• No categories

Politics Blog

Vigil for Hugues de la Plaza this Saturday

-
2

clouseauimage.jpgredux.jpg
Will the French be able to crack a case that has baffled SFPD investigators?

Text by Sarah Phelan

The mystery surrounding the death of Hugues de la Plaza began on June 2, 2007, when a neighbor noticed blood on the front porch of his Hayes Valley apartment. Two years later, friends of the 36-year-old de la Plaza, who had dual French and American citizenship, are holding a vigil to keep attention on the case, which, they believe, remains unresolved by the SFPD, because of failure of leadership at the highest levels of San Francisco city government.

And his grief-struck parents are offering a $100,000 reward for information on the case.

A January 2008 San Francisco Medical Examiner/Investigator’s report, concluded that the cause of de la Plaza’s death was “multiple stab wounds” but that the manner was “undetermined.”

“On 06/02/2007 at about 0810 hours a neighbor of the subject came out of his apartment to the front porch to collect his newspaper,” stated the report. “He noted a large amount of blood drops on the porch, a blood trail leading to the subject’s apartment, and blood dripping from the subject’s apartment door knob.”

After emergency services were contacted, police got into de la Plaza’s apartment by forcing entry through a back dead-bolted door.

“Investigation at the scene revealed the subject, dressed in cut away street clothing and shoes, to be supine in the front room of his apartment,” the investigator’s report continued. “There were copious amount of frank (sic) and partially dried blood on the floor and wall near him. A broken wine glass was noted on the floor of the front room. Bloody handprints were noted on the wall across from the subject. The door to the front room was dead bolted as well as the back door of the apartment where the police forced entry.”

But despite this gruesome scene, neighbors, friends and relatives felt that the SFPD decided early on that his death was a suicide. They point to questions the police asked and to parts of the Medical Examiner’s report, as evidence that investigators believed de la Plaza killed himself:

“On the coffee table in the front room was a bloody open lap top computer and notebook, devoid of apparent blood, with the following two sentences on the visible page: “learn as if you were to live forever” and “live as if you were to die tomorrow,” the investigator’s report stated.

Newsom’s no-tax budget

-
1

By Tim Redmond

Steve Jones will be reporting in tomorrow’s paper about the details of Newsom’s budget proposal, and it’s going to take a few days to figure out exactly what’s in and what’s out of the budget, but the mayor has already made one point, and it’s infuriating:

He proudly announced that the budget is balanced with no borrowing and no new taxes.

Sounds like something that George W. Bush would have said.

And here’s the problem: When Newsom was negotiating the latest round of givebacks with the unions, he promised to work toward a revenue measure in November. And if he were serious about that, he could have included that projected revenue in this budget — avoiding some of the most painful cuts.

So what’s up? Is Newsom going back on the deal with SEIU — or is he just assuming that any revenue measure he puts on the ballot will fail?

Here’s what the mayor’s press secretary, Nathan Ballard, has to say:

After SEIU rejected the sensible deal that had been reached with the Mayor,
the revenue-measure talks unraveled, and so the Mayor could not in good
faith include projected revenue from a hypothetical measure in his proposed
budget.

All along we’ve said that a revenue measure would have to include support
from a broad coalition of San Franciscans, and nobody from the business
community — an essential part of any such coalition — is going to support
a revenue measure unless SEIU has already agreed to shoulder its fair share
of the city’s budget burden.

However, once SEIU votes to approve the new deal with the Mayor’s office,
it’s a whole new ball game. At that point we can convene a new series of
talks and attempt to come up with revenue measures that a broad coalition
can support. Once that happens, the budget could be adjusted accordingly.

Okay, sure — blame it on the SEIU members. But that’s not the point. First of all, it’s pretty likely the union membership will approve the latest contract offer, and Newsom knows that. More important, this isn’t about SEIU v. Newsom. It’s about the city, and the health of San Francisco and its residents. And a mayor who was serious about preserving essential services wouldn’t be waiting until the last minute, and planning to “adjust the budget” after front-line workers are laid off, programs are cut, nonprofits shut down etc. before he started talking seriously about new revenue sources.

