Fall 1975 Special San Francisco Chapter Edition
Primary tabs
=
We're Moving
The ACLU is moving. Our new address will be-
814 Mission Street
(3rd Floor) |
San Francisco, Ca. 94103
Che FOCon.
news
ee
NYHA NYS Buik Rate Permit
GT OL22 4424
ORNS Mailed in
San Francisco, 94101
_ FALL 1975
Dear Members,
I, for one, breathed a sigh of relief a little over a year
ago when Nixon resigned. I thought I didn't have to
be on guard all the time, that I wouldn't have to -
work as hard as I had, and worry all the time about
what horrendous thing: was lurking in_ the
background to deprive you and me of our
"inalienable rights."
But, even though the surface menace is removed,
our work as civil libertarians is endless.
We are faced withS.1,the bill in Washington which
allegedly tightens our criminal law and procedure
but in effect is unbelievably oppressive in many ways
and supported by some of our most intelligent
representatives who should know better. We are
faced with the overwhelming problems created by
the power shortage and struggle, particularly the
issue of nuclear reactors; and on a local level the
issues raised by the police strike and the power of
our Mayor.
All of these problems contain fundamental civil
liberties issues. These things sometimes appear to be
beyond our control, but we must constantly and
persistently make our voices heard. We can exert
pressure for change for the good. We have done it in
the past and we must do it now, and in the future.
We need be "troublemakers" as our founding
patriots were called 200 years ago.
Yours,
~ Ruth Jacobs, President
Essay Contest
The Chapter is sponsoring its Second Annual
Essay Contest for San Francisco Senior High School
students. Within the next few weeks, the contest will
gain momentum. Judges are being selected. Watch
for details in our column of the ACLU News.
Keep The Date!
The 184th Anniversary of the Bill of Rights will
be celebrated by the ACLU-NC Foundation,
Sunday, December 14th, 1975 in the Grand
Ballroom of the Sheraton-Palace Hotel. A no-host
cocktail party is scheduled for 7 p.m. Program will
start at 8 p.m.
This celebration is an expression of our belief in
civil liberties, and so, it is at that time we will present
the 3rd Annual Earl Warren Civil Liberties Award to
a Northern Californian (or Californians) for
contributions to civil liberties by word, act and
deed. A smashing program of skits and music is in
the making, concerned with WOMEN and THEIR
civil liberties. .
Watch for details in the forthcoming ACLU-NC
NEWS.
VOL. 2 NO. 2
Special San Francisco Chapter Edition
HEAR YE!
COME ONE! COME ALL!
SAN FRANCISCO CHAPTER PRESENTS
LIFE, LIBERTY AND PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS
FESTIVAL SATURDAY AND SUNDAY
OCTOBER 4 and 5
10a.m.to6p.m.
FORT MASON, PIER AREA
(Laguna Street entrance at Marina Green)
MUSIC, ENTERTAINMENT,
FLORAL EXHIBITS
ARTISTS, CRAFTSPEOPLE, FOOD.
PARKING AVAILABLE
FREE...FREE...FREE...FREE.
COME ONE! COME ALL! ALL WELCOME! (c)
Reserve These Dates:
CUETO SER.
SoM WES
4
5 =
ee 5)
igh 5 16-17 18
1 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29
San Francisco Chapter
Annual Meeting
and
Mover Candidate's Forum
Sunday, October 19, 4 p.m.
Fireman's Fund Auditorium
3333 California Street
Chapter members and guests will have the
opportunity to meet the candidates for Mayor, and
to hear how they stand on civil liberties issues.
Ample time will be allotted for questions, answers
and discussion.
Chapter members will have the opportunity to
exercise their vote for the Chapter's Board of
Directors. There are ten vacancies. Nominees are
Arthur Brunwasser* Anson Moran*
Ernest Fleischman* Norman Posner*
John Hansen* Richard Rogers*
Lillian Kiskaddon* Peggy Sarasohn*
Bernice Krook Frances Strauss*
Nina Lathrop" Bacurbents
Peter Levy
Civil Liberties and
the Mayoral Campaign
Committee _
Andy Moran, Chairperson
For the past six months this committee has been
busy developing an extensive questionnaire for
Mayoral candidates, bludgeoning recalcitrant can-
didates into cesponding,- compiling the summary
presented here and organizing a Candidate's Forum
for our Annual Meeting, October 19, 4 p.m..
Fireman's Fund Auditorium, 3333 California Street.
