Still, one never knows What The Future Will Bring
Archive for the ‘politics’ Category
“PRESIDENT LONDON BREED’S STATEMENT REGARDING ALLEGATIONS FROM RAYMOND CHOW
I learned long ago that you can’t control what other people say about you. And that’s especially true when you serve in public office.
Today, the attorneys for a man who’s facing multiple felony charges tried get him off the hook by making baseless allegations against many other people, including a number of local African American leaders. The attorneys wrote:
Reverend Amos Brown, Reverend Arnold Townsend, Derf Butler, Malia Cohen, and London Breed [all African American] were all implicated in dramatic pay to play schemes including calling into doubt the efficiency and real purpose of the One Stop Career Center in the Fillmore…London Breed who is a supervisor in a district where young children join gangs and are murdered before they can ever ‘pay to play.’ Butler allegedly takes Breed shopping for clothes and touts himself as something akin to a pimp explaining to Jackson that you have to teach an official how to be corrupt.
The One Stop Center exists to help people in my community find stable, quality jobs. The statement about children being murdered is as callous as it is offensive. And the only thing I’ve learned from this sad episode is that you should be very skeptical of what you read in the news, especially when it comes from an accused felon looking for anyone but himself to blame.
I’m not angry. It’s just very sad.”
There’s also this:
Serial entrepreneur Derf Butler, purportedly told an FBI agent he “pays Supervisor [London] Breed with untraceable debit cards for clothing and trips in exchange for advantages on contracts in San Francisco.” She denied this claim to the Examiner.
“San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi Responds to Mayor Ed Lee’s Call to Rescind ICE Contact Policy” – Requests BoS HearingThursday, July 16th, 2015
A new release:
“San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi Responds to Mayor Ed Lee’s Call to Rescind ICE Contact Policy
San Francisco, CA ― San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi today delivered his response to Mayor Ed Lee’s July 14, 2015, letter [referenced here in the Examiner] calling on the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department to rescind its policy regarding contact with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
“This tragedy spotlights the need for legal clarity at every government level,” stated Sheriff Mirkarimi. “This matter requires an open and honest conversation about the legislative intent and meaning of San Francisco’s ordinances and how they comport with everyday enforcement of laws leading to deportations.”
In his response, printed in its entirety below, the Sheriff asserts that the Mayor’s request raises legal conflicts; the Sheriff asks for an open and immediate discussion, via a Board of Supervisors committee hearing, to resolve the conflicts, provide clarity, and produce a workable and fair ordinance.
July 15, 2015
The Honorable Edwin Lee
City Hall, Room 200
San Francisco, CA 94102
Dear Mayor Lee:
I received your July 14, 2015 letter regarding the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department’s (SFSD) Federal Immigration communications policy. Your letter does not provide legal clarity regarding my department’s duty under city law. Your request to immediately rescind the policy contributes to the confusion and conflict between the Sanctuary City Ordinance (Administrative Code 12H.2) and the Due Process For All Ordinance (Administrative Code 12I). I urge a resolution of these conflicts so that there is a consistent and uniform understanding of the laws.
Finger pointing around this tragedy serves no purpose other than election year politics. It would serve the public interest to have an immediate open discussion of the Sanctuary City Ordinance and the Due Process For All Ordinance. I propose that you and I and other stakeholders come before a committee hearing with the Board of Supervisors so that a resolution of the conflicts can be achieved in a meaningful and transparent way.
Your request to rescind the policy and require the SFSD to contact federal immigration officials would eviscerate the city’s Due Process For All Ordinance, an ordinance I supported and which you signed into law. Historically, the only reason for SFSD to notify federal immigration officials of an individual’s release has been in relation to honoring an immigration detainer. This practice has been curtailed by the Due Process For All Ordinance and the federal court ruling that any detention for the release of an individual to federal immigration officials without probable cause violates the Due Process Clause and the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
At present, the only request for notification SFSD has received from federal immigration officials is contained in the detainer form which the Due Process For All Ordinance prohibits SFSD from honoring, absent limited circumstances.
The only reason to now notify federal immigration officials of an individual’s release would be to facilitate the release of the individual to the federal immigration officials. This would completely circumvent the requirements and intent of the Sanctuary City Ordinance, the Due Process For All Ordinance and lead to unconstitutional detentions.
In 2013, my office worked closely with the City Attorney’s Office and the Board of Supervisors before and after the Due Process For All Ordinance was implemented to provide guidance on its provisions and effects. SFSD alerted representatives from the City Attorney’s Office, the Board of Supervisors and you of provisions of the Ordinance that posed operational and procedural problems. In early 2015, I met with the Deputy Secretary and Secretary of Homeland Security separately on two occasions to confirm San Francisco’s laws and procedures. I also expressed concern about the legality of the detainer/notification process.
I shall continue to ensure that SFSD policy as it relates to federal immigration issues is consistent with city, state, and federal laws. I therefore request legislative direction to reconcile the conflict inherent in your proposal versus city legislation prohibiting ICE detainers except in specific circumstances. Your request would require the Board of Supervisors to amend the Administrative Code as it relates to cooperation with federal immigration officials and honoring detainers.
