Well, there's small movement on the city-owned car front. Apparently, department heads were issued paperwork on Monday to be given to "city workers" who get a free car and gas to use as they please. They are supposed to write down why they should have a free car, gas and tolls.
I hope the Examiner stays on this story and that these justification forms are made public.
Despite the fact that the economy is sinking (thanks to the purchase of the White House for Obama by the unions), the City of San Francisco wants to raise taxes (surprise, surprise!) to balance its morbidly obese budget.
Instead of cutting the fat out of the city budget (of which there is a LOT), the bozos in Silly Hall want the citizens of San Francisco to pay for their pet projects and payoffs to special interests by raising the sales tax, parcel tax, car tax and payroll tax. Naturally, these monies will not be used to pay down the debt; it will go to support the unions.
If the unions want a raise, why don't they tax themselves more?
So the Mayor has finally realized that its "workers" are often spoiled bureaucrats with too many priviliges and not enough oversight. Funny how he's realizing this, just as he begins his big fundraising push for his run for Governor.
First, the Mayor's office has eliminated 103 cars from various departments and has repossessed 46 more cars from city "workers" who have been using them to commute to and from work every day without paying for tolls or gas or parking. Some of these people commute as far away as Santa Rosa. The excuse Gavin is using is the "global wah-wah" argument, but also argues that the financial cost that these "workers" run up driving these cars every day costs the City money.
Seems like to me that using a city car to commute free every day (and to run errands during other times) is not the right use for a government vehicle. Actually, I think the City should calculate how much each one of the people cost the City in fuel, tolls and mileage. Then report it as income so it can be taxed. I have seen Official SF Vehicles at the mall in Colma during the weekdays. There's a city "worker" who has been taking a Pious home every day down the block from me for the past few years. I wonder if his car has been repossessed and now he will have to suffer on Joe Muni like much of San Francisco does. Although this move has been made in the name of global wah-wah, I think that in this case, the ends justify the means.
And speaking of spoiled city "workers", some of them may be losing their free cell phones! The City spent over $13 million dollars last year for city owned cell phones. Aside from public safety, there should be no other agency that gets a free cell phone. Who are all these people that have cell phones and why are they using them so much? Don't they have REAL work to do?? Again, calculate how much each person has rung up and add it on to her paycheck as income so it's taxable!
Let's see how much teeth these directives have. Or is it just window dressing for a Governor's run?
Well, I found out that an extended member of my family is now a statistic. He and his family were victims of a home invasion robbery, part of a string that has been happening over the past few months. Apparently, the suspects are black, one fat and one skinny, who proceed to force their way into the house when the victims are getting out of their cars, produce a weapon and proceed upstairs into the house where it is ransacked and the victims terrorized.
Of course, they're hitting victims that usually come home late from work. Naturally, these victims are not black, but of an ethnicity that usually doesn't call the po-po.
My advice? Always be aware of your surroundings. See a strange car parked nearby with people inside? See strangers loitering around your house? Call the cops and hope it doesn't take over an hour for them to show up. Leave the outside lights on so you can see. And exercise your 2nd Amendment rights. Get trained in the use of a firearm and buy one. I've the feeling that the 2nd Amendment may be abridged after 21 January...
One of the misconceptions that I hear often about the San Francisco area is how "tolerant and diverse and progressive" it is here. That's there's no discrimination here and all that does occur is Bush's fault. Unless you're not white.
Well, this happened in Marin, which is populated by people from San Francisco that got too uppity for the City. And the cab driver's solution was a typical San Francisco play too.
The left wing has completed its takeover of the SF School Bored. But they're not bored!
And typical of the left wing, guess what their first point of business is? Yup, a NEW Tax. A Parcel Tax. And guess what it's for?
Raises for CTA members! That's on top of a 8.5% increase that they received since 2004. While enrollment has been dropping each year for the past 10 years...
