Dear Everyone;
As the Cher song went " And the beat goes on... La Di Da Di Dah ....
more news on the beat foot patrol problem and its solutions from the bureaucrats. Both of todyas newspapers had stoires on Chief Fong's proposed beat foot patrol program in light of and just in time for an over-ride vote by the board supes on the veto by Newsoms of Mirkarimi's beat foot patrol program.
No one actually gets into redeployment from victimless or on-violent or non-essential dusites the Chief comes closest with police officers being replaced by civilians - but still ......
What about redeployment - DO'H!
Ron Getty
SF Libertarian
Chief unveils S.F. foot patrol plan
12 hrs ago Chief unveils S.F. foot patrol plan
Printer Friendly | PDF | Email | digg
Adam Martin, The Examiner
Read more by Adam Martin
Nov 14, 2006 2:00 AM (12 hrs ago)
Current rank: # 75 of 7,396 articles
SAN FRANCISCO - The day before a pivotal vote on police staffing legislation that has pitted the Board of Supervisors against the Mayor and the Police Department, police Chief Heather Fong announced Monday that more officers will walk foot beats in San Francisco.
The issue of mandated police foot patrols has become one of the hottest political fights of the year. Resisting efforts of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors to dictate policing policy, Fong announced that 44 officers will walk foot beats starting Nov. 24.
Saying he was frustrated by inaction on the part of the mayor and the Police Department in the face of a skyrocketing violent crime rate, Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi introduced legislation in June that mandates minimum staffing levels for patrols in his district — a high crime area. Since then, the ordinance has been expanded to eight police districts as more supervisors signed on.
The Police Department’s move comes as the Board of Supervisors prepares to vote today on whether to override Mayor Gavin Newsom’s Nov. 3 veto of the bill, which the board passed 7-3 last month.
Fong announced Monday that, with eight positions held by officers being civilianized and 36 new recruits who recently completed training, the department finally has personnel to dedicate to foot patrols.
“While I certainly applaud solidifying any foot-and-beat patrol effort, the timing [of the department’s announcement] is suspect because we have been asking the mayor and the department to act on this for a year and a half now. They never did,” Mirkarimi said after the announcement Monday.
Even though the department’s newly planned deployment of officers brings it into compliance with the terms of the proposed legislation, Fong said she did not think the legislation was appropriate.
“Legislation that says you have to walk here, when potentially a problem moves elsewhere, requires that we stay in one place,” she said. Captains need to have the discretion in order to staff beats effectively, Fong said.
But Mirkarimi said the bill gives captains that discretion. While it does list streets on which officers are to walk in Park and Northern districts, it notes that those streets are merely suggestions to describe the neighborhoods in which they are to walk. In the Tenderloin, Mission, Ingleside, Taraval, Southern and Bayview districts, no streets are specified for officers to walk.
At Monday’s news conference, Fong said that if there is a conflict between the beats staffed by the captains and those outlined in the law, she would favor the captains.
“I’m not saying we won’t comply. I think the captains have to do an analysis, and then, hopefully, we can explain the reasons certain decisions should be made,” Fong said.
Mirkarimi said he supported giving captains the discretion to staff the patrols, but, “there needs to be some accountability built in.”
Vote on contentious bill sparks City Hall guessing game
Printer Friendly | PDF | Email | digg
Joshua Sabatini, The Examiner
Read more by Joshua Sabatini
Nov 14, 2006 2:00 AM (12 hrs ago)
Current rank: # 109 of 7,396 articles
SAN FRANCISCO - The Board of Supervisors vote today centering on the most politically charged pieces of legislation this year has City Hall watchers only guessing how the votes will fall.
“I’m not going to forecast whether we have the votes or not,” said Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, who authored the legislation that Mayor Gavin Newsom vetoed. The board will vote today on whether to override that veto.
And perhaps it is impossible to forecast, with too many votes still in play.
“The corridors within City Hall have been whispering loudly as to all the politicking, both by the police chief and the Mayor’s Office in trying to persuade people to sustain the veto,” Mirkarimi said.
At first glance, it would not seem difficult to predict.
The legislation received eight votes of support on its first hearing. Supervisors Aaron Peskin, Michela Alioto-Pier and Sean Elsbernd opposed it. At the time, the vote count shielded the legislation from a Newsom veto. It takes eight votes to override a mayor’s veto.
Then on the legislation’s second and final hearing before the board, it passed in a 7-3 vote. Supervisor Jake McGoldrick had missed the meeting.
At first, McGoldrick was eyed as the key vote to back Newsom’s veto. But on Monday, McGoldrick said, “I’m going to vote to override the veto.”
As heavy politicking continued leading up to today’s vote, rumors abounded on other possible vote-switchers on both sides, including Supervisors Bevan Dufty, Sophie Maxwell and Aaron Peskin.
SAN FRANCISCO
Supervisors, chief face off on police foot patrols
On eve of vote on veto override, Fong details her rival plan
- Jaxon Van Derbeken, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
San Francisco Police Chief Heather Fong spelled out details Monday of her plan to put more foot patrols in neighborhoods and suggested that she would defy a competing version approved by the Board of Supervisors if her commanders disagreed with it.
The board is set to vote today on whether to override Mayor Gavin Newsom's veto earlier this month of legislation that would force the Police Department to create foot patrols by January in some areas and that would dictate the number of officers involved. Supervisors need eight votes to overturn the mayor's action.
Fong reiterated her opposition to the plan Monday, saying it would force decisions on the department that are best made by district station captains.
"The captains of our districts, and not legislation, are the individuals most appropriate'' to decide how the beats will staffed, Fong said.
The chief said her plan will take effect Nov. 24 and involve 44 officers assigned to foot beats. She said her plan "exceeds the requirements of the plan" that the Board of Supervisors envisions.
The legislation's author, Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, called the timing of Fong's announcement of the department's foot patrol program "suspect."
"I find this all very surreal," Mirkarimi said. "It is strange that we would be in this place where it feels that Chief Fong and others are putting politics before public safety."
Mirkarimi's measure would require at least two officers to walk a full shift each day in areas patrolled by the city's Northern, Southern, Taraval, Park, Tenderloin, Mission, Bayview and Ingleside police stations. In all, 33 officers would be needed each week for the patrols, the board's budget analyst estimates.
Mirkarimi pushed the legislation, which would be a one-year pilot program, as a response to violent crime and what he said has been a lack of initiative from the mayor, the Police Department and the city Police Commission.
Fong's plan would post varying numbers of new foot patrols in all 10 stations -- Central, Southern, Bayview, Mission, Northern, Richmond, Taraval, Park, Ingleside and the Tenderloin Task Force.
Mirkarimi said there are no guarantees that a department that opposed his legislation would stick to a voluntary plan for making officers walk beats.
"The acute difference is accountability and measurement," Mirkarimi said. "What we would like to see is how effective are foot and beat patrols. Under the chief's plan, there isn't that accountability."
Asked what she would do if the board overrides Newsom's veto, Fong said, "I'm not saying we're not going to comply."
But she also said her commanders would have the right to determine how to use their officers. "I think we go with the recommendation of the captains," Fong said.