Wine bar wars in West Portal

-
5

By Cécile Lepage
wine.jpg
If you live in West Portal, you may have recently noticed the sign in the WineStyles window at 9 West Portal: the wine shop is applying for a bar use permit. Its Conditional Use authorization hearing is scheduled for Thursday, June 4, at City Hall, and if approved, the wine retailer will be able to sell wine by the glass to its customers.

Actually, WineStyles had already been doing just that, in violation of the Planning Code, for almost a year, until the store got caught by the enforcement division. Pleading ignorance, the owners now want to come into compliance. But they’re facing opposition for locally based neighbors upset that WineStyles – part of a national chain – didn’t play by the rules.

God rides the bus

-
4

By Tim Redmond

601jesus.jpg
Or maybe he takes his bike — but he doesn’t park in the median

Sarah Phelan interviewed Nat Ford, the head of Muni, for her story on the Muni budget that will appear in Wednesday’s Guardian. I have to offer a sneak preview of one of his comments.

Confirming that the agency dropped a $9 million a year proposal to extend meter hours citywide after receiving input from merchants, Ford said, “We’ll clearly have to revisit parking. We’ll be looking at how to administer extended meter hours and how that impacts churches if we do it Sundays. But we are sitting here with a structural deficit that’s been going on for decades. We need to figure out the revenue streams we need to enhance the system.”

Wait, wait, wait.

The impact on churches?

Mr. Ford, let me clue you in on something. In San Francisco, particularly in the Mission, nobody every parks at a meter to go to church on Sunday. They park in the middle of the goddam street.

This is illegal. There are no permits required. The cops just look the other way.

And, as I pointed out when I last wrote about it:

Nobody else gets to do this.

If you go to see the (secular) Mime Troupe in Dolores Park and you stick your car in the middle of the street, you get a ticket. If you drink at a (secular) bar or eat at a (secular) restaurant and you leave your car in the Valencia Street median, you get cited. You can’t double park while you run in for a (secular) cup of coffee at Muddy Waters.

You can’t even do it when you go to yoga, which for a lot of people is a spiritual experience.

You want some money, Nat? Make the damn churches pay a fee for the damn free parking they get. I’m sorry: If you don’t want to pay for parking, you can ride the bus to church. Or walk. Or ride your bike. That’s what Jesus would do. Right?

The rich don’t use public services

-
11

By Tim Redmond

That’s what Gov. Schwarzenegger’s finance director told the New York Times:

Nearly all of the billions of dollars in cuts the administration has proposed would affect programs for poor Californians, although prisons and schools would take hits, as well.

“Government doesn’t provide services to rich people,” Mike Genest, the state’s finance director, said on a conference call with reporters on Friday. “It doesn’t even really provide services to the middle class.” He added: “You have to cut where the money is.”

But that’s just wrong.

California spends a ton of money protecting rich people’s homes from fires. California spends billions on law-enforcement and prisons, much of that money going to ensure that poor prople can’t take money from rich people. Who do you think state highways serve? (Mostly the middle-class.) Who gets to live safer, more secure lives because desperatly mentally ill people aren’t wandering the streets?

Does the public school system and the state college and university system not train workers for the state’s wealthiest corporations?

And what about all of the excessive tax breaks that go to big businesses? Tax breaks are money that comes out of the government’s pocket. Tax breaks are handouts, just like welfare payments are handouts. Except that the tax breaks tend to be much bigger.

When you add up all the benefits that state government provides for the wealthy — and you look at how modest the tax payments from the wealthy are in this state — you get a sense of why we’re in this budget mess.

City Desk Newshour ends long SF run

-
2

By Steven T. Jones

An era ended last night while my colleagues and I taped the final episode of the City Desk Newshour, a Comcast television program that has provided continuous weekly coverage of San Francisco City Hall for almost 30 years. It is simply the latest blow in a steady erosion of political and local government coverage by experienced journalists.

I’ve been a regular panelist on the show for a couple years now, but I was really struck by what an institution it is in November when we did a segment on the anniversary of the Harvey Milk and George Moscone assassinations. I glanced at the monitors and saw our B-roll footage of Milk, Moscone, and Dan White being interviewed in our studio for our show back in the day.

