S.F. Police Commission sheds another police critic as potential successors line up
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors has fielded five applications to the commission, including from a Tenderloin community advocate and several prominent local attorneys.
The commission, which sets police policy and imposes discipline against officers, is one of the most influential bodies at City Hall. The seven-member panel was until recently controlled by Yáñez and other progressive-aligned members who emphasized the commission's role as an independent check on the police department.
But as the pandemic gave way to concerns about crime and street conditions, the commission became a lightning rod for critics who accused it of putting reform over public safety. Voters curtailed its power last March, approving a measure that requires more time and public input for changes to police policy. Then this year, Mayor Daniel Lurie ousted its most prominent adversarial voice, attorney Max Carter-Oberstone, a mayoral appointee who broke off from Mayor London Breed.
The board's upcoming decision on Yáñez's successor, which has yet to be scheduled, could give Lurie and his police-friendly allies another reliable vote on the commission. The body is already stacked in favor of the mayor's office, which gets to appoint four of its members. Lurie himself has appointed two members, Mattie Scott and Wilson Leung. Adding another moderate-aligned voice to the commission would only shore up their majority.
The balance of power on the commission is especially consequential at a time when the city has a new mayor and its longest serving police chief in decades, Bill Scott. If Scott departs for any reason, the commission will play a key role in choosing his successor.
The candidates who applied as of Thursday included Pratibha Tekkey, a community organizer with the Tenderloin Housing Clinic, and Hasib Emran, a California deputy state controller and longtime aide to State Controller Malia Cohen, who previously led the police commission.
In her application, Tekkey said she would build trust between police and the community, while Emran, a Bay Area-born son of Afghan refugees, told the Chronicle he wanted to be a 'community ambassador' for the commission.
The other applicants so far were Meredith Osborn, a white-collar defense attorney and former chief trial deputy for the city attorney's office, Neil Hallinan, a criminal defense attorney, and Albert Mayer, an artificial intelligence consultant and former senior trial counsel with the U.S. Department of Justice.
Osborn wrote in her application that she would be an ally for immigrants and LGBTQ+ people as well as a representative for working families, while Hallinan noted that he had represented many people arrested by San Francisco police, sometimes wrongfully.
'I understand the proper balance between acknowledging the difficulty of being an effective and honorable police officer versus the need to hold police to the high standard,' Hallinan wrote.
Mayer told the Chronicle he had successfully prosecuted opioid companies and wanted to help the police department fight to end the 'open-air drug markets and theft rings.'
At least one other potential candidate is also considering applying: Marjan Philhour, who was endorsed by the police union in her unsuccessful race for District 1 supervisor last year.
'I have been approached by numerous neighborhood, small business and public safety leaders urging me to apply,' Philhour said.
Another rumored candidate, community advocate Betty Louie, said she applied for the role, but withdrew her name from consideration after learning about the other applicants.
Yáñez, a juvenile justice advocate and commissioner since early 2022, held one of three seats on the panel appointed by the Board of Supervisors. The other two are currently filled by Cindy Elias and Kevin Benedicto. He said Thursday that he decided not to seek reappointment because he became disillusioned with the commission and what he saw as its lack of urgency for reform and embrace of 'copaganda.'
'I was left being one of the few voices that was not willing to bite my tongue,' Yáñez said.
Yáñez said he had struggled to get the commission to hold hearings on issues he viewed as important, including on a police pursuit that led to a stolen vehicle crashing into a parklet in the Mission and injuring multiple people in February. Yáñez was also upset that the San Francisco Police Officers Association had publicly accused him and his wife, a deputy public defender, of obstructing a police investigation — a claim he denied.
'The way that people perceive me has completely shifted,' Yáñez said. 'Why am I going to continue to expose myself to this?'
It's unclear that Yáñez would have had the support to remain on the commission, even if he wanted to. To oust Carter-Oberstone, Lurie secured a 9-2 vote at the Board of Supervisors. Yáñez would have had to garner the support of the board to retain his seat.
Any applicant for the commission has to appear first before the board's rules committee.
Rafael Mandelman, president of the board and a member of the rules committee, said he probably wouldn't have supported Yáñez had he chosen to reapply.
Mandelman said it was time for a 'new day' at the police commission and that he wanted the next appointee to signal the board's 'commitment to safety.'
"There's an abundance of excellent candidates for this spot,' Mandelman said. 'It's going to be a hard choice to make.'
Supervisor Stephen Sherill, another rules committee member, also emphasized the need for candidates focused on public safety.
