Politics

Berkeley: Cops bust in as negotiations break down

2009-11-21T02:17:18Z

By Rachel Sadon

Negotiations between students barricaded inside Wheeler Hall and campus police and administrators just broke down, as police sawed the hinges off the door and entered the room where the students are hold up.

Reports from the Berkeley campus describe students trying to arrange negotiations, and police moving in to break down barricades and make arrests.

Havoc broke out on the campus this morning in response to yesterday’s 32% increase in tuition fees in the UC system.

Wheeler isn’t an administration building -- it’s mostly classrooms for English classes. But it’s right in the middle of campus, so the protest action has taken over the central campus area.

Rachel Brahinsky, a former Guardian reporter who is now a Berkeley grad student, called in with this report:

Tensions are escalating. Rows of riot cops are marching toward lines of students at the barricades. They come up to the students and barrel through. A student has been injured with either a rubber bullet or a taser, we’re not sure which.
I have personally witnessed two incidents of students getting beaten badly.

None of this is provoked. The students have linked arms, but nobody has taken any hostile action toward the cops.

According to a spokesperson for the students, Callie Maidhof, the action started early this morning. “Around 5 a.m. a group of students put barricades up and sometime before 6 a.m. police arrived and arrested three people who were unable to get up to the second floor.”

She added that bail was set at $10,000 for two of the students and $16,000 for the third (he refused to provide a DNA sample), who gave the statement “I think it’s ironic that we’ve been charged for burglary when it’s them that are stealing our futures.”

The two initial demands of the estimated sixty locked-in students were to rehire the 38 custodial workers that were recently laid off by American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) and to grant amnesty for all protesters involved in the events.

As the day progressed, the occupiers added two more, 3) to enter into good faith negotiations with the current business occupants of the Bears Lair Food Court and 4) to reinstate the Rochdale Berkeley student cooperative lease in perpetuity.

But of course, this is also partially the result of the furor on campus over fee hikes.

Professor and member of the Solidarity Alliance Lynn Hollander commented, “Though I would not have recommended an occupation like this, since it has happened, I am enormously proud of the students and particularly such by their initial demands. It is an act of enormous solidarity and generosity.”

According to Maidhof, the occupiers consistently requested negotiations, however, their initial calls to police were not returned. A team of faculty, including Professor Ananya Roy, helped arrange the negotiations with the students. A lawyer was initially prevented from entering the building but eventually participated in the talks, which have since broken down.

There have been several incidents of recorded police violence, including at least two protesters with hands broken. Zhivka Valiavicharska, a graduate student in the department of rhetoric, had her hand resting on a barricade and was hit by a police baton. She was taken to a hospital and will need reconstructive surgery.

This was the second occupation of a building on campus this week. On Wednesday, students locked themselves in to the administration building where capital projects are based, but the confrontation was resolved in a few hours.

Professor Scott Saul empathized with students’ frustration, “It’s totally understandable that students are very angry at this moment. Fees are skyrocketing, services are being slashed and they are concerned that the core mission of the university is rapidly eroding.

The website of the Daily Californian, the campus paper, is down after getting deluged, but the staff is still putting out twitter reports here.

Prison report (outside the walls): The parolee's dilemma

2009-11-21T01:10:12Z

Editors note: Just A Guy has been writing from inside the California state prison system. He was released this week -- great news -- but the story is by no means over. Here's his latest; you can read his some of his previous posts here and here.

It's also a little easier for him to communicate now, so he can more quickly respond to your comments and questions.

By Just A Guy

I’m sitting here about 24 hours after my release from California State Prison, Solano wondering what the hell I am going to do -- because I am staying in a hotel and unable to travel to my home.

Don’t get me wrong; I’m grateful to be out -- but beyond irritated at the measures The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has gone through to make it difficult for people to transition back into society. You see, I don’t live in this state, and though I started attempting to get my parole transferred out of state six months ago while in prison (as required) the request wasn’t done until two months ago, and Sacramento’s regional parole desk hasn’t even received it.