In addition to clarifying city law, other solutions should be considered. One such solution is to propose that an Administrative Law Judge review immigration detainers and provide a warrant or finding of probable cause for those persons who federal immigration officials seek to detain.
I will continue to cooperate with any amendments to city legislation by the Board of Supervisors. I look forward to working with all city representatives including the Board of Supervisors and the City Attorney’s Office to provide legal clarity to these sensitive and complex issues.
cc London Breed, President of the Board of Supervisors
Board of Supervisors
Beat Sweetening Goes Sour: Writer CW Nevius vs. Judge Susan Illston – Dishonest Reporting in the SF ChronicleMonday, July 13th, 2015
Meet Senior District Judge Susan Illston, Duke University (B.A., 1970) and Stanford Law School (J.D., 1973). Publications. She was appointed by Bill Clinton:
And in the other corner, comes now CW Nevius, known for his “breezy writing style” and also known for “having lived in the suburban East Bay until May, 2010, whereupon he moved to San Francisco.” Publications. (He was not appointed by Bill Clinton, nor by anyone else.)
Introductions finished. So here you go – “Losing a lawsuit can mean financial gain” by CW Nevius:
“As Judge Susan Illston said in her ruling, ‘plaintiffs did not prevail on a single substantive motion before the Court.’”
But now let’s look at the entire sentence:
“First, although the Court has found that they gained their desired outcome, plaintiffs did not prevail on a single substantive motion before the Court.”
See how that works? Judge Illston awarded attorneys fees of $300,000-something to the plaintiffs in this particular Sharp Park Golf Course case because they gained their desired outcome.
So Avuncular East Bay Everyman Chuck Nevius chopped up the judge’s sentence because, because why? Because it would have weakened his point? Is this an honest approach for a writer to take? I don’t think so.
And then a reader of The Nevius, the Blessed Nevius, might read his bit and think to ask:
And the answer is … no, no we shouldn’t, because the plaintiffs won, at least sort of:
“…[t]he Court finds that plaintiffs’ litigation goal was the halt defendants’ taking of the Frogs and Snakes without first obtaining authorization pursuant to the ESA.”
I’ll tell you, Judge Illston looked at a host of evidence when making her decision, including this bon mot from SFGov:
“…it is extremely important to be able to dispose of the litigation at long last.”
Here you go, read the whole thing yourself, Gentle Reader. You don’t need to be up-to-speed on “catalyst theory” or whathaveyou to understand what the judge is saying.
Oh, and quoth The Nevius:
“Take the ruling in U.S. District Court on July 1, 2013, which, by any measure, rates as a legal smackdown of the institute.”
But as we’ve seen, in fact, this ruling was NOT “a legal smackdown” “by any measure.”
So, Judge Susan Illston isn’t crazy after all.
(One wonders why the City and County of San Francisco wishes to operate a money-losing White elephant of a golf course in the first place. Our Board of Supervisors has tried to unload it back in aught-eleven, to no avail. And now, in 2015, we’re in a drought what rivals what we experienced in the 1970’s. Oh well.)
IMO, the job of CW Nevius is to promote the goals of his local political faction, the dominant one. That’s why I refer “beat sweeteners” and “source greasers” and the like. He slavishly promotes SFGov’s department heads, among others, and, in return, he gets rewarded by them. That’s his gig. But sometimes the way he promotes his faction is wrong.
AARON THE GIANT HAS A POSSE: How Aaron Peskin Would Beat Interim Supervisor Julie Christensen, Were the District 3 Election Held TodayTuesday, June 23rd, 2015
Here’s your Aaron Peskin running hard, once again, for Supe of District Three:
As you can see, Aaron has a posse.
Have you seen the polling? The thing is that gaffe-prone Julie Christensen, the Sarah Palin of SF politics, still has a few more months to introduce herself to her constituents and we still don’t know what kind of effect the “uncoordinated” and inevitable Ron Conway-type money-dump against Aaron will have.
Now let’s hear from Julie, the unknown redshirt, the redshirt freshman in her 60’s, you know, talking about economic classes, trying, you know, to give a shout-out to her temporary fiefdom:
“…both lower and upper and middle, middle upper, lower, you know, fisherman’s wharf, the financial district, the waterfront…”
I think, you know, that’s enough for now.
All right, place your bets:
“D3 is Rose Pak’s Chinatown district, and according to Rose, Julie Christensen “doesn’t know jack shit about Chinatown.”http://www.sfexaminer.com/sanf… She’s also facing former D3 supervisor Aaron Peskin, who can boast significantly greater name recognition.”
As you can see by clicking on the above link, JC is not the favorite in this race, oh well.
All right, play us out, Mssrs. Matier & Ross:
“San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee is dropping his affable smile when it comes to Aaron Peskin. The mayor grew a set of fangs last week, warning a collection of the city’s business, labor and tech leaders that there would be consequences if they help the former Board of Supervisors president’s bid to unseat Lee’s handpicked District Three incumbent in November, Supervisor Julie Christensen. “I am paying attention,” the mayor told the assembled guests at a closed-door meeting Tuesday at the Hanson Bridgett law offices, according to people who were there.”
