Posts Tagged ‘carmen chu’

Evanescent Evidence: Rose Pak Spanked by the Fair Political Practices Commission Over Travel to China a Half-Decade Ago

Wednesday, March 5th, 2014

Gaia bless state and federal investigators in their efforts to clean up this town.

(If Rose Pak had a gift for me, I’d turn her down…)

Anyway, here’s the pdf from two point something years ago.

And here’s the OCR (but as you can see from the link, this evidence of wrongdoing is fading from the Web, at least in OCR form).

“Contents : FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION 428 J Street Suite 620 Sacramento CA 958I4 2329 !916 322 5660 Fax t9!b) 322 0886 August 22 2011

Ms. Rose Pak o/b/o Chinese New Year Festival Committee REDACTED Letter Re: FPPC No. 11/081 Carmen Chu, David Chiu and Eric Mar

Dear Ms. Pak: The Fair Political Practices Commission (the “FPPC”) enforces the provisions of the Political Reform Act (the “Act”) found in Government Code section 81000 et seq. As you may be aware the Commission has undertaken an investigation into gifts of travel to southern China from November Ii. 2009 through November 16 2009 provided by the Chinese New Year Festival Committee to Supervisors Carmen Chu David Chiu and Eric Mar.

The Act places limitations on the acceptance of gifts by certain public officials including city supervisors. Section 89503(a) prohibits these public officials from accepting gifts from any single source in any calendar year with a total value of more than the applicable gift limit. The $250 gift limit is adjusted biennially to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index pursuant to Section 89503 subdivision (t). The gift limit in 2009 was $420. (Regulation 18940.2.)

Under specific circumstances payments for transportation lodging and subsistence may be exempt from the definition of “gift.” Section 89506(a)(2) provides that travel expenses reasonably related to a legislative or governmental purpose or to an issue of state national or international policy are not prohibited or limited if they are provided by certain specified sources such as governmental agencies bona fide public or private educational institutions or non-profit 50 I (c)(3) organizations. During the course of our investigation we reviewed documents obtained from the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) concerning the Chinese New YearFestival Committee’s tax exempt status.

According to these documents which included copies of IRS filings and The Political Reform Act is contained in Government Code sections 81000 through 91014. All statutory references are to the Government Code unless otherwise indicated. The regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission are contained in sections 18110 through 18997 of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations. All regulatory references are to Title 2 Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations unless otherwise indicated. FPPC Case No. 11/081 Page 2 01’2 Articles of incorporation originally filed with theCalifornia Secretary of State the Chinese New Year Festival Committee is registered as a 501 (c)(6) chamber of commerce organization. It has never been registered as a 50J(c)(3) organization. Therefore the requirements under Section 89506(a)(2) for an exception to the gift limit are not met and any gift including those of travel are subject to gift limits. Please be advised that since the Chinese New Year Festival Committee is not an organization that falls under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code no public official may accept gifts of any type from this organization valued in excess of the applicable limit. Feel free to contact me with any questions you may have regarding this letter. Sincerely REDACTED ‘-iachary ‘ II. Norton Commission Counsel Enforcement Division”

Sorry, Carpet-Bagging Challenger Ivan Seredni, But Katy Tang Will Beat You – Her Six-Second Vine Shows Why

Wednesday, May 29th, 2013

This one.

(I guess you got to click it to make it go, or go here.)

‘Cause if you think “Born and Raised” carries a lot of weight in San Francisco, it’s even more that way way out in the west bay.

Katy Tang is unlikely to make a big mistake before election day because she’s a do-girl who does what she’s told. She learned how to be that way from another District 4 do-girl, who consistently did what she was told.

Hey, are there any other do-girls on the Board of Supervisors? I don’t think so.

But let’s check:

(Recent D5 Supervisor Christina Olague was a do-girl at first, but then she reneged. Now she’s the Former Supervisor Who Shant Be Named. Like Voldemort.)

Of course, ten years is a long time, long enough to grow a backbone I suppose.