Committee members are: Clarence Blanken-
ship, Marina and Valerie Devoulin, Virginia Goff,
Howard Jones, Nancy Kramer, Chuck Ortmeyer and
Phil Stevenson. All did an outstanding job and I
thank them warmly. :
What follows is this report regulting from the
Committee's efforts. -
Introduction
Civil liberties aren't usually thought of in local
terms, but there is every reason to do so. The
promise of government under our Constitution and
Bill of Rights is two-fold; first, that there are limits |
beyond which even government will not go in the
exercise of its power, and second, that the
- government will be responsive to the will of the
people. The Zebra searches are evidence that local
government can and will go beyond those limits, and
we read daily that groups of people have had to take
to the streets to achieve redress of their grievances.
The San Francisco Chapter of the ACLU
believes that the need has never been greater for
citizens to be alert to government's tendency to
erode our freedom. We are convinced that local
government has an important and immediate impact
on individual liberties. Moreover, we are concerned
that the Mayor, through the exercise of executive
power, has a tremendous influence over our
personal freedom.
In mid-June, all announced Mayoral candidates
were sent a questionnaire of 88 questions covering a
broad range of civil liberties issues. A compilation of
their answers follows. Conclusions are left to the
reader; our effort has been to present the
candidates' responses in as neutral a manner as
possible. Some of their answers raise additional
questions. The Candidates Forum on October 19 wil:
give you an opportunity to raise such questions
yourself.
continued on page 2 :
aclu news
9 issues a year, monthly except bi-monthly in
. March-April, July-August, and November-December
Published by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California
Second Class Mail privileges authorized at San Francisco, California
Richard DeLancie, Chairman of the Board
David M. Fishiow, Executive Director
Mike Callahan, Editor and Assistant Executive Director
593 Market Street, San Francisco, California 94105 - 433-2750
| Membership $15 and up of which $2.50 is the annual subscription fee
for aclu News
ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1968.batch ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1969.batch ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1970.batch ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1971.batch ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1972.batch ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1973.batch ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1974.batch ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1975.batch ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1983.batch ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_1999 ACLUN_1999.MODS ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log Nee 4
continued from page I
As is the case with most civil liberties questions,
the ones asked have few "correct" answers. Accord-
ingly, no attempt has been made to grade the
candidates' responses. The dilemmas reflected in the
questions cannot be solved. But answers are demand- |
ed in the day to day functioning of government, and
are found, whether through action or inadvertance.
The purpose of asking the questions is to make the
search for answers open and more intentional.
Questionnaires were sent to and completed by
the following:
Judge John Ertola
Hon. Dianne Feinstein
Ms. Josie-Lee Kuhlman
Sen. Milton Marks
Hon. John Barbagelata
Mr. Nicolas Benton
Mr. Ray Cunningham
Mr. John Diamante |
Mr. Donald Donaldson Sen. George Moscone
Mr. Victor D`Orazi Mr. Roland Sheppard
The only element of non-comparability
between individual candidates' responses stems from
factors of timing. Candidates Barbagelata, Benton,
D`Orazi, Ertola, Feinstein, Kuhlman, Marks,
Moscone, and Sheppard all received questionnaires
through the June mailing, and were requested
to submit their responses by July 15th.
Cunningham, Donaldson and Diamante received
questionnaires as we became aware of their
candidacy. Returns from Moscone, Kuhlman,
D`Orazi, and Sheppard were received in July.
Feinstein, Ertola, Benton and Cunningham returned
theirs in August. Returns from Barbagelata,
Donaldson, Diamante, and Marks were received in
September.
Police Practices
Of all the uses of governmental power, the
exercise of coercive power is potentially the most
abusive. As the instrument of the State's coercive
power, the police are often at the cutting edge of
civil liberties issues. Roughly half the questionnaire
dealt with police practices. Attention was focused
on intelligence operations, criminal history dossiers,
move-on orders, Operation Zebra, police officers'
rights, and the licensing of private police.
POLICE INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS
Because police intelligence operations are
directed at crime which might happen, not at crime
which has happened, it is highly suspect from a civil
liberties standpoint. It involves the investigation of
and collection of data about people who may or may
not be criminal, but who are considered dangerous.
That danger, in turn, may be real or imagined,
criminal or political.
