Supervisor Joel Engardio’s tendency to prioritize his agenda over his constituents’ needs is illustrated by his recent SF Standard interview. Billed as an opportunity for community engagement, it served as little more than a PR stunt.
Most of them were armed with pistols in holsters, but the HSI people carried heavy weaponry and wore bullet-proof vests. One had what appeared to be an assault rifle with a stand for it in the back of his vest. Another had a submachine gun hanging across his chest. I watched one of the team walk across the street carrying what appeared to be an assault rifle.
American corporations are deciding they would rather pay low wages with no benefits to immigrants and manipulate the H-1B visas to hire vulnerable non-union immigrant workers at a lower cost than they would have to pay if they hired Americans.
This “shallow and simple minded” voter would like to point out to a recent letter writer that Joel Engardio must have been similarly “shallow and simple minded” when he loudly, publicly and actively promoted the recall of the city attorney and board of education members when he disagreed with their positions. Suddenly a recall of HIM is “wasteful”? How convenient.
The rise in recall efforts in California, particularly against Supervisor Joel Engardio, reflects a troubling trend where voters pursue recalls based on single issues. This approach wastes taxpayer money and undermines democratic processes by ignoring broad electoral decisions.
I would really like to see Connie Chan host a “Coffee with Connie” monthly meet-up with Richmond District neighbors. I remember when former Supervisor Eric Mar did it. I attended a couple of meetings and found them to be productive, and Eric took the time to listen to neighbors.
What I’d appreciate hearing from my supervisor is a definition of what constitutes a ‘crosswalk’ as pertains to the parking restriction law, and will his office do anything to speed-up the process for marking those crosswalks that will have motorists ticketed?
Recalls should not become a tool for resolving political disagreements. They are a serious measure that should be used sparingly and only for legitimate, profound breaches of public trust.
It isn’t right that our city applies the laws differently to different groups of people and depending on whether the neighborhood is wealthy or not.
The great majority of the residents of the Sunset and Richmond districts who are behind the recall are not “petulant” nor are we seeking revenge. What we would like to see is politicians held accountable to their constituents for their conduct.
The deployment of robocars in San Francisco reveals a troubling trend of technological “innovation” that prioritizes corporate profits over community well-being. While proponents claim autonomous vehicles will improve street safety, the reality is far more complex and problematic.
My name is Vy (Vee), and my husband and I became new residents of the Outer Sunset area two years ago. One of the things that made us fall in love with this neighborhood was discovering your local newspaper — on the day we toured our home, we saw a copy of the Sunset Beacon on the front porch, and it felt like an instant connection to the community. We truly appreciate the work you do to keep us informed and united.
There is a box with the The Richmond Review displayed,
(this time the November edition). It is so much fun to reading what’s
going on … in the
Richmond District.
All of this is to say that the proponents of Prop. K (and similar measures) are putting the cart before the horse. If they want people to get out of their cars and onto public transit, the way to do that is not to inconvenience drivers by closing roads and hoping they get the hint.
I hope, in the future, when all concerned make decisions such as JFK Drive and the Upper Great Highway, more consideration is given to the majority of people who are busy with their lives on Mondays through Fridays and who can only “recreate” on the weekends.
Richmond Review/Sunset Beacon 