2003: US$295 million (Yes, MILLION) General Obligation Bond for "school facility improvements" 2004: US$300 million General Obligation Bond for "extracurricular needs" (perhaps raises again?)
2004-2006: CTA members in San Francisco get 8.5% raise over 2 years
See a pattern here? Enough is Enough. If you want to run for School Board in the next election cycle, better start fundraising NOW!
So Gavin's been trying to get "citizens" to do overpaid union DPW workers' work by encouraging them to "volunteer" to clean the streets, in the name of "civic pride".
One of the reasons why the streets are so filthy is because the DPW is inefficient and does not do their job, despite being paid exorbitant union wages to clean the streets and take care of the roads. Well, there was an audit released that confirms much of what true San Franciscians have suspected all along.
The best part, the head of DPW doesn't deny any of this!!! So shouldn't he be fired and the union broken?
A report was released that SFGate picked up stating that San Francisco (along with Oakland and San Jose) have bad roads and that winds up costing drivers (who pay personal property tax AKA DMV "fees" for the privilige to drive on the roads) close to US$700 each year in maintenence and repairs.
SF Gate ended the story with a thinly veiled pitch for an upcoming bond measure. The problem is that, as in the story, local governments (ran by spending liberals) have not been maintaining the roads. It's not for a lack of money though. 50% of the money that gets sent to Sacramento in the form of DMV "fees" gets sent back to the county that it came from. That money was originally intended to fix and maintain the roads that vehicles use which it was prior to 1978 when a state initiative uncoupled this revenue stream and road maintenance.
Now, the liberals who run the cities have a lot of money to play with and play they do! To the point that roads are neglected. Then they blame Prop. 13 for the shortfall and the bad condition of the roads (and schools too).
The real problem for both the schools and the roads is a SPENDING PROBLEM by the liberal left. In a typical county, such as Alameda or San Francisco, there are hundreds of millions of dollars coming in each year from various sources. It is the liberal left who sets the priorities for spending. It is the left wing school boards that spend the money. It is the left wing Boards of Supervisors and City Councils that allocate the money.
As it's been shown in the past, they would rather pay themselves and their union cronies outrageous sums of perks and monies instead of using that money for its true intent. Fixing the roads and maintaining the schools.
But that's life in northern Californa for the moment...
Over the past year, there's been an increase in the amount of bums on the streets of San Francisco. Specifically on the West side of San Francisco, especially on the roads heading out to the Richmond and the Sunset. If you go to the limousine/trust fund liberal sections of San Francisco, such as Hayes Valley or Noe Valley or the Marina/Cow Hollow/PacHeights, you will find few to none. That's because they're all on the West Side, living in Golden Gate Park. Out of sight, out of mind and for these limousine/trust fund liberals, the Richmond and the Sunset are not part of "real San Francisco" anyway.
Golden Gate Park is a park, not a campground! Citizens cannot enjoy the park because of the risk of finding encampments full of drugs, booze and refuse. Should kids or the elderly have to deal with that? Like I said in a previous post, San Francisco can't have anything nice because the bums and their non profit pimps will spoil it for everyone else.
Now because it's an election year next year, there's the usual sweep and the rediscovery of the fact that most true San Franciscicans are tired of bums polluting their streets and neighbourhoods and of all the tax money that is wasted on bum services and the non profit whores who profit off of them.
Real San Franciscians are ones who are at least 2nd generation natives, have suffered through the SF Public Schools and who own property (and thus pay taxes). Very few who live in the limousine/trust fund liberal districts do that. A lot who live in the Richmond and the Sunset do. And these are the people that Silly Hall and especially Room 200 should be appeasing.
San Francisco rarely gets nice new places becuase the bums take over and then it's not nice anymore. Kudos for the SFPD for keeping the sidewalks clean!
If the leftists are soooo concerned with the welfare of bums, why don't they let them ply their trade in Hayes Valley and Noe Valley? Why? Oh, it's because they're much better than the rest of us. We don't deserve clean streets, but they do. F--- that!