These practices were recently at issue before
the Police Commission as they considered the
adoption of a new Manual of Police Conduct and
Rules. The concern of the ACLU over the proposed
manual's provisions covering intelligence operations
was two-fold. First, that, such activity would be
intrinsically intrusive on rights to privacy and
second, that the manual's enumeration of areas of
permitted intelligence activity was so broad that
such activity could exist without restriction and
expand without limit. The following are questions
which relate to police intelligence operations which
were posed to the candidates, and their responses:
Q: The Manual of Police Conduct and Rules,
currently on review before the Police Commission,
states that the Intelligence Bureau "shall be
responsible for the production and dissemination of
information" concerning espionage, labor disputes,
riots, sabotage, secret societies, subversive acti-
vities, treason offenses, vice and drug traffic. (Note:
no definition for these terms is given in the manual.
ed.)
Do you feel that intelligence gathering is a
legitimate concern of local police?
If you feel that it is a legitimate concern would
you indicate below those areas where concern is
justified.
Mr. Sheppard and Mr. Donaldson were the only
candidates who indicated that intelligence gathering
was not a legitimate concern of local police. All
other candidates approved of some degree of
intelligence activity.
Barbagelata approved of intelligence in all
stated areas. ee |
Judge Ertola was also permissive, indicating
disapproval only of intelligence gathering of secret
societies, and limited approval of such activity in
labor disputes.
Sen. Moscone and Mr. Diamante were the most
restrictive, Moscone indicating only approval of
intelligence gathering in the area of drug traffic, and
Diamante approving it for sabotage.
Ms. Feinstein mentioned a Supreme Court
holding that "intelligence gathering is a legitimate
activity of an agency when it is directly related and
necessary to its legislative purpose and function."
She goes on to approve such activity when
concentrated on Part I crimes and Hard Drug
traffic. "Such activity must be strictly limited in
scope and duration."
Sen. Marks approved of intelligence activity in
the areas of espionage, riots, and sabotage;
disapproved in the area of labor disputes; and
offered no opinion on the other areas.
Mr. Benton approved of such activity in the
areas of espionage, riots, sabotage, secret societies,
subversive activities, vice, drug traffic and other
area.
Mr. Gumanicien approved only in the areas of
riots and sabotage.
Mr. D`Orazi approved of reporting the
enumerated offenses but approved of more
extensive intelligence gathering only for vice and
drug traffic.
Ms. Kulhman vat restrict such activity only
in the areas of labor disputes and secret societies.
Q: Which if any of the following police activities
do you feel are proper at a public meeting or
gathering where there has been no indication that a -
crime has been committed or is being committed?
Traffic control (inc. pedestrian access), photo-
graphic surveillance, stop and question, stop and
search?
All candidates except Sheppard stated that
traffic control was. proper. Diamante exempted
_ pedestrian access from his approval.
Feinstein, Moscone, Benton, Cunningham,
Diamante, Donaldson and Sheppard responded that
photographic surveillance, stop and question, and
stop and search activity by the police at such
gathering would not be proper.
Ertola indicated that they would not be proper
"other than court room security problems and where
prospective crime (is) likely."
Marks indicated only that
surveillance would be proper.
D`Orazi and Kuhlman felt that photographic
surveillance is proper.
Barbagelata and Donaldson agreed that stop
and question activities would be proper.
Q: Do you favor the operation of "eye in the
sky" TV cameras like those in use at 5th and
Mission?
Only Kulhman answered "yes."
Barbagelata, Ertola, Scare
Benton, Diamante and Sheppard said, 0x00B0
_ Cunningham does not favor their use on public
property.
Donaldson did not offer an opinion because he
"(does) not know of its effectiveness;" and Marks did
not offer an opinion.
CRIMINAL HISTORY DOSSIERS
The San Francisco Police maintain extensive
manual and computerized criminal history records.
photographic
ae
~The history of legal distribution of these records
forces the conclusion that a person's
"debt to
society" cannot be considered "paid" as long as the
individual's record persists. The threat that such
records pose to one's freedom of movement and
ability to obtain employment cannot be discounted.
In April 1975 Captain Andrew Kristensen of the
San Francisco Police Department announced the
Department's revised standards for retention of
various classes of police records pertaining to
individuals.
eFelony arrest records with convictions are
retained forever.
eFelony arrest records with no convictions are
held for seven years and then destroyed,
assuming no further entries on their record.
eMisdemeanor arrest records with or without
conviction are held for five years, then
destroyed.
eArrest cards (where no charges are filed) and
FALL 1975
Field Interrogation cards (such as used in the
Zebra and juvenile sweeps) are held one year,
then destroyed.
Each of the candidates was asked to agree or
disagree with the stated Police policy, and were
further asked whether they thought that the police
should be allowed to keep records on persons
arrested but not convicted.
