Posts Tagged ‘city attorney’

Oh, It’s On! A Boxing Day Courthouse Showdown Betwixt CCSF and the ACCJC – Thursday, Thursday, Thursday!

Tuesday, December 24th, 2013

Comes now San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera, in the baby blue trunks…

…taking on the nameless, faceless Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, in the dark blue trunks.

I don’t think there’s any argument against the contention that City College of San Francisco has screwed up BIG TIME, and I think we all can agree that the ACCJC is not a perfect organization.

Anyway, Round XXXVII is coming up Thursday AM:

“Court will hear City Attorney’s motion to forbid de-accrediting City College
*** Thursday, Dec. 26, 9:00 a.m. ***

SAN FRANCISCO (Dec. 24, 2013)—As a part of its lawsuit to prevent the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) from revoking the accreditation of City College of San Francisco, City Attorney Dennis Herrera’s office will be appearing in San Francisco Superior Court on Thursday, December 26 to ask the court for a preliminary injunction in the case.

What: Hearing on plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction in the case of People of the State of California v. Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges

When: Thursday, December 26, 2013, 9:00 a.m. Note: the court’s calendar begins at 9:00 a.m., but this particular motion may be heard at any time between 9:00 a.m. and the conclusion of the court’s morning business

Where: Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Francisco (Complex Litigation Department), 400 McAllister St., Department 304, San Francisco, CA

If the motion is granted, the Court would not only forbid the ACCJC from de-accrediting City College until the conclusion of the case, but would acknowledge that the City is likely to prevail on the merits of the case should it go to trial.”

 

“Nevada ‘patient dumping’ led to crimes–including a murder–Sacramento Bee reports”

Sunday, December 15th, 2013

The latest:

“Nevada ‘patient dumping’ led to crimes–including a murder–Sacramento Bee reports

San Francisco City Attorney suing Nevada over improper discharge, busing practices says news ‘confirms our worst fears: that some of these trips led to tragedies’

SAN FRANCISCO, Dec. 15, 2013 /PRNewswire/ — In a major follow-up story on the State of Nevada’s controversial psychiatric patient discharge and busing practices, which critics have called “patient dumping,” the Sacramento Bee today reported that dozens of the more than 1,000 patients the newspaper was able to identify went on to commit crimes in locales to which Nevada officials bused them.  Included among the crimes committed by patients discharged from the state-run Rawson Neal Hospital in Las Vegas were one murder, another attempted murder, detonating explosives in a grocery store, failing to register as a sex offender, and an apparent suicide.  The report is available online at http://sacb.ee/1dCtXve.

San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera, whose office is currently pursuing a class action lawsuit against Nevada on behalf of California local governments to which indigent psychiatric patients were improperly bused, issued the following statement in response to today’s new revelations.

“Earlier this year, federal auditors identified multiple instances in which Rawson Neal patients were clinically diagnosed as homicidal and suicidal–and yet were still bused within hours to remote destinations,” said Herrera.  “Today’s news from the Sacramento Bee’s investigative report confirms our worst fears: that some of these trips led to tragedies.  We know from federal audits that Nevada officials bused at least one patient who was diagnosed as homicidal to San Francisco.  We also know that their clinical records reflect nothing about where that patient would stay, or access mental health services once here.  I hope this report is wake-up call to local governments nationwide that they, too, may be paying a heavy price for Nevada’s reprehensible conduct.”

Auditors from the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which is evaluating whether to revoke the hospital’s Medicare funding, included extensive reviews of Rawson Neal’s confidential clinical records.  Some of the resultant auditors’ reports, which have been released to the public, contain references to homicidal and suicidal patients whom Nevada officials discharged and bused out of state, including: the March 20, 2013 U.S. CMS Complaint Investigation; and the May 9, 2013 U.S. CMS EMTALA Complaint Investigation.  Both are among the records available for download on the San Francisco City Attorney’s website at http://sfcityattorney.org/index.aspx?page=519.

