I don’t know what’s behind this:
(Yeah, but even so, you just do a “no endorsement” deal, right?)
And this is Chuck Reed’s daughter, the 39-year-old the Air Force Lt. Col? Hatchi matchi!
I’ll tell you, Supervisor Scott Wiener, for one, lives in fear of running afoul of these people, the very same people who vandalize the “no dogs allowed” signs our Feds put up on certain parts of our Federal lands:
Click to expand
Our Feds wonder why Bay Aryans can’t abide the rules the rest of America accepts with no trouble at all…
So look out, little Western Snow Plover. The dog pacs of the world say that you’re nothing special and that, in fact, you don’t even exist – they say there’s no such thing as a Western plover anything. OK fine.
As seen at Ocean Beach near Taraval, 1200mm focal length:
Good luck, little plover.
All right, it’s on, the defense of Prop B (2014) is on:
SAN FRANCISCO (July 15, 2014) — The California State Lands Commission today sued San Francisco to invalidate Proposition B, an initiative measure passed in the June 3 election that requires voter approval for waterfront development height increases on property owned or controlled by the Port of San Francisco. The legal challenge filed in San Francisco Superior Court contends that the California legislature specifically intended to prohibit local voters from exercising authority over bay and coastal public trust lands, strictly limiting management of state tidelands to designated trustees. In its legal action today, the State Lands Commission argues that the sole trustee responsible for sovereign tidelands in San Francisco is the city’s Port Commission. The State Lands Commission is additionally seeking a preliminary injunction to bar San Francisco from enforcing Prop B.
In response, City Attorney Dennis Herrera issued the following statement:
“For decades, land use decisions involving San Francisco’s waterfront have included voters, elected leaders and appointed members of our Planning and Port Commissions. It’s a participatory process that enacted a comprehensive Waterfront Land Use Plan in 1990, developed a showplace ballpark for the Giants, and continues to protect an urban waterfront that is the envy of cities worldwide. San Francisco’s deliberative decision-making process on waterfront land use has never been successfully challenged, and I intend to defend it aggressively. With today’s lawsuit, the State Lands Commission seems to have embraced the notion that any local initiative — and, by extension, any land use regulation approved by a Board of Supervisors or Planning Commission — affecting port property is barred by state law, and therefore invalid. That view represents a radical departure in law and practice from land use decision-making in San Francisco and elsewhere. While the City must certainly honor its obligations as trustee in managing public trust property, it is a legally and practically untenable position to argue that San Francisco’s voters and elected officials have no direct say over how our city’s waterfront is developed.”
“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/
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
As always, You Make The Call, Gentle Reader:
Click to expand
So obvs, the people pointed at haven’t yet won the lottery yet, right?
Of course after you win the lottery, you should get a high-performance, low-quality ride like, IDK, an Audi A8, which just might catch fire on you, but at least you won’t be another loser riding on a the MUNI.
What if God were one of us
Just a stranger on the bus?
Well it’s the morning of the second Sunday of June, so that means it’s almost time for the Haight Ashbury Street Festival.
Lets take a look at some photos from recent years.
Click to expand
…and all around:
From Bluoz: Upper Haight is for Lovers:
Let your freak flag fly, baby. From the Eastern Stage:
And here’s one from Chris Witte:
There’s a feeling I get/
when I look to the West…
…and the East…
…on Haight Street on the Second Sunday in June.
At least the Yelpers like Frank:
This ganga guy in purple will sue you for $1000 if you take his photo, or something:
And Obama in a Giants cap, just the way they had it at the recent Union Street Festival:
You know who loves the Haight Street Fair? Parole agents
A mass of humanity:
Hookahs! Get your hookahs! It’s Hookahs.com
A dancing baby grooving on Haight Street:
Can you see the superfluity of nuns in white approaching the Fair? Also note the F430 Ferrari supercar (sans license plates), one of many exoticars that made the journey to the Upper Haight today. Also note the sign: “No Open Containers of Alcohol.” Too bad.
Of course, all you need to get around the alcohol ban is a gallon jug of overproofed white rum and a giveaway “water” bottle. As seen on Ashbury.
