The collapse of a progressive city
Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2022 11:13 am
That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
https://www.octopusoverlords.com/forum/
https://www.octopusoverlords.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=99077
And police clearan rate is highly dependent on the DA/SA's willingness to charge and ability to prosecute.“Given the exacting standards that the state’s attorney has for charging a case — which is proof beyond a reasonable doubt — when those charges are brought, these people are guilty,” Mayor Lori Lightfoot said. “Of course they’re entitled to a presumption of innocence. Of course they’re entitled to their day in court. But, residents in our community are also entitled to safety from dangerous people.”
Right but in SF Boudin was charging people at that high rate. My take is that if you think the revolving door is a problem you prove it. Keep arresting the same people. Make a case. Instead they intentionally let crime happen and then blame the policy arguing the unproven counter case. I see it as just blind faith that the carceral state approach is inherently better. Despite that really only the US uses this model across advanced economies and like most things we have poorer results.LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 5:57 pmAnd police clearan rate is highly dependent on the DA/SA's willingness to charge and ability to prosecute.
I would note two things:malchior wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 5:13 pm Jesus wept. This piece is at worst full of misinformation or at best missing a lot of key context. It talks about the crime problem without directly talking about how the police have effectively gone on a law enforcement strike. SF didn't defund the police. The police claim they are understaffed but in fact they have the most police officers per capita of any major city in California. They also have the worst clearance rate. They solve crime at half the rate that most other city police departments in California perform.
Instead, the police stopped fighting crime and blamed it on Boudin's policies. The problem with that is he actually was prosecuting more cases per arrest than past DAs. The piece does talk about it but then amazingly goes on to say who can blame the cops since he doesn't prioritize what they care about. Hard to know if they aren't willing to test it.
FFS. I love The Atlantic but this is a really disappointing piece of writing. Not that it is totally wrong but that it seems to step over a lot of issues to frame this as a particular audience wanted.
Edit: I'd also point out there is all sorts of bad causation here. Crime is up everywhere. And by everywhere - I mean in most of the United States but in SF it was somehow worse because Boudin was diverting more cases? The guy has been in office a couple of years - some of which included a deadly pandemic. Is that case really that strong? Or is it the police not doing their job or a combination. I've read that a lot of Koch network and tech bro money was poured into this campaign because they've been unhappy with the government in general there.
I consider that and the fact that the writer of this piece is deeply embedded in the tech scene there. That's admittedly not a strong case but I just have read enough about this from multiple angles to see a whole bunch of red flags all around this 'progressives' have bad policy positions framing to buy it too strongly...yet. Especially since they've hardly even been tried. It's too politically convenient for certain 'big money' interest world views. Again I think there is a kernel of truth here but that is how the best misinformation works.
Actually I didn't. I just focused on the part where I saw the most misinformation/lack of context. It also was what was most relevant for the election. Perhaps the author is right and it was collected exasperation however...
Right about 60% of the turnout but that was after a 2-year concerted campaign and huge money drops from a GOP donor network and tech bros.2) Not withstanding your perspective, the public thought otherwise and recalled the DA by a wide margin. Seems like a lot of people in SF are in agreement with the author.
What's really interesting is that right across the bay from them in Oakland where crime is worse the 'progressive' DA candidate and county Sheriff's candidate both won a strong plurality in a divided field. Both are heading for generals since they didn't win outright though. Still not the slam dunk denunciation of progressive politics. They also weren't facing such well-funded opposition.A Marin County-based political action committee is responsible for nearly two-thirds of all donations to groups seeking to recall San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin and 45% of all monetary contributions in the race, according to city ethics commission data.
Neighbors for a Better San Francisco Advocacy, a political action committee that lists its address in San Rafael and the same phone number as a Northern California lobbying firm with an office in the North Bay city, contributed $4.7 million to three of the four groups seeking to oust the progressive prosecutor in Tuesday's election.
Recall proponents have touted citywide concerns about crime as a reason to oust Boudin, who was elected district attorney in 2019 and previously faced a recall that failed to reach the ballot last year.
...
San Franciscans for Public Safety Supporting the Recall of Chesa Boudin, which has raised more money than any other group seeking to remove Boudin, highlighted last month that it had more than 1,000 donors, 80% of whom contributed fewer than $250. But that belies how much the anti-Boudin groups relied upon spending from outside committees with deep-pocketed donors like Neighbors for a Better San Francisco.