Herrera’s class action, filed in San Francisco Superior Court on Sept. 10, seeks a court-ordered injunction barring Nevada from similar patient discharge practices in the future, and reimbursement for San Francisco’s costs to provide care to the patients bused there.  If successful, San Francisco’s claim for reimbursement of the amounts expended to care for indigent patients bused from Nevada would benefit all California jurisdictions by setting a precedent for restitution to all jurisdictions able to demonstrate claims for damages and restitution substantially similar to San Francisco’s.  The suit additionally seeks injunctive relief that would apply statewide to prohibit Nevada from continuing to transfer non-residents into California without prior arrangements for patients’ care, or in a manner that violates state or federal standards governing patient discharges.

The case is: City and County of San Francisco v. State of Nevada et al., San Francisco Superior Court, filed Sept. 10, 2013.

SOURCE  City Attorney of San Francisco

City Attorney of San Francisco

Web Site: http://www.sfcityattorney.org

City Attorney Dennis Herrera Sues Former Supervisor Michael Yaki for More Than 70 Violations of City’s Lobbyist Ordinance

Wednesday, December 4th, 2013

Well, I suppose I can’t oppose enforcement of the Lobbyist Ordinance.

[And I'll mention that the "Yaki Compromise" would have had numerous salutary effects and would have saved lives lost due to the horrible Octavia Boulevard project.]

Herrera sues former Supervisor Yaki for more than 70 violations of City’s lobbyist ordinance

Lobbying for Rescue Air Systems, Inc. in the legislative process involving Fire Code revisions, Yaki ‘brazenly flouted a law with which he had no excuse to be unfamiliar’

SAN FRANCISCO (Dec. 4, 2013) — City Attorney Dennis Herrera today filed suit against former Supervisor Michael Yaki for more than 70 violations of the city’s lobbyist ordinance during the time Yaki was paid to advocate for the interests of his client, Rescue Air Systems, Inc., in the legislative process that revised San Francisco’s Fire Code earlier this year.  According to the complaint filed in San Francisco Superior Court this morning, “Yaki flouted the lobbyist ordinance in every way” by failing to register as a lobbyist, failing to disclose the amounts and sources of payments for lobbying, and failing to report his lobbying contacts.  The complaint, which was filed with 15 accompanying declarations from Board members, legislative aides, fire commissioners and S.F. Fire Department Chief Joanne Hayes-White, alleges that Yaki misrepresented his identity as a paid lobbyist when trying to set up meetings with five Supervisors.  

The city’s lobbyist ordinance provides for civil penalties of up to $5,000 per violation, or three times the amount of compensation scofflaw lobbyists fail to report — whichever is greater.  Yaki himself voted to support the ordinance in 2000 while a member of the Board of Supervisors.

“San Francisco’s Lobbyist Ordinance is a good government cornerstone that brings needed transparency to our local legislative process,” said Herrera.  “It imposes a simple requirement on lobbyists to disclose the nature and extent of work they do for their clients, and other paid advocates have managed to comply with it thousands of times.  Unfortunately, in the case we’ve filed today, the evidence is overwhelming that Mr. Yaki brazenly flouted a law with which he had no excuse to be unfamiliar.  Our lobbyist ordinance fulfills a very important function in our local government, and its aggressive enforcement is essential to the legitimacy of the law itself.” 

San Carlos, Calif.-based Rescue Air Systems, Inc. manufactures a patented “firefighter air replenishment system,” or FARS, which San Francisco’s Fire Code has required since 2004 for new buildings with a height of 75 feet or more.  When city policymakers undertook their periodic revision to the local Fire Code beginning last year, Fire Chief Hayes-White was among numerous city officials to oppose extending the FARS requirement because the San Francisco Fire Department had never used or trained on the system, and because firefighters “do not have confidence that the air coming from the FARS pipes is safe and breathable, or that the system has been checked and maintained on regular basis,” according to Hayes-White’s declaration.  

Yaki engaged in extensive lobbying efforts over a period of more than a year on Rescue Air Systems’ behalf to retain the FARS requirement.  According to the city’s complaint and supporting declarations, the former supervisor lobbied fire commissioners, S.F. Fire Department officials, staff in the Mayor’s Office, and members of the Board of Supervisors and legislative aides to extend the legal requirement for an air replenishment system that only one company — Yaki’s client — manufactured.  The City Attorney’s Office’s investigation secured evidence of at least 70 lobbying contacts, including more than 10 lobbying meetings with Supervisors and their legislative aides and more than 50 emails to city officials on behalf of Rescue Air Systems’ interests in the Fire Code revision process.  