Anything’s possible…

The SFMTA Has an N Judah Express, So Where’s the T Third Express? – “MUNI’s Shameful Racism”

Wednesday, March 20th, 2013

CCSF student Gloria Dean has a question for the SFMTAMUNIDPTSFBC:

“I would like to know the reasons why the Muni constantly stops trains on the T-Line at 23rd Street as if the rest of Third Street doesn’t exist. 

“To see elderly women, men and children waiting over an hour for a train to get home is some of the worse treatment of citizens I’ve ever seen from a transportation system. I’ve traveled extensively all over the country as well as the world and I’ve only lived in this area for one year. However, this is obviously a classic combination of classism and racism being displayed, and it is truly a SHAME!

“I’ve decided to take my car out of the parking garage and drive. I refuse to be treated as a second class citizen. I deserve more and so do all the residents of Bayview. Last check, San Francisco doesn’t end at 23rd Street.”

Well I know the answer – it has to do with the district election system for the Board of Supervisors, and also the SFMTA’s general incompetence.

Now the Supervisor for our Bayview Hunters Point area asked about this sitch and the answer was that the T-Third zipped along at a speedy 9 MPH or something, so a T-Third Express wasn’t really needed.

Hey, here’s a jobs program. Why not tear out the T-Third and bring back the buses? Just asking. I mean the T-Third takes up a lot of space, right? Why doesn’t MUNI use it more?

Now speaking of the N Judah Express, here it is, in action, or lack thereof:

Click to expand

Is that four buses sitting around on Sansome Street during rush hour? The drivers are just starting work and it’s time for a 40 minute lunch break? All right.

And here’s another on Bush, just idling away.

Actually, even when the N Judah Express band-aid operation is operational during our rush hours, the buses are totally empty, no passengers, most of the time.

Oh well.

Does the N Judah Nx Express Bus Make Sense or Does It Function as a Kind of Bribe to Supervisor Carmen Chu?

Thursday, April 26th, 2012

So these new Nx Judah Express Buses are “wrapped,” right? That means that they generally just sit around waiting to function in one direction during the morning drive and the other in the evening.

So, does the Nx Judah Express concept make sense?

Well, sure, you say, cause it gets you from the outer reaches of the West Bay, way out in the Outset, in San Francisco Adjacent, all the way into San Francisco Proper faster than the regular N Judah.

Yeah, but does it make sense?

Why don’t we have a Tx Third Street Express as well? Cause isn’t the newish T-Third line as fucked up as the N-Judah?

Click to expand

And the only reason why MUNI doesn’t charge you Outsetters three or four or five dollars a trip is because the SFMTA tried doing that before and failed in that attempt. But, rest assured, raising the price of express buses is on their list of things to do.

Anyway, consider the Nx Judah Express a kind tangible gift to Supervisor Carmen Chu.

Mira, mira, Carmen! Look what we’re doing for you! Aren’t we the best transit agency in the City and County of San Francisco!

Is this what they call Transit Justice?

 

The “San Francisco Jewish Community” Paid for Supervisors Malia Cohen, Carmen Chu and Scott Wiener’s Trip to Israel Last Month?

Thursday, April 12th, 2012

Well, this is news to me:

20120315_20120314_3.216d_cohen_malia (pdf)

Check it:

Gee, who didn’t go on this junket? 

Now if I were a Supervisor, I’d prefer to take a $6000 [don't say bribe, don't say bribe] whatever and use it to head off to Trinidad, but that’s just me.

Vacation, all I ever wanted/

Vacation, have to get away

 

Why is McDonalds Charging Sales Tax on Donations? Anyway, the New San Francisco Happy Meal is Exactly the Same as the Old

Thursday, December 1st, 2011

Well here it is, the before and after of the San Francisco Happy Meal from McDonalds.

Today’s the day that the San Francisco’s Healthy Meal Incentives Ordinance kicks in. The upshot is that now you have to donate 10 cents to Ronald McDonald House in order to get the toy.

See?

Click to expand

(Note the apple slices in the upper right. They’ve been around for a while.)