Now I’m hoping that I am given a travel pass to go out of state to see my little girls and be with my family for Thanksgiving, but that is, according to my P.O, a very tenuous proposition because his boss doesn’t like to give out travel passes…and since I just got out I’m not known…and it doesn’t seem to matter much that my house, my car, my business, and my entire support network are over a thousand miles away…you get the picture.
And I’m one of the lucky ones, because I have the resources to be able to live in a hotel for three months if necessary, to work from a hotel as well, to have a car delivered to me. WHAT ABOUT THOSE THAT DON’T HAVE THOSE RESOURCES?

(Not an hour after writing this I was fortunate enough to have my P.O call me and let me know that I have been approved to go to the state where my family resides as long as the supervising agent there is willing to accept me, which he is. I am grateful that my agent was able to go to bat for me and get this done, that I will be able to spend the holidays with my family, friends, and loved ones).

Again and again, the mediocrity of the R of CDCR stands to the fore -- yet the citizens are in denial as to what the real problem is. How can a system such as this possibly sustain rehabilitation? It’s truly unconscionable to proclaim that they are helping. What is also unconscionable is a lot of these P.O.’s really want to help people stay out of prison and protect society -- but their hands are being tied by tough-on-crime rhetoric and lack of funding.

Yeah, we committed the crimes, but the majority of these crimes were committed in the pursuit of drugs or alcohol or the rewards of selling the former. What good can possibly come of sending a person into society after many years with no substantive rehabilitative programs, and having him live in the bushes by the freeway, and not let him go home out of state because of CDCRs bureaucratic follies unrelated to the inmate’s attempts to get the paperwork done? Don’t you see how the system is set up for failure?

There are more than 600 more people in prison per 100,000 people in the USA vs. Netherlands (700 vs. 100) , but it’s the inmates that are the problem, right?

Yes, we (I) made some very poor choices, but I just did three years and two months for possession (a victimless crime). I was not allowed to go into the Substance Abuse Program because I had an out of state warrant for a marker I didn’t pay at a casino in Vegas (felony warrant), although I did pay it eventually. What about people who couldn’t pay? Do they need help any less? How does keeping someone from entering a drug abuse program because of old warrants help him prepare for a return to society? How does anything in this broken self-fulfilling prophecy of recidivism called CDCR help transition your soon-to-be neighbors back into the world?

Again, it’s our responsibility to find our own recovery, our own path to staying out of prison, but don’t believe for one minute that we are given the help many of us need, many of us hope for, and many of us never get…because though it is our responsibility many have never been responsible for anything at all, then they are asked to be, they try and find the brick wall that is CDC(R).

I really appreciate the support of my readers over the time I've been writing from inside, but my thoughts and observations on the prison system won't just end now that I've been released. I'll continue to write about the parole process as it develops and to comment on prison issues -- and you can look forward to a larger story on my experience in the pages of the Bay Guardian in the near future.

The return of Newsom's public schedule

2009-11-21T00:53:50Z

By Steven T. Jones

After my post yesterday about how Mayor Gavin Newsom has been ignoring the City Charter by refusing announce his public events in recent weeks, his Office of Communications just sent out a “revised media advisory” that lists his events for the day, long after the first event is over.

But, hey, at least he’s finally agreed to return to public life. Welcome back, Mr. Mayor. What follows are the first events that Newsom has announced since ending his gubernatorial bid last month:

*** REVISED MEDIA ADVISORY ***

MAYOR GAVIN NEWSOM’S SCHEDULE OF PUBLIC EVENTS FOR FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2009

9:15AM
Mayor Newsom to visit Downtown High School.
693 Vermont Street

4:30PM
Mayor Newsom to attend swearing-in ceremony and reception for Jeffrey L.
Bleich, U.S. Ambassador to Australia.
City Hall Rotunda

5:00PM
Mayor Newsom to attend Boston Properties’ 23rd Annual Building Lighting
Ceremony.
Holiday Ice Rink, Embarcadero Center

7:00PM
Mayor Newsom to attend the launch of Art in Storefronts in the Mission.
Lower 24th Street

Newsom talks taxes

2009-11-20T23:57:40Z

By Tim Redmond

And he appears to be against them. At least, that's what a brief interview with SF Appeal suggests:

Although that doesn't mean the Mayor is seriously considering EVERYTHING -- especially not tax hikes. The same wisdom as before applies: tax hikes don't poll well, therefore it's probably a waste of time to present them to voters. Newsom doesn't support browning out fire stations, and wants to protect police officers' salaries (which increased by another 4 percent this year). A bigger sales tax only hits poor voters, Newsom said. The state's already raising taxes, and the school district has its own parcel tax measure, so we're back to controversial moneymakers like the condo-conversion fee.
"They hate it," said Newsom, gesturing to Board members' doors. Though the Mayor was quick to mention that he and Avalos have a good working relationship, something that might not always play well with Avalos's progressive buddies on the board.

