Posts Tagged ‘lawsuit’
Friday, February 3rd, 2012
You know about the Bodie, CA ghost town, right? That’s the model for the NIMBYs of the Marina District and points beyond when they oppose activity in the Presidio.
Read below for the update.
Here’s the abandoned Main Post Theatre from a few years back – I’m sure it looks the same now. Do you know who supported the mofos listed below back in the late aughts by paying tens of thousands of dollars to oppose the use of the Main Post Theatre? How about the owners of neighboring movie theatres, how about that?
Click to expand
I don’t know, this crew doesn’t want new buildings and it doesn’t want the reuse of old buildings. Of course they can sue, in this town, the world capitol of NIMBYism, of course. But is it really true that there’s ”nearly unanimous public opposition” against lodges (or inns or hotels) in national parks?
On It Goes:
Press Release (Also distributed via Business Wire 2/2/2012)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Feb. 2, 2012
For more information contact:
Gary Widman, (President, Presidio Historical Assn) 415/435-0360, gwidman@mindspring.com
Becky Evans (Sierra Club/SF) 415/775-3309, rebecae@earthlink.net
Deborah Sivas (Stanford Law School, Environmental Law Clinic) 650/725.8571, lyndaj@stanford.edu
Whitney Hall, (VP, Presidio Historical Assn) 707/778-6975, whithall@comcast.net
www.presidioassociation.org
PRESIDIO HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION, SIERRA CLUB SUE SF PRESIDIO TRUST TO HALT NEW CONSTRUCTION
San Francisco….The Presidio Historical Association (PHA) and Sierra Club filed a Federal lawsuit in U.S. District Court late Wednesday to halt proposed new construction on the Main Post of the Presidio of San Francisco, a historic national park in San Francisco. The lawsuit charges the park’s managing Federal agency, the Presidio Trust, with failing to comply with the Presidio Trust Act, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).
“The Presidio Trust has violated these statutes in its push to convert the most historically significant site in the Presidio into a luxury hotel despite nearly unanimous public opposition,” said PHA President Gary Widman. “We have no choice but to file this lawsuit to protect this national park, which belongs to all Americans.”
The suit sets a precedent as the first to question activities in a national park that is not managed by the National Park Service.
Recently, the Presidio Trust’s Board of Directors changed restrictive zoning policies that protected the Main Post until now in order to permit construction of a 14-building hotel, a large addition to a historic theater and other structures, a move strongly opposed by numerous nonprofit organizations and private citizens.
“The Sierra Club has protected national parks since 1892, and played a major role in the creation of the Presidio National Park and Golden Gate National Recreation Area,” said Sierra Club spokeswoman Becky Evans. “The unique historic value of the Presidio Main Post should not be sacrificed to build an unnecessary hotel.”
The Sierra Club won a 1986 Federal lawsuit that enjoined the US Army from undertaking new construction in the Presidio, a military base at that time. “By filing this suit, the Sierra Club seeks affirmation of that 1986 decision and seeks the Presidio Trust’s compliance with the Presidio Trust Act and other environmental laws,” Evans said.
The lawsuit asserts that the Presidio Trust ignored its duty to “[protect] the Presidio from development and uses which would destroy the historic…character of the area…and other cultural resources”, and failed to limit new construction to one-for-one replacement of demolished structures as required by the Presidio Trust Act.
The plaintiffs also claim that the Trust’s NEPA process was flawed and that the Trust failed to minimize adverse impacts in its National Historic Landmark District to the maximum extent possible as required by the NHPA.
The Presidio Trust Act (PTA) of 1996 recognized and protected the 1,491-acre Presidio of San Francisco as a unique place of history and open space in a densely populated urban center. The Main Post, established in 1776, was designated a National Historic Landmark District in 1962. The Presidio was home to Spanish, Mexican, and American military operations for nearly 220 years until the base became a national park within the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) in 1994. More than 30,000 Americans veterans and their families are buried in the Presidio’s National Cemetery, on the western side of the Main Post.
The nonprofit Presidio Historical Association has helped to preserve and present the Presidio’s history for more than 50 years. The watchdog group recently gained attention for successfully fighting the Presidio Trust’s plan to build a massive, contemporary art museum on the historic Main Post.
