It’s all about the budget this week.
For months, the supes Budget and Finance Committee has been holding hearings and going over department needs and the mayor’s proposals, and on Monday/21 the public will get to weigh in on the final package.
The hearing starts at 10 am, and will last most of the day.
One of the big issues will be the move by Sup. John Avalos to put $200 million of the Police Department’s budget on reserve – until some of the reforms that the department has promised actually happen.
The mayor is going to do everything he can to stop this, and is going to argue that the city has to support the cops. That’s fine, but Avalos argues that putting money on reserve isn’t a cut at all – it’s just a way to ensure the accountability that has been missing.
Every quarter, the department would have to show the board how it made quantifiable progress in things like training, use-of-force policies, and discipline for officers. As long as the chief could show those goals were met, the money would be released.
Help us save local journalism!
Every tax-deductible donation helps us grow to cover the issues that mean the most to our community. Become a 48 Hills Hero and support the only daily progressive news source in the Bay Area.
Meanwhile, the Budget Justice Coalition will hold a rally on the steps of City Hall at 9:30 to demand that some $53 million is shifted to critical social priorities. The group wants the mayor to cut additional Police Academy classes and reduce what is now a big increase in criminal justice – also known as the criminalization of poor people.
Budget Committee Chair Mark Farrell wants the entire hearing process over by Wednesday/22, when he has scheduled the committee to vote to pass the mayor’s budget to the full board.
The supes on Tuesday/21 will consider the mayor’s Affordable Housing Bonus Program, which would allow developers to build bigger and taller buildings in exchange for a modest amount of below-market housing. It was an interesting hearing at the Land Use Committee last week: Sup. Scott Wiener Spoke at length about how important the private market was to the city’s housing supply. Sup. Aaron Peskin, who introduced an alternative called “density done right,” talked about the importance of giving neighborhoods a voice in planning decisions.
In the end, Peskin didn’t have three votes — but he might have six at the full board, where all of his amendments will be considered in the politics of an election year. Does Sup. London Breed want to side with the developers and against the neighborhoods on a major housing issue? is there somewhere an eight vote for something the mayor will want to veto?
At the committee hearing, Chair Malia Cohen, as is so often the case, seemed to want nothing more than to get the hearing over. Land Use always has long meetings, with complicated issues; if she doesn’t want to spend her time listening to the public and hearing debate, why is she the chair of that committee?
C.W. Nevius is apparently convinced that Sup. Jane Kim’s amazing showing in the June election for state Senate is all about strategy and the “Bernie factor,” and that it was really cool high-tech campaigning that allowed her to move to stunning victory.
But I have to ask: Is it not possible that the voters are profoundly unhappy with what’s going on in Mayor Ed Lee’s San Francisco, and that Wiener is associated with Lee, and that people wanted to see a change? I don’t doubt the brilliance of the Storefront Political Media strategy, but it’s hard to pull off an upset like this on strategy alone. You need a candidate who speaks to what the voters care about. And right now, they care about saying that the city has become a godawful mess and they want different people in charge.