Payday loans
Cialis

Newsom’s Lie on Sit/Lie

Written by Luke Thomas. Posted in Opinion, Politics

Published on May 26, 2010 with 13 Comments

Candidate for Lt. Governor, Mayor Gavin Newsom. Photos by Luke Thomas

By Luke Thomas

May 26, 2010

Just when everyone thought it might be possible for the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and Mayor Gavin Newsom to work together to address growing angst over threatening behaviors on our sidewalks, Newsom did what some believe he intended all along – to put his Sit/Lie measure before voters on the November ballot.

In other words, it’s never been Newsom’s goal to use his commander in chief authority to carry a big stick over the San Francisco Police Department, to enforce the myriad of laws already available to deal with loitering, assaults, blocking sidewalks, smoking crack, etc, etc.  No, that would upset the San Francisco Police Officers Association and Gary Delagnes who would threaten to yank the POA’s all important law enforcement endorsement of Newsom for Lt. Governor. Nor does the POA like their boys and girls in blue walking beats, the most effective crime deterrent known to mankind.

San Francisco Police Officers Association President Gary Delagnes.

“We’re not enforcing current law and that is due to the absence of leadership in Room 200,”  Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi said to a group of reporters following a Sit/Lie hearing on Monday. “The mayor is the commander in chief. The police department is a paramilitary institution. All they have to do is compel to walk foot beats to be that deterrent and liaison to the community.”

“If somebody is concerned or feeling threatened or has been threatened bodily, assault or battery of any kind, there’s no excuse for law enforcement to not exercise the authority that they’ve been given,” Mirkarimi added.

District 5 Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi.

The unsaid reason Newsom is putting Sit/Lie before voters is so that it can be used as a wedge issue, a politically motivated means to funnel gobs of money into independent expenditure accounts to attack candidates for supervisor who do not publicly support Sit/Lie or, more accurately, those candidates who wear a Progressive target on his/her back.

“I had hoped that the mayor and the supporters of Sit/Lie would not view it as such, but I think that the fact that they’re unwilling to engage in a real conversation here suggests that this is a cynical wedge issue, and that’s unfortunate,” Board of Supervisors President David Chiu told FCJ.

Board of Supervisors President David Chiu.

But what Newsom is failing to understand is this: He is exposing his greatest weakness during a time when he needs to be seen as a leader. He is effectively saying he does not have the courage to reform the San Francisco Police Department, to instill in the rank and file a fear that insubordination will not be tolerated.

And as for SFPD Chief Gascon, who is Newsom’s wingman on this caper, even he is careful not to admit that police enforcement of loitering laws is the solution to many of the problems being raised. No, instead, Gascon is now a politician wearing a taxpayers’ funded police uniform, endorsing candidates and going along with Newsom’s sham like former Prime minister Tony Blair went along with George Bush’s pack of lies over weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

SFPD Chief George Gascon endorsed District Attorney Kamala Harris (left) in the race for California Attorney General.

It’s really quite shamefully transparent, all at the expense of public safety and progress.

But here’s the red meat. Word has it, there could be a few unwelcome surprises in store for Newsom, the POA and Chief Gascon on the November ballot. What could these be? Random drug testing? Mandatory, targeted foot patrols? Patrol specials? They’re all being talked about.

Let’s see Newsom, the POA, and Gascon, fight those measures while pretending to be the stewards of public safety.

And, by the way, FCJ invited Newsom spokesperson Tony Winnicker to respond to the allegations raised by Mirkarimi and Chiu – that Newsom is using Sit/Lie as a wedge issue and that he lacks leadership over the police department. You’d think this would be a perfect opportunity for the mayor to address these concerns. Instead, Winnicker has chosen silence.

