PAR (Planning Association for the Richmond) article about Stop Crime SF and the Court Watch program. Summer 2019.

SF Voters: This is your historic moment to fight crime. Don't miss the August 7 District Attorney candidate debate. Why should we care who is District Attorney? They're in charge of prosecuting criminals — and the FBI says San Francisco ranks #1 nationwide in property crime among major cities. The District Attorney sets the agenda for how San Francisco will or won't fight our crime epidemic. The stakes couldn't be higher.

The Alameda County Civil Grand Jury released a report about crime and quality of life on BART and its impact on ridership.

There is some good news to report. Politics is about compromise and the police department has reached a deal with the budget committee.

Press Release: Supervisors blast grassroots anti-crime group for “Trump-like falsehoods” when Stop Crime SF tries to publicize potential foot patrol cuts in police budget that supervisors want to use to pay for more staff and other pet projects.

Supervisors want to take money away from the police department meant for more foot patrols to pay for things like a fourth legislative aide for each supervisor. Please tell supervisors we need safer streets, not more bureaucrats.

Stop Crime SF President Frank Noto shares the loss of his younger brother in an open letter to the Board of Supervisors. Frank urges supervisors to support the Housing Conservatorships Ordinance, which will establish conservatorships to help those suffering on the streets from the most severe forms of mental illness and addiction.

Stop Crime SF briefed residents on its Court Watch and crime prevention programs in a May 26 Sunset District public safety town hall attended by more than 200 people. The town hall was called by District 4 Supervisor Gordon Mar after a number of high-profile robberies in Sunset neighborhoods.

Instead of an outright ban, a moratorium would have been more appropriate. There are problems with facial recognition ID technology and it should not be used today. But the technology will improve and it could be a useful tool for public safety when used responsibly and with greater accuracy. We should keep the door open for that possibility. Especially when facial recognition technology can help locate missing children, people with dementia and fight sex trafficking.

Amending legislation is a messy process of horse-trading words. One of the amendments in San Francisco’s new video surveillance law is still missing a vital word. Police can receive private security video, but will they be able to use it to solve crimes? Words matter when we have the highest rate of property crime among the nation's largest cities.

San Francisco residents concerned about property crime should send a message to City Hall ASAP about the anti-video surveillance law. It's currently being amended and some key words are missing. Please tell supervisors to get this law right. Your emails must be received before May 6, 2019.

We are concerned that the “Stop Secret Surveillance Ordinance” currently being considered by the Board of Supervisors will limit the ability of law enforcement to fight crime with video cameras. This law is well-intended. It is important to acknowledge the problems with facial recognition technology and the city needs a policy for use of traditional video cameras. We support the intention of this law and offer the following amendments to ensure its success.

This open letter to members of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors expresses concerns about proposed video surveillance legislation. The law will significantly limit the ability of law enforcement to fight crime with video cameras and could have unintended consequences that make us less safe. The letter includes suggested amendments.

Unlike many cities around the country San Francisco does not publish homicide or assault clearance statistics on a regular basis. This information should be posted yearly on the SFPD website, readily accessible website as “Crime Trends.” It’s impossible to hold our public servants accountable without reliable, publicly available information.

To scores of city residents, Shirin Oloumi is known reverentially as the Queen of Car Break-ins. No, it’s not because she smashes car windows and swipes backpacks with abandon. It’s because she prosecutes the guys who do.

Fighting Big Brother and Big Tech might feel good when privacy is a concern. But a proposed law to ban facial recognition and severely impede San Francisco’s use of security cameras is full of unintended consequences that won’t keep us safe or free. Stop Crime SF guest OpEd published in the San Francisco Chronicle.

Newlyweds and tourists from Asia had their car broken into and luggage stolen as they posed for photos on the mosaic steps near 16th Avenue and Moraga Street in the Sunset District. The theft was just one of roughly 60 auto break-ins that happen every day in San Francisco.

Unlike many cities around the country San Francisco does not publish homicide or assault clearance statistics on a regular basis. This information should posted yearly by January 31, and readily accessible on the SFPD website as “Crime Trends.” We would like to see the information be easy to read and access and copy, with links and downloadable, copy-ready files.

When a public school teacher who lives in the Bayview expressed concern about drug deals and illegal dumping outside her home, Stop Crime SF board member Nancy Tung offered to raise the funds for a security camera — and installed it herself. The availability of lower cost home camera systems is a great way to fight neighborhood crime.

Stop Crime SF is backing a proposed state law by Senator Scott Wiener to close a legal loophole that makes it difficult to prosecute car break-ins. San Francisco is experiencing a car break-in epidemic and this common sense change in the law will give prosecutors the tool they need to put criminals out of business.