Yaki’s lobbying efforts ultimately proved largely unsuccessful.  San Francisco’s Fire Commission passed a motion recommending that the FARS requirement be altered to offer developers a choice of whether to install FARS or a firefighter service elevator to facilitate oxygen delivery.  That recommendation was adopted as part of the San Francisco Fire Code amendments unanimously approved by the Board of Supervisors in September, which Mayor Ed Lee approved on Oct. 3, 2013.  

The case is: Dennis Herrera in his Official Capacity as San Francisco City Attorney v. Michael Yaki, San Francisco Superior Court, filed Dec. 4, 2013.  Due to the large file size of the 468-page court filing, the complete presskit with accompanying declarations is not being emailed but is available for download on the City Attorney’s website at: http://www.sfcityattorney.org/index.aspx?page=570.”

More Backbone for Our Invertebrate Ethics Commish: “Dennis Herrera Names Peter Keane to San Francisco Ethics Commission”

Monday, October 21st, 2013

In one fell swoop, our ethics commish has become 40%* vertebrate, a strong minority:

“Herrera names Peter Keane to San Francisco Ethics Commission. Law professor, former law school dean and Chief Assistant S.F. Public Defender brings ‘extraordinary professionalism and legal credentials’ to five-member panel

SAN FRANCISCO (Oct. 21, 2013)—City Attorney Dennis Herrera today named law professor and law school dean emeritus Peter Keane to the San Francisco Ethics Commission. Keane brings a wealth of experience in law and government ethics issues to the five-member panel, which is charged with serving citizens, public officials and political candidates through education and enforcement of ethics laws and regulations.

Keane currently serves as a professor of law and dean emeritus at Golden Gate University Law School, and as a visiting professor at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, where he teaches evidence, criminal procedure, constitutional law and professional responsibility. He served for 20 years as San Francisco’s Chief Assistant Public Defender, and was appointed by the Board of Supervisors in 2004 to serve a term on the San Francisco Police Commission. Keane, a former president of the Bar Association of San Francisco and vice-president of the State Bar of California, remains a highly sought-after legal commentator for local, national, and international news organizations, and has hosted numerous legal roundtables and radio programs, including “Keane on the Law” for KPIX Radio. He authored 1994’s Proposition 190, the successful statewide ballot measure that amended California’s Constitution to reform and restructure the Commission on Judicial Performance, the agency that oversees the California Judiciary.

“Peter Keane brings extraordinary professionalism and legal credentials to the San Francisco Ethics Commission, and I know San Franciscans will be extremely well served by his experience as an educator and veteran public servant,” Herrera said. “Peter’s dedication to the cause of justice and remarkable knowledge of government ethics will be an enormously valuable asset for the commission and the citizens it serves.”

The San Francisco Charter specifies that the City Attorney’s appointment to the Ethics Commission have a background in law as it relates to government ethics. Created by voters with the passage of Proposition K in November 1993, the Ethics Commission is empowered to, among other things, administer the City’s ethics laws, including its campaign contribution, conflict of interest, lobbying and whistle-blowing laws; to investigate alleged violations of those laws and to impose penalties; and to submit proposed ordinances directly to voters relating to government ethics.

Keane fills the vacancy created by the resignation of Herrera’s prior appointee, Jamienne S. Studley, who was recently appointed to serve as Deputy Undersecretary of the U.S. Department of Education in the Obama Administration. The unexpired term is set to lapse on Feb. 1, 2014.”

*Keane plus Benedict Y. Hur, Esq., vs., you know, three jellyfish.

San Bruno vs. San Carlos: Incompetent “PG&E Welcomes Opportunity To Demonstrate Safety Of Line 147″

Tuesday, October 8th, 2013

So let’s see here. According to PG&E, it doesn’t have to listen to any judges telling it to shut down any pipelines, no matter how dangerous the pipeline is and no matter how reckless PG&E employees and contractors behave.

In the words of John Malkovich, “WTF to that.”