Comcast decided to slash its locally originated programming budget and fire half its Bay Area staff, something it is allowed to do because local governments have lost the legal ability to set local programming standards for cable companies as part of their franchise agreements. If you have Comcast cable, try to catch the final episode replays this weekend on Channel 11 and/or check out old episodes in the OnDemand section under hometown local programming.

But there is a silver lining to this story. Comcast officials in California successfully fought to save our show as long as we can retool it to have a more regional focus, which we’ll be working on over the next couple months. So tune in later this summer for a new show with a new name and new focus, but some of the same faces from the Guardian, Chronicle, Examiner, and KQED.

Prop 8: The French say it best …

-
0

… via the lovely and very British singer Lily Allen:

Bonus! The original “Big Fat Gay Collab” video the above takes off from:

Can young people hurry up and take over the world already? Yeesh.

Prison report: Inmates will be back

-
5

Editors note: Just A Guy is an inmate in a California state prison. Read his last blog entry (and links to past ones) here. His dispatches run Monday and Thursdays; he tries to answer questions and comments as quickly as possible, but it’s a bit tricky communicating from prison, so be patient.

By Just A Guy

The tides have turned and the language is changing as politicos try to salvage their political futures via a different spin on the old tune.

As the State of California budget fiasco lays the foundation for massive cuts in spending the results will be: early releases (eventually) for prisoners and even LESS rehabilitation, NO welfare, LESS education spending, and less aid in general. The long term result, unarguably, will be MORE people in prison and HIGHER recidivism!!!

PG&E’s latest malevolence

-
1

By Steven T. Jones
shameonpge.jpg
Image of environment justice protest from Greenaction.org

As the Bay Guardian has documented for over 40 years, Pacific Gas & Electric Company has a sordid history of malevolent actions, including illegally cheating San Franciscans out of public power (from its initial violation of the federal Raker Act to its record-setting sums spent to defeat public power initiatives), corrupting local politics, lobbying against higher clean energy standards and consumer empower measures at all levels of government, greenwashing its dirty power portfolio (including the state’s largest nuclear power plant), transferring billions in ratepayer money to its parent company just before its utility declared bankruptcy (the lawsuit over which was recently dropped by Attorney General Jerry Brown, to his shame), screwing the city and ratepayers and then aggressively fighting the myriad resulting lawsuits, and on and on.

But now, we can add to the list mistreatment of its own employees. PG&E has reportedly ended negotiations with its Engineers and Scientists of California Local 20 labor union and announced its intention to unilaterally implement its final offer. The move has enraged both that union and its brothers and sisters on the larger House of Labor, which will be rallying and picketing outside PG&E headquarters at 77 Beale Street tomorrow at noon.

Video of Prop 8 protests

-
0

By Rebecca Bowe

Yesterday’s evening rally in the wake of the California Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Prop 8 attracted thousands. Click below to view a multimedia slide show of the events.

Supervisors fail to reject MTA’s “cars first” budget

-
0

Board President David Chiu and Sup. Sophie Maxwell joined their more conservative colleagues–Sups.Michela Alioto-Pier, Carmen Chu, Bevan Dufty an Sean Elsbernd–today in voting not to reject the Municipal Transportation Authority’s 2009-10 budget.

As a result, proposed fare increases and service cuts To MUNI will go ahead. And so far there are only verbal promises from MTA executive director Nat Ford that his agency will examine the feasibility of extending parking meter hours in the city’s downtown core, even though the MTA is facing 10 million to $15 million deficit-thanks to the state’s ongoing budget mess and as yet unresolved union negotiations,

Here’s hoping the progressives on the Board find a way to keep it together during the upcoming battle over the Mayor’s budget, which is due next Monday, June 1.

A new corporate tax cut

-
0

By Tim Redmond

Calitics has the scoop on one of the most insane parts of the budget debate — just as the governor is talking about massive, mind-numbing cuts in public services, the state is about to give a big tax break to large corporations.

Lenny Goldberg, of the California Tax Reform Association, puts it this way:

“This is the gutting of the state corporate tax,” said “In fact, they did it so badly that lawyers are chuckling about the opportunities for tax avoidance.”

