Examiner 12/04/08 - YouTube = MeBored; Municipal ID's; and the CJC

Newsom on YouTube = YouBored

“I wouldn’t watch Pamela Anderson for 7½ hours, much less Gavin Newsom.” That’s the e-mail I got from a dear friend on Wednesday.

I had asked for his thoughts on Mistermayor’s 7½-hour-long State of the City speech, which is being unveiled in several segments on YouTube and on the city government’s Web site.

Five parts have already been released, and, yes, I have listened to them all. Initially, I figured that since one could walk through every neighborhood in The City in about the same time it is going to take Mistermayor to tell us about its present state, he must have something very interesting to say. But no.

Like pushing a button on a drinking fountain and getting a fire hose, viewers who tune in are assaulted for 30-45 minutes at a time with randomly strung-together facts and information on a particular subject, such as education. Remarkably, after hearing all those statistics, one comes away still not knowing much about where The City is going.

Immediately numbed by the substance of the speeches, my mind wandered to the question of why he chose to address us in this fashion. He claims to want a dialogue, a discussion — yet the comments section of the videos is turned off. Part closing argument, part infomercial and part desperate babbling — as if, like Scheherazade, he has to keep talking until the sun comes up — these lengthy monologues do not invite conversation.

Instead, what I see is a man who is having a tough year. Four of his candidates for the Board of Supervisors lost, and his relationship with the current board is as strained as ever; his ballot initiatives did poorly; he’s dealing with high crime and a budget crisis; and his image was used to successfully pass a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.

Let us not forget that, like Linus, the blanket-toting “Peanuts” character, Mistermayor is idealistic and rational, but also ultrasensitive and insecure. He’s using this State of The City address to remind us that he is special. Mission accomplished.

City’s ID cards identifying the known

Last November, the Board of Supervisors passed an ordinance stating that The City would follow the lead of New Haven, Conn., and issue municipal identification cards. The cost of issuing the cards is estimated to be $1 million to $3 million for the first three years.

The City was supposed to start issuing the IDs in August, but the rollout has been delayed. Mistermayor’s office says that’s because it is tightening security protections on the cards, but I suspect the budget crisis and sanctuary-city troubles are also part of the problem.

Recently, groups have demanded that The City start issuing the cards. However, people who think the cards are going to help undocumented San Franciscans should read the law carefully. In order to qualify for the identification, a person has to show proof of identity. So, in a strict sense, people who are “undocumented” aren’t eligible for the card.

And even those who have enough identification to get the card aren’t getting any new benefits. (If New Haven’s experience is any indicator, don’t expect any banks here to accept the cards as primary proof of identification.)

As Wade Crowfoot, then-board liason from Mistermayor’s office, told the Board of Supervisors last year, “More than allowing for specific residents to access specific services that they haven’t been able to access, this is to ensure that all of our immigrant residents feel comfortable accessing city services that they can technically already access.”

And, I suspect, The City will have a nifty new way to track people who use municipal services — though you won’t hear that point in all of the empty rhetoric about helping undocumented persons.

Proposition L — the funding dance

As you may recall, Proposition L on November’s ballot would have required the expenditure of approximately $1 million to pay for the proposed Community Justice Center. The purpose of the center is to provide social services to San Franciscans who commit nonviolent felonies in the Tenderloin area. Prop. L failed with 57 percent of voters opposed.

Citing Prop. L’s failure, about two weeks ago, Supervisors Chris Daly and Jake McGoldrick, opponents of the center, introduced an ordinance that would defund the center. It was on the agenda for Wednesday’s Budget and Finance Committee hearing.

So, just to be clear on how this dance goes:

Step 1: Begrudgingly fund the center in this year’s budget.

Step 2: Tell everyone to vote against Prop. L because it is unnecessary — the center has already been funded! (Daly and McGoldrick signed just such an argument in the voter pamphlet.)

Step 3: When Prop. L fails, claim that it means people don’t want the center so we should de-fund it.

WTF?

That’s like saying the reason we didn’t rename the Oceanside Water Treatment Plant the George W. Bush Sewage Plant is that 70 percent of us love the current president. Nonsense. There are many reasons why people vote against a ballot initiative.

In the case of Prop. L, any number of folks voted against it based on the very argument advocated by Daly and McGoldrick — that the proposition was unnecessary, not that the center is a bad idea. Inferring a reverse mandate is laughably irrational — and I suspect Daly and McGoldrick know it.

I’m sure they also know that even if the defunding ordinance passes, there are not enough votes to override the mayoral veto that would surely follow. All of which makes me wonder if we should make being a supervisor a part-time job again.

--Melissa

Comments

[Beth Spotswood]

That is such a Vansmack quote...

[kerthialfad]

This ID card plan is a waste of money. Why not charge $100 each and make some money on it?

[Michael]

Who wouldn't want to watch Mistermayor for 7 1/2 hours?? Just turn down the volume, grab your favorite toy, a box of kleenex and watch!! Who needs porn when Mistermayor is doing this?