Like a mole emerging from a hole, bespectacled freelance journalist Josh Wolf squinted into the September sunlight, as he stood on the steps outside the U.S. Court of Appeals 9th Circuit building on Seventh Street in San Francisco. It was the 24-year-old’s first taste of freedom after a month-long stint inside Dublin Federal Correctional Institute for refusing to give a federal grand jury video outtakes of an anarchist protest turned violent.
During his stretch at Dublin, Wolf was only able to breathe fresh air for an hour each day, and he looked as if was relishing the feeling of the sun on his skin, as he voiced his belief that what should have been a SFPD investigation into an assault on an officer, turned into federal witch hunt, involveing the FBI, the Joint Taskforce on Terrorism, a grand jury—and the thousands of tax payers’ dollars to prosecute and jail him.
As Wolf, who’d traded prison dudes for black jeans, blue shirt and white sneakers, began to speak, jackhammers went off across the the road, as if some evil mastermind was making a last ditch effort to censor the truth. The crowd of camera wielding, microphone-holding paparazzi pressed closer, as Wolf expressed his hope that the 9th Circuit’s decision to grant him bail was a positive sign. (A month earlier, District Court Judge Alsup denied Wolf bail, calling his case “a slamdunk for the federal government.”)
“The late Senator Paul Wellstone once said that significant social change comes from the bottom up,” said Wolf, who hopes his case will ultimately help cement the rights of the independent, as well as those of the traditional, media. Expressing concern that the federal shield laws that are currently on the table “do not encompass people who meet my criteria,” Wolf critiqued the proposed laws for only protecting those who are employed by or under contract with an established media outlet.
"There should be a common law to protect journalists,” he said, voicing the belief that anyone who is involved in gathering and disseminating news and information is a journalist, whether they are paid for their activities or not.
“I am a journalist, I have a website, I’ve sold footage, including to MichaelMoore.com,” said Wolf, who worries that proposed federal reporter shield laws will create two classes of journalists, those that report and get paid, and those that do it out of volition. “It will create a corporatocracy in which only corporations are media,” he said. “It goes against the idea of a free and independent press.”
Wolf also critiqued what he saw as an increasing abuse of grand juries, which were established to protect the rights of those accused, but increasingly appear to be used by the feds to secretly coerce and investigate targets.
“There is no means that any extended stay in jail is going to bring about a coercive effect,” said Wolf, who believes the case of former New York Times journalist Judith Miller, as well as those of the two BALCO reporters from the San Francisco Chronicle who still face jail time, helped publicize his plight, as did the blogosphere.
‘It’s egregious that the feds took up an investigation into an assault in a SFPD office,’ said Wolf, who believes that the alleged arson to a SFPD car was a hook, allowing the feds in simply because SFPD receives federal funds.
“In my tape you hear someone yell, 'Officer Down!' That’s the extent of it,” said Wolf, in reply to the question of what interest the feds could possibly have in his clips on the cutting room floor.
“I don’t want my case to be a reason why people don’t get involved in grassroots journalism,” he said, acknowledging that his case shows there are risks involved. “But an individual can decide what’s important and truly change the world we live in,” he said, comparing that freedom to the restrictions imposed on journalists who work for corporate media.”
To help freelancers, Wolf would like to see more information out there on what independent journalists should do, if they are subpoenaed. “Know your rights and how to protect them,” he advised.

By Tim Redmond

Assemblymember Mark Leno has gotten one of the most important bills of the year through the state Legislature, and if the governor signs it -- and he might -- it could bring an additional $70 million to San Francisco, enough (for example) to wipe out Muni's structural budget deficit.

The billl would allow San Francisco the option of imposing a 2 percent fee on motor vehicle registrations -- the same fee that every car owner in California paid for years until Gov. Schwarzenegger summarily repealed it, leaving the state with a $5 billion budget deficit.

If the city voters approved it, the fee could be assessed on cars registered in San Francisco. The city would pick up desperately needed cash for public transit, and car owners would be no worse off than they were under every governor in the past 25 years (except for this one).

Congrats to Leno for making this happen -- and if it becomes law, the supervisors should move immediately to implement it.