The Stanford Law School’s Environmental Law Clinic is representing the Presidio Historical Association and the Sierra Club in the lawsuit.
###
The complaint is posted at http://presidioassociation.org/issues.htm
Case# CV12-00522, US District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division
Presidio Historical Association
P.O. Box 29163
San Francisco, CA 94129
(415) 752-2270
www.presidioassociation.org
Tags: 2012, arrested decay, association, bay area, Becky Evans, bodie, ca, california, CV12-00522, Deborah Sivas, Environmental Law Clinic, Gary Widman, ghost, lawsuit, president, Presidio Historical, Presido, San Francisco, sierra club, Stanford Law School, town, trust, Whitney Hall
Posted in parks | 2 Comments »
Wednesday, December 28th, 2011
I’ll tell you, I don’t know how good your odds would be if you sued the maker of your car because you felt it didn’t meet the EPA mileage estimate, but this lady in SoCal appears to have a good shot.
I’ll tell you, Honda Civic Hybrid owners, The System wants you to take some worthless $100 coupon or whatever to compensate you for Honda messing up. The System doesn’t want you opting out of the national class action settlement.
Click to expand
Choose or lose, Honda owners.
“HONDA ORDERED TO STAND TRIAL ON JANUARY 3rd
Normally a small claims case is just that – small – in fact, barely an annoyance to large corporations because damages are limited. However, one small claims case pending in the Los Angeles area is certain to get a lot of attention because it will be going to trial just when approximately 200,000 Honda Civic Hybrid owners are opening their mailboxes to find notices of a proposed class action settlement where the Honda owners would get no more than $200 cash and the lawyers would get $8.474 million!
One disappointed Honda Civic Hybrid owner in California who got wind of the tiny settlement offer in advance chose to opt-out of the class and paid $75 to file a small claims case instead. The trial was set for January 3rd, six weeks before the 200,000 Civic owners are set to decide if they want to stick with the class action or file their own suits which can often be done quickly and cheaply without lawyers. (Think Judge Judy where regular people get up and give a 15 minute version of their complaint in plain English and then get a decision from the court). This case will be one of the first under the new 2012 law allowing individuals to sue for up to $10,000 in small claims court in California.
Honda has attempted four different legal maneuvers to postpone the trial until after the deadline had passed for Hybrid owners to opt-out of the class action, but the Judge said “no” all four times and the trial will proceed as originally scheduled on January 3rd. If the Plaintiff in that case wins and gets awarded thousands of dollars in damages, then Honda will have a lot of explaining to do to justify paying other Hybrid owners just enough to cover a few tanks of gas instead of replacing the defective hybrid batteries at $3,000 a pop – roughly $600,000,000.00!”
Tags: $10, 000, 10000, 2011, attorneys, batteries, bay area, california, car, cars, civic, court, electric, EPA, gallons, gas, Heather Peters, Honda, honda civic, hybrid, Judge, lawsuit, lawyers, mileage, mpr, opt, opt in, opt out, per gallon, San Francisco, settlement, small claims, sue, wOMAN
Posted in cars | No Comments »
Thursday, December 22nd, 2011
I think that’s the right way to describe it.
Here’s the news of the day:
“Attention Golden Gate Law School graduates We intend to sue 15 law schools throughout the country — including 4 in California — shortly after the New Year for allegedly inflating their employment data. One of the schools we intend to sue is the Golden Gate University School of Law (we’ve just added them to our list). Our general rule is that we won’t sue a school unless we have at least three name plaintiffs, and while we’ve secured the requisite number for most of the schools, we still have not reached that number for Golden Gate Law. If you have graduated from the school in the past few years and would potentially be interested in serving as a class representative please visit my law firm’s website (http://www.anziskalaw.com/) to learn more about the Law School Litigation or give me a call at 914-216-3540. Now is the time to make your voices heard and finally hold law schools accountable. Regards. . .David”
Actually, maybe it’s good news that this attorney needs to hunt on the craigslist for GGU grads. (You’d think that former students would be coming out of the woodwork already during this Great Recession.)
Oh, and USF too – you’re gonna get sued as well.
