Former S.F. leader to return as chief of mayor's staff

Continued from comment below: A license plate would be much more difficult to replicate or loan out. I think a good resolution to eliminating the fines being charged to individuals parking illegally and people taking up a full day of parking in these spots is to charge EVERYONE to park at a meter, whether they have a disability placard or not.

I responded to a very similar news article and I'll say it again here: I have a big gripe on this whole parking placard issue in general! I think that EVERYONE should have to pay for parking at a meter, regardless of if they have a disability or not. Most people who have limited incomes do not get a "Park For Free Card" if they park at a metered parking area. People who have mobility or other disabilities, who require a placard, who work for a living like many of us do, who make a fairly good income should have to pay for parking meters just like the rest do! Fine, issue a disability placard to an individual if an accommodation is necessary, but why eliminate the charge for parking to these individuals? If the income level of a person with a disability is a concern then maybe consider issuing disability license plates to individuals that are in the lower income bracket, allowing them to park for free. A license plate would be much more difficult to replicate or loan out. I think a g

What the hell does this got to do with the story mentioned above. Axe Grinders?

In SOMA in San Francisco parking in a garage costs $20-28 per day. Metered parking costs 25c a minute - $3/hour or $27 for the nine hours the meters are active. More than 50% of the metered spots are taken by handicap placard vehicles that don’t move all day. It’s the same vehicles every day-nice cars too. Multiply $27 dollars a day by 5 days/week times 52 weeks/year=over $7000 in parking fees that the city is not collecting. There is no turnover for these spots since their meters do not expire, so even people willing to pay $3 an hour are not able to find a spot. All people emerging from these cars are moving just fine. I do know that there are handicaps that are not immediately visible, but if the argument is that handicapped people cannot move very fast so therefore cannot get back to the car in time to pay pay the meter, then people who are issued placards should be required to have an actual physical disability. Check out the Howard / 2nd and surrounding area and stop the abuse!

As a libertarian, I would prefer to see government programs to "help" the homeless and the poor ended, as I believe they do more harm than good in the long run to all concerned (although when it comes to scaling back the government leviathan I would much prefer to start with things like corporate welfare and six-figure salaries of government officials). But while I don't believe in charity that is built on stolen taxpayer dollars, I am absolutely appalled when these same stolen taxpayer dollars are used to violate the civil liberties of those of us of least financial means, and to deliberately make public places inhospitable to them. Where is the leftist outrage, when a supposedly "progressive" Supervisor like Sophie Maxwell proposes to put the benches back in Civic Center Plaza, but to have them constructed in a manner so as to make it uncomfortable for the homeless to sleep on them (presumably at an added cost, to boot)? I find it absolutely unconscionable.

This is a law we desperately need in SF. I live across the street from someone who has not done one bit of maintenance on his property for over 10 years. It is the eyesore of our street. When he purchased the property over 11 years ago, it needed a new roof, and over $100,000 in termite work. The house needs painting, also, and he has debris and overgrown plants surrounding the front. Nothing has been done to date. I commend Supervisor Geraro Sandoval for his role in trying to get this legislation passed. Another issue related to this: We need legislation to protect us from homeowners who are hoarders. This individual hoards not only inside his house but on the exterior also. He has multiple junkers parked on our street every day. One person, three cars parked on the street every day, 2 vehicles parked in his driveway that are inoperable.

This should also apply to empty, abandoned lots. A building gets demolished and then the surrounding buildings get tagged with graffiti. Example: the lots across from SoMa Grand, on the south side of Mission Street between 7th and 8th Streets.

if city hall can make all the benches disappear overnight and if they could do the same thing with the homeless population, they will be political winners. think so? bring back the benches and guess what? the homeless just found a resting place they once missed.

finally some good urbanism is coming to SF.

It seems like the San Francisco Parks Trust is trying to raise money for park benches. And the Police are justifying their jobs. And Maxwell looking to have her name in the news. Most community members should not be fooled by thinking that park benches would not cause any problems. Would love to see plagues recognizing the homeless that have died.

Worried about the homeless & drug dealers? Fine - put a FULL TIME police officer on foot patrol of that area. Let him roam around all the way down to the UN Plaza area, 6th & Market. There are PLENTY of drug dealers to keep him busy. It's about time that the SFPD got off their butts and started cleaning up that area. Hell - even if it takes two or three cops undercover, it'd be nice to get that area of San Francisco cleaned up!

