Skip to comments.S.F. cop on hot seat for writing sizzling letter about homeless
Posted on 10/17/2007 7:44:41 AM PDT by SmithL
A veteran San Francisco police officer is under departmental investigation - and could be suspended - for writing a letter to The Chronicle criticizing the way Mayor Gavin Newsom and the Police Department are handling the homeless problem in Golden Gate Park.
According to police sources, Sgt. John Lewis of Park Station is being investigated for authoring a letter that "undermines the efficiency of the department."
Lewis' letter, published on The Chronicle's editorial page Aug. 15, questioned the Newsom administration's tactic of sending cops and outreach workers into the park before dawn to steer campers into social programs or, if they refused, cite them for quality-of-life crimes.
Lewis, who has 20 years with the department, wrote that the campers were neither interested in programs nor concerned about being cited, and that the real problem was during the day when drug use, drug dealing, drinking and fights were commonplace.
"Instead of sending a horde of people into the park at 4 a.m., the city should be sending this same horde into the park from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., when the real problems exist," Lewis wrote.
"It's funny," Lewis went on, "every time something is in the paper that makes this administration look bad, they throw a bunch of money at it and hope for the best.
"I won't go into how many officers have been taken off street patrol duties, because people in the city would go nuts,"
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Hey in the peoples republic cops should follow the Sgt Schulz routine with respect to their betters, “I see nothing, I hear nothing, I know nothing.’ It must be nice to be investigated by Gavin’g people for voicing an opinion in and editorial page. Shoosh - gotta hand it to the libs, they can sure embrace diversity and free speech all at once. If the cop is lucky, SF punishes him and then he can sue them for a butt-load of taxpayer money. Does Gavin think the 9th will supress free speech for him?
My my my....I guess only LIBERAL PRO-HOMELESS speech is free in San Francisco.
Maybe Mayor Gavin should actually leave his little ivory tower in the daylight and see the human animals leaving poop in the streets and on the front of people’s cars; or the drug-addled psychos screaming at decent citizens as they walk down the street, often following them at close range.
A homeless guy rammed his “rolly cart” into the back of my leg repeatedly as I was walking to work a year ago. I went into my building and had the guard call the police. They nabbed him a few blocks up, came back and basically tried to talk me out of pressing charges. I wouldn’t. Of course, I shouldn’t have been surprised when the DA also declined to prosecute.
Police officers don’t enjoy First Amendment rights of free speech?
Ergo use the cops to FORCE them to sign up for services.
In any organization, using your inside knowledge to publicly discredit that organization will subject you to discipline.
He should have had his mother-in-law send the letter.
If more cops and other line employees spoke up about government efforts which don't get any results, all liberal pols would be exposed and publically ridiculed.
No. I was an officer and wrote a letter to the editor of our local paper criticizing a local businessman who had overtly leaked information back to suspects I was investigating. The local U.S. Attorney at the time pondered charges but declined due to enormous case load.
So I wrote the little very abstract letter pointing that leak out. My dept. heads became upset and asked me to transfer to another town ( I worked for the state ). I fought it at first then the more I thought about it I became angry and decided to get out. So I quit without notice and left all my issued stuff on the desk of my asinine boss.
Best decision I ever made. I have less stress, more time at home, 3 times more money and do not have to face the unending criticism from bosses and the public ( like some on here who disparage LEOs constantly ).
I have my problems with Mayor Newsom (the gay thing, etc.), but one has to be fair here - he really does want these homeless off the streets, and he has to tip-toe around the large and noisy leftist pro-homeless interests. And remember that in SF Newsom counts as a conservative. No Republicans are going to be elected here anytime soon.
The point about citing them at 4:00 am is to roust them and harrass them, in the sort of passive-aggressive hypocritical manner that suits the local electorate. This sort of policy is why Newsom is so popular - the locals really don’t like the homeless and want them gone (and are quite conservative in many other surprising ways), but they don’t want it done in a way that will upset their sensibilities.