The schools on the list currently:
“1) Albany Law School
2) Brooklyn Law School
3) Hofstra Law School
4) Pace University School of Law
5) St. John’s University School of Law
6) Widener University School of Law
7) University of Baltimore School of Law
8 ) Florida Coastal School of Law
9) Chicago-Kent College of Law
10) DePaul University School of Law
11) John Marshall School of Law
12) California Western School of Law
13) Southwestern Law School
14) Golden Gate University School of Law
15) University of San Francisco School of Law”
That’s it so far. To Be Continued…
Tags: 2011, 914-216-3540, Albany, anziskalaw, attorney, bay area, Brooklyn, california, California Western, Chicago-Kent, college of law, data, DAVID ANZISKA, DePaul University, employment, find, Florida Coastal, ggu, golden gate, golden gate university, graduates, Hofstra, jobs, John Marshall, law school, Law School Litigation, lawsuit, lawyers, litigation, market, mission, Pace, Pace University, plaintiffs, rosy, San Francisco, School of Law, second, south, southwestern, St. John’s, street, university, University of Baltimore, university of san francisco, USF, Widener
Posted in education, employment, law | 1 Comment »
Tuesday, December 6th, 2011
San Francisco resident Jon Sieker has a beef with AT&T.
See?
“You accidentally gave me a White and Yellow pages this year after I signed up to not receive either of them”
Here’s the proof:
Click to expand – via Jon Sieker
And here’s the note he just sent to Ma Bell, cause you see, Jon has Internet access:
“Dear AT&T,
2 years ago I was so disappointed by the waste that the Yellow and White pages caused, caring about my community and environment, I searched online for what I could do to minimize the waste. I was very happy to find your web site that allowed me to opt out and not receive a White Pages and Yellow pages to save on the waste. Thank you for providing this option as I have The Internet and don’t need a physical phone directory. The Internet gives me all of the information I need including your yellow pages site. I felt great to find and fill out the form that allowed me to NOT RECEIVE both yellow and white pages. I felt I was doing something to save the environment. Imagine my surprise when I was accidentally given both the yellow pages and white pages today.
Please let me know what I should do with the unwanted publications. It would be best if you came and picked them up from me and passed them on to some unfortunate soul with no internet.
As a side not, it would be great if your delivery agents didn’t litter my street and community with these unwanted relics from the past. I have photos of the litter if you are interested or don’t believe me. I would be happy to pass these photos on to you or any of the other organizations copied on this email.
Thank you for your help. I look forward to the solution you provide.”
O.K. then.
Now, do you think that the National Opt Out Program would work any better?
I don’t.
Simply, nobody in San Francisco wants telephone books anymore.
So, telephone book industry, why not just tell your Santas to pass over the 415 when you send them out delivering across America this holiday season?
Just asking…
Tags: 2011, assn, association, at&t, bay area, book, buggy whip, california, change, changed, delivery, environment, group, horse throttle, in, industry, internet, It's a trap!, jon sieker, law, lawsuit, letter, local search association, localsearch, localsearch association, name, opt, opt in, opt out, out, pages, rachel gordon, San Francisco, scam, ShoppyBag, telephone, trade, useless, wasteful, website, white, yellow, Yellow Pages Association, yp, ypassociation
Posted in environment | No Comments »
Friday, November 11th, 2011
Ah let’s review.
- Remember when a mid-level PG&E employee* threatened me at an event sponsored by the Presidio Trust, told me that I should take one of my PG&E-related posts down because, I was done told, “It would be your interest to take that post down?” And I was like, well what does that mean? Oh that’s right, Gentle Reader, you don’t remember, but I do. Strike One.
- And remember when PG&E killed eight people near SFO last year? Strike Two.
- And remember when Mayor Ed Lee* recently started going on about how “City Family” member “PG&E is a great local company who gets it?” Strike Three.
Oh well.
Now, here’s the scene last night at 7:00 PM as I was swinging by the FiDi to pick up my special lady friend at an area law firm. Workers were just setting up the cones. And then a paramedic was telling me, “This one isn’t PG&E’s fault – somebody was digging.” Well yeah, but that somebody was PG&E itself:
Click to expand
Isn’t it ironic, dont’cha think?