Marriage ruling met with civil disobedience in SF

-
1

arrest.jpg
Story and photos by Rachel Buhner

Hundreds of people had gathered outside City Hall this morning to peacefully protest the Supreme Court’s 6-1 decision upholding Proposition 8. While there was undeniable anger and frustration in the air, the overall sentiment clearly indicated that the ruling wasn’t a surprise. Protesters arrived prepared, holding up signs and passing around petitions in a peaceful show of objection.

Frank Capley-Alfano, 34, sat among the circle of people gathered in the intersection of Van Ness and McAllister. A member of One Struggle, One Fight, he was accompanied by his husband, Joe, who held up an oversized replica of their marriage license. “I had a feeling deep down inside that the ruling would go the way it did,” Frank said. “I’m devastated, but I came to sit here and commit peaceful civil disobedience.”
joeandfrank.jpg
Joe and Frank Capley-Alfano

And he did just that. At about 11:45 am, police began barricading the intersection and warned protesters to either move to the sidewalks or face arrest. Staying true to his word, Frank and his husband remained seated as officers marched in to begin arresting those who stayed behind.

Pics: Prop 8 scene at City Hall

-
2

P88cha0509.jpg

P85cha0509.jpg
Contrary to rumor, this is not legendary activist Cleve Jones

Today’s Supreme Court decision to uphold Prop 8 — but keep valid those same-sex marriages performed before its passage — was met with dismay and protests at City Hall. Photos by Charles Russo

P81cha0509.jpg
Same-sex couple Stuart Gaffney (left) and John Lewis appeared optimistic as they waited for the California Supreme Court ruling on Proposition 8

P82cha0509.jpg
Sister Mary Timothy Simplicity of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence engages supporters of Proposition 8 outside of the California Supreme Court Building

P82Acha0509.jpg
Opposing sides on the issue of Proposition 8 debated the matter just moments before the California Supreme Court announced their ruling to uphold the law banning same-sex marriage in the state

P83cha0509.jpg
A wave of discontent spread through the largely anti-Prop. 8 crowd …

P83Acha0509.jpg
… as the ruling was announced that the California Supreme Court would uphold the measure

A love-hate story: same-sex marriage ban

-
0

Despite the sunny weather, the mood outside the California Supreme Court turned bitter this morning, with marriage-equality supporters and anti-gay marriage supporters exchanging verbal jabs, as news spread that the justices had upheld Proposition 8, a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage that state voters passed in November.

Initially, this bitterness wasn’t mitigated by the court’s other piece of news, namely that the justices had, however, decided to validate the marriages of the estimated 18,000 gay couples who got wed before Prop. 8 took effect.

By noon, the marriage equality movement appeared to have regathered its composure as its leaders vowed to hold rallies, starting tonight, and to go to the voters in November 2010– timing that has profound implications for Democratic and Republican 2010 gubernatorial hopefuls

But lest anyone underestimate the polarizing nature of the emotions and beliefs on display outside the Court today, here is a brief snapshot of some of the exchanges that took place today:

“Love is unconditional!” yelled a glitter-festooned Pan Gaea, wearing a long skirt and stripper heels and standing directly in front a small knot of American River College students, who were holding up a huge Proposition 8 banner, outside the court, just before the justices issued their 6-1 ruling.

“I want my friend staying married, I don’t want homophobia taking away my rights,” Pan Gaea continued, jumping into the air and landing with a loud click of stripper heels, next to Luke Otterstad and George Popko, who are both at the Sacramento-based American River College, whose student body voted last fall to endorse Proposition 8.

“Can you handle this, yea-ah?” Pan Gaea added, showing off the stripper heels to the unwilling ARC students. “ I don’t think you’d be able to balance on these and jump on one foot on a stiletto. I don’t think so, because it takes talent and a lot of balance.”

Just then, a chant of “Shame on you!” rippled through the crowd, diverting Pan Gaea’s attention to the court ruling, details of which were being spread through the waiting crowd by gay rights activists like Ronnie Mason, who confirmed that, yes, the justices had just ruled against marriage equality for all.

“But 18,000 people are still married,” added Mason, searching for the situation’s proverbial silver lining.
“They’ll get divorced,” Otterstad countered.