You see, PG&E prefers to be regulated by the lapdog CPUC.

All right, here’s the latest, from PG&E’s point of view, just released:

“PG&E Welcomes Opportunity To Demonstrate Safety Of Line 147

SAN FRANCISCO, Oct. 8, 2013 — Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) today said it welcomes the opportunity to continue its work with the California Public Utilities Commission and San Mateo County communities to validate that the company has completed, as represented, safety-related work on transmission Line 147.

“We want to be a good neighbor to San Mateo County communities. Customers in these communities can be assured that Line 147 is safe and we look forward to the opportunity to document all the work that has gone into maintaining and operating this line safely. It is important that this validation be completed on an expedited basis because Line 147 is even more critical to our system once colder weather comes our way. We don’t want to be in a position of being unable to serve our customers because the pipeline is out of service,” said Nick Stavropoulos, the executive vice president responsible for leading the PG&E gas organization since June 2011.

PG&E on Friday was ordered by a San Mateo Superior Court to cease service to Line 147 after the City of San Carlos questioned the pipe’s safety.  The company complied with the order and today said it does not intend to return the line to service pending a review by the CPUC. However, the company today asked the Court to vacate the temporary injunction because it lacked the jurisdiction to make such a ruling.  In California, exclusive jurisdiction is given to the California Public Utilities Commission in order to avoid a patchwork of conflicting local standards and regulations.

Background

What is Line 147 and where is it located?

Line 147 consists of a 20-inch and 24-inch gas pipeline that runs for 3.8 miles between Highways 101 and 280 along Brittan Avenue in San Carlos (PG&E Gas Transmission Pipelines). Line 147 plays an important role in PG&E’s ability to safely and reliably serve more than 650,000 customers on the Peninsula. Line 147 is a cross-tie, connecting Line 101 on the eastern side of the Peninsula to Lines 109 and 132 that are centrally located on the Peninsula. Lines 101, 109 and 132 run south to north from Milpitas Terminal in Santa Clara County to PG&E’s San Francisco Gas Load Center.

What measures has PG&E taken to ensure the safe operation of Line 147?
Our work on Line 147 has included verifying records and pressurizing the line with high-pressure water to confirm its integrity. PG&E employees – on foot and in the air – have regularly checked this line, and all of PG&E’s lines, for leaks.

Following the San Bruno accident in September 2010, PG&E lowered the operating pressure on many pipelines – including Line 147 – as an interim safety measure. In addition, after the San Bruno accident, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recommended hydrostatic testing for pipelines that were previously not subject to a pressure test – a process whereby water is put into the line at nearly double, if not more, the pressure that the gas typically reaches – be performed across all gas utilities in the nation.

In October of 2011, Line 147 was hydrostatically tested, and passed. Because of this successful pressure test, PG&E asked the CPUC to allow it to restore the line’s operating pressure. This request included a large volume of documentation and evidence supporting this restoration of pressure.

After receiving approval from the CPUC, PG&E increased the operating pressure on Line 147 as necessary to meet winter load, but kept the operating pressure below the approved Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP). On May 24, 2012, after the winter months, PG&E again reduced the operating pressure on Line 147.

Additional measures taken to ensure safe operation of Line 147
In addition to the pressure test, PG&E has taken extensive actions since 2010 to ensure the continued safe operation of Line 147. These have included:

–  MAOP Validation: Using its Pipeline Features List, PG&E conducted a
systematic evaluation of the characteristics of Line 147 to validate the
MAOP of each pipeline component.