'Public safety is my number one priority and I want police commissioners who share that priority,' Sherill said.
Supervisor Shamann Walton gets to decide when to schedule a hearing to vote on the applicants as chair of the rules committee.
He has not set a date yet and did not respond to a request for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Magazine
4 hours ago
- Time Magazine
Trump Blasts Musk's New Political Party as ‘Ridiculous'
Donald Trump fell in love with Elon Musk when the richest man in the world bankrolled his reelection campaign. Then he fell out of love with Musk when the tech titan openly criticized his 'Big Beautiful Bill.' The two briefly seemed like they might be able to coexist amicably, but that quickly changed last week when Musk reignited his criticisms of the President's massive tax-and-spending legislative package that was streamrolled through Congress and which is expected to add trillions to the national debt. Musk promised to campaign against Republicans who voted for the bill, and Trump pondered whether to deport the South Africa-born billionaire. Read More: Can Trump Deport U.S. Citizens Like Elon Musk and Zohran Mamdani? But after Musk announced over the weekend the formation of his planned third political party, the 'America Party,' Trump seemed to feel less love or hate than pity. 'I am saddened to watch Elon Musk go completely 'off the rails,' essentially becoming a TRAIN WRECK over the past five weeks,' Trump posted on Truth Social on Sunday. Trump told reporters earlier, 'I think it's ridiculous to start a third party. We have a tremendous success with the Republican Party. The Democrats have lost their way, but it's always been a two-party system, and I think starting a third party just adds to confusion. It really seems to have been developed for two parties. Third parties have never worked.' He added of Musk: 'He can have fun with it, but I think it's ridiculous.' On Truth Social, Trump expanded on his political analysis about third parties, writing: 'They have never succeeded in the United States - The System seems not designed for them. The one thing Third Parties are good for is the creation of Complete and Total DISRUPTION & CHAOS, and we have enough of that with the Radical Left Democrats, who have lost their confidence and their minds! Republicans, on the other hand, are a smooth running 'machine,' that just passed the biggest Bill of its kind in the History of our Country.' While most Americans seem to disagree with Trump that the Republican Party is running the country smoothly, experts agree that the American political system is not designed for third parties to succeed. Challenges include institutional barriers, such as ballot access, as well as political and financial barriers, though the latter should be of no problem to Musk. Musk has suggested in posts on X that his party will aim to elect lawmakers in the 2026 midterms who will 'caucus independently' in Congress. 'One way to execute on this would be to laser-focus on just 2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts. Given the razor-thin legislative margins, that would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws, ensuring that they serve the true will of the people,' he posted. 'Backing a candidate for president is not out of the question, but the focus for the next 12 months is on the House and the Senate,' he added later. In response to Trump, Musk mocked, 'What's Truth Social?'—referring to the platform Trump started in 2021 as an alternative to what was then known as Twitter (now X), which Musk bought in 2022. Musk also suggested that Trump is scared, invoking a line from Frank Herbert's epic sci-fi novel Dune: 'Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little death that brings total Obliteration.' Trump, despite telling TIME in December that 'Elon puts the country long before his company' and insisting that Musk had the credibility to lead the Department of Government Efficiency amid concerns about conflicts of interest, continued to insist that Musk's opposition to the 'Big Beautiful Bill' is self-interested. 'It is a Great Bill but, unfortunately for Elon, it eliminates the ridiculous Electric Vehicle (EV) Mandate, which would have forced everyone to buy an Electric Car in a short period of time,' Trump posted on Truth Social. 'I have been strongly opposed to that from the very beginning. People are now allowed to buy whatever they want - Gasoline Powered, Hybrids (which are doing very well), or New Technologies as they come about - No more EV Mandate. I have campaigned on this for two years and, quite honestly, when Elon gave me his total and unquestioned Endorsement, I asked him whether or not he knew that I was going to terminate the EV Mandate - It was in every speech I made, and in every conversation I had. He said he had no problems with that - I was very surprised!' While there has never been a federal mandate to buy electric vehicles, Trump's bill does eliminate federal tax incentives for electric-vehicle owners, which is expected to hurt Musk's company Tesla. Musk insists that his main issue is with the deficit. 'What the heck was the point of @DOGE if he's just going to increase the debt by $5 trillion??' he posted Sunday. The non-partisan Committee for a Responsible Budget estimates that the 'Big Beautiful Bill,' as written will add more than $4 trillion to the national debt through 2034, and if various temporary provisions are made permanent, that figure would rise to $5.5 trillion. Column: The Budget Bill's Big Consequences Trump also aimed to contrast his own allegiance to the nation with Musk's supposed self interest—and responsibilities to the companies he runs, including Tesla and SpaceX—by referencing, not by name, Jared Isaacman, a Musk associate whom Trump nominated to head the National Aeronautics and Space Administration before withdrawing the nomination after his breakup with Musk. 'Additionally, Elon asked that one of his close friends run NASA and, while I thought his friend was very good, I was surprised to learn that he was a blue blooded Democrat, who had never contributed to a Republican before. Elon probably was, also. I also thought it inappropriate that a very close friend of Elon, who was in the Space Business, run NASA, when NASA is such a big part of Elon's corporate life,' Trump ended his Truth Social rant. 'My Number One charge is to protect the American Public!'