Ertola and Benton agreed fully with the ceed
Police Department policy, including the retention of
records on persons arrested but not convicted.
D`Orazi agreed in the main, but said that felony
records should be destroyed after seven years.
Donaldson also agreed in the main, but favored
indefinite retention of felony convictions only for
hardened criminals.
Marks said that arrest records without
convictions should be kept but for a limited time and
under strict security.
Feinstein, Moscone and Cunningham each
favored destruction of arrest records not supported
by convictions with various stipulations as to record
retention while the case is in progress.
Kuhlman recommended retention of felony arrest
records for two years without conviction.
Ertola, Feinstein, Marks, Benton, and
Cunningham (except for non-victim felony) agreed
with the PD's policy of keeping felony conviction
records forever. Other candidates responded as
follows: Moscone, 5; D`Orazi, 7; and Kulhman
during incarceration and parole only.
Ertola, Benton, Cunningham, and D`Orazi
~ agreed with the PD's policy of keeping misdemeanor
conviction records for five years. Marks recom-
mended less; Moscone, two years; and Kulhman,
one year.
Diamante did not respond to the policies
specifically but did indicate that he did not favor the
police keeping records of arrests - without
convictions.
- Barbagelata did not respond to the question on
retention period, but indicated that records without
convictions should be kept for felons.
- Benton and D`Orazi agreed with the one year
retention of discharged arrests and Field Inter-
rogation cards. All other candidates responding said
`that such records should not be kept.
Sheppard favored no retention of such records.
MOVE-ON ORDERS
The best protection against the abuse of power
is that its exercise be public. It is for that reason that
police blotters are public information in spite of the
fact that arrest records are considered confidential.
In the same vein, considerable emphasis has been
placed on protecting the right of citizens to view
arrests. Restriction of that right by an officer
demanding that by-standers "move-on" cannot be
considered a harmless convenience `to the officer;
they are an encroachment on the public's right to
observe their police operate publicly.
Q: There are currently no policy guidelines to
guide a police officer in making a decision to
demand that a person watching an arrest move on. |
Should clear, written policy be established in
this area?
Should move-on orders be strictly limited to
situations where there is a clear and real danger to
suspect, officer, or citizen?
Under what other situations should a police
officer be allowed to deny a citizen's right to watch
an arrest?
All candidates except Benton and Diamante
favored clear written policy. Diamante favored "oral
tradition."
All candidates except Ertola indicated that
move-on orders should be strictly limited to
situations where there is a clear and real danger to
suspect, officer, or citizen. His position was that
they should be permitted "where arriving citizens
provide the Potential) for making a minor incident a
major one.'
Feinstein, in agreeing that move-on orders
should be used only "when there is a clear physical
danger," stated that, "a police officer's arrest should
be in compliance with the law . . .Citizens serve as a ~
check on police officers."
- OPERATION ZEBRA
Operation Zebra, as much as any other factor,
provided the incentive for the San Francisco
ee a eee ie eee ae eS
FALL 1975 | 3
Chapter of the ACLU to question mayoral Ertola said: "a child should be subject to become law and will become effective on January 1,
candidates. It was proof positive of municipal parental love, care and control and not just the ever 1976.)
government's ability and willingness to extend the
use of its power beyond consitutional limits, and
highlighted the power of the mayor in such activity.
Before Operation Zebra was declared uncon-
`stitutional, hundreds of people were subjected to
unwarranted search of their persons because they
were black and male. The only law enforcement
purpose served by the searches was a series of minor
arrests totally unrelated to the ostensible purposes of
the procedure.
The candidates were asked if they would "ever
authorize a Zebra-like search program," and if so
under what circumstances.
Candidates Feinstein, Marks, Moscone,
Benton, Cunningham and Sheppard indicated that
they would never authorize such a search program.
Diamante indicated that he would in the case of
nuclear or CBW (chemical and biological warfare.
ed.) terror.
Kulhman said she would if "citizens' safety is
gravely threatened."
Barbagaleta and Donaldson agreed.
D`Orazi would "only when the party searched is
known to be a member of a known public enemy
(group)," or is a known public enemy.
Ertola states that he couldn't imagine
circumstances under which he would, "but
everything is possible."
POLICE OFFICERS' RIGHTS
It is one of the ironies of civil liberties that
police officers surrender more of their civil liberties
by virtue of their employment as police officers than
most employees. Aside from the constitutional
issues involved, it seems unwise to establish the
police asa sub-section of society for which the rest _
of society's rules do not apply, and at the same time
expect them to justly enforce the society's rules.