That committee, whose filings list the same address as the political lobbying firm Nielsen Merksamer, received donations averaging $80,000 from just shy of 100 groups and individuals, according to a San Francisco Chronicle analysis published on Monday. Republican billionaire William Obendorf contributed more than $600,000 to Neighbors for a Better San Francisco over the last two years, or more than 10% of the nearly $5.9 million the group raised during that time.
In all, Neighbors for a Better San Francisco – which also successfully sought to recall three San Francisco school board members after spending more in the race than any other group – and other political action committees spent nearly $5.5 million.
But during the pandemic, he faced intensifying backlash from law enforcement, tech industry leaders, conservatives and residents concerned about crime. Backed by ultra-wealthy funders, including a billionaire GOP mega donor, the recall supporters raised $7.2m and ran a campaign that blamed Boudin’s policies for the complex problems of crime, violence, homelessness, drug addiction and other challenges in the city.
The recall message won out in a low-turnout election on Tuesday, with initial results showing 60% of voters supporting his removal, despite a lack of evidence that Boudin’s reforms were causing an uptick in crime rates.
San Francisco, like cities across the US, saw an increase in homicides, but overall violent crime has decreased during his tenure. The DA has a limited impact on the root causes of crime, but chooses which cases to prosecute and what charges to file and what punishments to pursue; police are largely responsible for solving crimes and making arrests, and judges make the final decisions about sentencing and whether to release defendants.
...
Some national pundits have suggested the recall shows Democratic voters support tough-on-crime policies and oppose reform. But reform activists in California are skeptical of that conclusion. Boudin and his supporters say they were unable to overcome the huge financial advantage of their opponents and noted the struggle to get residents to the polls in a city fatigued with voting, after already having two special elections this year.
“People have been just completely bombarded by ads and years of fear mongering and sensationalism in the media about ‘rising crime’ and ‘San Francisco being unlivable’,” said Emily Lee, co-director of San Francisco Rising Action Fund, a racial justice group. “Even though violent crime is down in San Francisco, facts didn’t matter. People emotionally were driven by that narrative. And it is a tough time. People want easy answers to hard problems, like homelessness and the drug overdose crisis, and they want something to latch onto.” Voters most affected by crime and the criminal system were probably not well represented at the ballot box, Lee added.
The vast majority of the city’s residents on Tuesday voted for Rob Bonta, the progressive state attorney general who has supported reform and was facing challengers that favored a punitive approach.
Good grief. Time for a reality check. Point out where you were told you were wrong. Any criticism was directed at problems with the piece. Which was to be blunt was chock full of misinformation.
SF Chronicle wrote:San Francisco police officers stepped up street enforcement in significant ways after District Attorney Chesa Boudin was recalled and replaced by mayoral appointee Brooke Jenkins, a new analysis of city data finds.
In the three months since Jenkins was sworn in July 8, police initiated eight more traffic stops per day on average when compared with the three months before — an increase of nearly 30%.
Also in the 45 days after Jenkins was sworn in, officers made 10 additional “public order” stops per day, a 20% increase, according to the analysis conducted by an economist from New York University’s Public Safety Lab in partnership with The Chronicle.
Public order stops include those related to vandalism, illegal dumping, soliciting sex, trespassing and sit-lie ordinances, which prohibit individuals from sitting or lying on city sidewalks between 7 a.m. and 11 p.m. These crimes are mostly classified as lower-level, and police typically exercise more discretion in responding to them than they do with more serious offenses like robberies and shootings.
The jump in stops raises questions about whether the change was driven by the replacement of a progressive, reformist prosecutor with a more moderate district attorney who has publicly pledged to increase punishment for people accused of crime.
Some police critics decried what they saw as purposeful police inactivity under Boudin’s tenure — an assertion that officials disputed — while some voters who ousted Boudin believed he was hamstringing the cops by being too lenient with prosecutions. Recall supporters have been asking for more street enforcement.
“The paper’s potential implications that there were significant changes in officers’ behavior relating to the recall election are very concerning to me,” Police Commissioner Kevin Benedicto told The Chronicle in an email. “I plan to review the paper and data closely and discuss the findings with Chief Scott and SFPD leadership.”
Also in the immediate period after Jenkins took office, residents made fewer calls to police related to public order offenses, suggesting that the increase in enforcement likely wasn’t due to a surge in these crimes. The data does not include the outcome of stops, so the analysis does not show whether there was a corresponding increase in arrests.
The study did not show any significant uptick in police response to violent crimes such as assault or property-related offenses like burglary and shoplifting.
