Local GOP: I don’t think so
By: Ken Garcia
Examiner Staff Writer
April 3, 2009
Republicans in San Francisco are currently having a field day with their Democratic counterparts, and when was the last time anyone could say that?
This week, members of the local GOP passed a resolution smacking down The City’s ultra-liberal ruling contingent for demanding that Mayor Gavin Newsom and members of the Police Department not enforce federal immigration laws for foreign nationals accused, or convicted, of felonies.
Democrats described their action as a call for “due process.” Republicans correctly called it breaking the law.
“We usually don’t make that big a deal about some of their actions, but in this case, since they specifically chose to support a policy that would protect people accused of violent felonies, well, we didn’t think that was the right way to go,’’ said Howard Epstein, the local Republican Party’s chairman. “If they hadn’t gone that far, we probably would have just let the Democrats be the Democrats.”
Or in this case, let the supervisors be the supervisors, since four members of the board signed on to the Democratic resolution, and then had the temerity to taunt Republicans in a newspaper exchange. That brought out the official rulebook, which in this case is a California Appeals Court decision that the “dissemination by local law enforcement officers of information indicating an arrestee’s immigration status does not violate the arrestee’s constitutional right of privacy nor deny him or her equal protection of the laws or due process of laws.’’
In essence, that means the Democrats are urging city law enforcement officers to break the law, which could get them in even more trouble than they do on a regular basis.
Said Epstein: “You can’t pick and choose which laws to obey. I mean, what if I chose not to stop at red lights, or what if we all chose not to pay our property taxes?”
The bottom line is that members of the local ruling party don’t really care what the feds think, because they don’t seem to understand that San Francisco is such a special place we can make the rules up as we go.
Certainly it’s a lot more fun that way, and it does occasionally allow the 15 or so percent of the local electorate known as Republicans to have a good laugh — something that almost never happens when they go to the polls here or pick up their daily newspaper.
Niners’ money blitz failing miserably
If the San Francisco 49ers showed the same bravado in player evaluations and draft picks as they do in dealing with their future home, they may actually have a chance for success.
As it is, the Niners continue to reveal a formula for failure. Just a few days after announcing that they are going to seek a ballot measure in 2010 so Santa Clara voters will reach deep into their pockets to pay for a new stadium, they said in a letter to The City that they want $61 million in new fixes for aging Candlestick Park.
Mayor Gavin Newsom had the expected response: Was the organization’s bell rung?
For a team whose primary offensive weapon seems to be an incomplete pass, here’s a quick review.
The 49ers still have no deal with Santa Clara and the ballot measure is coming two years later than planned, following one of the worst economic crises in the country’s history. And, the 49ers continue to tell San Francisco that they’re maybe, kind of, possibly interested in The City as a second choice.
Now there’s a good negotiating position: Tease your two suitors as you demand millions in free money. Bernie Madoff would be proud.
All hail the chief-search process ... OK, maybe not
Now that San Francisco Police Chief Heather Fong has agreed to stay on past her expiration date, we can kindly offer some words of wisdom: Do not do anything except hold the title. Leave the heavy lifting to your successor — assuming the Police Commission and the mayor can ever find one.
That’s no small assumption. As we know in the searches for other department heads, San Francisco’s politics come with caution tags for people outside our magic bubble who see the dysfunctional relationship between the mayor and the Board of Supervisors, and constant meddling from points unknown. The mayor’s former chief of staff, Phil Ginsburg, recently obtained the head post at the Recreation and Park Department, because, it appears, no one really wanted it.
Yet the search for a new police chief has already gone on considerably longer than need be, and commission members are already saying it might be midsummer before a pick is made. Meanwhile, the same commission is announcing “big’’ changes coming to the department via district station reorganizations and key personnel moves. That’s a really bad idea when there is not a permanent chief, who will no doubt want to be pushing all the buttons in his/her department.
And now, of course, you have some supervisors trying to “insist” that they should have a say in the process, even though the City Charter clearly states that the selection process lies solely with the commission and the mayor.
Too many chiefs spoil the kitchen.
It just became much worse for Garamendi
John Garamendi, the man who would be governor, is showing once again why he probably will not. Garamendi, the politician who just cannot stop himself from running for office, sought the governor’s seat in the early 1980s and the mid-1990s, and now 15 years later, he’s off — and we really mean it.
This week, as reported by the political scribes at Calbuzz, Garamendi was left in the lurch when his top campaign consultant quit. Adding pain to the public wound was the comment by Jude Barry that, “I’ve done all I can to help him.’’
He’s had trouble raising money and his candidacy for the Democratic nod has been eclipsed by Attorney General Jerry Brown, and even San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, who was in high school when Garamendi was pining for office.
This is a campaign in need of a 12-step program — one that starts with admitting the obvious.
Follow The Examiner