By Tim Redmond

Matier and Ross reported Sunday what everyone on the San Francisco left knew was coming: Sup. Tom Ammiano is formally announcing his run for State Assembly in 2008. Aside from the fact that Ammiano would make an excellent state Assembly member, here's the political brilliance of the move: The only other person remotely rumored to be considering running for that seat is Sup. Chris Daly. In fact, behind the scenes, a lot of local players have been saying that state Sen. Carole Migden would suport Daly, even in a run against Ammiano.

But Daly is up for re-election this fall, and obviously can't announce a run for Assembly (if he's even interested) until well after November. That means for months to come, Ammiano will be the only game in town -- and he can start lining up endorsements. According to M&R, Migden has formally endorsed Ammiano, as has the incumbent in that seat, Mark Leno.

Daly would also be an excellent member of the state Assembly -- but if he wants to run, he's already way behind and will have the challenging task of explaining why he's better than Ammiano, particularly when they generally agree on all the issues.

By Tim Redmond

It's hard to even describe how horrible this state Supreme Court ruling on the secrecy of police disciplinary cases really is. Read it and weep -- or better, read it and hide. Under this ruling, the cops can do almost anything, and get away with it.

By G.W. Schulz

So I’ve been watching older episodes of Frontline lately, the longtime investigative journalism program produced by PBS. You can download each of their past shows in pieces here. Sure, it doesn’t sound like the most exciting way to spend your free time, and it may even say something disturbing about my personal life.

Maybe it helps that as I watch Frontline, I swill whiskey and crank the volume on the computer’s speakers – neighbors be damned – while spitting a beer chaser at the screen when a voiceover lists the show’s nonprofit benefactors. Okay, that’s a lie.

By Tim Redmond

Okay, so I tweaked Sup. Bevan Dufty a couple of weeks ago about an item that appeared in Matier and Ross Aug. 20. The item suggested that "mud balls are being lobbed" in the District 8 supervisorial campaign; someone apparently sent the dynamic duo at the Chron a "1995 news clip from the Chicago Tribune describing how Rosenthal, then a 22-year-old senior at Northwestern University, abruptly resigned as student body president rather than face an impeachment hearing over a campaign finance scandal.

"Her sin: Exceeding the campaign spending limit by $26.06"

I picked it up and raised the question: Since Dufty has made a huge point (rightly so) of refusing to engage in negative campaigning, who exactly was flinging this mud?

Well, it's turned into a fascinating little teapot tempest.

Dufty came in for an endorsement interview last week (we'll post the full tape, all 90 minutes of it, on sfbg.com in a day or two), and tore into me for implying that he was somehow involved in dishing dirt on another candidate. He said he'd called Matier and Ross and complained that they never asked him for comment on the item (true); he then told us that the boys had apologized and promised to run a correction. He swore nobody affiliated with his campaign had done it, and suggested that it might have come from anywhere -- even Rosenthal herself.

That's not how Andy Ross remembers it. Ross told me that Dufty had, indeed, called him to complain, but that he had never promised to correct anything -- the item, he insisted, was entirely accurate.

No, Dufty wasn't the source for the dirt -- but it was, Ross promised me, "someone in his corner ... that's why we said mud was flying."

So someone allied with Dufty -- perhaps an overzealous supporter -- dragged Bevan the clean campaigner's name through the, uh, mud by dredging up a silly and pointless item from a decade ago and tossing it to the Chron.

Dufty disavowed the hit, and told me that anyone who would do something like that "shouldn't claim to be a supporter of mine." But it raises an interesting question: Why would any of Dufty's allies waste time on this sort of stuff? (Among other things, the B.A.R. has made a point of playing up Rosenthal's attendance at Burning Man). Could it be that, as the latest Progressive Voter Index shows, District 8 is still a pretty left-voting part of the city? Rosenthal has some real political challenges -- she's not well known, she's a straight woman running in what has traditionally been a gay district, and Dufty has most of the key endorsements -- but on the issues, especially tenant issues, Rosenthal may be more in touch with the voters.

Frankly, Dufty's the clear front runner at this point. For anyone in his "corner" to give Rosenthal additional press and credibility by attacking her for something everyone with any sense knows is irrelevant -- that's either a sign of world-class stupidity or a signal that the incumbent is vulnerable.