Oh, and this was all right in front of Pacific Gas & Electric Building, one of San Francisco’s tallest, you know, at 77 Beale:
“The Pacific Gas & Electric Building is a 150 m (490 ft) skyscraper located at 77 Beale and Mission streets in the financial district of San Francisco, California. Completed in 1971, the 34 story building is headquarters for Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the main utility provider for Northern California, and has been host to a nesting pair of Peregrine Falcons since 1987. List of tallest buildings in San Francisco“
Isn’t it ironic again, dont’cha think?
Hey, PG&E, why don’t you eat your own dog food and CALL BEFORE YOUR DIG?
Via Daedrius
The easy-to-remember phone number is 811, you remember?
In short, I just can’t believe how much you suck, PG&E.
Straighten up and fly right PG&E.
*A member of San Francisco’s dominant political faction (aka Downtown) along with fellow members Willie Brown, Chamber of Commerce, Gavin Newsom, real estate interests, PG&E, and you know, all those non-profits, among others.
Tags: 2010, 2011, 77 Beale, 811, area, bay area, before, california, call, central subway, chevy volt, city attorney, city family, CPUC, dig, digging, ed lee, election, explosion, exposion, gas, gas pipe, gavin newsom, Giraffes and Elephants, hearing, HQ, lawsuit, Lee, market, Mayor, Mayor Ed, mission, November 10, ntsb, pacific gas & electric, parking control officer, pg&e, Pigs, Pipeline, san bruno, San Francisco, soma, south, street, sue, sued, sueing, utility, you
Posted in paranormal | No Comments »
Wednesday, November 2nd, 2011
[UPDATE: Senator Leland Yee is on the case this AM - he's doing a presser involving this latest allegation. (I guess it's too late to call this an October Surprise, and frankly, it's not all that surprising neither. Let's call it a November Expectation. Brace yourself for more.) Oh, and Leland is onto some Chinatown voting sting operation as well.
And there's this: "Statement from Chiu Campaign on Money Laundering Allegations - SAN FRANCISCO (November 2, 2011): Addisu Demissie, spokesman for the David Chiu for Mayor campaign, released the following statement about a San Francisco Chronicle report of potential money laundering by supporters of Mayor Ed Lee:
"This is now the fourth allegation of illegal conduct by Mayor Lee's supporters, and it should be investigated fully by the District Attorney and appropriate authorities,” Demissie said. “With six days to go before Election Day, it will be up to the voters to decide whether this kind of bullying, pay-to-play politics is what they want to see at City Hall for the next 4 years. David is going to spend the last 6 days of this race talking about why he represents a new generation of leadership for San Francisco that will stand tough against the special interests and shake things up at City Hall."
Paid for by David Chiu for Mayor 2011, P.O. Box 641541, San Francisco, CA 94164, FPPC##1337108]
Well, it looks like early-rising City Attorney Dennis Jose Herrera is the first one out of the gates to follow up on today’s piece from San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writers John Coté and Heather Knight.
Testify, DJH:
“Too many of Ed Lee’s supporters act as though they’re above the law — on money laundering, on ballot tampering, and more – and Ed Lee isn’t strong enough to stop it.
Amen.
Earlier this year, Ed Lee was picked unanimously to be an Interim Mayor. He wasn’t picked to be a Reformer. He’ll never be a Reformer.
In Ed Lee’s world, the notorious Willie Brown Administration deserves an A+, Rose Pak is not a cancer on Chinatown, and corner-cutting PG&E (“KABOOM!“) is simply “a great local corporation” and a “great company that gets it.”
Oh well.
Is Ed Lee Breaking Bad? Has the City Family corrupted him? Or has he corrupted the City Family? A little of both?
Click to expand
All the deets:
“Herrera calls on FPPC to join D.A. in investigating new Ed Lee campaign money laundering charge - CitiApartments’ former eviction goon led reimbursement-for-donation scheme, suggesting political payback for City Attorney’s 2006 tenant-protection lawsuit
SAN FRANCISCO (Nov. 2, 2011) — City Attorney Dennis Herrera this morning called on the state Fair Political Practices Commission to join District Attorney George Gascón in reviewing new allegations reported in today’s San Francisco Chronicle that Ed Lee’s mayoral campaign received donations that appear to have been illegally laundered to skirt San Francisco $500 per donor contribution maximum.[1] Andrew Hawkins, a property services manager whose harrowing tenant intimidation tactics were central to Herrera’s lawsuit five years ago against the Lembi Group landlords’ once high-rolling CitiApartments empire, promised reimbursements to at least sixteen employees in exchange for maximum contributions to Ed Lee’s mayoral campaign at an Oct. 18, 2011 fundraiser, according to the Chronicle.