There was actually a great piece on the collapse of San Fran on The Daily recently. While certain “progressive” (quotes for you, malchior) policies have certainly contributed to the problems in the city, the focus on the piece was all about how San Francisco so tightly yoked its future to tech that it was very poorly positioned to withstand a downturn in that sector or how quickly companies in the tech sector adopted remote work during the pandemic.malchior wrote: ↑Fri Mar 24, 2023 2:34 pm I've been to SF many times as well. I have clients there. I talk daily with a co-worker who lives there regularly. It is undoubtably a city with significant problems. Problems that can't get addressed in the current media and political environment. It is also a touchstone for all the centrist scolds who want to bash on "progressives". Progressive has practically become a pejorative term itself that ranks up there with "woke" in my mind as a useless term.
Dean Preston, another member of the Board of Supervisors, recently introduced a proposal called the Grocery Protection Act, which would require a closing store to provide the city six months’ notice and try to find a replacement supermarket for the location it’s vacating.
No, that's not like most blue cities.waitingtoconnect wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2024 5:57 pm Like most blue cities it’s run by liberals for ultra conservative:libertarianism minded tech bros or billionaires.
that federal order is still in effect.A panel of federal appellate judges Tuesday left in place a lower court order that bars San Francisco from using the city's laws against sleeping on the streets to prosecute people who are involuntarily homeless.
Is there still liberal stupidity? Sure, but in a lot of ways, that comes from being one of the cities who has to deal with most of these issues first.According to data released by Comprehensive.io, a website that tracks salaries and job trends in tech, San Francisco beats out every other city in terms of its share of artificial intelligence-based jobs by a vast margin. Around 22% of AI job postings are from companies headquartered in San Francisco—more than Cupertino and Los Angeles, the second- and third-ranked cities in terms of AI job posts, combined.
This may be true, but the Ds have a strangle hold on state level politics in IL, which leads to all kinds of Fuckery. Just look at how many IL governors have been charged with various types of Felonies for a good example. The exact same thing can be said of Ohio, but in Ohio it's the Republicans with the super majority and the Republicans who get up to the Fuckery and inevitable felony charges.ImLawBoy wrote: ↑Tue Apr 16, 2024 9:58 am One party rule in major cities is a bit of a myth, though. Sure, the majority of city council members in Chicago, for example, have a D next to their names, but the reality is that a lot of them would qualify and identify as Rs if they were in some of the suburbs. I'm betting that if I saw my city council member's ballot from 2020 it would show he voted for Trump. Rahm Emmanuel largely acted like a Republican while mayor of Chicago (granted, a very centrist R who would have been labeled a RINO nationally), and we were a whisker away from electing an even more conservative version of him in the last mayoral election. Local politics is hugely different from national politics, especially in "one party" cities.
California had that history as well, at least until the GOP went batshit crazy, and stopped caring about the things most Californians care about. In particular, the environment. One of the reasons Ahnold was able to win in CA was that he wasn't all in on selling out the environment (yes, there were plenty of others).ImLawBoy wrote: ↑Tue Apr 16, 2024 10:52 am Except Illinois has a history of electing Republican governors, too. In fact, of our last two imprisoned governors, one was a Democrat (Blago) and the other was a Republican (Ryan). There have also been two Republican senators in Illinois just in the 21st Century (Peter Fitzgerald from 1999-2005 and Mark Kirk from 2010-2017).
There are a ton of reasons why IL/Chicago politicians go bad, so I didn't mean to imply that a one party rule is the only reason, but it is certainly a contributing reason. I would point out that of the 69 people on that list Zarathud says only 20 of them are Republican. I'll take his word on that number and it certainly leaves it lopsided.Zarathud wrote: ↑Tue Apr 16, 2024 11:01 am Plenty of Illinois politicians, Democrats and Republicans, have been prosecuted. As many Republican governors as Democratic governors have been convicted of crimes. There’s about 20 Republicans in this list — https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor ... _of_crimes
I may be wrong but I always felt from personal experience and education that both parties have long had conservative and liberal wings. That was something I liked about our system. Obviously that’s changed.ImLawBoy wrote: ↑Tue Apr 16, 2024 9:58 am One party rule in major cities is a bit of a myth, though. Sure, the majority of city council members in Chicago, for example, have a D next to their names, but the reality is that a lot of them would qualify and identify as Rs if they were in some of the suburbs. I'm betting that if I saw my city council member's ballot from 2020 it would show he voted for Trump. Rahm Emmanuel largely acted like a Republican while mayor of Chicago (granted, a very centrist R who would have been labeled a RINO nationally), and we were a whisker away from electing an even more conservative version of him in the last mayoral election. Local politics is hugely different from national politics, especially in "one party" cities.