Ah yes, the condo conversion fees. The idea is to make it easier to turn rental housing into condominiums as long as you pay a fee. That would, of course, decimate the rental housing stock and lead to more evictions.

But the Examiner reports that the mayor seems to be ready to play some political hardball -- he won't talk about new taxes unless the supes give him his condo conversions and a equally bad plan to sell of taxicab permits:

Generating more revenue could soften the blow of the cuts. Newsom indicated he has not ruled out tax measures on the November ballot. But he also emphasized the need to approve two of his previous proposals that stalled after meeting opposition, including from members of the Board of Supervisors. Those proposals are charging a fee for people who want to do a condo-conversion right away, instead of having to wait for years, and auctioning off permits to drive taxicabs.

The thing about both of those items is that they represent short-term money. You'll get a lot of fees quickly -- but no structural fix.

And the supervisors won't want to go for either of them.

Following the UC riots

2009-11-20T23:10:39Z

By Rachel Sadon

Students inside Wheeler Hall have started a Twitter account to track moment-to-moment changes.

The Daily Cal site has been crashing as a result of heavy traffic, but they are still updating here.

You can also check out some intense home footage here and here or full coverage on Cal TV.

Eve Batey at SF Appeal has also put together a “Guide to Tracking Today’s UC Berkeley Civil Disobedience”.

UC students are revolting. Literally.

2009-11-20T22:40:02Z

Faced with the 32 percent tuition hike that University of California regents approved yesterday, students have been occupying buildings on campuses in Berkeley, Davis, Santa Cruz and Davis. And, in a sign of escalating tension, we just got word of tear gas, and police hitting students with batons at UC Berkeley.

UC officials say the tuition increases, which would raise an estimated $505 million, are needed to prevent more cuts being made as a result of the state’s ongoing financial crisis.

Critics say increased tuition costs hurt low-income and middle-class students, but the regents say $175 million (of the $505 million) will go for student financial aid.

In Berkeley, students have reportedly occupied Wheeler Hall’s second floor, and campus police have arrested at least three students, after breaking through a makeshift barricade constructed of office equipment and furniture.

Regents say the first hike, in January, raises undergrad tuition $585 a semester. The second, scheduled for next fall, raises tuition an additional $1,344.

Transgender Day of Remembrance observed

2009-11-20T20:48:18Z

By Marke B.

Horrible murders of LGBT people have been out of control lately -- but the number of reported murders of transgender people has doubled over the past year. If you can stomach the statistics and seeing some of the faces (and it really does bring the point home, even without the dramatic music), then here:

While not all of the above people may have been killed because they were transgender, they were all killed and its a tragedy -- as well a reason that an inclusive ENDA bill and a stronger push for global transgender rights is so important. Today on Transgender Day of Remembrance, the community gets together to mark the violent passing of its members. Here's the plan:

San Francisco, California
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
7:00 - 9:00 PM
CIIS California Institute for Integral Studies
1453 MISSION ST
3rd Floor - Namaste Hall
—–
San Francisco, California
Friday, November 20, 2009
6:00 - 8:00 PM
API Wellness Center
730 Polk Street (corner of Ellis)
For more info: Leeza Edwards, Co-chair of SF TEAM
415. 724.1680 or lavendergoddess@mac.com
—–
San Francisco, California
Transgender Day of Remembrance Shabbat
Friday, November 20, 2009
7:30 PM
Congregation Sha’ar Zahav
290 Dolores Street (corner of 16th Street)
San Francisco, CA 94103
For more info: http://www.shaarzahav.org/node/1852

Newsom's back -- and so is the budget axe

2009-11-20T19:49:29Z

By Tim Redmond

The mayor is speaking to the press again. Oh goodie.