The candidates were asked if they would favor
the extension of police officers' rights to include: the
right to write and speak on controversial issues, the
right to strike, and the right to hearing prior to
suspension or other disciplinary action resulting in
loss of pay or position.
All candidates answered that police officers
should have the right to "write and speak on
controversial issues.'
All also agreed that police officers should have
the right to "hearing prior to suspension or other
disciplinary action resulting in loss of pay or
Position. " Feinstein allowed for temporary suspen-
sions when "there is possible danger for the
individual officer and/or others." She further
indicated that such suspension "would be limited in
duration to the first meeting of the Police
Commission immediately following the incident."
The candidates are split on the issue of whether
the police should have the right to strike. Candidates
Barbagelata, Ertola, Feinstein, Cunningham,
Donaldson and Kulhman said that they should not.
Moscone, Benton and Sheppard said they should.
Marks favored binding arbitration; Diamante
favored "bargain(ing) with elected representatives;"
D`Orazi said they should have the right to strike
while "leaving minimum crews."
JUVENILE RIGHTS
Juveniles occupy a special, "protected," and
uncomfortable place in the law. People of humane
sensibilities are reluctant to surrender juveniles to
the full range of life's vagaries, and have sought
refuge in protection by the State. That protection
has not always proved benign. The juvenile justice
system is tribute to the fact that the State makes a _
poor parent.
In order to determine just how far each
candidate thought the State should go to protect
juveniles from themselves, and to what degree
society should take advantage of juveniles' special
status to protect itself from rampaging juveniles, the
following questions were asked.
Q: Do you feel that juveniles should enjoy the
same civil rights (liberties) as adults?
Feinstein, Marks, Moscone, Cunningham,
Donaldson, D`Orazi, Kulhman and Sheppard
answered, "yes." Diamante said, "largely."
Barbagelata said "yes .
. . as well as the same
responsibilities." -
present state."
Cunningham and Benton said no.
Q: Should truancy laws be under the jurisdiction
of the police or some other agency?
_ _ (Would you support new truancy laws to enable
authorities to take faster action against juvenile
violators?
Barbagelata, Benton, Donaldson, and D`Orazi
considered truancy laws to properly belong in the
jurisdiction of the police. Other suggestions for
appropriate agencies were: Ertola: school truant
officers; Feinstein: a social service agency; Marks:
Social Services; Moscone: Board of Education;
Cunningham: parents; Diamante: peers; Kuhlman:
Children's Bureau of Social Welfare; Sheppard:
School Boards elected by the black and minority
communities.
Barbagelata, Ertola, and Donaldson favor
additional truancy laws ``to take faster action against
juvenile violators."
Ertola commented that such action,
the innocent."
Those not favoring new truancy laws were:
Feinstein, Marks, Moscone, Benton, Cunningham,
Diamante, D`Orazi, Kulhman, and Sheppard.
Q: Do you agree with the necessity for and
propriety of the curfew laws?
(Would you support) a new law to prevent three
or more persons under 21 from congregating on the
streets between 8:00 PM and daylight?
(Would you support) a curfew law to control
juveniles on the street after 11PM. _
Favoring curfew laws were Barbagelata and
Donaldson.
-D`Orazi agreed, "but only for limited periods,
where an actual emergency exists."
Ertola agreed, depending on the time.
No candidate favored the 8:00 PM to dawn
curfew, but Barbagelata and Donaldson favored the
11:00 PM curfew.
Q: Should juveniles be arrested and processed
through the juvenile justice system for offenses not
considered criminal for adults (e.g., juvenile truancy
laws, runaway laws, being beyond parental control)?
Benton, Donaldson and D`Orazi
juveniles arrested for such charges should be
"protects
processed through the juvenile justice system.
Barbagelata, Ertola, Feinstein, Moscone, Cun-
ningham, Diamante and Kulhman thought that they
should not. Marks and Sheppard did not respond to
the question.
Q: State law authorizes charter cities to transfer
jurisdiction from Juvenile Court to the Department
of Social Services for those persons under 21 who
fall under Welfare and Institutions codes 0x00A7 600 a, b
and c. Would you favor taking these "shelter" cases
out of the juvenile justice system?
Ertola, Feinstein, Marks, Moscone, Cunning-
ham, Diamante, D`Orzai, and Kulhman agreed in
favoring such a transfer. Barbagelata did also but
with the concurrence of the social services system.
Benton did not agree; Donaldson and Sheppard did
not respond to the question.
