Posts Tagged ‘attorney’

The 10th Anniversary of the SFPD Detention of Lawyer Rodel Rodis – Everything’s About Race? – Scott Wiener Angle

Friday, February 15th, 2013

Yes, everything that ever happens in your life has to do with your ethnic heritage, apparently.

That’s the conclusion you might come to after reading this tale from area attorney Rodel Rodis. It started up ten years ago and ended up involving a former Assistant City Attorney by the name of Scott Wiener.

All right, Rodel, the SFPD took you into a station after thinking you were trying to pass a fake $100 bill, but actually it was real, so look sad, come on, sadder, sadder, cleek:

Via Darryl Bush from a story by Ryan Kim

Uh, dude, you’re telling your story wrong.

And I’ll tell you, if you ever find me with a $100 bill, I’ll know exactly where I got it from.

And you’d think somebody could have entered the phrase “1985 $100 bill” into the Google earlier in this process, back in the day, but oh well. (And IRL, a teller supervisor at a bank in the pre-Internet era could examine a bill and then contact the feds in a New York minute, you know, to check the serial number.)

And if Walgreens ever sends me a giant bouquet to turn my frown upside-down, I’d tell them they should have simply handed over the bouquet money directly to me.

But, In mitigation, you went to the former New College of Law and then, unlike most of its graduates*, you passed the CA bar exam. So good on you. Srsly.

And you escaped the college board before City College came crashing down, so that was a good move as well.

All right, let’s look forward to this incident’s 20th anniversary in 2023, when we’ll surely hear this tale again…

*Such as your fellow area minor celebrity, the ivory-white “Ivory Madison.”

Can You Really Sign Binding Legal Documents with Your Handle? Yes – Meet “John The Animal Protector Mounier”

Monday, January 14th, 2013

Here he is:

Click to expand

I’ve never seen anything like that in a signature line.

In other news, Charlie lives – he just got a life sentence on a farm someplace after his mouthpiece struck a plea bargain with Dennis Herrera and the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office.

But, come to think of it, attorney John Mounier is actually “The Animal Attacker Protector,” IRL.

Oh well.

Here’s What Tonight’s World Series Viewing Party Will Look Like – But No Alcohol in Civic Center – Vote No on Prop B

Sunday, October 28th, 2012

You’re invited to come to Civic Center tonight to see Game Four of the World Series on a makeshift “Jumbotron.”

See you at 5:07 PM (or earlier, to get a good spot if you want to be able to actually see the action unobstructed.)

It’ll look like this, but probably with more Matt Cain than Timothy Leroy Lincecum on the screen:

Via RubyxCube - click to expand

The SFPD requests (more or less) that you transfer your alcohol to unmarked containers, thusly:

And, oh yes, speaking of the Rec and Park, Remember to Vote No on Proposition B (November 2012), the so-called “Clean and Safe Neighborhood Parks Bond”

Why?

Well, because Prop. B is too costly for San Francisco

And also because Reform is Needed at San Francisco’s Recreation and Parks Department.

Also because area lawyer Philip Alan Ginsburg would consider passage of Prop B (November 2012) an endorsement of how he’s running the RPD.

That’s why.

Now, let’s hear from San Francisco Mayor Ron Conway,* after the jump. (Spoiler: He wants you to go to Chipotle’s and spend your money before you blow town.)

PS: The after party will be in the Mission District – spread the word, bring fireworks.

*Poor Sony. It appears that any television-like contraption bigger than 100 inches now gets the generic term “jumbotron.”

Oh well.

Displays similar to the Jumbotron include:

(more…)

San Francisco Chronicle Writer CW Nevius Is Always Wrong: Chapter 237, Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi Case

Wednesday, October 10th, 2012

Here’s the latest boner from CW Nevius regarding the Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi case:

“It’s not that Mirkarimi is expected to have much of a shot to win reinstatement. All the smart money at City Hall is predicting an 11-0 vote against his case. That way everyone has some political cover.”

So, once again, CW Nevius is totally wrong on an issue. And, once again, he will refuse to acknowledge his mistake.

Nevius, can’t you learn from your mistakes?

Oh well.