It is the second major allegation of campaign money laundering to benefit Ed Lee’s campaign. The first, involving GO Lorrie’s airport shuttle, is the subject of separate investigations by Gascón’s office and the FPPC, the state commission responsible to investigate and impose penalties for violations of the California Political Reform Act. Such schemes have been prosecuted as felonies in California for conspiring to evade campaign contribution limits, and for making campaign contributions under false names.
“I think San Franciscans have now seen enough,” said City Attorney Dennis Herrera. “Too many of Ed Lee’s supporters act as though they’re above the law — on money laundering, on ballot tampering, and more — and Ed Lee isn’t strong enough to stop it. If this is how they behave before an election, just imagine how they’ll behave after the election, if Ed Lee wins. This scheme is clearly a bid for political payback by CitiApartments henchmen for my litigation to protect tenants five years ago. It is patently illegal, and I call on the FPPC to join the District Attorney in investigating.”
Hawkins is listed in Ed Lee’s campaign disclosures as the owner of Archway Property Services. As the one-time head of CitiApartments’ “tenant relocation program,” the gun-carrying Hawkins is reported to have coerced more than 2,500 tenants out of their rent-controlled units, and once boasted in civil court testimony, “I run people out of their apartments for a living. It’s what I do.“
Several recipients of Hawkins’ email invitation to an Oct. 18 event on Russian Hill made contributions to Ed Lee’s campaign on the same date. All contributed the maximum $500.
Herrera sued the CitiApartments residential rental property behemoth in Aug. 2006 for an array of unlawful business and tenant harassment practices, which sought to dispossess long-term residents of their rent-controlled apartments. The coerced vacancies freed the company to make often-unpermitted renovations to units, and then re-rent them to new tenants at dramatically increased market rates. The illegal business model enabled CitiApartments, Skyline Realty and other entities under the sway of real estate family patriarch Frank Lembi to aggressively outbid competitors for residential properties throughout San Francisco for several years — before lawsuits and a sharp economic downturn forced the aspiring empire into bankruptcies, foreclosures and receiverships.
A 2009 San Francisco Magazine feature story on the Lembi real estate empire[2] described Andrew Hawkins as “a burly former nightclub bouncer who headed up CitiApartments’ relocation program.” Hawkins reportedly led teams as large as 14 full-time employees, according to the report, and the company estimated that “Hawkins relocated more than 2,500 tenants.” An earlier exposé in 2006 by the San Francisco Bay Guardian[3] cited civil court testimony in which Hawkins boasted to one tenant’s family member, “I run people out of their apartments for a living. It’s what I do.”
# # #
SOURCES:
Tags: 2006, 2011, 500, Addisu Demissie, airport, Andrew Hawkins, apartments, aprtment, Archway, Archway Property Services, ballot, bankruptcies, bankruptcy, bay area, bay guardian, bouncer, breaking bad, building, california, campaign, chinatown, chronicle, Citi, CitiApartments, city apartments, city attorney, city family, commission, da', David Chiu, dennis herrera, Dennis Jose Herrera, District Attorney, donations, ed, ed lee, edwin, Employees, fair political practices commission, false, felonies, foreclosure, fppc, fundraiser, George Gascón, Go Lorrie's, group, gun, harassment, heather knight, henchmen, illegal, intimidation, John Coté, landlord, landlords, laundered, laundering, law, lawsuit, Lee, leland yee, lembi, Lembi Group, limits, long-term, maximum, Mayor, mayoral, names, nightclub, Oct. 18, pay-to-play, penalties, pg&e, political, promised, property, realty, receivership, reimbursements, reporters, Rose Pak, russian hill, San Francisco, schemes, services, shuttle, skyline, spokesman, Staff, state, tactics, tampering, tenant, utility, violations, willie brown, writer's
Posted in politics | 1 Comment »
Friday, September 2nd, 2011
Uh, telephone book industry, what you don’t seem to realize is that the vast majority of your “customers” in the 415 don’t want your product.