VICTIMLESS CRIMES
The prosecution of victimless crimes is an
affront to civil liberties and a waste of municipal
resources. The candidates were questioned re:
consenting adults legislation, marijuana legislation,
-enforcement of prose aey laws and resource
allocation.
SB 489 (the "consenting adults bill") was
recently signed by Governor Brown. Do you support
the provisions of this legislation?
Q: In what respects, if any, do you disagree?
Supporting candidates were: Ertola, Feinstein,
Marks, Moscone (co-author of the bill), Benton,
Cunningham, Diamante and Kulhman. Donaldson
supports the bill but feels that adultery should not be
legalized. Barbagelata does not support the bill
stating that his objections are, "too many to relate."
Sheppard and D`Orazi did not respond.
Q: A bill in the California Legislature, SB 95,
eliminates criminal penalties for the private use and
possession of small amounts of marijuana (similar to
existing Oregon law). Do you support this bill.
(Since the questionnaire was drafted, SB 95 has.
felt that .
Supporting this legislation were: Feinstein,
`Marks, Moscone (author of the bill), Cunningham,
Donaldson and Kulhman. Diamante indicates that
while he is not familiar with SB 95, he has favored.
similar legislation in the past. D`Orazi supports the
bill, "with limitations."
Barbagelata and Benton do not support the bill.
Ertola favors diversion, noting that the "new
law may increase arrests" and that "supporters now
challenge it.'
Q: Alameda Superior Judge Avakian recently
ruled that the practice of enforcing prostitution law -
discriminating against women and not men was
illegal. He ordered equal treatment by the police of
both parties.
Without commenting on the merits of the
specific case, do you agree that both prostitute and
client should be treated equally with respect to :
pretrial detention and pressing of charges?
All candidates favor equality of enforcement
with the exception of D`Orazi who answered "no
and indicated that he would favor decriminalization
of prostitution. Moscone, Cunningham, Sheppard
also indicated that they would favor the
non-criminal treatment of prostitution although that
question was not specifically asked.
Q: Different areas of law enforcement receive
different amounts of resource. Do you believe that
the San Francisco Police Department's current
allocation of resources in the following areas is
appropriate: Prostitution, drug usage, gambling,
homosexual solicitation, and public intoxication?
Benton thought that the current allocation was
about right.
Cunningham, Donaldson, Kuhlman and
Sheppard said that the current allocation in all
enumerated areas was high.
Feinstein considers allocation of resources for
prostitution, gambling, and homosexual solicitation
high; for drug traffic, low; and did not respond to
public intoxication.
Marks called allocatiofis to prostitution and
homosexual solicitation, high; to drug usage and
gambling, about right; and said that public
intoxication probably does not belong in the
criminal justice system.
Moscone considered all allocations high, but
indicated that the current allocation to drug usage
_was unknown to him.
Ertola considers allocation to prostitution and
_ drug usage about right, and the other areas high.
Diamante called prostitution, drug usage, and
homosexual solicitation high, and indicated that he
was not familiar with departmental particulars.
D`Orazi considered prostitution and public
intoxication emphasis high, the rest about right.
Barbagelata did not respond, indicating that
"without a current SF budget, this is impossible to
answer. Only with a program budget process can this
be accomplished." -
PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE
A recent report by a committee of the San
Francisco Bar Association pointed out that the
Public Defender's Office was severely underfunded.
One indicator cited was the fact that San Francisco's
Public Defender's annual caseload of 768 mixed
felony and misdemeanor cases per attorney in 1974
was substantially in excess of the 200-400 per
attorney recommended by the President's Com-
mission, and of the 350-450 per attorney of the three
major neighboring counties.
Q: What is your opinion of the operation of the
Public Defender's Office? Do you feel that they are
providing adequate legal defense for its clients?
What non-budgetary changes to the office do you
feel should be made? Please be specific.
Would you favor increased funding for the
Public Defender's Office?
Within the realities of municipal finance, what
are the chances that an increase in the Public
Defender's budget could occur during your
administration as Mayor?
Barbagelata holds the Public Defender s Office
in high regard and feels that it provides an adequate
continued on page 4
4
continued from page 3
defense for its clients. He doubts that many
non-budgetary improvements can be made and
stated that increased funding "depends on needs."
Ertola feels that the office "has a good
operation," especially in the area of felony defense.
He favors increased funding and indicates that a
"very careful appraisal will be made."
Feinstein stated that "the caseload per Public
Defender should be compared each fiscal year to the
caseload per District Attorney and the budget
_ should provide for an appropriate number of Public
Defenders." She also suggests increased use of
paralegals and law students; and will favor increased
funding after the current budgetary crisis is ended.