Luke Thomas

Luke Thomas

Luke Thomas is former software developer and computer consultant who proudly hails from London, England. In 2001, Thomas took a yearlong sabbatical to travel and develop a photographic portfolio. Upon his return to the US, Thomas studied photojournalism to pursue a career in journalism. In 2004, Thomas worked for several neighborhood newspapers in San Francisco before accepting a partnership agreement with the SanFranciscoSentinel.com, a news website formerly covering local, state and national politics. In September 2006, Thomas launched FogCityJournal.com. The BBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox News, New York Times, Der Spiegel, San Francisco Chronicle, San Francisco Magazine, 7x7, San Francisco Examiner, San Francisco Bay Guardian and the San Francisco Weekly, among other publications and news outlets, has published his work. Thomas is a member of the Freelance Unit of the Pacific Media Workers Guild, TNG-CWA Local 39521.

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
TwitterFacebookGoogle Plus

  • http://www.fogcityjournal.com/wordpress/author/hbrown/ Harold Brown

    Fabulous, Luke,

    All you and I have to do is look out or window or walk out our door to see the fact that our desk/car bound para-military does not have control of the streets. By their own choice.

    We pay, equip and train our SFPD better than probably any force in the country. They’re a waste. You can’t beat the POA. The only answer is to defund 400 cop slots by attrition and bring the Patrol Specials up by a similar number (‘Jane’s Law’). And, clean out the thug cops who regularly attack our citizens in steroid rage by requiring a yearly tests of all sworn and civilian employees (‘Clean Cop’).

    We deserve better,

    h.

  • http://users.lmi.net/confetti/confetti_page.html Robert B. Livingston

    Great analysis, Luke.

  • Ruth R. Snave

    Thank you, Luke, for taking the time to write your article above on the Civil Sidewalks Law and for your help in keeping it at the center of public attention. This is an important issue and deserves ongoing, thoughtful discussion by all parties.

    Some comments follow.

    You say:

    “Newsom did what some believe he intended all along – to put his Sit/Lie measure before voters on the November ballot.”

    The mayor would be foolish not to. The hearing on the measure by the supes’ Public Safety Committee was conducted like a rigged TV quiz show.

    Committee Chair David Chiu allowed Chris Daly, who isn’t even a member of the committee, to taunt and bait members of the audience by name (without giving them a chance to respond), hog much of the committee’s time for himself, engage in profanities, and then leave before anyone could respond to his charges.

    Likewise, David Campos, who also is not a member of the committee, came in, made a grandstanding speech, and left before his charges could be answered.

    And then even David Chiu, the chair, left before the questions he had raised could be answered.

    The committee’s process was rotten to the core. When a legislative body fails to perform its duty, it’s appropriate to take the case to the people. Which is what the mayor is doing.

    You say:

    “Nor does the POA like their boys and girls in blue walking beats, the most effective crime deterrent known to mankind.”

    We agree that there should be more beat patrols in SF.

    Beat patrols would be far more effective if they could use the tool of the Civil Sidewalks Law.

    You say:

    “‘We’re not enforcing current law and that is due to the absence of leadership in Room 200,’ Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi said.”

    Ross Mirkarimi is the one with failed leadership.

    Last year, when the public-safety crisis started emerging in the Haight, he failed to attend meetings dealing with the subject at the local police station.

    He failed to mention the situation in his newsletters to constituents. He failed to respond to constituents who e-mailed him, asking him about his opinion of the Civil Sidewalks Law.

    He refused to have his Public Safety Committee hold meetings dedicated to the safety problems caused in the city by its migratory addicts and alcoholics.

    He refused to take a position on the Civil Sidewalks Law, all the while making caustic public comments about it.

    If the Haight had possessed a champion for its safety in Ross Mirkarimi, residents would not have had to turn for help to Gavin Newsom.

    Mirkarimi has a terrible record on this score, and we, his constituents, will never forget it.

    You say:

    “The unsaid reason Newsom is putting Sit/Lie before voters is so that it can be used as a wedge issue.”

    The mayor was initially unresponsive to the growing public safety crisis in the Haight. He eventually moved because he was pressured into doing so by residents of the Haight (some of whom are his neighbors).

    The mayor eventually responded, in contrast to Mirkarimi, who did not.

    The Civil Sidewalks Law will go to the ballot box because Ross Mirkarimi and his allies at the board of supes hoped, first, that it would just go away, and, second, that they could smother it as it emerged from the womb.