By Steven T. Jones
Despite Mayor Gavin Newsom's rhetorical efforts to dismiss the importance of ideology in San Francisco politics, this is a town the is deeply divided between progressives and Establishment moderate-to-conservatives. And the battle we fight is an important one that will determine whether San Francisco remains open to low-wage workers, tolerant of diversity, and a leader in combatting the dismal and divisive policies being perpetrated on the state and federal levels.
OK, OK, maybe y'all know that. But to get more insights in where the battlelines are drawn in San Francisco -- right down to the level of individual precincts and neighborhoods -- you'll need to spend a little time studying the latest version of the Progressive Voters Index. Kudos to political scientists Rich DeLeon and David Latterman -- and the good folks over at www.sfusualsuspects -- for providing this valuable resource.

By G.W. Schulz

I mentioned yesterday that I’d been downloading older episodes of Frontline from the PBS Web site. The show has three major new episodes coming out next month. But yesterday I didn’t get a chance to summarize what I felt were some of the better pieces they’d done over the last few years that contained some cool local angles.

On Sunday night I went back and watched 2004’s “Tax Me if You Can,” which appears to have been inspired at least in part by David Cay Johston’s spectacular tax-beat reporting for The New York Times. Johnston made popular what was long considered a dreadful area of government to cover as a Times reporter – the IRS. We localized some of his more recent reporting for the Times on big IRS layoffs and the estate tax a while back.

By G.W. Schulz

It’s not healthy for the press to be relentlessly pessimistic. In that spirit, hats off to Gavin Newsom for introducing a new plan designed to counter the city’s surge in violence. Critics, including this newspaper, have repeatedly demanded a bold plan, and the mayor appears to be stepping up to the plate. Here's part of it.

There are a few problems with the plan, however. Newsom intends to enforce a controversial city curfew for kids 13 and under that’s already on the books. He says he’s willing to expend the political capital necessary to make it work. We’re proud of you for being bold, Gav. Seriously. This city needs strong leadership.

By G.W. Schulz

I’ll never forget the first time I stood in the presence of Ann Richards.

Years ago during the late 90s when I lived in Austin, I worked at a little natural foods grocery store on the west side of town. Richards used to come into the deli quite frequently. Although she was a short woman, there was something about her stature that simply commanded respect. Plus, she was the widely revered former governor of Texas. She just exuded principled toughness. I was sad to learn this week that she had succumbed to cancer at the age of 73. One thing the Democrats can't afford to lose right now is anyone with a sense of humor.

By G.W. Schulz

It's always been difficult to imagine that privatization could become so popular entire cities would actually begin outsourcing all of their administrative functions. But it’s occurring, according to the USA Today. Truly scary. Anyone who thinks private companies that claim they can handle the public sector and save mobs of money won’t eventually get into some kind of trouble in their haste to generate profits isn’t thinking clearly.

UNITE HERE Local 2 has reached an agreement with San Francisco's leading hotels after a two-year struggle.
So far, 13 CLass A hotels have agreed to a settlement that includes card check neutrality, which means that if a hotel buys up a smaller, or non-unionized hotel, workers at the non-unionized hotel have a right to join the union, too.
This settlement covers 4,200 workers.

UNITE HERE Local 2 is now working on settling with another 30 SF hotels, where contracts of 5,000 workers have expired.
As UNITE HERE Local 2 president Mike Casey put it, " we're not done until all of the hotels are settled."
Casey feels that the hotels that have settled have created a pattern for others to follow."
"It would be unacceptable for a hotel to think it could get some cheaper deal or have a competitive advantage over other hotels," he said of what he sees as a "citywide standard that doesn't create 2nd class citizenship for other hotel workers.
Casey is hopeful that the ovewrwhelming majority of hotels will settle up in next 30-45 days. He notes that for the handful of hotels that are non-unionized but that some day could be bought by a uionized chain, the settlements include a provision that allows their workers to join the union and raise their standards.
"The hotels resisted and said they'd never allow it," says Casey of the card check provision. "It's quite unprecedented. I think the hotels finally decided to make a smart business decision. They realized it was costing them more to fight than to settle with us."
Unite Here Local 2 spokesperson Valerie Lapin also told the Guardian that settlements had been reached in New York, Chicago and Monterey and that others are still being negotiated in a number of cities, including San Francisco, Hawaii and a couple of hotels in Monterey that aren't covered by the settlement that's already been reached in that city.
While the details of each settlement varies, Lapin said that overall the settlements are good.
"The wages and benefits are very good, which is a reflection of how prosperous the industry is, and the settlements guarantee the rights of workers to join a union," she said.
In additFor more details of the settlement, check out www.unitehere2.org.