    —  Integrity Assessment: PG&E has completed baseline assessments for the
portions of Line 147 that are in densely populated areas, by performing
External Corrosion Direct Assessments in 2004 and/or 2009.
    —  Valve Replacement: A new 20-inch valve was installed on Line 147 near
Brittan Avenue in 2011 to allow PG&E to quickly stop the flow of gas and
isolate the line if necessary.
    —  Regular Maintenance:
–  Leak Surveys: All of Line147 was surveyed in April 2013. PG&E
continues to survey Line 147 for leaks on a regular basis.
—  Ground and Aerial Patrols: PG&E has conducted ground patrols of Line
147 in each of the first eight months of 2013 as well as in November
and December of 2012. During these patrols, PG&E gas employees walk
or drive the line to check for any leaks. PG&E also has conducted
aerial patrols on Line 147 every month from December 2012 to date,
except for February 2013. PG&E continues to patrol and monitor these
lines and records observations of any potential threats to the
integrity of the lines.
—  Anti-Corrosion Measures: Line 147 is equipped with cathodic
protection (CP), a system to safeguard against pipeline corrosion.
PG&E inspects its CP systems using pipe-to-soil reads, and annual
rectifier inspections. This electrical device impresses current on
the pipeline, which is a critical part of the corrosion control
system. PG&E continues to perform CP pipe-to-soil inspections on
Line 147 every other month.
A leak was discovered as part of routine work

In October 2012, as PG&E continued other work to improve the safety of its system, a leak was found on Line 147. At the same time, the company discovered discrepancies in the information that was originally submitted to support the pipeline’s MAOP.

As part of PG&E’s due diligence into the leak, a contractor raised questions about Line 147 in an email. That’s exactly what we encourage our people to do: raise any concerns about safety. All of the issues raised by the individual were seriously discussed.

PG&E also removed the section of pipe that leaked to confirm its mechanical and metallurgical properties via laboratory work, including a root cause analysis of the leak itself. That report concluded the leak was on base metal, not on a girth weld or the long seam weld and, importantly, that “no evidence of crack growth during service or hydro testing was detected.”

The results of this metallurgical test, the results of the 2011 hydrostatic pressure tests, and other steps PG&E has taken to ensure the integrity of its system, confirm that Line 147 is safe.

To learn more about PG&E’s commitment to pipeline safety, please visit www.pge.com/pipelinesafety.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, a subsidiary of PG&E Corporation (NYSE:PCG), is one of the largest combined natural gas and electric utilities in the United States. Based in San Francisco, with 20,000 employees, the company delivers some of the nation’s cleanest energy to 15 million people in Northern and Central California. For more information, visit: http://www.pge.com/about/newsroom and www.pgecurrents.com.

SOURCE  Pacific Gas and Electric Company

Pacific Gas and Electric Company

CONTACT: PG&E External Communications - (415) 973-5930

Web Site: http://www.pge-corp.com

Horrible PG&E Offers Up Excuses for Dragging Its Feet Shutting the Pipeline It Was Just Ordered to Shut Down

Saturday, October 5th, 2013

Sometimes it seems like PG&E is 100% run by MBAs. Anyway. here’s the latest in the ongoing San Carlos, CA fiasco:

“Pipeline Is Safe, PG&E Tells San Carlos Customers. Utility is taking steps to be able to safely and effectively shut off service to San Carlos pipeline in compliance with Superior Court order

SAN FRANCISCO, Oct. 5, 2013 — Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s (PG&E) today said customers in San Carlos, Calif., can be assured that a natural gas transmission pipeline in their community is being operated in a completely safe manner.”

Gee, PG&E, wasn’t that what you said before about the natural gas pipeline in the San Bruno community before your negligence killed eight people in 2010? Do you think it’s a common thing for utility to kill eight people at a time? Your assurances mean nothing, PG&E.

In addition, PG&E said that despite the line being operated safely, the company is taking steps to be able to safely and effectively shut off service to the pipeline in compliance with an October 4 temporary injunction order by the San Mateo Superior Court. PG&E expects to be in a position to shut off service as early as Monday or Tuesday. The plan must account for a number of important safety and customer impacts associated with shutting off service.

What’s all this “PGE said” crap? Aren’t you PG&E? So why don’t you just come out and make the claim to the world, instead of to the people of San Carlos? What’s the angle here? Anyway, this graf here sounds like you’re sassing the judge, doesn’t it? Like, despite some judge going stark raving bonkers, we’re going to do what the judge ordered us to do, eventually. And you’re not ready to shut the pipeline down now? You have to “take steps” first? OK  fine.