That’s why when you deliver them, they end up hanging around exactly where you left them for days or weeks…
…or months. See?
The only people who like telephone books in the bay area are the people who make (not very much) money delivering them:
Now, telephone book industry, wouldn’t you prefer it if your customers actually wanted your product? That’s how opt-in works.
I know you all talk about opt-out, but what I don’t think you all realize is that most of the books you deliver go into the recycling without ever being opened. (This might not be applicable in Omaha, Neb., but it’s certainly true in the 415.)
And I know the bidnesses what advertise in your books are reassured by all the hullabaloo of delivery, but you’d be better off just delivering your product directly to recycling bins and, letting your true customers just dig them out, you know, if they want.
All right, see you Hell, dinosaur telephone book industry!
Tags: 2011, assn, association, bay area, book, buggy whip, california, change, changed, delivery, group, horse throttle, in, industry, It's a trap!, law, lawsuit, local search association, localsearch, localsearch association, name, opt, opt in, opt out, out, pages, rachel gordon, San Francisco, scam, ShoppyBag, telephone, trade, useless, wasteful, website, yellow, Yellow Pages Association, yp, ypassociation
Posted in paranormal | 2 Comments »
Thursday, September 1st, 2011
Now whatever you do, never “opt out” of useless telephone book delivery. (“It’s a trap!”)
‘Cause that’s just what they want you to do. (Just like ShoppyBag, that scam, which wants you to “opt out” – it wants you to do anything with it except ignore it, which is what everybody should do and then the scam would simply go away. )
No no, just wait for Nature to take its course, just wait for San Francisco’s “opt-in” law to take effect. Easy peasy.
Now check it, Rachel Gordon’s bit today shows us the new name of the phone book industry’s horrible, wasteful, useless, trade group. See? It’s now called the “LOCALSEARCH ASSOCIATION.”
Isn’t that cute? This lobbying group thinks its Google!
(You know, back in the day the buggy whip industry should have changed its product’s name to “horse throttle,” right? The better to compete with the nascent vehicular competition…)
That’s it, keep on making us laugh, Yellow Pages Association.
Tags: 2011, assn, association, bay area, book, buggy whip, california, change, changed, delivery, group, horse throttle, in, industry, It's a trap!, law, lawsuit, local search association, localsearch, localsearch association, name, opt, opt in, opt out, out, pages, rachel gordon, San Francisco, scam, ShoppyBag, telephone, trade, useless, wasteful, website, yellow, Yellow Pages Association, yp, ypassociation
Posted in environment, paranormal | 1 Comment »
Tuesday, August 30th, 2011
Here’s the news of the day from City Attorney Dennis Herrera:
“Herrera says NTSB hearing on San Bruno blast offers ‘devastating indictment’ against PG&E, regulators - Findings strongly support Herrera’s July 14 notice of intent to sue CPUC, PHMSA regulators
SAN FRANCISCO (Aug. 30, 2011) — City Attorney Dennis Herrera has issued the following statement in reaction to today’s National Transportation Safety Board meeting in Washington, D.C. to discuss and adopt the pipeline Accident Report relating to the natural gas pipeline explosion and fire that occurred in San Bruno, Calif. on September 9, 2010.
“NTSB’s report offers a devastating indictment, not just against PG&E, but also the California Public Utilities Commission and federal regulators for their failure to reasonably enforce safety standards,” Herrera said. “These conclusions point to the lax regulation that has enabled PG&E to flout regulations and safe gas pipeline operating practices for decades. NTSB’s report thoroughly supports my office’s allegations in my notice of intent to sue and in our comments to the CPUC. It makes clear that both agencies have a great deal of work to do to better regulate gas transmission pipelines and protect public safety. I commend the NTSB staff for its thorough investigation and comprehensive findings, and NTSB members for unflinchingly adopting the staff’s recommendations.”