City Hall, Room 200
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, CA 94102
Telephone: (415) 554-6141
Fax: (415) 554-6160
I just sent the Mayor a little “nastygram”.
I hope we see results, then. But more needs to be done downtown - the harassment of passersby, the “following” and annoying of people trying to get one place to another, and the out and out defecation on busy City streets should be addressed asap.
IIRC correctly, when Oracle had its big convention down on Howard street, they shooed ALLL the homeless away and cordoned off the streets - I mean, we gotta keep Ralph Ellison happy, right?
My problem is that I don’t live in SF, just work there. So of course, since I can’t vote for Gavin, he doesn’t care much what I think.
Now if I was a convention booker, I’m sure I’d get his attention.
"Would", I'd say for the most part the people in that city are already nuts.
The city is just following the leader of what is now cranking up to be a hotly debated presidential election.
A blast from the past (Nov 14th,2000):
” Crackdown on “quality of life” crimes
By Fred Mazelis
23 November 2000
New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani held a news conference on November 14 to announce a new crackdown on quality of life crimes.
The latest in a long series of such police campaigns since Giuliani took office nearly seven years ago, this one is distinguished by the city’s plan to use a computer mapping system for precinct-by-precinct tracking of such offenses as panhandling, jaywalking, graffiti, public drinking and prostitution. Computerization has up until now been used only in connection with more serious crimes like robbery, rape and murder.
The mayor also listed homelessness among the offenses he was targetingor, more precisely, the homeless. You are not allowed to live on a street in a civilized city, Giuliani lectured the assembled media. It is not good for you; it is not good for us. He did not bother to explain why in a civilized city there are as many as 100,000 people who have no place to live.
The November 14 news conference was something of a return to form for the Republican mayor, who has kept a relatively low public profile since he withdrew from the Senate race against Hillary Clinton some six months ago. Although he cited his battle against an early-stage case of prostate cancer as the reason for dropping out of the Senate campaign, there was little doubt that he had been placed on the defensive politically following the police killings of Amadou Diallo and later of Patrick Dorismond.
These two young men, one a West African immigrant and the other a native-born black, were the innocent victims of a policy of police targeting of black and Hispanic males in working class neighborhoods throughout the city. Their deaths sparked outrage and anger in the city and far beyond. The mayor refused to express sympathy for the families of the victims and in the case of Dorismond vilified the young man, releasing his juvenile police record to the press.
It appeared that some sections of big business, earlier among the mayor’s most enthusiastic supporters, were growing concerned that his provocative behavior would provoke an explosion among New York’s working population and the poor. In the period immediately after he gave up his race for the Senate, Giuliani made a number of gestures, including one-on-one meetings with several Democratic Party officials and a few expressions of regret that he hadn’t reached out more to the city’s minority communities.
Apparently the fence-mending has now ended, at least as far as city workers and other sections of the population who are typically the objects of the mayor’s wrath are concerned. Giuliani’s characteristic style was very much on display in the past week. At the press conference he publicly scolded a reporter for his pathetic, sophomoric silliness. At another meeting he told an angry math teacher that the man was acting like a child. He got into screaming matches with teachers who complained that the city has yet to make a contract offer even though they are now working without an agreement. You’re all teachers! he yelled. You’re supposed to be intellectuals rather than yellers and screamers. Think a little! Think a little!
Perhaps Giuliani’s sudden return to the attack has something to do with his personal political plans for the future. The mayor, who enraged Republicans by his refusal to back fellow Republican George Pataki when he first ran for governor in 1994, may be positioning himself for his own future run for governor or some other position...”
There is only so much that anybody can do, without a wholesale change of attitude by the local voters. But something seems to be selling reasonably well, else Newsom wouldn’t be doing it.
And you are completely correct re Oracle/Ellison. Hypocrisy is the big thing around here.