“We are working diligently to comply with the court order to safely and effectively shut off service to the pipeline. However, in the meantime, I want all customers to know that this pipeline has been demonstrated to be safe using the leading and most universally accepted standard for assessing the integrity of operating pipelines. Under no circumstances would we operate this pipeline in an unsafe condition and any suggestion to the contrary is simply wrong,” said Nick Stavropoulos, the executive vice president with responsibility for all PG&E gas operations since June 2011.

Yet a PG&E engineer asked, “Are We Sitting on a San Bruno Situation? Right? What about that, EVP Nick?

PG&E is responding to the court order by developing a plan to shut down the pipeline in a safe and effective fashion as quickly as possible.  The company noted that work is presently being conducted on Line 101 on the Peninsula – the pipeline stretches from South San Francisco to San Jose. This work must be completed before Line 147 can be taken out of service in order to avoid posing an unreasonable risk of loss of service to other customers.   In addition, the company is completing an assessment of gas service impact to customers in the San Carlos community, which will be taken into account as the company’s analysis concludes by Monday.

Uh, PG&E? “Safely” means to not kill any more people. “Effectively” means shutting down Line 147 100%. That’s it. Obviously this isn’t going to be convenient for you but aren’t you worried about being in contempt?

“To ensure safe operations on Line 147 in San Carlos, PG&E conducted hydrostatic pressure testing on the line in September 2011 to validate the safe operating pressure. Hydrostatic pressure testing, including a spike test, is widely considered among state and federal regulators the leading industry standard to ensure the safe operation of a gas transmission pipeline. In addition, a third party consulting firm conducted independent metallurgical testing after further questions were raised about the pipeline by a company employee. PG&E is requesting that San Carlos officials consult with state and federal pipeline safety officials to validate the actions taken by PG&E on Line 147. To learn more about PG&E’s commitment to pipeline safety, please visit www.pge.com/pipelinesafety.”

Blah blah blah. Hey PG&E! Why don’t you just shut down the fucking line now before you kill any more people?

All right, play us out of here, you incompetent boobs:

“Pacific Gas and Electric Company, a subsidiary of PG&E Corporation (NYSE:PCG), is one of the largest combined natural gas and electric utilities in the United States. Based in San Francisco, with 20,000 employees, the company delivers some of the nation’s cleanest energy to 15 million people in Northern and Central California. For more information, visit:  http://www.pge.com/about/newsroom/ and www.pgecurrents.com.

SOURCE  PG&E

PG&E

CONTACT: PG&E External Communications - (415) 973-5930

Web Site: http://www.pge-corp.com

PG&E Delivers a Big FU to Superior Court Judge George Miram – PG&E Engineer: “Are We Sitting on a San Bruno Situation?”

Saturday, October 5th, 2013

Isn’t it special when America’s worst large utility starts talking smack about pipelines and safety?

Yes it is.

San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee* might be in the pocket of PG&E, but not the authoritahs down San Carlos way.

How refreshing.

Here’s the latest:

“10/5/2013

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE  - PRESS RELEASE #10052013
Subject :

City Activates Limited Emergency Operations Center
Responds to State of Emergency
Contact : Jeff Maltbie, City Manager, City Manager (650) 802-4228
jmaltbie@cityofsancarlos.org
Greg Rubens, City Attorney, City Attorney (650) 593-3117×202
grubens@adcl.com

SAN CARLOS, CA, October 5, 2013 – At 11:30am on Saturday, October 4, 2013, the City of San Carlos activated the Emergency Operations Center in a limited capacity.

At 12:00pm today, the City Manager, City Attorney, San Carlos Police and Fire Departments, and Public Works met via conference call with representatives from PG&E Gas Operations, and State and County Office of Emergency Services, to discuss the current status of Natural Gas Transmission Line 147. Line 147 is a 20″ pipe that is 3.8 miles long and runs from the Interstate 280 corridor, through San Carlos, to the Highway 101 corridor, primarily down Brittan Avenue. The City estimates that some 5000 plus residents live near the transmission line.

Thursday, the City learned that some engineers within PG&E had stated in emails that line 147 may have been structurally compromised by pressure testing that the company permitted in 2011. The City requested PG&E voluntarily shut down line 147, until such time as a neutral third party could examine the data and evidence establishing the current physical condition of the pipe, and its safety. PG&E declined to shut down line 147, and the City was forced to seek an injunction to shut down the line. The injunction was obtained just before 5:00pm Friday.