Ah, memories:

San Francisco Chronicle opinion “reporter” CW Nevius should stick to his opinions, IMO. Cause it’s when he mixes up his opinions with what he considers facts, that’s when the trouble starts.

Anyway, I don’t question his ability to get people to answer his phone calls and then offer quotes, but I do question his ability to understand what those people tell him.

Oh well.

Here it is, a Nevius column three-way mash-up, starting all the way back in the month of January 2012.

(And, as always, please keep in mind that The Nevius is NOT biased on this particular topic, not at all, like why would you even think that?)

“The neighbor who called authorities with concerns (and good for her) learned that the hard way. She reportedly said she only wanted to express concern, not to release the photo or the cell phone texts.”

SO, SOMEBODY  CALLS THE COPS TO “EXPRESS CONCERN?” WHO DOES THAT? SOMEBODY WHO’S HORRIBLY NAIVE, LIKE IVORY MADISON? AND SHE DOES IT WITH HER VERY OWN PERSONAL IPHONE? SO YOU CALL THE COPS AND TELL THEM YOU HAVE SOLID EVIDENCE OF A CRIME BUT YOU’RE NOT READY TO TURN IT OVER TO THEM. I MEAN, HOW MANY MINUTES WILL IT TAKE FOR THEM TO BE BANGING ON YOUR DOOR? OH WAIT, YOU POLITELY ASKED THEM _NOT_ TO STAR-69 YOU? WELL IN THAT CASE…

There are many people in law enforcement who dislike him and don’t think he is fit for the job.

THE THOUGHTS OF “MANY PEOPLE” ARE ALWAYS CONGRUENT WITH CW NEVIUS IN CW NEVIUS-LAND. HOW CONVENIENT!

There is a school of thought that says Mirkarimi should step gracefully away from the job now and get on with his life.

SEE? MORE “THOUGHT” FROM THE NEVE. NEVE IS UPSET THAT ROSS MIRKARIMI WON THE SHERIFF’S RACE, SO NEVE IS HAPPY TO SEE ROSS GO, OF COURSE.

There is the possibility that Mirkarimi could be angling for something like a plea of “no contest,” which doesn’t carry the stigma of a guilty plea.

UH, NEVIUS, HOW SIMPLE ARE YOU? HAVE YOU HEARD OF THE TERM BEFORE? DO YOU EXPECT YOUR READERS TO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT “NO CONTEST” MEANS? AND OH, IT MEANS “GUILTY,” MORE OR LESS, SO YES, THERE’S A STIGMA ATTACHED TO NOT FIGHTING WHEN A DISTRICT ATTORNEY IS TRYING YOU FOR DOING SOMETHING WRONG. FOR _MOST_ PEOPLE, SUCH A PLEA CARRIES THE SAME STIGMA OF A GUILTY PLEA. AND, AS GOES WITHOUT SAYING, IT’S OUR RIGHT TO PLEA THAT WAY IN CALIFORNIA. YOU SEE, THERE’S NO “ANGLING,” THERE’S NO DEAL STRATEGERY REQUIRED, DESPITE WHAT YOU THINK, NEVE.

But to Mirkarimi, that may seem like caving in.

AS IT WOULD TO ANYONE.

Fighting the charges and winning would be the sweet vindication for Mirkarimi. He would never get tired of saying “I told you so,” and no one could blame him.

UH, I DON’T THINK HE WOULD GO AROUND SAYING “I TOLD YOU SO.” AND IF HE DID, PEOPLE COULD AND WOULD BLAME HIM.

Until now, I’ve gone along with the idea of letting the Ross Mirkarimi misdemeanor domestic battery case play out.

HOW GENEROUS OF YOU. ARE YOU THE FOURTH BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT, CW NEVIUS? AREN’T YOU MERELY AN EX-JOCK MOVIE REVIEWER? I THINK SO.

It is time for Mirkarimi to cut his losses. Clearly he is fighting for his political life. But that cannot be the only consideration. What about what is good for the city?

