GOT SMACK?

COMING SOON TO your neighborhood, courtesy of Supervisor Chris Daly:
junkies, crack fiends, hopheads and speed freaks.

Sitting in his chair as a member of the Board of Supervisors' Finance
Committee, Daly said on Wednesday that he's looking forward to siting more
drug rehabilitation programs in various locations throughout the city --
"even in neighborhoods that don't want them" -- while his colleagues on the
committee, Supervisors Aaron Peskin and Sophie Maxwell, smiled and nodded
in agreement.

Of course, the supervisors didn't say exactly which neighborhoods would be
getting rehab clinics whether they want them or not, but it's worth noting
that both Daly and Peskin were elected on a platform of neighborhood
preservation. Indeed, both have taken great pains to sanctify the
"neighborhood voice" in the civic discourse, placing it above virtually all
other considerations. Which begs some obvious questions: how, exactly, does
locating drug rehab clinics in residential neighborhoods constitute the
preservation of San Francisco's neighborhoods? And, perhaps more
importantly, what's a sanctimonious supervisor to do when the neighborhood
voice isn't telling you what you want to hear?

Campaign Finance Disclosure? That's for the Little People.

Daly's chief legislative aide, Bill Barnes, who just got himself elected to
the San Francisco Democratic County Central Committee out of the 13th
Assembly District, believes in full disclosure of campaign finance
information -- as long as it doesn't apply to him.

During the recently concluded campaign, Barnes sent out a mail piece
promoting himself, Peskin aide Wade Crowfoot and another self-styled
"reform" candidate who finished far out of the money. The mailer depicts
Barnes and Crowfoot as good-government types standing against "big-money
politics in City Hall."

Barnes, however, has chosen to thumb his nose at the disclosure laws by
which all candidates and campaigns must abide. His campaign finance filing
covering the period through Jan. 19 indicates nothing: no contributions and
no expenditures. In fact, the Ethics Commission cited Barnes on Feb. 22 for
failing to file the campaign finance report that was due Feb. 21. The
document still has not been filed.

So how did Barnes pay for the mailing? Asked where the campaign cash came
from, Barnes said smugly, "I'll take anybody's money," but refused to say
anything more. Sources around City Hall, though, say Barnes got at least
$3,000 from political consultant and failed mayoral candidate Clint Reilly.
Indeed, Barnes' mail piece notes the support of "Philanthropists Clint and
Janet Reilly."

So much for standing against Big Money.