But uh oh, is Micky Dee’s charging sales tax on the donation? Yes it is. I cry foul.* (Uh, San Francisco McDonaldses, can you do that? Do you need to rejigger your registers?)

This sign was just put up. It’s all “10 cents adds a toy.”

Now I’ll tell you, I can recall buying a Hamburger Happy Meal in Palo Alto last year for exactly two-fitty ($2.50). It had more fries plus the free toy (but it didn’t have apple slices or a slice of cheese for the burger.) Anyway, prices be going up, it seems.

Oh well.

*So, the only reason to charge sales tax is if the 10-cent purported “donation” is actually for the “retail sale of tangible personal property,” right? So which is it, a donation or a sale? I mean if I donated money to Ronald McDonald House on Scott Street, they sure as Hell wouldn’t tack on sales tax, would they? Mmmm… I paid ten cents extra to get a toy, right? Thinking out loud here, could it be that, as far as San Francisco is concerned, the 10 cents shows that the toy isn’t included “for free” and therefore the sale need not comply with the HMIO, but as far as the state of California is concerned, McD’s is just selling the toy for 10 cents, so therefore, obviously, a penny needs to be collected and forwarded to Sacramento for each sale? (But of course, if you walk up and offer your 10-cent donation for just the toy, they’ll say, “No dice.” They used to charge $2 for toy only purchases). Have the legal advisers for area McDonalds restaurants thought this through? I don’t know. Anyway, the approach they’re taking appears to be a giant F.U. to the City and County of San Francisco. I’ll tell you, the path they’re on is full of rusty nails and garbage pails. Just saying. But hey, what about McDonalds Corporation in Oak Brook, Illinois? Did they sign off on this? I wonder. (Did they indemnify the local owners? By contract, or, you know, some other way. I’m just curious about who came up with this ten cent idea.) Anyway, this is me thinking aloud, just raising issues. I can’t wrap my head around “ten cents adds a toy” and how that relates to state tax law. Like when I got my Android phone plus two-year contract for $50, I had to pay another $50 or so in sales tax because the phone is worth far more than $50. For example…

Today’s Mayor Ed Lee Electoral Victory Lap Around San Francisco is Nothing But a Big F.U. to David Chiu

Thursday, November 10th, 2011

Ah, let’s see what’s on the agenda today – oh it’s a tour of the City, a kind of victory lap to celebrate yesterday’s big news.

Mr. Mayor will drop by Districts #4, #7, and  #10 with  area Supervisors. Check it:

“Mayor Lee to visit Sunset neighborhood merchants along Irving Street with Supervisor Carmen Chu to discuss jobs & small businesses.
Merchant walk to start at Sunset Super”

“Mayor Lee to visit West Portal neighborhood merchants along West Portal Avenue with Supervisor Sean Elsbernd to discuss jobs & small businesses.
Merchant walk to start at Squat & Gobble”

“Mayor Lee to visit Portola neighborhood merchants along San Bruno Avenue with Supervisor Malia Cohen to discuss jobs & small businesses.
Merchant walk to start at North East Medical Services (NEMS)”

Fair enough, but oh, here’s another one – it’s in District #3, you know, the realm of Board of Supervisors President David Chiu.

“Mayor Lee to visit Chinatown neighborhood merchants along Stockton Street to discuss jobs & small businesses.
Merchant walk to start at Self-Help for the Elderly”

You notice anything? That’s right, Supervisor Chiu isn’t invited to a merchant walk in his own district.

Do you think that this is a mere oversight on behalf of the scheduling secretary?*

I don’t.

This is WillieBrownRosePakEdLee saying Foxtrot Yankee to poor DC for, among other things, Speaking Truth to Power a few months back.**

Oh well.

President David Chiu (along with Dr. Malcom-esque District #1 Supervisor Eric Mar) in mayoral campaign mode last week. 

Click to expand

Soon, if not already, he’ll be in supervisorial campaign mode once again. What do WillieBrownRosePakEdLee have in store for David Chiu for 2012?