No, that's not a new TV show, although you can see the desperation on TV...
The CA dum party is running attack ads on behalf of their "candidate" for Governor.
Their candidate who has been likened to "Gray Davis without personality". Or new ideas. Indeed, the ads are not even touting his "credentials" or "ideas". The ads are trying to tie Schwarzenegger with Bush. Repeat 10 times. That's the gist of the commercial.
The problem with this is that: A, it's too early in the campaign for desperate attack ads and B, the dem candidate has a lot of skeletons in his closet that will see the light of day, soon.
It's interesting how the SF Chron is calling the Schwarzenegger campaign "mean" because they've removed all of the dum candidate's possible angles of attack. When Davis and Kerry ran, it was called "good campaigning".
And is there ANY question that this is a publicity stunt using the power of a constititutional office to generate any media for the dums? Since Lockyer filed the lawsuit, he should have his car, driver and protection detail removed, since they drive cars and that could be seen as a confict of interest.
Of course, since he a dum, he CAN'T walk with the common people...he's more equal than we are!
MUNI spent US$2 million on a study that says buses are slow because of stop signs and the number of stops. And that people dun ride MUNI because it's too slow. Well DUH!
Only government "workers" are shocked about this! Is it any wonder that MUNI is the slowest system AND has the highest paid "workers"? Nope. That comes with the territory.
And MUNI spent US$2 million on this "study". I coulda told them all this for half the price!
Pretend you are a "big business" operating in a City. You provide hundred of jobs and generate tax revenue for the City because you do business there. So far, so good, right?
Then there's a regime change. Instead of seeing you as an economic partner, with the best long term interest of the City in mind, you are now seen as a cash cow, ripe for milking extra taxes from to satisfy the spending problem that the City has in droves.
So what do you do? You are paying much more taxes than you did before because you are a business. Should you continue to stay where you are because "being in San Francisco" has some sort of status? Should you stay because it's your "patriotic duty" to support leftists and unions via excess taxation?
Or do you pull up stakes and move to where it's cheaper to provide those jobs that you do no, maybe Oaktown or Daly City? If you're rational, you'll choose the latter.
This is the choice that many downtown business have to face. All I gotta say is that Oaktown has better weather and Daly City has more parking!
Chances are that leftists that accuse The President of being corrupt or starting a "war for oil" or any of that bullshit will wax nostalgic about Clinton and how he was great.
I will agree. Just look at this list of accomplishments made by the Clinton Administration:
- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance - Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates* - Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation - Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify - Most number of witnesses to die suddenly - First president sued for sexual harassment. - First president accused of rape. - First first lady to come under criminal investigation - Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case - First president to establish a legal defense fund. - First president to be held in contempt of court - Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions - Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad - First president disbarred from the US Supreme Court and a state court
STARR-RAY INVESTIGATION
- Number of Starr-Ray investigation convictions or guilty pleas (including one governor, one associate attorney general and two Clinton business partners): 14 - Number of Clinton Cabinet members who came under criminal investigation: 5 - Number of Reagan cabinet members who came under criminal investigation: 4 - Number of top officials jailed in the Teapot Dome Scandal: 3
CRIME STATS
- Number of individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton machine who have been convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes: 47 - Number of these convictions during Clinton’s presidency: 33 - Number of indictments/misdemeanor charges: 61 - Number of congressional witnesses who have pleaded the Fifth Amendment, fled the country to avoid testifying, or (in the case of foreign witnesses) refused to be interviewed: 122
CLINTON MACHINE CRIMES FOR WHICH CONVICTIONS HAVE BEEN OBTAINED
OTHER MATTERS INVESTIGATED BY SPECIAL PROSECUTORS AND CONGRESS, OR REPORTED IN THE MEDIA
Bank and mail fraud, violations of campaign finance laws, illegal foreign campaign funding, improper exports of sensitive technology, physical violence and threats of violence, solicitation of perjury, intimidation of witnesses, bribery of witnesses, attempted intimidation of prosecutors, perjury before congressional committees, lying in statements to federal investigators and regulatory officials, flight of witnesses, obstruction of justice, bribery of cabinet members, real estate fraud, tax fraud, drug trafficking, failure to investigate drug trafficking, bribery of state officials, use of state police for personal purposes, exchange of promotions or benefits for sexual favors, using state police to provide false court testimony, laundering of drug money through a state agency, false reports by medical examiners and others investigating suspicious deaths, the firing of the RTC and FBI director when these agencies were investigating Clinton and his associates, failure to conduct autopsies in suspicious deaths, providing jobs in return for silence by witnesses, drug abuse, improper acquisition and use of 900 FBI files, improper futures trading, murder, sexual abuse of employees, false testimony before a federal judge, shredding of documents, withholding and concealment of subpoenaed documents, fabricated charges against (and improper firing of) White House employees, inviting drug traffickers, foreign agents and participants in organized crime to the White House.