Prison report: Cell phone madness

-
10

Editors note: Just A Guy is an inmate in a California state prison. Read his last blog entry (and links to past ones) here. His dispatches run Monday and Thursdays; he tries to answer questions and comments as quickly as possible, but it’s a bit tricky communicating from prison, so be patient.

By Just A Guy

About six months ago, a buddy of mine was denied a visitor because his prospective visitor owes the California Department of Motor Vehicles money.

What does that actually have to do with anything? How does that pose a risk to the security of the institution or California Department of Corrections in general? Isn’t one of CDCR’s stated goals to encourage involvement/visiting with family and friends?

It is not CDCR’s responsibility to punish the inmate because his prospective visitor owes the DMV money, nor is it CDCR’s responsibility to punish the prospective visitor because he/she owes the DMV. These are two unrelated entities. If someone is late in paying their state income tax will CDCR not allow them to visit one of us? CDCR, in effect, is creating a sort of debtor’s prison, which is illegal.

The icing on the cake of this story is that the individual has been making payments to the DMV and is trying to pay off the debt, yet was still refused out of hand.

Apparently folks, CDCR’s role has expanded from public protector to debt collector as well.

This leads me to cell phones in prison. CDCR espouses family ties, yet allows Global Tel Link, which controls the prison pay phones, to charge astronomical rates on collect calls. How is this conducive to keeping strong ties to the outside world? It costs $20 to make a 15-minute call out of state! So, my friend above can’t have his girlfriend come to visit him because she hasn’t paid her DMV fine, so now she accepts his collect calls because they can’t see each other in person. But she spends a huge amount of money on these calls — and can’t pay the fine that is keeping her from visiting my friend. That’s pure insanity.

Prop. 8 protests — where to go

-
1

Sfist has a handy-dandy guide to today’s protests here.

And here’s Assemblyman Tom Ammiano’s statement:

“Today’s Supreme Court opinion upholding Prop. 8 is a stark reminder that the struggle for equality and justice must and will go on. We have come a long way since the days when Harvey Milk and I fought against the discrimination of the Briggs Initiative and Proposition 8 was no different. Harvey’s message then was one of hope and we can see how that message is making progress throughout the country – five states now embrace marriage equality and several more are on the verge.

History has shown that equality cannot be denied to any group and it is only a matter of time before justice prevails. I encourage the supporters of same sex marriage to engage in peaceful, focused actions and we will transform the anger that is felt today into a successful message of political change. The decision today only strengthens my commitment and resolve to restore equality for all Californians.”

A question for the Supremes

-
0

By Tim Redmond

I have one question for the CA Supreme Court: It the voters passed a law saying that black people couldn’t marry white people, or that only Christians could get married, or that Muslims couldn’t marry Jews, or that hotels and restaurants had the right to deny food and lodging on the basis of skin color, would you uphold the vote?

Because if you’d put Brown v. Board of Education to a nationwide vote in 1954, what do you think would have happened?

Okay, that’s two questions. But you get the point. Discrimination is now legal in California.

Leno: Court says “minorities do not matter”

-
0

By Steven T. Jones

Sen. Mark Leno — whose legislation to legalize same-sex marriage was twice vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger — just put out the following statement: “Today’s decision is extremely disappointing for California and hurts thousands of caring couples who wish to make lifelong commitments to one another through marriage. Let today’s decision be a rallying cry for all Californians who believe in equality and fairness, and encourage thousands more to stand up and fight the pervasive injustices LGBT people face in our community and our nation.”

“The issue before this court was much greater than marriage equality. The question asked of our justices goes to the core of our society. Can a majority vote undermine a foundation stone of our constitutional democracy, equal protection under the law? Today our highest court ruled that minorities do not matter.”

“Through our disappointment, we will still find hope and encouragement, including the 18,000 couples whose marriages in California remain secure and protected today. Through our sadness, our resolve to fight for justice and equality only grows stronger. Love is an unstoppable force, and equality is right around the corner.”