IN NEVIUS-LAND, EVERY POLITICIAN IN TOWN SHOULD BE A REPUBLICAN OR BUSINESS DEMOCRAT. PER NEVIUS, THAT’S WHAT WOULD BE “GOOD FOR THE CITY.” AND SINCE WHEN DO YOU CARE ABOUT THE GOOD OF THE CITY SO MUCH? HEY NEVIUS, DON’T YOU ACTUALLY OPPOSE THE CENTRAL SUBWAY? I THINK YOU DO, OR AT LEAST YOU USED TOREMEMBER HOW THE VERY THOUGHT OF IT MADE YOU “WINCE?” BUT YOU CAN’T VERY WELL OPPOSE IT NOW, CAN YOU, NOW THAT IT’S GOTTEN A LOT WORSE? WHAT WOULD THAT BE LIKE, NEVE, IF YOU WOULD VOICE YOUR CONCERNS OVER ROSE PAK’S SUBWAY TO NOWHERE, YOU KNOW, “FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY?” ALL YOUR RECENT BEAT SWEETENER AND SOURCE GREASER COLUMNS, WELL, THEY’D BE FOR NAUGHT, RIGHT?

It wouldn’t be inconceivable that it would be the middle of March before a courtroom was assigned.

FRET NOT, NEVE, THE CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO ACTUALLY FOUND A PLACE TO HOLD A CRIMINAL TRIAL, BELIEVE IT OR NOT.

Although Ivory Madison’s biography says she attended law school, whether or not she was working as an attorney, or represented Lopez, is bound to be contentious. And that’s just one of the issues. The video is pivotal to the case, so there will probably be further challenges of that.

YOU KNOW NEVE, BY YOUR STANDARDS, YOUR ERRORS IN REPORTING THIS CASE AREN’T ALL THAT EGREGIOUS. HOWEVER, THIS BONER IS WHY YOU’RE IN THE SPANKING MACHINE AGAIN. IVORY MADISON NEED NOT HAVE BEEN ‘WORKING AS AN ATTORNEY” NOR “REPRESENTING” ANYBODY IN ORDER FOR THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE TO APPLY. YOU TALK TO EXPERTS, THEY TELL YOU THE RIGHT THING, AND THEN YOU SCREW IT UP, OVER AND OVER AND OVER. DON’T YOU HAVE AN EDITOR BY NOW? OR ARE YOU EMPOWERED TO WRITE WHATEVER CRAP YOU WANT AS LONG AS YOU MAKE MONEY(?) FOR THE SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE? DO YOU EVER ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR MANY MANY MISTAKES? DO YOU EVER ISSUE CORRECTIONS? ANYWHO, THE “CONTENTIOUS” ISSUES YOU WONDERED ABOUT WEREN’T CONTENTIOUS AT ALL, AS IT TURNED OUT, AND AS SHOULD HAVE BEEN OBVIOUS TO YOU. YES EVEN YOU.

A reasonable suggestion would be for him to plead no contest to the charges.

A REASONABLE SUGGESTION FROM A SUBURBAN-MINDED REPUBLICAN SUCH AS YOURSELF, THAT’S WHAT YOU MEAN.

He should admit mistakes, apologize, and lay out a plan of rehabilitation – anger management, family counseling and personal guidance. He could say he has seen his errors and faced up to them. Therefore, he could say, he should be allowed to remain on as sheriff. Keeping the job would be a long shot. Personally, I’d oppose it.

OK, SO IT’S “DO EVERYTHING I SAY AND THE REWARD WILL BE ME, THE NEVIUS, OPPOSING YOU FROM FULFILLING THE WISHES OF THE VOTERS.” IS THAT YOUR CARROT-AND-STICK APPROACH, NEVE? MORE LIKE STICK AND STICK, IT WOULD SEEM.

Today it is a public soap opera, with trial-stalling delays, media scrums in the courthouse, and open snickering about ex-girlfriends’ panties.

I THINK YOU MEAN PAIR OF PANTIES, NEVE. LIKE ONE ARTICLE OF CLOTHING. YOU SEE, THE WAY YOU SAID IT MADE IT SEEM LIKE THERE WERE MULTIPLE GFS AND MULTIPLE PAIRS OF FOUND PANTIES. OH, I SEE, WE’RE IN NEVIUS-LAND, WHERE A “REPORTER,” SUCH AS YOURSELF ISN’T HELD TO THE SAME STANDARDS AS ANY OTHER REPORTER. OK.