    You say:

    “‘this is a cynical wedge issue, and that’s unfortunate,’ Board of Supervisors President David Chiu told FCJ.”

    As noted above, the inept and cheesy way in which David Chiu conducted the Public Safety Committee triggered the move to the ballot box.

    You say:

    “[Police Chief] Gascon is now a politician in a taxpayers’ funded uniform.”

    This is an outrageous libel on your part. Shame on you.

    Chief Gascon responded to concerns of residents about public safety when politicians looked the other way.

    That’s his job.

    You say:

    “FCJ invited Newsom spokesperson Tony Winnicker to respond to the allegations.”

    Next time, invite the folks who started the push for the Civil Sidewalks Law – we, the residents of the Haight and other at-risk neighborhoods.

    We’ll be glad to debate you in any forum.

  • http://www.fogcityjournal.com/wordpress/author/luke/ Luke Thomas

    Arthur, tell us the last time an SF police chief publicly endorsed a candidate for higher office.

    I think we can all agree our police chief was not hired to endorse politicians.

    Gascon and just about everybody else (except you) knows well that the problems in the Haight can be resolved by walking beats and enforcing existing laws, so why is Gascon going along with Sit/Lie?

    Oh, wait. Gascon was hired by Newsom.

  • Ruth R. Snave

    In your post above, Luke, you say:

    “Oh, wait. Gascon was hired by Newsom.”

    Some folks believe that the push for sidewalk civility and safety in SF is just a plot by certain politicians.

    Certain other folks believe that the move to save the planet from global warming is just a plot by certain politicians.

    Both groups of believers are entitled to their dogmas, despite all the evidence to the contrary. That’s fine by me. I support freedom of religion.

  • http://www.fogcityjournal.com/wordpress/author/luke/ Luke Thomas

    And that’s what you’re subscribing to, Arthur: faith in a celestial teapot that is Sit/Lie, conjured to sedate the masses while doing nothing to enforce existing laws?

    You really think when/if Sit/Lie passes, that Newsom’s leadership issue will be resolved? What makes you think cops will enforce Sit/Lie when they won’t enforce loitering laws?

    Drink some more koolaid.

  • Ruth R. Snave

    Thanks for your response above, Luke.

    You say:

    “And that’s what you’re subscribing to, Arthur: faith in a celestial teapot that is Sit/Lie, conjured to sedate the masses while doing nothing to enforce existing laws?”

    Nobody expects the Civil Sidewalks Law to be a panacea. But it will make things a littler safer and more civil for folks in challenged neighborhoods. We’re grateful for any help we can get at this point.

    You and I agree that there should be better enforcement of existing laws. Things deteriorated for years under the leadership of the former police chief.

    The present chief is acting to correct the problems and bring a professional approach to managing the department.

    I wish him well, don’t you?

    You say:

    “You really think when/if Sit/Lie passes, that Newsom’s leadership issue will be resolved?”

    I have no commitment to Newsom’s political fortunes. However, Newsom helped out when Mirkarimi failed, so Newsom gets a positive stroke for that effort.

    On the other hand, it would have been better if both Newsom and Mirkarimi had helped out when they first came into office.

    There is no first-class leadership anywhere at City Hall except for the Public Defender, Jeff Adachi.

    You say:

    “What makes you think cops will enforce Sit/Lie when they won’t enforce loitering laws?”

    In the Haight, where I live, the police constantly issue citations and make arrests for drug dealing, thefts, assaults, etc. The problem is with the D.A. She’s better than her predecessor, but I wouldn’t give her a grade above a “C.”

    If the police had the tool of the Civil Sidewalks Law, it would help keep the migratory addicts and alcoholics from being so territorial. That would benefit besieged neighborhoods.

    You say:

    “Drink some more koolaid.”

    May you have a long and healthy life, Luke.

  • Pingback: Streetsblog San Francisco » Today’s Headlines

  • marc

    What I find interesting here is that Gascón has barely been in the City for a year now, yet is endorsing local politicos as if he had a non-working relationship with them.