"Few, if any, homeless people sleep in the plaza or adjacent areas these days" That assertion could fertilize the City's new Victory Garden. I don't see much if any drug use in City Hall Plaza, but there are definitely homeless folks sleeping in and around the plaza at all hours. The benches would be a nice addition, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking that the blight of homelessness has gone away from City Hall Plaza and the Civic Center neighborhood.

CVC 22511.58(b) allows for a local review board. San Francisco was instrumental in adding this to the vehicle code in 1996 but has never set up the board. This would eliminate the bogus placards.

Here's a solution to the abuse of the disabled placards. The State law should be changed to only allow any car with a disabled placard to park for free for twice the legal time limit that parking space allows. Then a meterperson can chalk the tire of a car with a disabled placard and if that car is parked in that space for more than twice the legal limit they can be issued a ticket. It would also allow any legitimate disabled placard holder to park for free, have plenty of time to do their business and not hog a parking spot for free all day. For example, if it's a one hour parking zone then they would have two hours to do their business for free. Since the meterperson is recording the license plates of cars without placards and issuing tickets for violation of the time periods they could do the same thing for cars with disabled placards after allowing them to park for free in the time zone for twice the legal time period.

Both the Bd. of Supervisors as well as the administrators who have brought this up within this article have failed to realize that San Francisco has some of the best hospitals in the US. So there and many here who have had surgery-such as a Hip Replacements due to Arthritis who live here and require added medical attention. Permanent use of these placards for parking is very necessary. Your article points out areas where they are in use. The fact is these areas are within reach of Hospitals. I would suggest that Mr. Sabatini, the writer of this article do some added research by contacting the Hospitals in the City. In this manner, the reasons why there are a lot of individuals who make use of these Red and Blue Placards can easily be substantiated.

We need a place to report these placard cheats. There's a lady who has a business in my neighborhood who uses her mother's card to park all day without having to get a residential permit. Then she lets her employees use the placard to make deliveries. I tried looking for a place to report this abuse, but there is no place to report placard abuse.

Don't know why Supervisor McGoldrick is holding a hearing for the MTA to explain their enforcement practices. Instead, he should hold a hearing for Susan Mizner to support a change the state law that allows you to park for free at a meter, which is what creates the abuse in the first place. If you can't ride MUNI for free if you're disabled, why should you be able to park for free?

Never mind the loss of revenue... How about the REALLY handicapped person having to schlepp 2 or more blocks because of some selfish SOB?

At UCSF, the majority of the street parking is taken up by disabled placards. Now, you'd assume these are patients with legitimate disablities. But, no, these are EMPLOYEES with NO disablities who are basically getting out of (1) using public transportation or (2) paying for parking. As a physician, I find this behavior absolutely inexcusible. Not only should these people lose their placards, be fined but those that wrote for their placards (physician/nurse friends I suspect) should also be fined and their ability to write for disabled placards revoked. I would think an audit of the physicians who wrote for permits used in this way might yield a short list of those that need to be fined and reprimanded.

At my neighborhood Walgreens, 9 out of 10 people using the placard get out of their cars with no obvious disability. In fact, they seem young, healthy, and on-the-go.

why do career people at city hall always say they have to spend more time with their families? do they not know their own families by now? are their wives just as infantile like their little children? fishy. if they have been married this long, there's no excuse not to know their families or have to spend more time with them. do they really work 24/7? rather doubt it.

Many large corporations do offer employees subsidies for public transit or carpooling, but we just slammed a health care cost onto small businesses and now you want to add transportation? We need small businesses in order to maintain a vibrant culture. If you tax, fee, charge, or mandate all these incremental costs for small businesses, then the only businesses that can afford to do business in SF will be the chain stores and we know what the city thinks of them. Take the funds we're pouring into the black hole called 'homeless' and use the money to provide lower priced public transit.

I didn't know the progressive effort had the exclusive on tyrannical behavior. Have you been paying attention to the conservatives at the federal level for the last 8 years?

"Daly has candidly stated that the progressive effort has much to do with November’s Board of Supervisors election, in which seven of the board’s 11 seats are up for grabs." Whoever this guy endorses for Supervisor in November I plan to vote against, within my District. Daly typifies the tyranny of the progressives. Definition fits to a tee "1: oppressive power form of tyranny over the mind of man, oppressive power exerted by government." Forget it if you want to do your own thing because Daly has already decided for you what you will be doing, and that is what he wants.