First, Hank Plante of KCBS TV gets a sit-down interview that's stunning in its lack of substance. Newsom gets all pissy and defensive about his trip to Hawaii, says he doesn't read the newspapers and complains about inaccurate reporting without ever saying what's inaccurate. (I like Brock' suggestion at sfist:

Why couldn't Newsom tell CBS 5's Hank Plante, "Yeah, I took off to Hawaii. And what, hooker? Somebody hold my earrings."

Then when Plante finally starts asking about the budget deficit, the mayor totally ducks and won't say anything except that it's going to be a lot of work to resolve.

Then the mayor's office kicks the press out of a department head briefing on the budget and follows it up with some brief public remarks that show:

1. Newsom would much rather downplay this and say it's no big deal, and

2. There's no serious talk about raising new revenues (except from selling off the city's rental housing stock and creating lots of new condominiums) and

3. Every department is being asked to cut 20 percent and prepare for as much as 30 percent cuts -- but that's going to mean really, really ugly decisions that Newsom can't possibly make. For example, the Sheriff can only cut 20 percent by letting people out of jail -- many of them the same people who Newsom's new police chief, George Gascon, just put in jail with his much-lauded Tenderloin busts. Then the Tenderloin crackdown will become a joke, because nobody arrested will actually do any jail time, because the city can't afford to lock them up. Oh, and there won't be enough cops to arrest them, anyway -- unless Newsom has Gascon pull cops out of other, richer neighborhoods to patrol the Loin, which may be a fine idea but will create such political backlash among Newsom's allies that he won't dare do it.

And closing fire stations seems to be political poison, so the mayor won't want to do that.

Which means public health and human services and rec-park will have to cut way more than 30 percent to save police and fire, which means we won't really have much of a public health, human services or rec-park system any more.

4. The mayor is doing nothing to prepare the public to face the fact of life -- we're going to need significant tax increases, or we're going to see the devastation of the public service sector in this city.

Welcome back, Gavin.

Oh, and by the way: The last chief executive I remember saying that he didn't read the newspapers was Ronald Reagan. Great role model. Either Newsom is lying (which I suspect; I can't believe the mayor of San Francisco actually avoids reading the daily newspaper) or the guy is more out of touch, arrogant and clueless than even I am willing to believe.

Newsom warns of $522 million deficit

2009-11-20T02:17:44Z

Text and photos by Sarah Phelan

Mayor Gavin Newsom began speaking to reporters today, but not before members of the press were ejected from the plush velvety seats of Herbst Theater when the mayor, who was running half an hour late, arrived at the War Memorial Veterans Building to deliver his latest budget instructions.

(Mayoral spokesperson Joe Arellano did a good job of keeping the running dogs of the media at bay, as they waited outside in the foyer for an hour and a half, but next time he might want to bring dog biscuits, or other snacks, if he doesn’t want to lose fingers while confined in a small place with a pack of lunch-starved, news-hungry reporters.)

“Give him the dignity of speaking to his department heads in private,” Arellano said, when asked why reporters weren’t being allowed to remain in Herbst Theatre’s cushy auditorium.

Things to do while waiting for Newsom to finish a speech: check out war memorabilia.

And finally, just as I was beginning to wonder if we’d still be there when Isabella Rossellini’s scheduled evening performance at Herbst began, the mayor emerged and told reporters he is asking departments to cut 20 percent of next year’s budget, which begins July 1, 2010, and figure out an additional 10 percent in contingency savings to address a whooping $525 million shortfall. Those plans are due in February 2010.

Department heads are also being asked to come up with 3.9 percent in mid-year cuts by December 4 to balance out this year's budget, which ends June 30, 2010, and has a $45 million hole in the side, the mayor said.

Newsom noted that cuts will be made on an "outcomes" and "efficacy" basis and warned against "crying wolf."
He also warned hat the 09/10 shortfall could grow another $8 million, if the Board of Supervisors moves forward with what he called "an ill-advised supplemental,” a reference to efforts to avoid public health layoffs.

He then did a good job of sounding upbeat, given we're fiscally back to square one, only without any safety nets.