And here’s the stinger:
“And tech investor Ron Conway, one of the mayor’s biggest backers, urged the business community to step up to the plate for Christensen — saying there would be a backlash if he and his tech friends wrote the checks for the mayor’s candidate.”
Postcard from Sacramento County: “DOES THIS ASS MAKE MY TRUCK LOOK BIG?” – NOT an Obama Voter, CertainlyMonday, June 22nd, 2015
I think food manufacturers test-market a lot in Sac County ’cause it’s like a small snapshot of America, demographically speaking.
Anyway, here’s one voter:
(This was right by the freeway what has, about 80 miles away, a metal highway clean-up sign thanking “FRIENDS OF OBAMA” – I’ll have to try to get a shot of that sign the next time I pass through…)
“Plaza 16″ Group Makes Itself Look Foolish in Gadfly Michael Petrelis Video – Reporter George McIntire Ejected?Friday, June 12th, 2015
[CORRECTION: George Mcintire is a freelance journalist working on behalf of Vice for an article. I thought he was on staff.]
Personally, I wouldn’t expect to see something like this at any “community meeting.”
And actually, I’ve popped into hundreds of community meetings around the bay area over the years, and I aint never seen anything like that, just saying.
And here’s a well-edited video:
Frisco Disses Texas – Flies State Flag Upside-Down at Civic Center in Front of Historic City Hall – Poor Tech-sas!Thursday, May 14th, 2015
Here’s the scene down in Civic Center, with 18 flags in front of the Highest* Classical Dome in the Western Hemisphere (and fifth-highest in the world, I believe):
You can see the state flag of Texas camera left, red side down, as it’s supposed to be.
But here’s how things look these days:
See? It’s flying butter-side-down:
IDK if this is being done on purpose, as a dig against Our Great Competitor, or if this is being done out of ignorance. It’s been this way for a while – this isn’t just a one-day thing. (Maybe we’re still mad about losing QANTAS to Dallas/Fort Worth.)
Now, is the 415 an unlikely place for the Lone Star Flag? Some think so:
Here’s your answer:
“The name and star [of CA’s original flag] are said to be inspired by Texas, so maybe that’s why that state got included.”
*Yes, higher than the Capitol Dome in DC. By like a foot or two. On purpose. And any other dome you’re thinking about isn’t classical and/or it’s in the eastern hemisphere…
Some places have not enough democracy, and some have too much.
We’re in a place that has too much, I’m afraid:
“SAN FRANCISCANS PRIORITIZE FUNDING FOR PROGRAMS FOR SENIORS, PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES, AND VETERANS – New Citywide Poll Finds Strong Support for the Dignity Fund
A recent citywide poll conducted by Tulchin Research (memo attached) found that San Franciscans strongly support the Dignity Fund (69% support), a set aside which would take 2% of property tax revenues from the General fund, and dedicate them to providing services for seniors and adults and veterans with disabilities, similar to the long standing and recently renewed Children’s Fund. The Dignity Fund measure would provide a dedicated local funding source for these services during a time when demand for them is on the rise.
The Dignity Fund is backed and funded by a coalition of community based organizations (full list below), including Asian Pacific Islander Legal Outreach, Bayview Hunters Point Multipurpose Senior Services, Centro Latino, Episcopal Senior Communities, Independent Living Resource Center, Institute on Aging, Open House, San Francisco Village, Self Help for the Elderly, Senior and Disability Action, and Swords to Ploughshares. The proposed measure comes at a time when the cost of living citywide is rising rapidly, and critical services have been reduced due to pressure from state and federal government cuts.
“The funds generated from this measure would help support critical services that are in need of funding to be fully realized for seniors, people with disabilities, and veterans,” said Herb Levine, Co-Chair of the Dignity Fund Coalition. “The City budget does not have a dedicated funding source for these services. The Dignity Fund would create that source without raising taxes.”
The survey tested a specific proposal that would set aside 2% of property tax revenues in the General Fund and dedicate them to providing services to seniors, adults and veterans with disabilities, similar to the Children’s Fund. The survey makes it clear that voters, regardless of age or ideology, offer overwhelming support for creating a Dignity Fund.
“We are taking the steps necessary to place this measure on the 2015 ballot, because now is the time to ensure stability for seniors, people with disabilities, and veterans,” said Ramona Davies, Co-Chair of the Dignity Fund Coalition. “As our populations grow, it behooves us to ensure that the funding is available for these important programs which provide our communities with services that impact us every day.”
Dignity Fund Coalition Members
Asian Pacific Islander Legal Outreach
Bayview Hunters Point Multipurpose Senior Services
Community Living Campaign
Episcopal Senior Communities
Felton Institute (Family Service Agency)
Home Bridge (formerly IHSS Consortium)
Independent Living Resource Center of San Francisco
Institute on Aging
Meals on Wheels
San Francisco Village
Self Help for the Elderly
Senior and Disability Action
SteppingStone Adult Day Health
Swords to Plowshares
YMCA of San Francisco
Curry Senior Center
Episcopal Community Services”