Spiteful Cyclists? I'm a cyclist who attended the rally and I was happy that the SFBC is pressing this issue. Some (really spiteful)car-obsessed nobody sues the city and it takes 2 years to discredit his Charges? How Environmentally damaging is getting people on bikes?

Let's hope that Scott Weiner is re-elected as DCCC Chair in spite of the PC thuggery of Chris Daly! Scott is a sensible progressive leader and not an ideological zealot like Daly and his puppet candidate Aaron Peskin. Do we really want the DCCC to be led by the guy who leads the current Board of Supervisors? Enough said!

I attended my very first City Hall meeting yesterday in support of safer bicycling in San Francisco. With a few exceptions, I found the dialogue to be sincere and useful, despite the characterization on his blog by Rob Anderson, the individual who spearheaded the movement which has paralyzed the development of safer streets. Regardless of one's view of the SF Bicycle Coalition's efforts (which I personally see as a constructive force), an increase in bicycle transportation is a positive development on many fronts: each bicycle is one less car, one less body on crowded and unpleasant MUNI vehicles, and an individual who will most likely be healthier, happier and less of a taxpayer burden where soaring health care expenditures are concerned. Lastly, I am dismayed by the Examiner's choice of captions for the photo accompanying this article: "Spiteful cyclists" is a wholly inaccurate representation of those who offered public comment and begs the question of journalistic objectivity.

Funny how bike riders constantly complain about being disrespected by cars but they do the very same things to pedestrians.

''Leah Shahum, executive director for the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, said “We’re not a special-interest group The City can just brush off,” “There are 125,000 of us out there, regularly biking." LOL well I am one of the 125,000 you mention, I am on my bike 5 days a week but I do not consider the "Coalition for Adequate Review" my spokesman. I was a member of the Bike Coalition but NOT since I found out my annual dues went for supporting Chis Daly in his re-election. This comment is not directed at Leah as an individual but at the Bike Coalition Board who have shanghaied a once fine group and turned the organization into "bike nazis" who are non accepting of anyone's view one degree removed from theirs. Bike Nazis term may seem harsh but to be honest to hear the way the Coalition now represents itself really is reactionary one world view. Change will come, and dust ups are part of it, but the "regime change" politics is pure BS. Concentrate on bike air stations!

"In a 7-4 vote, a proposal to end the practice of using union-backed security guards at San Francisco General Hospital and other medical clinics and instead contract them out to save money was rejected. Supervisors Jake McGoldrick, Michela Alioto-Pier, Carmen Chu and Sean Elsbernd supported privatizing the security guards. McGoldrick noted that by not outsourcing, the board will now have to make $5 million in cuts to The City’s proposed $6.5 billion budget. The board is scheduled to take a first vote on the budget next week. Leave it to the seven real Stupervisors who take a pass at saving $5M. Now that is stupid. To top it off the same meeting they vote to make it harder for a voter recall of Stupervisors, please put me out of my pain this legislative board is out of control.

""Another proposal, introduced by Supervisor Chris Daly, would expand on the public areas that prohibit smoking to include such areas as 20 feet from any entrance, exit or operable window of private nonresidential buildings, outdoor eating areas and in lines for such services as event tickets."" How about private residential buildings period, and expand it to 50 feet since I live like that close to a club and its smoke city. I can't even open my windows for fresh air.

Many of us a quite capable of fending off advertising ploys by tobacco companies and saying no to free samples. How about the board of supervisors doing something about paving our decaying streets?

Hey if this is all it takes to stop the Board of Stupervisors from meeting then more power to the Ex. Hey think of all the money that this has saved the tax payers by not having the Bored Board trying to figure out ways to spend...

So my newspaper won't be in plastic when it's delivered in the rain? Will this new law also require my paper delivery person to place my paper in a dry place??????? STUPID!

My spiteful neighbor chain smokes in an enclosed common area of our building directly outside our apartment exit and our windows, filling up our home with smoke all day. It is very scary to be denied the basic right to breathe clean air, in your own home, every day, while a person like this says it's his "absolute right" to smoke there. Every year thousands of Americans that don't smoke cigarettes are killed from exposure to secondhand smoke. This law would stop people like me from being poisoned by smokers who live in their building. Smokers would have to go to an open, unenclosed area, or do it within their own apartment. Sure, you have an absolute right to be reckless with your own health, but you don't have a right to be reckless with MY HEALTH. All we're asking is that smokers smoke somewhere that doesn't expose us, too. It's not such a hardship to walk a few feet away to respect someone's health. Gasping in San Francisco THEN MOVE.HE HAS THAT RIGHT TO SMOKE IN HOME IF H

I agree that the environment is an important issue. But, shouldn't the Board of Supervisors prioritize The City's most urgent matter? Crime, homelessness, coal burning power plants...