Well, we’ll just have to wait and see…

*Will Ed Lee be the first San Francisco Mayor since the 1990′s to NOT have sex with a young, attractive, female, SFGov mayoral scheduling secretary? Why yes, you can bank on that. How refreshing!

**Play us out, Managing Editor James Gardner:

“’So, Ed,’ began David Chiu, recounting a private conversation he claims the two had shortly before Lee reversed his longstanding insistence he wouldn’t run. ‘You told me you didn’t have the fire in the belly. You’d looked in the mirror and said you didn’t want to run … but you didn’t know how to say no to Willie Brown and Rose Pak.’

OK, there’s a genuine gotcha. Ouch.”

City Family Unites for “Yes on C, No on D” Campaign Kickoff – Warren Hellman and the Wronglers Play

Saturday, September 24th, 2011

Public Defender Jeff Adachi was nowhere to be seen this AM during the big Yes on C, No on D campaign kickoff in the Western A today.

Warren Hellman (who used to be on the other side) and the Wronglers provided music. (Believe it or not, this is Warren’s most understated Star of David getup.) 

Via Steve Rhodes

Supervisor Carmen Chu, seen just behind Mayor Ed Lee, could hardly contain her enthusiasm – there was no place in the world she would have preferred to have been than right here, obviously:

Also via Steve Rhodes

A few deets:

“SAN FRANCISCO, September 23, 2011“Yes on C, No On D” pension-reform campaign will hold its campaign kickoff. Warren Hellman’s “old time” band, the Wronglers, will provide entertainment.

WHAT: Yes on C, No on D Campaign Kickoff
WHO: Mayor Ed Lee, Supervisor John Avalos, business and labor leaders
ENTERTAINMENT: The Wronglers
WHEN: Saturday, September 24, 10:30 AM
WHERE: African American Art and Cultural Complex, 762 Fulton St. (@Webster), San Francisco”

Our City Family: Labor Council, Chamber of Commerce, and Warren Hellman Unite to Fight Jeff Adachi’s Prop D

Wednesday, August 31st, 2011

Well here’s the news of the day – it’s the launch of YesOnCNoOnD.com

And look who’s the headliner of this Fellowship, it’s “Civic Leader” Warren Hellman, who used to play for the other team, so to speak.

Anyway, all the deets, below.

That Warren sure loves his banjo:

Click to expand

“PAULSON, FALK TO CO-CHAIR YES ON PROPOSITION C PENSION REFORM CAMPAIGN - Top Labor Leader, Top Business Leader Tapped To Lead Consensus Coalition

SAN FRANCISCO, August 31, 2011 – San Franciscans United For Pension And Health Reform today selected Tim Paulson and Steve Falk to serve as co-chairs of the campaign supporting Proposition C and opposing Proposition D on the November ballot.

Paulson is executive director of the San Francisco Labor Council, comprised of 150 local unions and representing 100,000 workers, and Falk is president and CEO of the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, a 1,500-member organization representing the business community.

“We are pleased that San Francisco’s top labor leader and top business leader are working together to lead this coalition’s campaign for pension and health reform,” said Thomas P. O’Connor, president of Fire Fighters Local 798. “Unions and the business community don’t agree on everything, but on Proposition C, San Francisco is united.”

Falk praised Proposition C, which was developed with input from the community, introduced by Mayor Ed Lee, and passed unanimously by the Board of Supervisors.

“Proposition C saves taxpayers at least $1.3 billion over the next decade,” said Falk. “This measure is fiscally responsible and it will help keep us solvent.”

Paulson emphasized the measure’s fairness.

“Proposition C provides a safety net for hardworking city employees who earn lower wages,” said Paulson. “It keeps pension contributions stable for those making less than $50,000 a year. Those who make more pay more.”

O’Connor drew a contrast between Proposition C and Proposition D, a rival pension measure.

“Proposition C has widespread support because it was conceived in the light of day, with a public process that encouraged input and ideas from everyone,” said O’Connor. “On the other hand, the backers of Proposition D bought their way onto the ballot with signature gatherers who were paid five dollars a signature and repeatedly got caught on tape lying about what the measure would do.”