ARKANSAS ALTZHEIMER’S
Number of times that Clinton figures who testified in court or before Congress said that they didn’t remember, didn’t know, or something similar.
Bill Kennedy 116 Harold Ickes 148 Ricki Seidman 160 Bruce Lindsey 161 Bill Burton 191 Mark Gearan 221 Mack McLarty 233 Neil Egglseston 250 Hillary Clinton 250 John Podesta 264 Jennifer O’Connor 343 Dwight Holton 348 Patsy Thomasson 420 Jeff Eller 697
Room 200 show how to waste San Francisco Taxpayer Money
1: You can waste money by fighting to overturn a court decision that overturned a defective law that you proposed and passed because it's compatible with your idiot-logy. Remember that the only people who are entitled to "civil rights" are the people that agree with you! So if other people want to defend themselves and avail on their Second Amendment rights, screw them!!
2: You can waste taxpayer money by providing legal and social services to illegal aliens who are in violation of Federal Law. Are you an illegal alien who is in violation of Federal Immigration regs? Well come to San Francisco and the Bored will provide you with a lawyer for free! Got frens in the non-profit mafia that need more money? Well, these illegal aliens will need to know that these "free" services will be made available! And dun worry, city workers are in solidarity with you, illegal alien, cuz they are not supposed to cooperate with el migra! Everyone wins!
He justifies this by saying that "...downtown must pay it's fair share", "...our roads need to be paved, our parks need to be refurbished".
"Fair Share?" Are you kidding?? To the limousine liberals in Room 200, "fair share" is business handing over all their money to them, in effect having business work for the enrichment of the unions and the Bored of stupes. But let's look at the points that were brought up.
Yes, our roads are crap. I ride a motorcycle AND drive a car (because MUNI sucks out here) because I have no choice. I experience the shite roads that we have here and I probably know traffic patterns better than the idiots at DPT and MTA. The City and County of San Francisco takes in, on average, over US$400,000 a month from DMV fees that are collected from drivers and motorcyclists that live here. That money is supposed to go to fixing the roads. But since the roads are crap here (and have been for over 10 years), you can presume (and you'd be correct) that the roads have not been maintained.
That's because the left-wing Bored of stupes chooses to take that money that is supposed to go to fixing the roads and wastes it, giving grants and free money to their non-profit buddies instead of providing services that taxpaying San Francisco residents pay for. What guarantee is there that the money that will be extorted by this new tax, if it passes, will actually be used for fixing the roads and parks instead of being used to pay off the unions as a lot of city and bond money goes to?
And the parks, sigh, the parks. Whenever the Bored declares a "fiscal emergency", the Parks Dept. usually takes the brunt of the cuts. Instead of trying to ban smoking in parks, the Bored should try to keep funding available by cutting wastful union jobs and perhaps taking a pay cut themselves. Lead by example.
Whoops, but they're not about paying their "fair share" when it comes to THEIR income.