It all could have been avoided. I understand if Mirkarimi and Eliana Lopez, his wife, feel wronged and want to fight the charges. But instead of having their lawyers challenge each piece of evidence, get up on the stand, make your case – Lopez does sound convincing – and let a jury decide.

WOW, SO WILLIAM WALLACE SHOULD JUST HAVE GIVEN UP TO KING ED BEFORE THE BATTLE OF FALKIRK EVEN BEGAN? BAD FORM.

Granted, the videotape of Lopez crying and pointing to a bruise on her arm doesn’t look good. But Mirkarimi and Lopez’s lawyers aren’t disputing the facts or saying it is a fake. They’re trying to remove it on a legal technicality. Just let them play the tape and respond.

NOW WHO’S THE FAKE ATTORNEY, IVORY MADISON OR YOU, NEVIUS?

Meanwhile, those who predicted a one-week trial are getting a lesson in the speed of justice.

WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE, NEVIUS? WHO ARE THESE STRAWMEN?

As weeks tick away, insiders estimate that Mirkarimi’s legal fees could be running into six figures.

WOW, “INSIDERS!” INSIDERS SUCH AS YOURSELF, NEVE?

Legally, everything turns on the video of Mirkarimi’s wife.

WOW, YOU EXPLAIN THE COMPLEX LEGALITIES SO WELL, PROFESSOR CONVENTIONAL WISDOM NEVIUS, JD. YOUR INSIGHT IS BOTH BOLD AND UNIQUE (OR NOT).

Lopez’s attorney, Paula Canny, says because the tape was made by a neighbor, Ivory Madison, who has a law degree, the tape would be violating attorney-client privilege.

NOT EXACTLY, NEVE. WHAT MATTERED IS WHAT LOPEZ BELIEVED, OF COURSE, UNDER CA LAW. THAT’S NOT ALL THAT MATTERED OF COURSE, AS THIS GAMBIT FAILED, BUT ANYWAY. YOU’RE PUTTING WORDS IN HER MOUTH, NEVE. YOU HAVE NO FRAME OF REFERENCE, DONNY. YOU’RE LIKE A CHILD WHO WANDERS INTO THE MIDDLE OF A MOVIE…

It may be a plausible legal argument but it stops the trial dead…

NOT REALLY, AS IT TURNED OUT.

Because now after months of these charges, those panties, and that tape of his weeping and bruised wife, this will follow Mirkarimi the rest of his life.

AND IF THE TRIAL HAD OCCURRED, SOMEHOW, IN FEBRUARY 2012, THEN THIS SITUATION _WOULDN’T_ HAVE FOLLOWED MIRKARIMI AROUND FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE? IS THAT WHAT YOU’RE ARGUING?

Keane compared him to O.J. Simpson, which sounded like a stretch.

YOU MEAN IT SEEMD A STRETCH AT FIRST, TO YOUR SIMPLE MIND? IS THAT WHAT YOU MEAN?

Simpson was charged with murder, not spousal abuse.

I GET YOUR POINT ON THIS, NEVE, BUT YOU’RE SORT OF WRONG ON THIS SCORE.*

But there are similarities.

WASN’T THAT HIS FUCKING POINT, NEVE? YOUR READERS ARE SMARTER THAN YOU, NEVE. SO WHY DO YOU THINK YOU HAVE TO EXPLAIN THINGS TO THEM?

After a long, painful, media-frenzy of a trial, Simpson was acquitted.

OMG, THAT CHECKS OUT TOO!

But he was a public pariah, his reputation in tatters. Simpson must wonder if it was all worth it. My guess is Ross Mirkarimi will too.

WOW, GREAT GUESS, NEVE. IT’S JUST LIKE WITH HITLER, WHO DIDN’T EVEN NEED THE REICHSTAG FIRE DECREE TO SEIZE POWER. HITLER MUST HAVE WONDERED “IF IT WAS ALL WORTH IT” OR LIKE WITH YOUR BUDDY, MAYOR ED LEE, WHO DIDN’T EVEN NEED STENCIL VOTING AND ROSE PAK TO WIN ELECTION. ED LEE MUST HAVE WONDERED “IF IT WAS ALL WORTH IT” AS WELL, HUH?