    It is not exactly like the SFPD and DA’s office have been partners in building confidence in the City’s bang for the buck in law enforcement. To the contrary, the two departments have been embroiled in imbroglios of incompetence, each revelation of which further diminishes the legitimacy of both organizations and bolsters the right wing project of discrediting government before the voters.

    - The Crack Head of the SFPD drug lab

    - Cops with criminal records not disclosing as much in court

    - The “Perpetrator of Fraud” as the DA’s toxicologist

    “The District Attorney’s Office’s reliance on the SFPD to disclose exculpatory information was not sufficient. It has long been recognized that it is the prosecutor — the People’s representative in court — who has the responsibility to put in place procedures to secure and produce exculpatory evidence.”

    –SF Superior Court Judge Anne-Christine Massullo

    This must mean that Gascón is not a problem solver, rather a political player, unless one views kicking Harris upstairs and bringing in a new DA as solving problems.

    Not only does Kamala Harris have some explaining to do, Theresa Sparks has gotta come clean on the political deals that were made to hire Gascón associated with the sit/lie proposal and Sparks’ own candidacy.

    Compared to the POA, MEA, and DA, the SEIU and TWU are small fry when it comes to delivering negative returns on each tax dollar invested.

    -marc

  • Ruth R. Snave

    In a post above, marc, you say:

    “Theresa Sparks has gotta come clean on the political deals that were made to hire Gascón associated with the sit/lie proposal and Sparks’ own candidacy.”

    It’s all a conspiracy by Theresa! That explains everything!

    Marc, you’re starting to sound like Tommi Avicolli Mecca. Soon we’ll be seeing you scribbling incoherent chalk slogans on the sidewalks in the Castro and playing a guitar out of tune.

    (Yikes!)

  • http://District5Diary Rob Anderson

    Once again city progressives are clueless on an important political issue. Fair play for the poor street punks! And they are clearly at odds with the city’s voters, just like they were in 2002, when Care Not Cash passed. (The homeless, you understand, were just poor people who couldn’t afford the rent in SF.) And they want to legalize prostitution (hookers are just “sex workers”!). And graffiti/tagging is “public art.” And, according to Supervisor Mirkarimi Critical Mass is all about making the city “bicycle friendly.” (“Critical Mass gets my support because of the attention they’ve brought in influencing the City to become more bicycle and pedestrian friendly.”)

  • marc

    Arthur, I thought that you were of the mind that these politicians were all schemers.

    Why just this week, in these pages, you made such a statement.

    From where I sit, you lie, such incivility on the sidewalk of public discourse as welcome as a turd in the punchbowl.

    Next, year, we should set up signs that direct Bay to Breakers participants will full bladders to Arthur Evans’ doorstep where they might find relief.

    -marc

  • http://www.fogcityjournal.com/wordpress/author/hbrown/ Harold Brown

    Reminder,

    You can’t do better than Gascon given the fact that Newsom (and Willie before him … etc.) is so beholden to the POA. Good piece Luke but I still like Gascon. He’s a genuine reformer with both hands tied behind his back.

    Endorsing Kamala? Hmmm. Look at the eyes she’s making at him in the photo you caught. Hmmm.

    Attending all those society functions? Hey, cheaper than eating at Carl’s Jr.. You don’t think they charge him do you? Would you eat caviar and drink champagne for free with your new bride? I’m sure that if some war monger like George Schultz tries to talk to him he just tells them to ‘f’ off.

    Randy Knox for DA!

    h.

  • Ruth R. Snave

    In a post above, marc says:

    “such incivility on the sidewalk of public discourse as welcome as a turd in the punchbowl. Next, year, we should set up signs that direct Bay to Breakers participants will full bladders to Arthur Evans’ doorstep where they might find relief.”

    Thank you for your intelligent contributions to this topic, marc.

    When the Civil Sidewalks Law goes to the voters in November, I sincerely hope that you will be the one to write the argument in the voters’ pamphlet opposing the measure.