I think banning plastic bags in supermarkets and pharmacies is a great idea (though a bag tax, rather than a ban, would have encouraged greater use of reusable bags). I fear, however, that the Supervisors risk jumping the shark on this one.

As a consumer: Now knowing that the compostable bag about eight cents or more, I can see why businesses have such a hard time operating in San Francisco, remember all the other taxes and other peices of legislation the Board of Supervisor have established in recent years. Even the Mayor wants liquor stores to sell boozes in clear plastic bags...

""The data on The City’s public and government relations officers was requested by Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, who told The Examiner he was concerned about government efficiency and performance. “It’s a question of explaining the justification of why we have to have 89 [public information officers],” Mirkarimi said."" Ross, while your at it lets consider cutting Supervior's paid staff in half and Supervior's slaries by a third. There was a time in the City when being a Supervisor was a part time "job" and paid $13k a year. Believe me things were a whole lot better in the city then...seems the more you jokers get involved the worse things get.

There's no reason to track the Mayor's salary to that of surrounding areas. In the era of term limits, being the Mayor of SF is an investment in ones personal, professional, and political future -- these are not career executives but social risers. I think all seven should give their raises back this year.

"Supervisor Chris Daly introduced one charter amendment that would allow the Board of Supervisors to approve large-scale redevelopment plans without sending the legislation to the Mayor for final approval. EXAMINER.COM RELATED ARTICLES Community funds to bridge economic gaps in SoMa Decision on Potrero power plant delayed CitiApartments’ conduct comes under fire — again New blue lines touted to streamline force Plastic bags on their way out of The City Daly is currently backing a June ballot measure requiring the redevelopment of the Bayview-Hunters Point area to include 50 percent below market rate housing, a measure that the developer and city officials, including Mayor Gavin Newsom said will not pencil out financially and would kill the project." This Supervisor is transparent. How did he ever get elected? Geeze the people there must be dumb.

When SFFD lowers the "noise" level of their sirens I can park on my street without waiting an hour to get a spot because DPT wont enforce area I then maybe you'll get my vote.. Ahh Who we kidding. City govt in SF won't change. I have health insurance and I've been to SFGH one time in ten years. Tell my why again I should give SFGH one dollar? Better yet-- Put SFGH in the hands of private business. They seem to have a better idea about where their money is going.

Josh, good article. Would you please do a follow up article and let your readers know who the property/building owners are? Thanks.

stop free parking for police and fire. The DPH employees are forced to pay for their parking, who note police and fire?

Once again the citizens of San Francisco have to deal with yet another Board comprised mostly of people like Peskin - reactionary, vain, unfocused, tempermental autocrats. And these very same citizens need to take a long hard look at why they keep electing incompetent politicians like this.

In March, Peskin said he was looking to ax city workers "who earn more than $150,000 annually in base pay." heheheh Mr. Peskin please sharpen your No.2 pencil and check the Board of Stupervisors too...how much are tax payers on the hook for, for you lot?

Peskin is a hypocrite and an idiot. Early in the article it states "In March, Peskin said he was looking to ax city workers who earn more than $150,000 annually in base pay. This week, Peskin introduced his legislation, which, if approved, would send 84 city workers packing." Then he is quoted as saying that the cost cutting from within The City’s legal offices “doesn’t have to come in the form of bodies.” except for police. Here is where Peskin is an idiot. When they pink slip the cops, they will still get at least 90% of their salary plus benefits in the form of pension. So where is the savings? Peskin is as naive as Newsom. He envisions himself as "Da Mayor" of North Beach, next in line to be "Da Mayor" of SF. Another idiot.

I have never once have agreeded with Peskin, but do give him credit for cutting from the top. Good Job

So its the smoking and not the drinking that is unhealthy in bars? Who goes to a bar because they are seeking a "healthy" enviroment? Come on people.

Instead of just eliminating 300 jobs why not start by reducing the number of Board of Supervisors we have. Lets be real. Does it take 11 members plus a mayor to run this small City? In order to justify large expenses such as wages and number of employees, the City will compare itself with other Cities. Well how about the County of San Francisco comparing itself with other Counties in the State? How many Board members does San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Marin County have? Lets take a look and start from there. Lets reduce excessive spending by starting at the top and work our way down. That'll take care of some of the problem.