As of the conclusion of today’s 12:00pm conference call with PG&E, company representatives confirmed that they continue to operate line 147 despite the existence of the injunction, but are analyzing the alleged impacts of shutting down the line. The analysis, according to PG&E, will be concluded by Monday morning, October 7, 2013. Mayor Bob Grassilli responded, stating this timeline is not at all satisfactory. “How can a company which claims safety is their top priority continue to ignore a court order issued to protect the public? It’s 80 degrees outside, PG&E customers in the Bay Area aren’t going to be without gas if line 147 were shut down. They shut down the line for several months in 2011 without impacting customers.” City Manager Jeff Maltbie reiterated for the residents of San Carlos that the City has no reason to believe physical conditions of the pipe have changed in the last few days. He stated, “We’ve declared a state of emergency and obtained a court order because we believe PG&E has incomplete and contradictory information about the safety status and physical make up of line 147. We believe PG&E has a responsibility to our community to shut the line down until they can show the public it’s safe.”

Vice Mayor Mark Olbert stated, “ Our residents deserve to live in their own homes without fear of a pipe line explosion. We are asking that the line be shut down until such time as PG&E can prove to the public in front of the CPUC that line 147 is safe and they know what they have in the ground here in San Carlos.”

*For various reasons. One of them is that he’s enamored by a PG&E lobbyist

Oh, So _That’s_ What the Central Subway Looks Like – A Giant Hole in the Ground at the Foot of Stockton – “Don’t Dig There!”

Thursday, June 27th, 2013

The Central Subway project might make sense politically (let’s take money from taxpayers from all over America to pay for a big project in our little-big city), but it doesn’t make sense from a transit standpoint.

Down down we go, under Market Street, under the MUNI Metro, and under the BART. When you pass by, you should crumple up all your ones and fives on you and throw them into this sinkhole because that’s what you’re already doing and what you will be doing far far into the future.

Click to expand

Oh, what’s that, “transit justice,” they say? Well, most of the victims of this project live in San Francisco and most of them aren’t caucasoids, so I don’t know what the fuck that phrase means in the context  of this ridiculous scheme.

The project promotes transit justice by providing reliable, efficient, and safe transit for those who live in Chinatown and those who want to visit Chinatown.”

Does City Attorney Dennis Herrera believe this bullshit? No. Does Supervisor Scott Wiener? No. How about closeted Republican Supervisor Mark Farrell? No. How about Board of Supervisors President David Chiu? No.

Oh well.

Don’t dig there and dig it elsewhere
You’re digging it round and it ought to be square
The shape of it is wrong, it’s much too long
And you can’t put a hole where a hole don’t belong

The Hole in the Ground” was a comic song which was written by Myles Rudge and composed by Ted Dicks. When recorded by Bernard Cribbins and released by EMI on the Parlophone label in 1962, it was a hit in the UK charts.[1][2]

The song is about a dispute between a workman digging a hole and an officious busybod y wearing a bowler hat. This exemplifies English class conflict of the era and Cribbins switches between a working class Cockney accent, in which he drops his aitches, and a middle class accent for the gentleman in the bowler hat.

The Mystery of This UberX Taxi Ad Chalked onto a Market Street Sidewalk

Thursday, June 20th, 2013

“If people did research into the scandal … the woman is the culprit.”

That bon mon came from so-called “girl-power” girl jennifer Siebel back in the day.

But it applies these days too, ’cause UberX sent a woman to sullie our sidewalks with unpermitted advertising art just yesterday.

As seen on Market betwixt 2nd and 3rd:

Click to expand

Now is this kind of thing a scandal? Well it sure was when Microsoft did it Down Mission Way back in 2010. Ah, memories.

Anyway, this is how it looked, les mise en scene:

And then, poof, this corporate ad got erased with a quickness after the Uber managed to figure things out, one supposes.

Oh corporate overlords, when will you learn?

Hey, are Ridesharing Companies Allowed to Chalk Advertisements onto the Sidewalks of Market Street? Check Out UberX

Wednesday, June 19th, 2013

Uh oh