I voted for Chesa Boudin for San Francisco District Attorney because I agree with his stated goal of focusing on services and rehabilitation instead of incarceration. That’s why I am voting “no” on Proposition H, the Boudin recall.
The San Francisco Chronicle analyzed data from the San Francisco Police Department and concluded, “While the pandemic significantly affected crime as San Francisco is getting back to ’normal,’ so are its crime rates. Boudin likely hasn’t had an impact one way or another.” And Boudin has not been accused of any unethical or illegal activity.
What crime wave? According to the proponents of the recall, District Attorney Boudin is “failing to keep San Franciscans safe.” Yet, an analysis of police data for 2021 shows an uptick in crime from 2020, but overall lower crime rates than pre-pandemic levels. True murders have increased but murders are not just a San Francisco problem as murders in major U.S. increased in 2021. In sum, the police data may be subject to different interpretation but clearly do not show a crime wave in San Francisco. Is there crime in San Francisco. Of course but a crime wave?
Why blame Boudin and for what? According to a Bloomberg analysis, there is no actual correlation between counties/cities with progressive prosecutors and crime rates or “tough on crime” district attorneys and crime rates. In other words, the District Attorney’s office cannot prosecute people until the police arrest them.
Who is behind the recall? The main funder of the recall initiative is Neighbors for a Better San Francisco made up of GOP donors and allies who “support Trump, McConnell, and the GOP agenda, and run by a lobbyist for the real-estate industry.”
Chesa Boudin is just doing what he pledged to do; thus, a recall is uncalled for, or at least premature. Instead of a recall, he should serve out his term in office and then let voters decide whether he should be re-elected for another term.
Ralph E. Stone, Richmond District resident
Categories: letter to the editor