More than half of the recommendations adopted by the NTSB today are directed at government entities — including CPUC, DOT, PHMSA, and the Governor of California. NTSB has indicated its intent to publish its synopsis of findings, probable cause, and recommendations at the following URL following today’s meeting:
On July 14, 2011, Herrera took the first step toward suing the California Public Utilities Commission and federal regulators for not reasonably enforcing gas pipeline safety standards as required by the federal Pipeline Safety Act. The notice of intent to sue is a legally-required precursor to civil litigation by San Francisco, which will seek a federal court order to compel the CPUC and the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration to enforce federal pipeline safety standards in an effective manner.
PG&E runs three major gas transmission lines — including the very same line that failed catastrophically in San Bruno last year, and another that dates back to the 1930s — under nine high-population-density neighborhoods in San Francisco where hundreds of thousands of people live and work, according to Herrera’s 14-page letter. Major facilities threatened by the failure of these inadequately inspected transmission lines include numerous schools and recreation centers, San Francisco City College, and San Francisco General Hospital, which typically contains more than 5,000 acute care patients and visitors, medical professionals and staff. Significant stretches of Highway 101 and Highway 280 additionally run over the antiquated lines.
Herrera’s July 14, 2011 notice letter outlines San Francisco’s prospective legal action, detailing the manner in which CPUC and PHMSA: (1) failed to enforce federal regulations mandating that pipeline operators maintain adequate records to enable the operator and regulators to ensure that pipeline conditions are not a threat to public safety; (2) failed to enforce federal regulations requiring that gas transmission pipeline operators identify all “high consequence areas” in which pipeline failure would result in significant harm to people and damage to property; (3) failed to enforce federal regulations mandating inspections of gas transmission pipeline integrity for pipelines susceptible to manufacturing and construction defects or other risks; (4) failed to ensure that CPUC had staff sufficient in number, training, and experience to adequately fulfill its obligations to regulate and enforce pipeline safety regulations; (5) failed to ensure that integrity management inspections of gas transmission pipelines in California are performed with sufficient frequency and thoroughness to ensure pipeline safety; and (6) failed to require PG&E to correct violations found in audits of PG&E’s integrity management practices.”
Man, that PG&E has issues, huh?
In lighter news, Rob Reiner explicates his ardor for Dennis Jose:
“I’ve been active in statewide politics for decades. I chaired the Prop 10 campaign in the 1990s to create the groundbreaking “First 5 California” program, which delivers critical services to millions of children from birth to age 5. I took on big developers to save our state parks and wildlife. And I fought big tobacco to protect public health, and to reduce its influence in Hollywood.
But it was as co-founder of the American Foundation for Equal Rights—which initiated the federal legal challenge to Prop 8 that eliminated marriage equality in California—that I had the opportunity to work closely with San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera.
And that’s why I’m endorsing Dennis Herrera for Mayor of San Francisco.
Not all San Franciscans fully appreciate the extent to which California looks to their city for strong, progressive leadership on issues that make a real difference in people’s lives—like civil rights, the environment and consumer protection. But we do.
That’s why what’s at stake in the 2011 San Francisco Mayor’s race is so important to all Californians. Dennis has a serious plan to create jobs and make San Francisco a model of a 21st century city. His proven record of leadership and professionalism is best suited to continue San Francisco’s honored tradition as a beacon of innovation and progress.
Will you join me in supporting Dennis Herrera by making a donation of $10, $35 or $100 today?
Dennis Herrera filed the first government lawsuit in American history to challenge state marriage laws that discriminate against lesbian and gay couples. His principled advocacy for the broad societal imperative of ending any-LGBT discrimination continues to make a persuasive difference in the courts in our fight for marriage equality.
A strong advocate for early childhood services, Dennis shares my conviction that government can and should do more to support schools, children, parents and teachers. And his record of accomplishment on consumer protection, the environment and public integrity is unmatched
Dennis has the best plan to make San Francisco a model 21st century city—and to continue San Francisco’s tradition as a beacon of innovation and progress.
I believe that Dennis is the right choice for San Francisco. Will you help him become San Francisco’s next Mayor by making a donation of $10, $35 or $100 today?
Thank you so much for your support of Dennis.
