He's a radical, leftwing liberal...
he actually believes this bullshit."
-SFPOA head Gary Delagnes
(Photo of angry cops staring down
said radical, leftwing liberal from sfappeal)
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors... whew... just about threw up there... have taken their cop-hating, criminal-loving, Commie agenda to its logical conclusion - by slashing $82 million from public safety services, namely police, fire, and sheriff's departments from the coming budget - in apparent retaliation for Mayor Newsom's cuts to homeless drop-in shelters and other programs catering to the terminally indigent.
This bit of fuckery has caused havoc with the search for a new police chief (replacing useless tool Heather Fong); according to Mayor Hairdo, the unnamed guy (yup, you heard right, guy) had accepted the job, but is now having second thoughts after seeing just how much our beloved Board cares about the men and women in blue.
San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom has selected the city's next police chief, but he said Thursday his pick is (apparently only just now) thinking twice about accepting the job after a Board of Supervisors' committee voted to strip public safety agencies of tens of millions of dollars in funding.
The Police Commission forwarded a list of three finalists for the position Wednesday night, but the mayor and his staff were mum on his final choice because the person hasn't said yes to the job.
Sources said the finalists include no women and nobody from within the San Francisco Police Department, a decision likely to irritate insiders who were angling to replace retiring Police Chief (and useless tool) Heather Fong.
The finalists are all (presumably non-white) male police chiefs in other cities, including Houston Police Chief Harold Hurtt, who would be San Francisco's second African American chief. San Mateo Police Chief Susan Manheimer was widely considered a front-runner, but is not a finalist, sources said.
Newsom said he is in final salary negotiations with his pick for chief, but said selling the job is a challenge after the board's move.
"I was about to make an announcement, and now I'm trying to explain what the board did," Newsom said, implying he had been in talks with his choice Thursday morning to convince him.
"This board acted without my understanding of their intent," he continued. "It's a very dangerous game. I don't know what they're trying to do. I am stunned. Thank God we have a mayor."
The Board of Supervisors' budget committee voted Wednesday to rewrite parts of Newsom's interim budget, a placeholder document that ensures that city services continue during July. July 1 marks the start of the new fiscal year, but the new budget isn't usually signed until later in the month.
Traditionally, the board rubber-stamps the mayor's interim budget, but on Wednesday, the budget committee voted to strip $82 million out of the police, fire and sheriff's departments to reverse the mayor's cuts to the health and social services programs.
City officials said there's enough money to keep paying the salaries of public safety officers through July, but that if a compromise isn't reached, it would mean major cuts in those departments once the new budget is signed.
David Chiu, president of the Board of Supervisors, said there's no reason Newsom should have been taken aback (as nothing these crazy dipshits do should surprise anyone anymore), because the board passed a list of budget priorities last month explicitly stating the city needs to protect the social safety net for vulnerable San Franciscans (and Mexicans and Salvadorans and any American citizens who excel at sponging off the system and can afford a bus ticket here).
Newsom's $6.6 billion budget for the 2009-10 year, which he delivered to the board last week, includes bigger budgets for public safety agencies while closing homeless drop-in centers and slashing millions of dollars from services for the mentally ill and drug- and alcohol-addicted.
"I'm surprised at the mayor's emotional reaction to a legitimate, genuine policy debate," Chiu said. "When he calms down, I look forward to working with him to develop a budget that reflects our shared policy priorities ."
While many city officials say they think a compromise will be struck within the next several weeks, Newsom and others didn't hesitate to outline what an $82 million cut to public safety would mean: the closure of district police stations, layoffs of more than 300 police officers, the closure of at least one city jail, the release of hundreds of inmates, the closure of 12 of 42 fire stations and 50 fewer firefighters working at any given time (you can just hear the progressives getting sexually aroused at the very idea!).
"When tourists get off the plane at SFO, should we hand them a sheet of paper that says, 'Danger! Staying in San Francisco could cause serious death (as opposed to "non-serious death?") or injury to you and your family'? It's crazy," said John Hanley, president of the firefighters union.
But supervisors said slashing health and human services would endanger lives, too (of the "important" people: drug addicts, illegal aliens, bums, criminals... the sort of people that dumbfucks like Chiu, Avalos, Daly, Mirkarimi, and Maxwell think run this city). Supervisor John Avalos, chairman of the budget committee, pointed out that no firefighter, police officer or sheriff's deputy will lose their job under the mayor's budget, while hundreds of other city employees will be out of work (and your point issss?).
"They have to share some of the pain," he said.
Sheriff Michael Hennessey said he's confident "a more moderate approach will develop over the next 60 days," but acknowledged that it will be a tense summer at City Hall.
"I won't be running off to the beach anytime between now and September," he said.
In sort-of related news...
The SF Chronicle published an editorial that actually praised the Police Department and admonished four of the Boards chief Commies - Mar, Maxwell, Daly, and my very own Ross Mirkarimi - for grandstanding in their attempt to pass a useless resolution (do they pass any other kind?) calling for charges to be dropped in the ancient case of the murder of SFPD Sgt. John Young in 1971 by members of the Black Liberation Army.
The editorial comes as a bit of a surprise from the normally anti-cop Chronicle. Indeed, in the same edition as this editorial are more stories of people suing the police for alleged misconduct - a fairly common storyline in the Chron.
Four supervisors - Eric Mar, Ross Mirkarimi, Sophie Maxwell, and Chris Daly - want the case dropped, using hazy logic (again - do they employ any other kind?) that mixes the discarded charges with images of Abu Ghraib abuse.
If the case is so weak, it will be exposed in court, not via a toothless resolution that insults the judicial process, the San Francisco Police Department and the integrity of City Hall.
But then... insulting the judicial process, the Police Department and the integrity of City Hall is what these assholes are all about. That's their raison d'etre. How can we expect any less - or more - from them? Nobody should be surprised that they're acting out in this way.
Oh and for a real laugh... the Chron previously published an op-ed on the same subject - urging for dismissal of the charges - by one of our favorite homegrown Communists Cindy Sheehan! America's least favorite Gold Star Mom tries to tie in Abu Gharib, J.Edgar Hoover, and, of course, racism, to try to explain why we should just give it up.
And here in San Francisco, the new attempt to prosecute this old case seems to have been generated less by any new evidence than by the atmosphere of fear fostered by the war on terror, led by a government willing to condone torture in the name of security.
I call on all officials to do so as well, to reject prosecution based on the results of torture and to defend the human rights of these men who have been subjected to such injustice.
yes... I'm sure they were fine, upstanding citizens until the bad policeman got a hold of them. Just like those poor misunderstood people in Guantanamo. Stupid bitch.
The only thing truly "tortured" here is Cindy Sheehan's logic.