By Steven T. Jones
San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera has invalidated the referendum that challenged the Bayview Hunter’s Point Redevelopment Plan, ruling that it didn’t include all the documents that the more than 33,000 people who signed it needed to make an informed decision.
“They didn’t have the redevelopment plan itself for voters to evaluate,” Herrera spokesperson Matt Dorsey told the Guardian just after the decision was released Sept. 19.
But Willie Ratcliff, the Bayview Newspaper publisher who helped funded and coordinate the referendum drive, told the Guardian that they carefully consulted with both city officials and their attorneys to ensure the documents complied with state law.
“We expected the city would try to look for a way out and of course we’re going to fight them in court,” Ratcliff said.
The Elections Department had ruled Sept. 13 that the referendum had enough valid signatures to stop the plan. The Board of Supervisors then had the option of repealing it or submitting it to a popular vote. But board clerk Gloria Young is now required by law to invalidate the referendum and only a judge can now make it valid.
The board, which approved the plan on a 7-<\d>4 vote in May (with supervisors Tom Ammiano, Chris Daly, Ross Mirkarimi, and Gerardo Sandoval in dissent), could still act independently to repeal the plan and submit it to a vote, as recall campaign coordinator Brian O’Flynn is urging. “The will of the voters should be respected,” he told us
The plan would put about 1,500 acres in Bayview-<\d>Hunters Point under San Francisco Redevelopment Agency control, set new development standards, and collect all property tax increases into a fund that would go toward projects in the community. Opponents fear the plan would displace current residents and gentrify the area.

More soon

By Tim Redmond

After ducking the question for weeks, the San Francisco police chief has finally announced that she doesn't want foot patrols in high-crime areas because it will harm response times. Take the cops out of their cars, the argument goes, and they can't get around as fast when somebody calls for help.

The chief cites an internal study her staff has done (not enough cops to patrol the streets, but plenty of time for the uniformed staff to spend behind their desks doing studies) that purports to show that removing one mobile unit each shift and replacing the car-bound officers with foot patrols would increase the time it takes to answer a 911 call by several minutes. Sounds awful.

But the study didn't seem to consider the other side: The cops on the beat -- already stationed in the areas where crime is the worst -- might actually decrease the number of 911 calls, or get to them faster than the car patrols coming from somewhere else in the precinct. It's no secret where most of the violent crime happens; that's why the supervisors are asking for the foot patrols.

If the cops really want to cut the homicide rate (instead of just getting there faster after someone's already been shot) they need to embrace this kind of proposal. Chief Fong's current approach clearly isn't working.

By Steven T. Jones
My head is spinning after reading both the City Attorney's Opinion that struck down the successful referendum drive challenging the Bayview Hunters Point Redevelopment Plan, and the redevelopment plan itself. Reading the actual 62-page plan and its supporting documents is what Herrera contends voters needed to be able to do before signing the referendum. I contend that few sane citizens have the stomach or tools they need to glean much meaning from this big pile of governtese. And for wonks like me who have a long history of poring through these kinds of documents, I can't say that I found much in there to disabuse me of the notion that redevelopment was, is, and will probably always be a tool for displacement of citizens and subsidies for private developers, with only vague and easily waived controls on how the Redevelopment Agency operates. One exception in this plan does appear to be the outright prohibition of using eminent domain to seize houses -- a needed protection against a tool the Redevelopment Agency used to cleanse the Fillmore of low-income black people -- although other properties can still be seized, despite plan proponents claims that eminent domain is banned by the plan.
But my point here is not to rehash the plan, which you can read yourself (and could have read yourself before signing the petition, whether or not the petitioners had a copy with them for you to spend a couple hours reading on a street corner). No, my main point is that the plan is a big deal, one that should be voted on (at the very least by BHP residents). And it's sad to see city officials circling the wagons instead of allowing that to happen, particuarly when state law calls for city officials to err of the side of letting people vote, as even this opinion concedes.

By Tim Redmond

The Police Commission held a long, long closed session tonight, and I'm sure they were discussing the big issue of the day -- the California Supreme Court decision that the cops insist makes all cases of discipline against peace officers totally secret.