Marks says that the office is "trying to do a good
job" and that he would favor increased funding.
Moscone indicated that the primary problem
with the office is budgetary and stated that "they will
be increased."
Benton also promises that the budget will be_
increased.
Cunningham states, "government defense of an
individual against prosecution by that government
cannot be considered justice. Legal defense of
indigent persons must come from purely private
welfare sources." D`Orazi also favors a private
funding of legal services on a basis similar to medical
insurance. Neither favored uncreased funding.
Diamante asks, "what are the chances of
converting an acre of asphalt?"
Donaldson suspects that "too many people who
can afford legal protection illegally are represented
by the Public Defender," that public defenders don't
work too hard, and that the office should not be
given increased funding.
Kulhman feels that the Public Defender is
providing inadequate legal defense, and favors more
training and outreach. She rates the chances for
increased funding under her administration as the
"same chance as many other items - financial
patterning and those services depend on priorities."
Sheppard did not respond.
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES
As the largest employer in the City, San
Francisco Municipal Government's employment
policies assume tremendous importance.
Q: Do you feel public employees should have
the right to: bargain collectively, strike, due process
in major (i.e., any action involving a loss of pay or
position) disciplinary matters?
Those favoring municipal employee's right to
strike were: Feinstein (except police, fire, and
emergency departments), Marks (except police and
fire which should have binding arbitration),
Moscone, Benton, and Sheppard (no exceptions),
1975 Highlights
San Francisco Chapter
ACLU
to our usual "housekeeping"
functions, e.g., fund raising, membership drives,
medio eee `legislative advocacy before city
boards and agenices, etc., the San Francisco
Chapter through the Board of Directors and
participating members undertook four major
_ projects during 1975, which are summarized below.
Weare also completing our first full year with a
salaried chapter coordinator. The availability of
staff support of this nature has made it possible for
the Chapter to undertake some of the major,
long-term projects discussed.
Budget
For the first time in its existence, the Chapter
Board adopted a budget for its proposed 1975
income and expenditures. The need for the budget
was the result of our successful fund-raising efforts
and the Northern California Affiliate's revenue-
sharing program. The proposed budget of $6,800
represented a 50% increase over 1974 expenditures.
At the beginning of September, the Chapter was
"on-schedule" in raising funds to meet the budget,
with the October 4-5 crafts fair being the major
source for funds for the rest of the year. The Fair is
In addition
D`Orazi ("with restrictions").
Those opposed to the right to strike were:
Barbagelata, Ertola, Cunningham, Donaldson and
Kulhman.
It should be noted that the only candidates who
took a different position on the right of policemen to
strike, and the right of other municipal employees to
strike, were: Feinstein, Marks and Diamante.
The right to bargain collectively were supported
by: Ertola, Feinstein, Marks, Moscone, Benton,
Diamante, D`Orazi ("with restrictions') and
Sheppard. Donaldson would favor collective
bargaining "only when the tax paying public (the
electorate) are given the same rights and
representation (certainly not the Board of
Supervisors or Mayor)." Bargabelata would favor it,
"with certain guidelines."
Cunningham does not favor it, objecting to
labor's "privileged" position. Kulhman does not
favor it at all.
Q: Are you personally committed to the City
being an equal opportunity employer?
Please describe what you believe the City must
do in order to be an equal opportunity employer.
Does that require changes in municipal personnel
practices? If so what changes would you propose?
All candidates indicated that they were
personally committed to the City being an equal
opportunity employer.
Ertola, Moscone and Siteppard called for
affirmative action programs. Ertola indicated that
such a program would have to go beyond the "simple
statement of policy adopted by the Board of
Supervisors." Moscone attached a copy of SB 700
which he authored and which outlined, in legislative
detail, an affirmative action program. Sheppard
indicated the need for a "super-seniority" system to
avoid last hired, first fired policies from getting the
gains of affirmative action programs.
Barbagelata, Feinstein, Marks, Benton,
Cunningham, and D`Orazi all pointed to the Civil
Service for maintaining equality of employment
oppportunity. Barbagelata said that "if those in
charge of Civil Service cannot guarantee this, they
will not be in charge long." Feinstein said that her
administration "will vigorously advocate and
mandate the opening of City positions, especially
managerial position, to women and minorities. (She)
will expand the Civil Service Commission from three
to five members, at least one of whom must be a
woman." Marks called for increased job related
educational opportunities.
