McGoldrick wrong about cameras

Supervisor Jake McGoldrick’s Sept. 20 letter regarding surveillance cameras was inaccurate, shallow, and ultimately demonstrated contempt for his constituents. I am disappointed with my supervisor: While agendas and judgment may be subjective, all government officials must be held, at a minimum, to accurately stated facts.

McGoldrick falsely stated that the use of cameras has not evidenced a reduction in detecting, deterring or reducing crime, and that each camera costs San Francisco $13,649. First, several studies demonstrate their effectiveness. Second, the cost of moving forward with the program is $4,000 to $7,000 each, all of which will be paid for with federal funds. Also, there is no verifiable data supporting his claim that London has a camera for every 13 people.

McGoldrick stated that the cameras “pose a threat to the rights of all residents” and “take away privacy rights.” It demonstrates poor judgment for McGoldrick to detract from the public debate with such blather, subject neither to testable analysis nor logic. Finally, McGoldrick ignores his constituent responsibilities in refusing to address the public desire for such cameras. This is perhaps the ultimate inexcusable act for any elected official.

Jason Jungreis

The City

The isolationists

This second-guessing Iraq is pointless. The fact remains, because of our U.N. entanglement, the choice was: “Let the sanctions work,” or invade. Calling Bush stupid or a terrorist for the pleasure of belly-aching is immature, at best.

If liberals are advocating isolationism, let the debate go there. If they want us to believe that John Kerry and the French know best, give us the proof. But, please, stop the nah-nah-nah schoolyard stuff.

Paul Burton

The City

School and state

The editorial [“Truancy: What would Edison do?” Sept. 21] highlights the dysfunctional government school system. Mandatory school attendance, created by the California Teachers Association, was designed to create more jobs for teachers due to students-per-teacher regulations. Sacramento added money be paid to school districts per student as part of a scheme to control local school districts through redistribution of tax money. The benefit to students of the mandatory attendance requirement is dubious. The SFUSD has 22 police officers patrolling middle and high schools and is getting federal funding to add 20 more. With gang warfare, drug dealing and disruptive students who couldn’t care less about education, you have day-care “juvie” detention facilities, not places of learning.

Ron Getty

Chair, Initiatives Committee

Libertarian Party of San Francisco

The City

Doing it right

In response to the editorial, “State’s homeland security a mess,” published Sept. 18:

The Bureau of State Audits report on the state of California’s administration of federal homeland security funds contains a number of inaccuracies and false implications.

Here are the facts: The state is very successful in administering federal security funds. All funds available to California are already obligated and invested in a comprehensive state and local security strategy, and more than 95 percent are committed to specific projects.

As more than 80 percent of federal funds are allocated to local first responders, California has worked closely with local and regional governments to streamline their reimbursement processes. Since Gov. Schwarzenegger took office, the state processing time for local reimbursements had dropped from six months to 50 days.

Hundreds of millions of dollars designated as “unspent” by the BSA are, in fact, already invested in key projects. For example, while the governor’s recently announced $9 million grant to UCLA’s infectious disease laboratory and $2.9 million grant to Bay Area mass transit will be immediately invested in these projects, the funds won’t be earmarked as “spent” until work is completed and federal reimbursement is received.

Matthew Bettenhausen

Director

California Office of Homeland Security

Keep it Ferry Park

Changing Ferry Park to “Sue Bierman Park” appears to be a done deal. The name should remain Ferry Park, which is consistent with the Ferry Building and the importance of the Bay’s ferry-system hub at the Ferry Building. Many hard-working District 3 activists gave literally years of their lives to bring about Ferry Park. No one person did it alone. If former Board of Supervisors President Ammiano and current President Peskin have a need to rename a major District 3 landmark, why not name it after a District 3 resident, such as Philo Farnsworth (inventor of TV — first TV image beamed from Green Street), Alex Haley (“Roots,” etc.) who lived and worked on Battery Street, or even Joe Montana (Telegraph Hill). Just leave it Ferry Park — please.

Brian Browne

The City