I have no idea how the behind-closed-doors discussion went -- but I do know that Commission vice-president David Campos, who is acting as a courageous champion of public access here, told me several days ago that he was going to push his colleagues not to bow down to the police lobby. He wants to keep disciplinary hearings open, to the greatest extent possible. But that will require some courage from CIty Attorney Dennis Herrera, too -- the kind of courage Herrera showed in backing the city's decision to issue same-sex marriage licenses, in defiance of the established legal authorities. There's a way to do the same thing here -- to say that San Francisco will not simply give up on public scrutiny of police misconduct: Keep the hearings open, and force the cops to sue. Then fight them all the way, and try to make better law.

Dennis?

By Tim Redmond

Mayor Gavin Newsom and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission are interested in pursuing tidal energy off the Godlen Gate. This is an excellent development, something that Matt Gonzalez pushed for when he was running for mayor. It's a way to generate huge amounts of renewable energy for the city and apparently is cost-effective.

There's only one flaw - and as far as I'm concerned, it's fatal.

From the Chron story Sept 19:

"The city is in negotiations with a number of companies that could help run the turbines and cover the costs. Pacific Gas and Electric Co. is among them, said Jared Blumenfeld, director of the city's Department of the Environment. "

Holy shit, here we go again.

PG&E, which stole the city's renewable electric power 80 years ago when the dam at Hetch Hetchy Valley began generating electricity, now wants to steal the power of the Golden Gate tides, too.

Memo to the PUC and the Department of Environment: Any tidal energy project has to be built, run and controlled by the city, as part of a public-power system. If PG&E has even the tiniest bit of involvement in the deal, it will be shot down as corrupt and unacceptable. Don't even think about it.

In the face of raised levels of violent crime in San Francisco in recent months, the Board of Supes voted on September 19 to look into expanding a pilot police foot patrol program.
The program was first suggested by Sup. Ross Mirkarimi and, as amended, would provide foot patrols in more neighborhoods.
In a 5-4 vote, the Supes decided to add the Tenderloin, Mission and Ingleside police stations to the program and to send the proposed legislation back to committee for another hearing.
All this went down in face of Police Chief Heather Fong's warnings that the program would result in increased costs and slower responses to violent crimes, even as she expressed support for expanding the program.
City Budget Analyst Harvey Rose predicted that the SFPD could start up the program without additional resources.
The amended legislation goes before the Committee on Gun and Gang Violence on Oct. 2 and returns to the full Board on OCt. 3,

By Tim Redmond

City Attorney Dennis Herrera released his official opinion on how the Police Commisison has to respond the the utterly horrible California Supreme Court decision on secrecy in police discipline cases. I'm not happy.

I realize that the Supreme Court has spoken on this, and that the city attorney of San Francisco can't just openly defy the Supremes. But there are some (small) openings in the ruling; among other things, it specifies that records in police discipline cases have to be closed, but pointedly does not address the issue of open hearings. Herrera's opinion pretty much says there's not a damn thing the Police Commission can do other than shut down all public access to information about cops who have behaved badly. I like and respect Herrera, but I have to side with Poice Commission vice president David Campos, who told me this afternoon that "if there's even a small opening, we should try to pursue it."

By Steven T. Jones
Like many Americans concerned about this country's imperial ways, I was thrilled to hear Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez denounce U.S. President George Bush during a speech to the United Nations General Assembly. It was biting, funny, insightful, and right on target. The cowardly Democrats are unwilling to really go after our truly dangerous leader, so it was refreshing to hear someone use an official lectern in this country to tell it like it is. And besides, despite the ridiculous denunciations of Chavez that have followed, Bush has been just as harsh with Chavez and other world leaders without being so roundly denounced for his lack of decorum and diplomacy.
But I was once again embarassed by our congressional representative, Nancy Pelosi, for joining the rhetorical lynch mob, and for the utterly ridiculous reduction of a head of state and the leader of the Latin American left to an "everyday thug." As we approach the mid-term elections, Democrats should be demonstrating than they're something other that the cowardly and unimaginative "me too" syncophants that much of the country suspects them of being. I'm beginning to fear that under Pelosi, the Democrats will never be anything more than has-beens and back-benchers, content to fiddle for spare change while the empire burns. It's sad.