Kulhman called for a major overhaul of the
Civil Service System saying that, "some of the
techniques are archaic (i.e., rule of one)."
discussed elsewhere.
Neighborhood Meetings -
The S.F. Chapter Board initiated a series of
"Neighborhood Meetings" to bring together
face-to-face members of the chapter and members
of the Board to discuss concerns and priorities of the
membership.
The meetings were highly praised by those in
attendance, although turnout was lower than hoped.
Another series of meetings will be scheduled for early ;
1976. Board members who attended the meetings
were excited by the level of interest and awareness
of the membership in civil liberties issues and
ACLU's response to them.
Manual of Police Conduct and Rules
In co-operation with Amatai Schwartz, Legal
Director of the Northern California Police Practices
Project, S.F. ACLU and other interested groups
forced the San Francisco Police Commission to
make public its proposed new Police Manual and to
hold public hearings prior to the adoption of the
same. ACLU representatives appeared and testified
at the hearing on the Manual, focusing on several
portions considered repugnant to the civil liberties
of both police officers and citizens.
While this effort may not have changed the
content of the manual eventually adopted, it did set
an important precedent regarding secrecy and the
Police Commission operations, as well as giving
citizens a look into the internal operations of the San
Francisco Police Department for the first time.
ACLU-S.F. intends to press forward for some
_ Diamante,
a = FALL 1975
COMMISSIONS
Most of the questions asked were about
attitudes, beliefs, and positions on civil liberties. A
few questions asked the candidates how they would
get something done. Time and time again they
pointed to the commissions as their mechanism for
action. The attitudes toward the commissions
- ranged from their being obsolete and disfunctional
to their being of prime importance. The
preponderance of opinion, however, held that they
were of prime importance.
The commissions probably have a great deal of
power. Whether that power is available to the
Mayor is a matter of question. The Mayor's single
greatest handhold on the commisssions is the power
of appointment. Under the Charter, it would take a
Mayor almost two full terms in office (all that is
allowed) to replace all commissioners if there had
been no resignations.
Nearly all the candidates claimed this power of
appointment as the tool by which they would
accomplish change. Most indicated obscurely that
their influence would extend beyond appointments
and two (Barbagelata, Moscone) indicated that they
would have the power to manipulate the
commissions and their actions at will.
The prevailing flavor of their responses,
however, was that the commissions, once
appointed, would be largely independent, capable of
being worked with, but not controlled. This was true
of Ertola, Marks, Benton, Cunningham, Diamante,
D`Orazi and Kulhman. .
Feinstein proposed that the Police and Civil
Service Commissions should be expanded from
three members to five, at least one of whom should
be a woman. The implication is that a change in
structure would bring a change in effectiveness; that
the specific change would maintain the commis-
sions' effectiveness; independance and make them
more broadly representative.
Our questions did not probe the functioning
commissions, but they did probe the appointive
process.
Asked about the adequacy of citizen input and
review of municipal agencies provided by the
commissions, Ertola, Feinstein, Marks, Moscone,
Donaldson, D`Orazi, Kulhman and
Sheppard made a resounding proclamation that the
commissions were not adequately serving these
functions. Benton and Cunningham dissented.
Barbagelata said that "citizen input must be
provided on a committee level prior to legislative
review by the Board of Supervisors."
All the candidates except Donaldson,
Diamante, and Sheppard agree that commissioners (c)
should continue to be appointed by the Mayor.
Pret
much-needed reforms in this area, the need for
which was never readily apparent before. Among
our projects is continued support for a Charter
amendment introduced by Superior John Molinari
to require all city commissions to hold public
hearings.
Campaign for S.F. Mayor
Perhaps the most ambitious project of 1975 was
the S.F. Mayor's Campaign project, whereby the
S.F. ACLU Chapter set out to make civil liberties an
issue in the 1975 campaign for mayor.
The project so far has had three major parts to
it.
First, the Board and a joint board/member
committee (headed by Anson Moran) developed an
extensive civil liberties questionnaire which focuses
on all the identifiable civil liberties facing San
Francisco where the Mayor will have any direct or
indirect involvement.
The questionnaire was sent to all candidates for
mayor, almost all of whom completed and returned
it. A digest appears in this issue.
Second, ACLU has scheduled a Mayor
Candidates' Forum in conjunction with the annual
membership meeting, where most, if not all
candidates are expected to appear and answer
questions.
Third, ACLU has established contact with other
community groups interested in the election, so that
we can share information and also assure that groups
with multi-interests include civil liberties in their list _
of priorities.