Newsom uses his famous hand signals to explain a projected $522 million deficit in FY 2010/11

“I got criticized last year for not calling it a crisis,” Newsom said referring to the massive $576 million shortfall that he announced in a shocking surprise visit to the Board last December.“But we found solutions."

The mayor did acknowledge that this year’s balancing act will be “more difficult,” since there are no federal stimulus dollars anticipated, or any one-time rainy day reserves available.

“Not everyone will be cut equally, some will be cut substantially less,” Newsom warned, as he voiced opposition to sales tax increases, support for condo conversion progams, and little appetite for more fee and fine increases.

But he also noted that the hotel tax was still strong, and unemployment is relatively low.

“We had a great month in October,a nd the unemployment rate is high, but it’s lower here than most of the country," Newsom said, before escaping out the door.

Many department heads also raced out of the meeting, but a few brave souls lingered to talk with the media.

“it’s going to be a team effort, there are difficult times, we face extraordinary challenges, Fire Department Chief Joanne Hayes-White said, noting that her department is being asked to cut $1.7 million by Dec.4, then come up with 20 + 10 percent in cuts/savings by February.

“Everything is on the table,” Hayes-White said.

‘What’s most disheartening is that we went through $578 million in cuts last year, only to find ourselves right back there, again,” Trent Rhorer, executive director of the Department of Human Services said, noting that his department needs to find $3.6 million in mid-year cuts, and $28 million for FY 2010/11.

“We serve the poorest San Franciscans, the ones who don’t have homes or healthcare,” Rhorer said.

Observing that you can’t make these size cuts without hurting somebody, Rhorer said, “The objective is to do as little harm as possible.”

Newsom's delusional lies

2009-11-20T01:06:08Z

By Steven T. Jones

There are facts and there are lies. And the fact is Mayor Gavin Newsom has been lying about whether he’s doing his job these days, a role that requires more than just hiding in his office or sweeping the streets. As the Chronicle piles on our absentee mayor for refusing to announce his schedule or talk to the press, Newsom has fired back, calling the reports “lies” and saying journalists are “delusional.”

But those descriptors are better applied to the mayor’s own behavior and outlook. The City Charter requires the mayor to announce his daily schedule. He’s never been good at showing he actually works a full day, but since his gubernatorial campaign tanked, he hasn’t announced any events (check for yourself at this site that the mayor is required to keep).

Apparently, he finally talked to reporters this afternoon, and they dutifully quoted his claim to have attended 62 events since his flameout – despite a dearth of evidence supporting that. Whatever. The reality is that Mr. Sensitive can’t pout for long, not without violating the law and breaking the public trust.

For once, I actually agree with the Chron's Chuck Nevius: Do your job, Mr. Mayor, or resign.

A timely move on Prop. 13

2009-11-19T20:09:49Z

By Tim Redmond

Calitics reports this morning that the California Nurses Association is preparing a split-roll ballot initiative for 2010. The outline of the measure looks good, both in terms of impact (billions and billions in extra tax revenue for local government) and politics (a clear message to homeowners that this won't raise their taxes). As Robert Cruickshank notes, the proposals would

• Tax commercial property at fair market value, and frequently reassess property taxes at fair market value (instead of locking in a value and rate, as Prop 13 currently does). The main difference between the two initiatives is how that reassessment is accomplished.
• Provide a small business exclusion of up to $1 million

• Double homeowners' exemption from $7,000 to $14,000 (as a sweetener to voters)

It's a clever approach, one that almost certainly polls well with voters, since the initiatives offer tax relief for residential owners and small businesses - making it crystal clear, at least in the initiative language, that this is NOT an attack on the sacred cow of residential property protections offered in Prop 13.

CNA has the money and the clout to get this going, and it could become one of the most important campaigns of the year. If the group goes forward -- and I hope that happens -- wafflers like Jerry Brown will have to take a stand, and tell us whether they're with big business and commercial landlords or with the millions of Californians who are getting screwed by an unfair tax system and deep cuts in public services.

Students win major sweatshop victory

2009-11-19T20:09:30Z

By Tim Redmond

It's gotten surprisingly little press (outside of the NY Times), but the decision by Russell Athletic to rehire 1,200 workers in Honduras who had been thrown out of work when the company closed a factory in the wake of a union-organizing effort is a very big deal.