Former District Five Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi on the scene
Poorbot looking for handouts:
“SHOW US YOUR BOOBS… please.” “FABULOUS PRIZES.” “DON’T WORRY (WE’RE GAY)” These inebriates residing above the Ben & Jerry’s at the corner of Ashbury were true to their word, tossing down trinkets to all flashers male and female.
You kmow why this San Francisco Native baby is better than you? Cause he had the foresight to be born in San Francisco, that’s why. He won the lottery/ when he was born.
And There You Have It.
The headline says it all, but here’s the entire release:
“SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT PTA LEADERSHIP AGAIN URGES STATE PTA TO MAKE A DUAL ENDORSEMENT ON PROPS 30 AND 38
San Francisco — The Second District (San Francisco) PTA leadership recommended in July a dual endorsement of state ballot measures, Propositions 30 and 38, to the California State PTA after hearing from PTA members across the City that funding education was a high priority. At that time, the State PTA held its “Yes” on Prop 38 and voted to approve a “Neutral” position on Prop 30.
In light of recent public polling and campaign dynamics with both initiatives, and again with the encouragement of its members, the District PTA leadership is re-recommending the State PTA take a “Yes” position on Prop 30 to add to its current “Yes” on Prop 38 at the State PTA Board of Managers Meeting October 27.
It is critical that education be funded at a higher level, or at the minimum, maintain current funding in order for all of California’s children to be prepared to be successful in college, career and life. Either Prop 30 or Prop 38 must pass for this to happen. The District PTA also strongly encourages both campaigns to refrain from negative messaging about the other to increase the possibility that at least one measure will receive the required 50% + 1 votes.
Prop 30 would prevent further cuts to K-12 public schools and higher education funding through an increase of around $6 billion per year for 7 years to the state’s general fund budget. Prop 38 would increase funding to K-12 schools, early education and school bond debt payments by $10-11 billion per year for 12 years. Prop 38’s increase in funding would greatly mitigate the result of state education budget cuts of over $20 billion statewide and the laying off of over 40,000 educators over the last three years alone.
For a comparison of both propositions go to http://www.edsource.org/
Image Photoshopped slightly, courtesy of the Gavin Newsom for
Governor Lt. Governor campaign
But I’ll tell you, the People of the State of California are not going to follow them.
Hey Molly, if you’re so great, why don’t you just give all your inherited money to the California Teachers Association no strings attached?
You know, instead of driving over the cliff with Prop 30 stashed in the trunk?
*In a Porsche paid for by Daddy, of course.
I don’t know, if I wanted to create gridlock in SoMA / Financial / Union Square, I think I’d hire some jackasses to drive “mobile billboards” around the block and around the block all day long.
“Blocking the box” yesterday with a mobile billboard truck in the middle of the intersection of 3rd Street and Market:
“Hey everybody! Stop everything and look at me!”
Reverse angle – now the driver is only blocking one lane of 3rd Street:
Note the Washington state license plates.
And here’s the result of the advertising trucks. Gridlock:
“Blocking the box” is illegal these days, but the SFPD doesn’t really hand out tickets for that, so have at it.
Now I’ll tell you, Lyft taxi, a service that you just might like, isn’t legal, but mobile billboards, a “service” that you don’t like, are legal, more or less.
Isn’t it ironic?
Don’t cha think?
Hey, check it, from Richard Zitrin, a professor at UC Hastings and of counsel to San Francisco’s Carlson, Calladine & Peterson:
Now here’s my viewpoint:
State Bar Disaster Team Doesn’t Overreach.
There we go, now it’s even-Steven.
Actually, our State Bar should have a DC-3 on standby so that its disaster team could more quickly parachute into places like Richmond CA, you know, just like D-Day, you know, When Disaster Strikes.
Actually, our State Bar wants people like attorney Nick Haney to call the whaaaaaaaaambulance, to complain about how the State Bar street team is just like the Waffen-SS. It sends a message to all the others.
Keep on keeping on, State Bar Disaster Team!
PS: Oh BTW, exactly zero people were hospitalized due to the latest Chevron refinery fire / explosion / incident. So the chances of any one person garnering “hundreds of thousands of dollars” from watching soot zoom up thousands of feet into the troposphere are, similarly, exactly zero.