December 13, 2007
Newsom Calls Chu "Naïve" -- Well, Sort Of
No, not Frank Chu -- although a Gav versus a crazy would be most fascinating, indeed -- Carmen Chu.
Let's back up a bit here: In her first hickory-bold move since taking over for he who shall remain nameless, Chu decided to chip away at the homeless problem in the Sunset. Chu, according to the Examiner, "publicly demanded that several city departments come up with a specific plan to address her west side district’s homeless problem." It seems that the Sunset is all atwitter after the homeless population has increased in their hood, post-Golden Gate Park cleansing. (An eyesore for those of us returning from Union Square, hands full of Burberry and Bloomindale's bags. Way to kill a shopping high, hobos.)
Chu now wants the SFPD and the Human Services Agency "to come up with a Sunset-specific plan to combat the homeless problem." Soon. That is to say, send them elsewhere. But in Chu's defense, we can't blame her for trying to do something regardless of its futility. After all, this comes on the heels of a German exchange student getting stabbed by a mentally-estranged gentlemen in the Outer Sunset who, by chance, was also homeless.
Anyway, Newsom responded that "'[t]here was a homeless problem in the Sunset before we stepped up enforcement in the park.'" The Examiner article also mentions that he said it " was 'naïve' to think that increased efforts in the park would not prompt some homeless to move to other locations." Which? True. He also added that the city has "budgeted for the hiring of additional homeless outreach workers" to focus on the west side. Whether or not said outreach workers get hired is another matter altogether.
Just who's right here? Both side are right. Or wrong. Who knows. Again, it's a difficult issue.
But the main point here is this: we just love the new mouthy second-term Newsom. Or at least, we think we will. An aggressive mayor who says what's on his mind -- infused with a touch of second term chutzpah -- is a fun mayor.
|
I don't think chance had anything to do with the crazy man's homelessness.
Now that all prospects for higher office are outside of city limits, I think these smackdowns are going to increase (as well as the number of rightward policy shifts).
And in other news Ms. Chu is organizing a community meeting on homelessness on Monday 17 December, 2007. It's at the community center at 28th and Lawton.
Ms. Chu is just trying to do what Ed Jew was unable to do - represent the needs of the Sunset, which always gets the shaft from slick folk downtown.
Gavin is naive to think that Ms Chu, or anyone, is going to sit there and watch their constituents get stabbed because the mental health clinic we paid for is non-existent, and the policy of warehousing crazies at Laguna Honda isn't working anymore.
But it's not like he has to care what anyone thinks - progressives were too busy circle jerking (politically) to stand up to him, the Guardian was asleep at the wheel, and people just re-elected this guy. He will never be Governor or Senator, but for at least four years he can go back to his frat boy Marina ways and stick it to the uncool kids on the westside.
Does "demanding" that other people do something about it really qualify as doing something about it herself?
zippy: What time is that community meeting? Thanks.
Never mind. I found it in Chu's newsletter.
http://www.sfgov.org/site/bdsupvrs_index.asp?id=71353
COMMUNITY MEETING
Homelessness in the Sunset
Have your voice heard!.
Please join us at Supervisor Carmen Chu’s Sunset community meeting
♦
Monday, December 17
7:00 – 8:30pm
Sunset Recreation Center auditorium
28th Avenue & Lawton
♦
Captain Chignell of the Taraval Police Station and representatives from the Human Services Agency, Department of Public Works and Recreation & Parks Department will be in attendance to address your concerns. Please call Supervisor Carmen Chu’s office for more information: (415) 554-7460
Much obliged, zippy. I'm trying to keep track of Sunset events at www.sunsetdistrict.org
Ms. Chu sends out a bunch of e-mails. Yeah, the opt-out bit bugs me. I e-mailed her about some MUNI problems (what else), and got an eventual e-mail response from Natty Tatty Ford, a phone call from Ms. Chu herself, and a fairly steady stream of e-mails from Ms. Chu's office about the goings on out here in D4. E-mail her and I'm sure she'll add you to the list (whether or not you want to be added :-D).
Say what you will about Eddie Jew (pompous gentile who didn't even live here and spent more time repping Chinatown than D4), but Ms. Chu seems to at least be attempting to involve herself with the people in her... our neighborhood.
I think the fact that Carmen Chu is still rather green to the job of city sup is to her benefit. She's a fresh young face that may just drum up some new solutions over Newsom's seemingly unchangeable ideas.
Are we sure Gavin Newsom was referencing Supervisor Chu's naivete or maybe his own? I'm not sure.
At any rate, it is delightful to see one of the Supervisors responding to her constituents, acting in a mature fashion (so far, but you never know when she might crack I guess and start insinuating Mayor Newsom does cocaine), and seems to be working in the interests of ALL District 4 constituents rather than a select few.
Hmm, Supervisor Chu is doing a monthly newsletter and displaying local art in her office . . . sounds like she's learning from Mirkarimi.
The cool thing is that as soon as Newsom was reelected, the meth campers all reappeared under the freeway again. Let them poop in potholes!
Awesome, she's got balls to go with that chin.
it will be interesting to see what comes out of this meeting. i don't think anyone has any new idea's short of criminalization. it's well past the point of anyone's patience that works and pays taxes, other than the professional lobbyist and chris daly machine of course.
can someone report back what they hear please?
frank chu is not crazy, just misunderstood.
I will be in attendance.
If she tries to do something, she gets blasted.
If she didn't try to do something, she'd be blasted.
Should she just meditate upon the problem until the jewel in the lotus gives her the key to the universe?
I believe a growing number of San Francisco residents are tired of the idea that some people do not need to follow laws. The wealthy and the economically disadvantaged (leaving aside mentally ill folks because that's a totally different story) should not have different rules than all of us in the middle of the extremes.
So are you saying(RinconHillSF) that if you loose your home and have nowhere to go, you are not branded a criminal like SFPD states you are?
SFPD states if you are in violation of the law you are a criminal. Ergo; sleeping in the park, when you get turned away from a shelter because there are no more empty beds, you are in violation of the law.
So, why dose being with-out a home/place to sleep makes you a criminal?
Everybody has to poop if they're eating anything. If we can pick up our dog's poop off of the sidewalk and throw it into the closest public trash bin, any human being should be able to take care of their own waste as well - there are plenty of Learning Annex and real estate publications available to serve as the disposal tool.
It isn't the fact that someone lacks a home that draws the ire of San Francisco residents in general.
Everybody has to poop if they're eating anything. If we can pick up our dog's poop off of the sidewalk and throw it into the closest public trash bin, any human being should be able to take care of their own waste as well - there are plenty of Learning Annex and real estate publications available to serve as the disposal tool.
It isn't the fact that someone lacks a home that draws the ire of San Francisco residents in general.
I echo RinconHill. And I'm getting tired of the crankypants in our park blaming all the poop on the sidewalks on dogs, when you can plainly witness numerous human poopers if you go out late enough.
Seriously, recently we saw a dude poop, then penguin-walked his way over to a garbage can, and with pants around ankles, started rooting in the trash. Just across the park, mind you, from a public toilet.
THIS is what I have an issue with, not the fact that they are "without homes."
{snark} Bluecanary & Rincon Hill, why you hate the homeless? {/snark}
i just had another horrible experience with the homeless. i needed air in my tires and had to go to the 76 on folsom and 4th. i parked next to the machine and paid my 75 cents. i went to put air in the tire next to the curb. guess what i almost put my hand in on the curb next to my tire? human feces!!!!!!
i want these fuckers all dead
i am fed up
they are not human beings anymore
they don't treat themselves like one, so why the fuck should we?