Today, San Franciscans United For Pension And Health Reform also announced the other members of its campaign committee. In addition to Paulson, Falk, and O’Connor, the committee includes other business and labor leaders, along with the measure’s sponsor at the Board of Supervisors:

Warren Hellman, Civic Leader
Gary Delagnes, President of the San Francisco Police Officers Association
Sean Elsbernd, Member of the Board of Supervisors
Steve Fields, Co-Chair of the Human Services Network
Larry Mazzola, Business Manager and Financial Secretary Treasurer of UA Local 38
Rebecca Rhine, Executive Director of the Municipal Executives Association
Bob Muscat, Executive Director of IFTPE Local 21
Sean Connolly, President of the Municipal Attorneys Association

Please visit www.yesoncnoond.com for more information.”

Well That’s It, the Great Multi-Year Battle Over the Stow Lake Boathouse is Over – Judge to Allow New Tenant Tomorrow

Monday, May 16th, 2011

[UPDATE: Well, geez, Rachel Gordon had this hours ago but she didn’t use the words “boathouse” or “boat house” so I didn’t notice her bit. I prob. wouldn’t have made this post if I had known. Oh well.]

Here’s the news, right from the source, about tomorrow’s case number CPF11511130 regarding the contract for the Stow Lake Boathouse:

“ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION/ ALTERNATIVE WRIT OF MANDATE. PETITIONERS’ REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION/ALTERNATIVE WRIT OF MANDATE IS DENIED. PETITIONERS HAVE NOT SHOWN THAT THEY ARE LIKELY TO PREVAIL ON THE MERITS.

THE EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT THE RFQ PROCESS WAS CONDUCTED IMPARTIALLY AND WITH FAIRNESS TO ALL BIDDERS. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF FAVORITISM, FRAUD OR CORRUPTION.

THE FACT THAT RESPONDENT REFERRED REAL PARTY IN INTEREST TO A LOBBYIST TO ASSIST WITH PR BEFORE THE AWARD ISSUE WAS PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION AND BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BUT AFTER THE AWARD, IS NOT EVIDENCE OF ANY IMPROPRIETY INVOLVING THE EVALUATION PROCESS.

IN FACT, PETITIONER ALSO EMPLOYED LOBBYIST IN PRIOR BID PROCESSES AND DURING THIS PROCESS AS WELL.

MOREOVER, THE OTHER ALLEGED IRREGULARITIES PLAINTIFF COMPLAINS OF DO NOT RENDER THE RFQ PROCESS IMPROPER OR INVALID.

FINALLY, THE BALANCE OF THE HARM TO PETITIONERS VS. RESPONDENT AND REAL PARTY IS OF EQUAL WEIGHT. MOREOVER, ANY HARM PETITIONER MAY SUFFER CAN BE MONETARILY COMPENSATED.

(The references to Stow Lake Corporation’s lobbying efforts are right here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.)

Will the Stow Lake Boathouse rise from the ashes of all the vitriol and whatnot? Sure, why not?

(And hey, speaking of vitriol, you know if the City and County paid me five figures a year to express my political views via a small blog, well, I’d take some of that money to pay an SEO optimizer to get old posts from 2009 into search results for the recent news regarding our famous boathouse. Thusly:

A post from 2009 has risen to live again as if it had been made this week – isn’t that nice? Anyway…)

As close as Stow Lake gets to having a real, live Phoenix Rising. Leave Us Begin the Healing, Oh Great Fire-Bird:

Click to expand

So you can look forward to eating a $3.95* gourmet Boat House Hot Dog come Autumn…

*Uh, and this is just one other thing to add to the record for Santa’s Naughty List Appeals Board (cause you know, if Saint Nick put the people at SaveStowLake! on the Naughty List then the SaveStowLake! people would attempt to crucify Santa in the press and, shortly thereafter, begin endless legal proceedings), the $8.50 price for “a hot dog” at the world-famous de Young Museum is incorrect. That is (or was) the price of a quasi-gourmet hot dog kids meal – you get like three things or something. (No toy though.)