital.It’s hard to find fault with the actions of the San Francisco Police Department, but it was a dispiriting day for them nevertheless. Because they’d already been to this house, a stone’s throw from Corona Heights Park. They’d been warned that something exactly like this could happen, by multiple sources, and they took action to prevent it. And yet, here they were, watching it all unfold—and powerless to keep a woman from being killed.
TICKETS for Saints mouthwatering Super League XVI home opener with Warrington Wolves are now on sale.The scene is set for a classic ALL TICKET encounter as Saints’ remarkable unbeaten home record against the Wolves is on the line at their temporary home.England internationals Louie McCarthy-Scarsbrook and Michael Shenton – who signed for the club last season – will also be ready for their home debuts in the red vee.But demand is expected to be high with the Wolves taking their full allocation as they make the short trip to Widnes.And Saints have reported strong season ticket sales and with the Stobart’s capacity limited to 13,500, a sell-out crowd is expected.Therefore, the best way to secure your seat is with a Saints Season Ticket which will also guarantee your seat in the new stadium in 2012. Your price will also be frozen for two seasons. Prices: Season Ticket Price (Full)Club Seat AreaAdultConcessionJuniorMembershipSeason TicketNorth Stand(reserved seating)£275.74£190.98£190.98n/an/aEast Stand(unreserved seating)£213.45£131.74£32.68n/an/aSouth Stand(reserved seating)£292.09£202.21£202.21£900.00£383.00Family Season TicketNorth Stand (reserved seating)East Stand(unreserved seating)1 Adult & 1 Child£419.74£221.621 Adult & 2 Children£592.34£251.231 Adult & 3 Children£763.91£280.852 Adults & 1 Child£667.91£413.622 Adults & 2 Children£840.51£443.232 Adults & 3 Children£1,012.09£472.85Match Day Prices Once again fans can save £1.50 by buying their ticket in advance! Matchday PricingAdvance TicketAdultConcessionAdultConcessionNorth Stand(reserved seating)£25£19£23.50£17.50East Stand(unreserved seating)£20£14£18.50£12.50South Stand(reserved seating)£25£20£23.50£17.50Concessions are applicable to Senior Citizens at 60+ or under 18s.*away fans will be in the West Stand at Widnes.
ENGAGE Super League rivals St Helens and Wigan Warriors are all set to do battle on the pitch at the DW Stadium this Friday at 2.45pm, but they have also taken their rivalry into the world of social networking as the clubs do battle in UK sports’ first ‘Facebook Faceoff’.Both clubs are now head-to-head from midday for one week to see who’s page can generate the greatest number of new ‘Likes’ and the most page activity. To date the St Helens page has nearly 5,850 ‘likes’ with the Warriors Fan Page on 7,400.Saints fans can help their side win this online battle by clicking here and then clicking the ‘Like’ button at the top of the Official St Helens Facebook page.St Helens’ Marketing Manager, Mark Onion, said: “Both Clubs have always had tremendous support, especially on the build up to a Derby game. I’m sure the Saints fans won’t want to miss an opportunity to get one over on the old enemy, so get online and like our page.”The online duel will end at 9am on Friday April 22 so make sure that you visit the Official St Helens Facebook page, and interact with us and other fans by liking, commenting and sharing the fantastic content!
SAINTS have been coaching the stars of the future at Barrow Island.More than 80 kids took part in a day session with Ade Gardner and recent signing from Barrow Greg Richards.Mike Rush, Saints Head of High Performance, said: “It was an excellent day with the kids really benefitting from the sessions and the input of both Ade and Greg.“This is all about developing a bigger talent pool and we’d like to thank John Jefferson for organising the day.”
CAN’T make it to the DW Stadium next week to watch your Super Saints take on Wigan in the Quarter Final of the Challenge Cup? Then watch it live at Langtree Park.We will be opening our Sponsors Lounge to show the match on two eight foot screens with the afternoon will hosted by our very own Tommy Martyn who will provide detailed half time and full time analysis.There will also be chances to win tickets to hospitality for a home game and a signed Saints shirt.And, Dominos Pizza will be giving a free slice to everyone who attends!Price is just £10 adults and £5 kids (prebooked) you can enjoy Chefs Pie and peas (childrens meal available)Tickets available online now by clicking here or calling 01744 455 052.