January 14, 2007
Swells Fake Question Time By The Numbers
There's no Swells society column today! Sad! So we're doing a Fake Question Time By The Numbers instead.
Number of people in attendance: 200.
Number of chickens: 6.
Number of times Angela Alioto referred to "Bessie," a 94-year-old homeless woman she's befriended: 6.
Number of questions Gavin collected: 2 inches of cards (We'd estimate maybe around 100).
Number of questions Gavin read: About 10 (grouped into categories, except for our question, which he did not answer).
How much it would have cost for the supervisors to attend: Given the requirements of the Brown Act, about $10,000-$15,000 to set up a "special board meeting" at the Rec Center.
Number of people trying to keep the chickens out of the meeting: 1 (Wade Crowfoot), who was forced to relent when the chickens' attorney showed up.
Number of invitations sent out by the mayor's office: 1000.
Angela Alioto's phone number, which she encourages you to call if you see any homeless person on the street in San Francisco who needs help: (415) 434-8700.
Number of dogs: 1. We're still not sure why Fiona Ma brought her spaniel puppy to the event (but it was very cute!).
Getty v. Traina: 1-1 (Trevor Traina is listed as a "philanthropist" in the Styles section today.)
After the jump, a quick summary of Newsom's proposals on homelessness, just so you don't think we weren't entirely paying attention (plus, it's an excuse for us to run more pictures that we took. Man, we love our digital camera.)
Picture of Fiona Ma at Fake Question Time, with her dog.

Since taking office, the Newsom administration is reporting that over 4,790 homeless people have been placed into permanent housing and 1,798 units of affordable housing have been built. The next phase of activity is going to be to support homeless families, who have different needs from homeless individuals, in that homeless families tend to be more "episodically homeless" and don't function as well in shelters.
The administration strongly denies any "criminalization of homelessness," with Newsom pointing out that he had gotten one question about why the city was so lenient with homeless individuals and another about why the city had been so harsh. They're working with the police and fire department to support individuals and make sure we use city resources wisely in doing so (so you give the chronic ODer supportive housing at $30,000 to save $1,000,000 in fire, police, and hospital services).
In terms of substance abuse, the administration acknowledges there are still issues in reaching those communities. Newsom said that his office was suggesting a "wet" shelter -- ordinarily, you must be sober to use a city shelter bed, but they're thinking about opening one where you can be drunk. There were some snickers in the audience, we regret to report.
Other topics covered included how the city's team is combating the cold weather, the status of the 39 Fell Street shelter, and how popular Project Homeless Connect is. (We're still disappointed he didn't answer our question about the problems with gathering stats, though! Just because someone says something you don't want to hear doesn't mean they're out to get you -- Just look at the comments we get as a matter of course around here, for instance. What if we dealt with them the way Gavin Newsom does?)
Even we can admit that it was good to hear what the city's doing on the homelessness issue, and Newsom should justly be lauded for tackling the problem. But why call it a forum to speak directly to the people if you're not going to let the people speak directly to you? Why not just call it a speech and panel discussion, then? If it walks like a chicken and it talks like a chicken, it's.....


rita -
why do you hate gavin newsom sooooooo much? it is a little weird.
pwr
@peter why do the facts have to be translated as hate?
jerry -
fair enough. jerry, honestly, i'm just trying to bring a little levity to the post... politics can be fun as long as it is not mean.
in this case, the facts are subjective. i think rita is a political critic of the mayor (and we assume a supporter of matt gonzalez, chris daly et al, if not please let us know) which is fine, people can and should support whomever they want in the world.
the only thing one would ask (esp in an election year): if someone is going to use the site to advance a political agenda, this should be made clear by sfist, so readers know that the point of view of the info posted.
anyway, ill refresh the question: rita, how much do you love gavin newsom? :)
pwr
It's clear that the premise under which people were drawn to Saturday's meeting was totally false. No one except his panel and staff directly interacted with Mayor Newsom and had any sort of dialogue. The general public got more policy dialogue from the Project Chicken Connect participants than any city official.
The SFist comments section are a better forum for policy dialogue than what the Newsom administration cooked up for Saturday. To approximate Saturday's format here would require every single comment to be moderated by a single person, perhaps Jon. But even aside from Jon moderating every comment, he'd also have to re-phrase and type his own version of each comment. Does that sound like a satisfying exchange of ideas on policy?
Peter (if that is Peter Ragone), you clearly have more important things to address than any progressive bias in the San Francisco blog world.
I'm kind of doubting that it's Ragone, who would presumably be able to use a shift key. I'll have the NSA check the internets logfile.
Let's hope it's not the real Ragone, who is the Newsom Administration's version of Tony Snow/Ari Fleischer, and who wouldn't know the truth if it bit him. As far as Rita's prejudices and her ability to be a journalist, her writing has always struck me as smart, funny, fair and well researched. I wish the same could be said about more journalists.
As for "hating" on Newsom, anybody with an ounce of intelligence is currently appalled by the mayor not because of his positions so much as the fact that he seems to be an empty suit doing the bidding of those who put him in power, and all the rest of us can go eff off. That also seems to be the attitude of the current police department, a fact that the entire city is starting to notice.
Newsom changed my question so that Angela could go off in a differnt direction and make him look good. I assume he did it to others.
Peter - you may indeed be a troll, but I'm going to feed you anyway.
Everyone who reads SFist and posts here knows that Rita hates Newsom and loooooooovres her some Chris Daly and Matt Gonzalez.
Do not despair that thinking leftys are taken in by her obvious slams of any politician she doesn't agree with (ie - nearly all of them except for Chris Daly). SFist isn't where one finds straight journalism so there is no standard that she violates, apparently.
She represents the voice of a certain element of SF - she has her supporters and the rest of us pretty much overlook the attempts to make political commentary. In fact, if you stick around, you may find yourself checking the author of certain posts before attempting to read them. Jon is cool, Chris is cool, Rita's bound to be slanted to her unique view.
Anyway, Peter, don't sweat it. If they haven't already taken a swig of the kool-aid, Rita's posts wouldn't inspire anyone else to do it.
Suzeqzee - brilliant post. But wait, did you want to address the topic of Mayor Newsom's first campaign stop? Nothing's going to get past you, so care to comment on Mayor Newsom alleging this was a meaningful public dialog that satisfies the intent of voters?
Personally, I didn't find this post as egresiously biased as some others, so there's not really a need to comment. I haven't yet made up my mind about Newsom, but I'm sure SFist and Rita, especially, appreciate your topic policing. Well done, Adam.
hehe, you are 2 fer 2 in this thread. Keep trying. You might hit the topic yet.
Hi Rita,
I wanted to publicly apologize for my post above. It definitely was not within the standards of the comment policy, was an attack on your personal writing style and views and further, isn't true. You are a talenter writer, although I'm sure you don't need me to tell you that.
We don't seem to agree politically, but that's no reason for me to stoop to the level of other posters by carrying over old disputes (I didn't appreciate being called out during the Chris Daly thing) to new topics.
Anyway, sorry about having a bitchy moment, unfairly directed at you.
Sincerely,
Suzeqzee