Newsom on same-sex marriage ruling

-
1

By Steven T. Jones

In the wake of the California Supreme Court decision upholding Prop. 8 and denying marriage equality, Mayor Gavin Newsom has put out a call to overturn the issue at the ballot box. “Let this work start today,” Newsom, who triggered the current fight five years ago with his decision to issue marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples, said in prepared statement.

It’s unclear whether Newsom wants to play a leadership role in that campaign, or whether the movement even wants him to after his boastful “whether they like it or not” speech was used effectively in pro-Prop. 8 commercials. But it is clear that Newsom’s political fortunes have been closely tied to the issue, and that he probably deserves more credit for creating the current push for marriage equality in California than he does for many of the other issues on which he is campaigning for governor.

Yet today is a day to focus on this decision and how to overcome it, and Newsom seemed to strike the right chords with his statement (which follows in its entirety).

Prop 8 upheld, marriages still valid

-
1

Dang! I knew I should’ve gotten hitched before Prop 8 – but do you know how long it takes Alexander McQueen to design a fierce dress?

At 10am today, the CA Supreme Court announced not-too-surprisingly that it was upholding Prop 8 on a 6-1 vote, but that the more than 18,000 same-sex weddings that were performed before the odious passage were still valid. Good news and bad.

We’ll have photos and more updates throughout the day.

Prop. 8 decision Tuesday, for real

-
1

By Tim Redmond

There have been so many rumors about the Supreme Court’s Prop. 8 decison that I was wary of believing anything until I saw it, but Calitics just reported that the court will publish it’s decision Tuesday at 10 am. To double check, I called the San Francisco CIty Attorney’s Office, and they confirmed it: Tuesday morning, we’ll know whether the Supremes think it’s okay to amend discrimination into the California Constitution.

I’m willing to be they overturn it. But I’m always an optimist.

Say goodbye to Gavin

-
9

Because he’s going to be around even less now that his campaign for governor is officially underway. Not that he’s been around all the much anyway. I like the way CBS describes how he’s spending his time:

Newsom has recently taken time off from campaigning to address budget issues in San Francisco, where he told reporters Thursday morning that he hoped to complete his budget before the June 1 deadline

Excuse me — “taken time off from campaigning?” Uh, isn’t campaiging “taking time off” from the job he’s been elected to do and is getting paid to do? Just for the record (thanks, Kimo Crossman for noticing this), the City Charter says:

CAEC § 13.5 (b)(2); Government Code §§ 24001, 24002 . The Mayor shall devote his or her entire time and attention to the duties of the office, and shall not devote time or attention to any other occupation or business
activity

Now, I know when any poitician runs for higher office, the current office suffers (Barack Obama wasn’t introducing a lot of legislation in the U.S. Senate last year). And that’s to be expected, and while the people of Illinois had a senator who was missing from the Senate a lot, I think most of them, like me, are glad that Obama did what he did.

Still, being mayor of a city that’s in a state of crisis is a little different. Running for governor is fine, but I’d rather it wasn’t Newsom’s major occupation, at least not right now.

Meanwhile, Sfist has a fascinating poll. These things are not at all scientific, and can easily be gamed, and it’s a small sample, but: remember, most sfist readers are San Franciscans, and I would guess the demographic skews young — that is, they’re Gavin’s people. And guess what?

About 50 percent like Jerry Brown. Only 30 percent like Newsom. A typical comment:

Let’s see, morally bankrupt, puppet mayor of San Francisco, morally bankrupt, idiot mayor of LA or the kooky old guy with more experience in his pinky than the other two combined.

Newsom better get his Plumpjack busboy uniform pressed or get used to being a socialite – again.

Gavin Newsom: Coming soon to a dog park near you, Mill Valley.

Now, before Nathan Ballard starts running around the office logging into every computer he can and piling up the Newsom votes, we all know that races are not won and lost on blog polls. Who knows — Jerry’s kids may have already started that game (although I don’t think they quite have it together at this point). And numbers aside, Newsom is running a sharp campaign. He’s selling himself as the agent of change, and Brown as yesterday’s news, and that will work — unless people take a hard look at what our mayor has actually done, in his own city.

Which doesn’t amount to much.

1...173174175...258Page 174 of 258

48hills.org is the official publication of the non-profit San Francisco Progressive Media Center.
Contact us: info@48hills.org