It's easy to criticize student activists; they're too idealistic, they're just kids who don't understand the real world, nobody listens to them anyway, or maybe (as one of my professors at Wesleyan once said about anti-apartheid activists) they just don't have enough homework.

But the folks at United Students Against Sweatshopsnot only took on a good cause -- they developed a brilliant strategy that actually worked. Targeting Russell Athletic made perfect sense for college students: Russell makes millions of dollars off university licensing deals. So students at hundreds of college campuses could work locally, demanding that their school cut its ties with Russell until it settled with the union in Honduras.

The local pressure worked. More than 80 colleges and universities, including Harvard, NYU and Stanford, agreed to cut off the deals that allowed Russell to use their logos on sportswear -- and that convinced Russell to turn 180 degrees around and accept the union in Honduras.

"This is the culmination of 12 years of student organizing around this issue," Shaun Martinez, a 2008 graduate of USC and a national staff organizer for USAS, told me. "We have never before been able to reverse a decision when a company closed a factory to stop union organizing efforts."

The student group was able to leverage its success with colleges and universities to put pressure on Russell's other major partners -- like the NBA -- and when NBA officials started hearing the message, Russell had no choice but to settle.

So chalk one up to the students; they've won a major victory not just for organized labor and the anti-sweatshop movement but for campus organizing everywhere.

Well, there's some good news ...

2009-11-19T01:03:47Z

By Tim Redmond

Arnold isn't running again -- for anything. Or so he says. After eating some Wienerschnitzel.

Bicyclists anxiously awaiting word from the judge

2009-11-19T01:01:12Z

By Steven T. Jones

Bicyclists and city officials are anxiously awaiting word from Superior Court Judge Peter Busch on whether he will lift the three-year-old court injunction against any bike-related improvements to the city. He’s now considering recent filings by the city and anti-bike blogger Rob Anderson’s attorney, Mary Miles, and could issue his ruling at any time.

At issue is whether the environmental impact report on the San Francisco Bicycle Plan, which the city completed early last summer, is adequate and addresses the concerns that led to the injunction. The far-reaching plan was originally approved with no EIR. A full hearing of the EIR’s adequacy won’t happen untill next year, but the city wants to be able to start making some improvements now.

Activists and city officials have long been frustrated with the breadth of the injunction, which bans all projects mentioned in the bike plan, even simple bike racks and sharrow markings (which indicate the safest area for bikes to ride on shared roadways), as well as critical safety features like new bike lanes on dangerous streets. And they’re hopeful that Judge Busch will issue at least a partial lifting of the injunction.

Once the injunction is lifted, the city is poised to move quickly on 45 bike lane projects that have already been approved and funded, as well as hundreds of racks and sharrows. To determine whether improvements could be removed if the EIR is invalidated, Judge Busch requested a full list of the near-term projects that the city would hope to complete before he rules on the EIR. The city wants a hearing by March, but Miles wants to push it back to at least July, which is more than a year after the city certified its EIR.

The city’s Nov. 2 brief answering that request indicated the schedule was to build “22 near-term improvement projects – approximately one-third of those analyzed in the EIR – for the first year of implementation.” They include bike lanes on Beale, Howard, Illinois, Mississippi, Fremont, Townsend, and Kansas streets and Laguna Honda, Alemany, Claremont, and Sloat boulevards. City crews also plan to paint about 20 sharrows per day and to quickly install the 60 approved bike racks and to review the more the 750 requests for bike racks.

In other words, when Busch lifts the ban, there will be serious cause for celebration among bicyclists.

Smoking out Russoniello

2009-11-19T00:26:14Z

Text and photos by Sarah Phelan

How much rope has the Obama administration given the US Attorney for Northern California Joe Russoniello (center) when it comes to prosecuting probation officers around the city's sanctuary policy?
-

The resignation of Gavin Newsom’s criminal justice director Kevin Ryan and his mayoral spokesperson Nathan Ballard
could give the mayor the chance to revisit his policy towards juvenile immigrants, smoke out US Attorney for Northern California Joe Russoniello over his claims that not referring kids at the moment of arrest is tantamount to “harboring," and allow Newsom to connect with seriously alienated members of the city's immigrant community.