Boston Globe
6 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Want more growth? Welcome more immigrants.
Which means the only way to ensure the population base needed to keep the economy growing is to increase the number of immigrants entering the United States. Much of the public supports President Trump's ferocious crackdown on illegal immigration. The administration is obsessed with rounding up and deporting foreigners who have been living in the country without proper documents. Whatever the wisdom of that policy, it ignores the fact that the vast majority of unlawful migrants who enter the country come here to work in peace. The US economy in recent decades has fueled an unprecedented demand for labor, but there aren't nearly enough legal channels to accommodate that demand. The result has been an influx of migrants crossing the border unlawfully. And that in turn eventually triggered the political backlash that helped send Trump to the White House. Advertisement All the while, however, millions of jobs are going unfilled in this country, because there aren't enough working-age Americans to fill them all. Clearly the best way to solve the problem of illegal immigration is to make it easier for foreigners to immigrate to America legally . That, in turn, is the only way the United States can have the expanding labor force necessary to achieve economic growth and higher living standards in the decades ahead. In The authors show that nearly half of the net growth in the US labor force over the past decade has come from immigrants. That might seem surprising since only about 1 in 7 Americans are foreign born. But immigrants are more likely to work than native-born Americans of working age. In 2023, just under 60 percent of US-born natives age 16 and older were working. Among immigrants, the percentage was almost 65 percent. 'Over the past decade, immigrants have filled nearly 40 percent of the new jobs in America,' Vedder, Moore, and Denhart write. And for most of that time, the unemployment rate has remained at historically low levels — evidence that immigrants are not displacing US-born citizens from jobs that would otherwise have gone to them. With roughly Advertisement But what makes immigrants so valuable to the US economy goes beyond their propensity to work. There is also their extraordinary performance as innovators and entrepreneurs. More than 45 percent of Fortune 500 companies were founded by immigrants or their children, and immigrants are more than twice as likely as US natives to start a business. In 2023, according to Such statistics are striking, but they also stand to reason. Almost by definition, immigrants have a higher than normal willingness to take chances, to relinquish the familiar, and to try new things. It shouldn't come as a surprise that newcomers from abroad are fired with a passion to dream the American Dream, or that Immigration increases both the labor supply and labor demand, which helps explain why states with the highest immigration inflows, such as Texas and Florida, are associated with lower unemployment than other states. Because immigrants are more likely to work and to start businesses, their presence leads to higher rates of economic growth. 'The parts of the United States with the highest proportion of population coming from other nations have higher levels of total output per capita,' the Unleash Prosperity authors show. Thus, in the 10 states with the highest percentage of immigrants, output per capita is nearly 40 percent higher than in the 10 least immigrant-intensive states. To be sure, correlation may not prove causation, and immigration is not the only factor affecting economic output. But it is hard to dispute that immigration and growth go together. Advertisement What is true nationally is true locally. At a presentation I attended in 2012, Boston's then-mayor Thomas Menino rattled off a slew of numbers that underscored how much foreigners added to the city's prosperity. There were 8,800 immigrant-owned small businesses in Boston, Menino said, producing nearly $3.7 billion in annual sales and employing more than 18,000 people. At the time, immigrants living in Boston were spending $4 billion per year, generating $1.3 billion in state and federal taxes. Since 2012, the To fully understand why robust immigration boosts American prosperity, it is crucial to take into account the contributions of their children . The United States would never have become the world's foremost economic powerhouse if not for the innovations of first-generation Americans — men and women whose parents were immigrants. Steve Jobs, the co-founder of Apple, was the son of an immigrant from Syria. Larry Ellison, creator of the software firm Oracle, was born to a single mother from Ukraine. Jeff Bezos was raised by Miguel Bezos, who immigrated from Cuba. Henry Ford's father came to America from Ireland. Advertisement Needless to say, millions of other first-generation Americans, though not as famous or as rich as the megabillionaires, have contributed to every American industry and field of endeavor. And in the process they have typically risen to greater heights than their foreign-born parents. 