YOU’VE GIVEN US ALL A LOT TO THINK ABOUT, NEVE.

*Sort of. Actually OJ was charged with domestic violence too, before he was charged with killing that gal and that guy. I’ll give you just one guess what his plea was…

“San Francisco City Family” Union Lawyer Vince Courtney Threatens YouTube and Vimeo Over This Video?

Friday, August 31st, 2012

Well, let’s see, the last time I checked into this incident in Golden Gate Park from 2010 involving union lawyer Vince Courtney was this:

Embarassed San Francisco Lawyer Requests and Gets a YouTube Takedown, To No Avail

But recently, like this month, Vimeo too, has acted, so, once again, you couldn’t see what occurred on your PC or whatever.

But now, look what just popped up on the YouTube:

Encounter with Vince Courtney, Part Two

IMO, back then and now, lawyer Vince Courtney got outfoxed* by a layperson.**

But You Make The Call:

I don’t know, if I were a certain attorney, I’d let sleeping dogs lie.

But that’s just me…

*I can explain to you how “street mediation” works, you know, when conducted by peace officers in this kind of situation. Could this lawyer have been arrested? I don’t know. But he seemed afraid of something. 

**I mean, he just pushed and pushed until he got the most he could possibly get, and he got it all recorded, and then posted it for tout le monde to see. That’s called advocacy.

Know Better Your California Attorneys: #263114 Mona Patel – She’s “Lady Justice” – Realtor Plus Attorney Equals…?

Thursday, August 30th, 2012

At the Law Offices of Lady Justice, REALTOR + ATTORNEY = SUCCESS.

See?

Hover + Click = Expand

And note the Roman column back there, just like Saul’s.

I like her – she has the moxie , non?

And that’s a good thing for a lawyer to have, IMO.

“Viewpoint: State Bar Disaster Team Overreaches” During the Latest Chevron Fire – But Actually, Not

Tuesday, August 21st, 2012

Hey, check it, from Richard Zitrin, a professor at UC Hastings and of counsel to San Francisco’s Carlson, Calladine & Peterson:

Viewpoint: State Bar Disaster Team Overreaches.

Now here’s my viewpoint:

State Bar Disaster Team Doesn’t Overreach.

There we go, now it’s even-Steven.

Actually, our State Bar should have a DC-3 on standby so that its disaster team could more quickly parachute into places like Richmond CA, you know, just like D-Day, you know, When Disaster Strikes.

Actually, our State Bar wants people like attorney Nick Haney to call the whaaaaaaaaambulance, to complain about how the State Bar street team is just like the Waffen-SS. It sends a message to all the others.

Keep on keeping on, State Bar Disaster Team!

PS: Oh BTW, exactly zero people were hospitalized due to the latest Chevron refinery fire / explosion / incident. So the chances of any one person garnering “hundreds of thousands of dollars” from watching soot zoom up thousands of feet into the troposphere are, similarly, exactly zero. 

Hey Lawyers, Here’s a Gig for You! Get Paid Six Figures to Represent Indebted California Culinary Academy Grads

Wednesday, June 13th, 2012

Hey, remember Amador v. California Culnary Academy?

Good times.

Well they’re still doling out the cash on this one, so why not get some of it?

Now I’ll tell you, the only worser idea than going to law school these days (ooh, that link is a bit much, non?) is going to cooking school, am I right, GF? So why not use your JD to help the poor souls who were misled by the California Culinary Academy?

It’s a win-win, baby! Get all the deets below.

Sure, cooking school can be sexy, but does it pay off? 

This job is new, this job is you, Counselor:

“Senior Counsel and Director of Legal Aid Firm (downtown / civic / van ness)

This is an opportunity to found a legal aid organization. In Amador v. California Culnary Academy, students alleged they were led to believe the $46,000 12-month culinary education they received would make economic sense based on their post-graduation job opportunities. For most students that proved untrue.

In connection with the $41.8 million class action settlement of the case (judgement is expected to become final later this month), $2 million has been earmarked to provide student-debt-related services to class members. These class members need help dealing with their creditors. The director will set up and manage the firm under the oversight of the trustees of the fund, Ray E. Gallo and Robert W. Mills. The objective is to effectively manage and compromise the class members’ debts by all legal means. Also, through other fundraising efforts, we hope this new firm may live beyond its $2 million founding budget to become the first agency to focus on providing remedies to the economically disadvantaged when they suffer consumer-related tragedies like those at issue in Amador.