I say “could” because the mayor is notorious for his snippy, thumb-in-yer-face attitude towards anyone that questions his policies.

But I also say “could” because records show the mayor reaffirming his commitment to the city’s original sanctuary policy in April 2008—just days before Ryan, Ballard and Russoniello began arguing for a policy shift.

That, of course, was before a series of leaks about the city’s practice of repatriating immigrant youth and/or placing them in group homes, the tragic slaying of three members of the Bologna family, found the mayor, who'd just entered the gubernatorial race, ordering city officials to start treating undocumented juveniles like adults by reporting them to the feds on arrest.

But records show that, up until this fall, it was Ryan and Ballard who were making demands and statements that sounded like they came straight from the mouth of Russoniello, while Newsom remained largely silent and unseen on the issue.

For instance, in July 2008, Ballard emailed Ryan and other mayoral staffers asking them to “please collaborate on a very simple one-pager or less that explains to me in plain English what programs we had/have that in any way could be construed as giving legal advice to undocumented criminals etc, how much we spent/are spending, etc. And what we are doing to make sure this never happens again.”

The same day, Ryan emailed Ballard, complaining that in the past two years, the Mayor’s Office of Criminal Justice gave $300,000 to three community based organizations under a “undocumented, unaccompanied, monolingual youth” category.

“That means that all $300K went to serve undocumented, juvenile delinquents,” Ryan ranted.

Even later that same day after Ryan talked to the Chronicle’s Jaxon Van Derbeken, he warned other mayoral staffers to “gird your loins.

“Russoniello is quoted as saying that ‘this is the closest thing I have ever seen to harboring!’” Ryan told Ballard and Ginsburg in a July 31 email that, in a back-to-the-future maneuveur, referenced an Aug. 3, 2008 Chronicle article.

“I told him I am scrubbing all of these policies,” Ryan told Ballard and Ginsburg at the time.

Records also show that it was left to mayoral staffer Adrienne Pon to explain to Ryan and Ballard that “no programs specifically fund services to ‘undocumented criminals” and that grants from the Mayor’s Office of Criminal Justice were “not used to harbor criminals but to educate them on legal rights and federal immigration relief.”

And it was left to Ballard to tell Ryan to do a politically correct edit on the mayor’s new sanctuary policy.
‘Do a final edit on the executive directive so the terminology is more consistent with the past e.d’s, e.g ‘undocumented felon’ instead of ‘criminal alien,’” Ballard told Ryan in August 2008.

Meanwhile, Newsom was suggesting that he was open to making further amendments to his new policy--statements that led the immigrant advocate community to believe that he was still willing to listen to their concerns.

In an Aug. 8, 2008 op-ed, written for the Chronicle and published shortly after he returned from his honeymoon, Newsom stated, “when the comprehensive review [of the city’s sanctuary policies] I have ordered is complete, I will not hesitate to make further amendments to the policy.”

And on Aug. 25, 2008, Newsom’s then chief strategist Eric Jaye told Matier and Ross that, “the mayor remains a “strong supporter’ of sanctuary laws, so long as they are “properly applied to make cities safer.”
"But for the sake of party unity, he said, the mayor plans to keep his lips locked on both that issue and same-sex marriage, at least on the national stage," Matier and Ross quoted Jaye as saying.

But in September 2008, Ballard told the Guardian that Newsom ordered the policy shift, “because he felt the old policy violated the intent of a sanctuary city, which is to promote cooperation by undocumented residents with law enforcement, not promote harboring."

And the following fall, Newsom, who had by then split with Jaye and crawled under the wing of scorched earth campaign consultant Gary South, was handing confidential memos to Ballard, who in turn was telling the media that the mayor planned to "ignore" the Board's veto-proof amendment that restores due process rights to juvenile kids.

But now Ryan, Ballard and South are out of the picture, and Newsom is slowly getting back to being mayor, and the City Attorney's office is pushing back against Russoniello, And while I'm not holding my breath, here's hoping that when the dust clears and the smoke settles, we'll find Newsom relishing his new role as father--and able to not take criticism of his sanctuary policy personally, especially since it appears to have emanated from nativist sympathizers.