Best,
Rob Reiner
P.S. There are only 70 days left until the election and every dollar makes a difference, can you chip in and donate $10, $35 or $100 today?“
Only 70 days?
Wow.
Tags: 2010, 2011, bay area, california, city attorney, CPUC, dennis herrera, election, explosion, gas pipe, hearing, lawsuit, Mayor, meathead, ntsb, pg&e, Pipeline, rob reiner, san bruno, San Francisco, sue, sued, sueing
Posted in politics | No Comments »
Monday, August 22nd, 2011
Here’s another victory for San Francisco’s Happy Warrior, City Attorney Dennis Herrera.
All the deets, below.
“Herrera secures $5 million settlement, tough consumer safeguards against BofA credit card subsidiary
Three-and-a-half-year-old case continues to win industry reforms nationwide to protect credit card holders in debt disputes
SAN FRANCISCO (August 22, 2011) — City Attorney Dennis Herrera today announced a major settlement agreement with the credit card subsidiary of the nation’s largest bank, Bank of America, in his three-and-a-half-year-old litigation against a so-called “arbitration mill,” which banks engaged to virtually assure they prevail over their credit card holders in binding arbitration proceedings. Herrera’s suit sought injunctive relief and penalties. The settlement secures $5 million for City taxpayers, and imposes tough, enforceable protections for California’s credit card holders in their debt disputes with FIA Card Services.
Under the terms of Herrera’s settlement noticed with the San Francisco Superior Court today, FIA will make a one-time settlement payment in the amount of $5 million, and agree not to arbitrate consumer credit card collections in California for two years. The credit card subsidiary has also agreed to not use the National Arbitration Forum in arbitrations with its card holders for at least five years, and to refrain from enforcing unconfirmed arbitration awards obtained through NAF, which was among the nation’s most notoriously anti-consumer arbitrators when Herrera filed his litigation in March 2008. FIA is also prohibited from barring consumer class actions challenging FIA’s practices. Herrera won a preliminary injunction against FIA early in his litigation, in April 2008, to halt the company’s practice of disclosing Social Security numbers and other private information of its customers in publicly available court records in San Francisco.
“This is a very significant settlement — not just because of its blockbuster dollar amount, but because it’s another milestone in a case that has helped reform the credit card industry’s abusive practices,” said Herrera. “For most consumers in debt disputes, binding arbitration was a sham that never gave consumers a chance — and major banks knew it. Credit card holders were often also victimized by outrageous attorneys’ fees and costs, which were illegally tacked onto arbitration awards against them. I’m very proud of a public interest lawsuit that continues to send a powerful message to the financial industry, and that has caused even the nation’s largest financial institutions to reform their conduct.”
Herrera initially filed his litigation against FIA Card Services and the National Arbitration Forum in March 2008 for violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law. The litigation would soon after feature prominently in a BusinessWeek cover story entitled “Banks vs. Consumers (Guess Who Wins),” in June 2008, which relied on key facts from San Francisco’s case, including statistics showing that consumers prevailed in just 30 cases out of more than 18,000 arbitrations brought by businesses that went to a hearing — less than two-tenths of one percent.
In July 2009, the National Arbitration Forum announced that it would cease handling consumer credit card arbitration matters after a state attorney general followed Herrera’s lead in filing a separate consumer protection case. A month later, Bank of America agreed to drop its longstanding requirement that consumers with credit card disputes enter into binding arbitration. That change by the nation’s largest bank freed millions of credit card consumers from binding arbitration requirements, enabling them to pursue civil actions in neutral courts. Herrera’s case remains in active litigation with NAF, which his office continues to pursue for financial penalties and other relief.
The City Attorney’s case is: People of the State of California v. National Arbitration Forum, Inc.; FIA Card Services et al., San Francisco Superior Court No. 473-569, filed March 24, 2008.”
Tags: 2011, 473-569, anti-consumer, arbitration, arbitrations, attorneys, bank of america, banks, bay area, california, card, court, credit card, fees, FIA Card Services, financial, holders, illegal, illegally, inc, law, lawsuit, mill, NAF, National Arbitration Forum, People of the State of California v. National Arbitration Forum, San Francisco, sham, Social Security numbers, superior, Unfair Competition
Posted in law | No Comments »