'Since immigrants arriving in America are typically poor (particularly these days because of the large recent inflow of relatively unskilled illegal aliens), immigrant poverty rates are higher than that of native-born Americans,' the three authors observe. 'But poverty among their adult children is typically below that of the native born. Moreover, while immigrants themselves are more likely than native-born Americans to receive graduate or professional degrees, their education is modest relative to their own children, who exceed native-born Americans in terms of high-level educational attainment.' In short, without immigrants and their children, the United States would be a poorer, duller, less influential, less desirable nation. That is especially true given the crisis of America's 'birth dearth,' since immigrants tend, on average, to be younger and to have more children than natives. According to Census Bureau calculations, the number of working-age US-born Americans is projected to fall by 5.3 million between now and 2040. Over the same span, the population of working-age immigrants is expected to grow by 1.9 million. Immigration has always been the great growth hormone of American history. More immigrants have always meant more economic development, more innovation, more cultural richness. That is as true today as it has ever been — and it is compounded by the fact that the US economy desperately needs more workers. Border control is not incompatible with a policy of welcoming immigrants with open arms. And the surest way to dissuade illegal immigration is to create more opportunities for would-be Americans to immigrate lawfully. Advertisement Anti-immigrant demagoguery may excite some in the MAGA camp; there has always been an appetite for Expanding legal immigration is a pro-growth, pro-worker, and pro-sovereignty agenda. It is the best way to strengthen the rule of law, suppress mayhem at the border, and maintain America's role as a safe haven for the oppressed — all while attracting the young and dynamic workforce on which US growth depends. We have always needed more immigrants. Now, as the United States is about to enter its second quarter-millennium, we need them more than ever. To open our gates to striving would-be Americans is to turbocharge the economy and enrich the American way of life. Much has changed since This is adapted from the current , Jeff Jacoby's weekly newsletter. To subscribe to Arguable, visit . Jeff Jacoby can be reached at
New York Post
9 hours ago
- New York Post
Zohran Mamdani's other baggage — bringing a socialist army to City Hall
Zohran Mamdani may be a lightweight in his own right, but as mayor he'd bring an entire extremist movement along with him to City Hall, with dire consequences for the city. Mamdani can hedge and haw all he likes, but he's the face of a truly radical movement, the Democratic Socialists of America — which boasts of being truly anti-capitalist and indeed looking to 'seize the means of production,' which is as Marxist as anyone could ask. Zohran himself just a few years ago lectured about how socialists needed to be honest about these goals; that he's changed his tune merely means he's now more interested in winning elections. Advertisement After all, this is a guy who's said that identifying himself as African-American just because he was born in Uganda would be fundamentally 'misleading' — but did just that when applying to Columbia. As mayor, he would at the very least bring a host of fellow DSA believers to the highest reaches of city government. And the DSA is a lot harder left than the Working Families Party, which has always been mainly a vehicle for unions and other 'progressive' special interests to boost their influence. Advertisement The DSA's constitution is frank about the party's beliefs: 'We reject an economic order based on private profit'; it seeks a 'social order based on popular control of resources and production' and 'economic planning.' As Santiago Vidal Calvo notes for The Post, these ideas have wrought disaster wherever tried — impoverishing society as a whole even as the socialist elite prospers. Already, ex-Rep. Jamaal Bowman is rumored as Mamdani's pick for schools chancellor. As an 'educator,' Bowman stood four-square against standards and rigor, and for DEI nonsense. Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Advertisement Imagine cop-hating Queens City Councilwoman Tiffany Cabán — an early Mamdani supporter — replacing Jessica Tisch as police commissioner. Or other lefty radicals running the Department of Finance and the Economic Development Corp. The DSA has been leveraging its way to power ever since its first marque triumph: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's ouster of Queens boss Joe Crowley, then the No. 4 House Democrat, in the 2019 primary. Advertisement Now, exploiting the city's ridiculous public-campaign-finance system and now the ranked-choice primary-voting rules as well as the establishment's social-media cluelessness, it's poised to seize City Hall behind Mamdani's disarming charm and puppy-dog head tilt. Beware: Even if the voters fend off this takeover attempt, the DSA will keep on pushing. Everyone else in local politics needs to get serious about not just beating Mamdani now, but treating all Democratic Socialists as completely toxic.