By Jonathan Beckhardt
Trailing by as much as 20 points in his race for governor, Democrat Phil Angelides has turned to the Iraq War -- the issue supposed to galvanize the nation's left -- and made it a state issue by today vowing to "do everything in [his] power" to bring home the approximately 800 California guard troops deployed in Iraq.
"A Governor's first responsibility is to ensure the safety of the people of California," Angelides said at a rally at San Francisco State University devoted to the issue. "And a governor cannot do that without a strong National Guard, [which is] our crucial defense against domestic disorder and natural disaster."
"What does Governor Schwarzenegger say about the pressure the war has put on our precious citizen soldiers, on their readiness for earthquake, flood, or fire?" Angelides said.
Angelides said he will "put in a formal request to President Bush to return our National Guard units" on his first day in office. Then he will "mobilize governors from across this nation to force a change in national policy- so guard units can be used for their intended purpose, not propping up the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld excuse for a foreign policy.”
Though not saying what legal options he might be able to exercise, Angelides said he would "take any action, including going to court," to carry out his pledge.
The new stand differs from the position he took in May, where at a Primary debate he said governors do not have the power over the Pentagon to bring state Guard troops home from war.
According to the California National Guard, the federal government provides about 85 percent of the funding for the National Guard, though this varies according to the amount the Guard is serving the federal government. The guard is under the command of both the state and federal government, though the federal government's power over the force supersedes the state's power over the force.
According to the Angelides campaign, 275 Californians have died in Iraq, 21 of whom have been members of the Guard.

G.W. Schulz

If you haven't caught up with the New York Times in a while, don't miss the intense three-part, investigative series the paper launched on Monday. Links for all three stories are now up on their site.

The series is about the completely out-of-control rural magistrates that populate New York State. Yes, it sounds a little lackluster, but the Times spent a year putting it together and it's making the rounds like crazy.

Thirty states have "justices of the peace," according to the piece, who often have little to no education, but are powerful enough to rule on civil suits worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, and they can put people in jail for up to two and three years. Some of the judges hardly even have a high school education, let alone a law degree, yet they possess an enormous amount of power. A mind-blowing deviation in the nation's criminal-justice system.

By Steven T. Jones
Mayor Gavin Newsom has been flailing this year, so apparently he's going back to what's worked politically for him before: cracking down on the homeless. This week, he ordered police and other city staffers to place notices around Golden Gate Park warning the homeless to move on or have their stuff confiscated. His flack Peter Ragone yesterday bristled when I used the word "crackdown" and insisted that this was simply a social service outreach. "We will not ask a person to leave the park without offering then a place to go," he told me. But when I pointed out that the city doesn't have nearly enough social service or shelter spots for the hundreds of homeless in the park -- and that the posted notices seem to be more of a threat than an offer -- he said that he'd have to check with Trent Rhorer (the architect of the mayor's get-tough homeless policies) and get back to me. He never did. Yet homeless advocates and civil rights groups (including the ACLU and Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights) sent the city a letter calling the crackdown illegal, unconstitutional, and counterproductive. (Download a copy of the letter here. Hit the back button to return to this blog entry.)

And it isn't just happening in Golden Gate Park. As we've been hearing and the Chron reported today, city cops are also apparently rousting the poor and homeless from around the newly opened Westfield Mall. And this stuff certainly isn't new, but more like the MO of this administration: act like you care deeply about the homeless while quieting forcing them from the city.
Compassion there too? When will Newsom, Ragone, and the rest of this disingenuous administration realize that their actions speak far louder than their words?

By Tim Redmond

I had a really scary moment tonight.

it started well -- I was moderating a discussion on immigration politics at New College, featuring Justin Akers Chacon, who has written a new book called "Nobody is Illegal." Renee Saucedo, a longtime advocate for immigrants and day laborers, was on the panel, too, and we had a great discussion -- until the very end, when Saucedo starting talking about how she was trying to build coalitions between immigrants and African Americans in Bayview Hunters Point, organizing around opposition in that neighborhood the the redevelopment plan.

And out of nowhere, she urged everyone to vote yes on Proposition 90.

For the record, Prop. 90 is almost indescribably horrible. It's a radical right wing property-rights measure that would instantly