The ideal applicant is an attorney with 10 or more years of experience who enjoys being in a courtroom and has significant experience supervising other lawyers and staff members. Big firm training and top 10 schooling are preferred, but anybody smart and scrappy is welcome to apply. This will be a small firm environment, and effective use of technology will be essential, so you should be someone who welcomes those things.

The job may be available as early as July 1, 2012 and requires a commitment of at least two years. The location of the firm will be determined in consultation with the Director once hired.

Please submit cover letter, resume, writing sample, and salary history by email. Potentially qualified candidates will be asked to complete online assessments.

rgallo@gallo-law.com

  • Compensation: $100,000 to $200,000 (negotiable, DOE, etc.)
  • This is at a non-profit organization.
  • OK to highlight this job opening for persons with disabilities
  • Principals only. Recruiters, please don’t contact this job poster.
  • Please, no phone calls about this job!
  • Please do not contact job poster about other services, products or commercial interests.”

“Pedestrians Always Have the Right of Way?” Uh, Shouldn’t the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition Have Consulted a Lawyer Here?

Tuesday, March 27th, 2012

Are these 2012 “Rules of the Road” posted anywhere? I don’t know. [UPDATE: Here we go.]

Anyway, leave us begin:

“Pedestrians Always Have the Right of Way.”

UH, NOPE. THIS IS EXACTLY WRONG IN CALIFORNIA* AND THIS IS THE KIND OF BAD ATTITUDE THAT GETS PEOPLE KILLED. (I DON’T KNOW IF DRIVERS IN SAN FRANCISCO ARE ANY WORSE THAN THE U.S.  AVERAGE, BUT PEDESTRIANS IN THE 415 ARE _MUCH_ WORSE THAN AVERAGE. RIVALING BERKELEY’S. IF I WERE GIVING THEM ADVICE IN A PUBLIC FORUM, I’D TELL THEM TO STRAIGHTEN UP AND FLY RIGHT. I WOULDN’T TELL THEM A FALSEHOOD ABOUT CA LAW TO MAKE THEM FEEL GOOD ABOUT THEIR BAD BEHAVIOR.)

In the crosswalk or not, bike riders and drivers are required to yield to pedestrians. (CVC 21954 (b))”

UH, NOPE.** IF YOU MEAN TO SAY THAT DRIVERS SHOULD USE DUE CARE FOR THE SAFETY OF EVEN THE CRAZIEST PEDESTRIAN, THEN YOU’D BE ACCURATELY BE PARAPHRASING THE CITED CODE. BUT CALIFORNIA LAW IS SPECIFICALLY WRITTEN* TO STATE THAT PEDESTRIANS DO NOT “ALWAYS HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY.” TO REVIEW, IF YOU ARE A PED IN A CROSSWALK, MARKED OR UNMARKED, OR NEAR ENOUGH (SOMETIMES CLOSE IS CLOSE ENOUGH), AND YOU DIDN’T START TOO EARLY (THAT MEANS THAT YOU WAITED FOR TRAFFIC TO CLEAR THE INTERSECTION AFTER YOUR “WALK” LIGHT LIT UP) AND YOU DIDN’T START TOO LATE (LIKE WHEN THE WAIT LIGHT STARTS FLASHING), THEN, CONGRATULATIONS, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY. IF NOT, THEN YOU DON’T. SORRY. THAT’S WHY WHEN YOU GET KILLED BY A MUNI BUS ON HAYES STREET BY JAYWALKING LIKE WHAT JUST HAPPENED, THE DRIVER INVOLVED DOESN’T GET PUNISHED. THE REASON IS THAT YOU DIDN’T HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY. DOES THAT MEAN THAT DRIVERS HAVE A GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY TO RUN YOU OVER ON PURPOSE WHEN YOU’RE JAYWALKING? NO IT DOES NOT.

Stop Behind the Crosswalk. Leave crosswalks free and clear for pedestrians. Always stop behind the line. (CVC 21950, 21455)

UH, HOW ABOUT IN FRONT OF OR AHEAD OF OR BEFORE THE CROSSWALK INSTEAD?

Stay on the Streets. It is illegal and unsafe to ride on the sidewalk if you are over the age of 13. (SF Transportation Code Sec. 7.2.12)

UH, ON SOME SIDEWALKS IT’S OK FOR ADULTS TO RIDE A BIKE, IT JUST DEPENDS. AND WHY IS IT “UNSAFE” FOR A 14-YEAR-OLD TO RIDE ON THE SIDEWALK BUT NOT A 13-YEAR-OLD?

Go With the Flow. Ride the same direction as traffic. Walk your bike on the sidewalk if you find yourself on the wrong block of a one-way street. (CVC 21650)

IRL, THIS IS MERELY ADVISORY IN SAN FRANCISCO. YOU COULD RIDE YOUR BIKE IN THIS FASHION ON A DAILY BASIS FOR DECADES AND NOT GET CITED FOR THIS.

Mind the Signs and Lights. Stop at stop signs and obey red lights, just like all other vehicles. (CVC 21200)

IRL, THIS IS MERELY ADVISORY IN SAN FRANCISCO. YOU COULD RIDE YOUR BIKE IN THIS FASHION ON A DAILY BASIS FOR DECADES AND NOT GET CITED FOR THIS.

Light up the Night! Reflectors and a front white light are required by law. We recommend you use a rear light as well. (CVC 21201)

WELL, _NOW_ YOU’RE TALKING. AGREE.

Take the Lane. Whether you’re next to parked cars, or there are hazards in the bike lane, if you feel safer, take the lane and ride outside the door zone. (CVC 21202)

THIS IS A SUBJECTIVE STANDARD UNSUPPORTED BY CALIFORNIA LAW. OH WELL.

It’s OK to Leave the Bike Lane. If you feel safer outside the bike lane, you can ride in other vehicle travel lanes. (CVC 21208)

MEH. SO WHY HAVE BIKE LANES THEN? I’LL TELL YOU, THE CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE DOESN’T REALLY DEAL WITH “FEELINGS” AT ALL, IRL.

Be a Friend to Disabled Neighbors. Sometimes people with disabilities need access to the curb. Paratransit carriers (including taxis) may have to enter the bikeway to drop them off. Be a good neighbor and give them room. (SFMTA Policy)

REALLY? I NEED TO CHECK TO SEE IF THE PERSON COMING OUT OF A CAB IS MY “DISABLED NEIGHBOR” BEFORE I DECIDE TO “GIVE THEM ROOM” OR NOT? THAT SOUNDS A LITTLE CRAY-CRAY, DOESN’T IT? MAYBE I’LL JUST GO AROUND PARKED TAXIS AS ANY SENSIBLE PERSON WOULD DO?

So there you have it.

Maybe they’ll get it right next year…

*”Every pedestrian upon a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway so near as to constitute an immediate hazard.”

**”The provisions of this section shall not relieve the driver of a vehicle from the duty to exercise due care for the safety of any pedestrian upon a roadway.”

When NIMBYs Attack: Richmond District Kerfuffle Regarding the Jack in the Box on Geary Makes the Sainted Wall Street Journal

Friday, March 23rd, 2012

Here’s the question: Is Chris Rillo, ERISA attorney and part-time Richmond District resident, a NIMBY? Let’s look at the evidence:

“Mr. Rillo and his wife are both long-term residents and homeowners in the Richmond district who have worked hard advocating for the safety of our neighborhood.”

(Signs point to YES.)

Anyway, NIMBY Chris Rillo et ux are going to have a harder time NIMBYing against beloved local institutions such as our late-night J-in-the-B. See?

Apparently, Chris Rillo tried to “intimate” District One Supervisor Eric Mar:

“When the captain called to tell me he was relieving me from the board, I asked whether it was for a cause,” Rillo said. “He simply stated he had the right to constitute members of the board and assured me there was no cause. I was startled when he reported a cause that night, that I supposedly intimated Supervisor Mar.”

Uh, I think that’s spelled intimidated, Counselor.

No matter, this incident will serve to keep our local millionaire NIMBYs down, so that’s good.

Hooray!