San Francisco, CA
Trump promises mass deportations, history shows they could disproportionally target US born children
SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) — Patricia Aguayo remembers the day in 1989 she was felt like she was a different class of American citizen.
She was at Club Elegante, a Mission District nightclub, when San Francisco police officers walked in followed by immigration agents.
“They locked the door and said nobody could leave. People were scared. Who was ever to think that this was going to turn into a deportation,” recalled Aguayo.
Immigration agents asked everyone for identification, including the workers and musicians.
Aguayo, who was born in San Francisco, felt racially profiled so she refused to show her I.D.
“I was not going to show them anything because if I were Anglo they would not have asked me for documentation,” said Aguayo. “I was legally here I wanted to let them know that they were not going to just profile people and assume that everybody in that club was undocumented.”
Patricia and the ACLU of Northern California filed a class-action lawsuit claiming immigration agents violated their constitutional rights by detaining and questioning them simply because they were Latino. They won.
The incident shaped the future of San Francisco politics.
At the time, San Francisco was a sanctuary for Central American refugees who faced deportation.
After the nightclub raid, the city adopted a more expansive sanctuary policy and forbid local law enforcement from cooperating with immigration agents.
Immigrant advocates say raids at places where Latinos gather may come back under the Trump administration.
“The last time President Trump was in office, one of the one of the places that was subject to immigration raids were 7-Eleven stores and convenience stores and in relatively low budget stores in neighborhoods where Latinos were heavily populated,” said Kevin Johnson, professor at the U.C. Davis School of Law.
Johnson said the intention of public raids is to make undocumented immigrants so afraid of being apprehended while grocery shopping or dropping their children off at school that they will leave the country on their own, a type of self-deportation.
The United States has had two previous mass deportations of primarily Mexican immigrants in the last 100 years.
The first happened during the Great Depression, when unemployment was high and many people blamed people of Mexican ancestry of taking jobs meant for Americans.
Local and state police carried out the mass arrests.
“People were rounded up who looked Mexican, were put on buses, trains driven by social workers even to the U.S.-Mexico border and dumped,” said Johnson.
It’s estimated up to a million people of Mexican ancestry were removed from the United States and returned to Mexico during what became known as the Mexican Repatriation.
MORE: Immigration raids in Central Valley create fear among Half Moon Bay farmworkers
An unexpected three-day border patrol operation in the Central Valley is amplifying fear for the farming community in Half Moon Bay.
Some historians say two-thirds of those forced to leave were U.S. citizens, many of them children of immigrant parents.
Johnson called it a form of ethnic cleansing.
“They terrified communities and they violated the rule of law and they are what some would say is a national disgrace,” added Johnson.
A second mass deportation happened in the 1950s. It was called “Operation Wetback”, a racial slur used to describe Mexican immigrants who crossed the Rio Grande and got their backs wet.
“The US government carried a military type operation where immigration officials went to job sites, schools, and neighborhoods and deported immigrants who were caught there. Their family members often didn’t know where those people had been sent, what happened to them,” explains Anna Raquel Minian, author of ‘In the Shadow of Liberty’ and a professor of history at Stanford University.
MORE: Trump deportation vow causes concern in Napa Valley; immigration advocates brace for impacts
Just like the mass deportation two decades earlier, many of those deported were U.S. citizens.
“They couldn’t leave their children in the United States by themselves, so they were forced to take them with them, even though these children were American citizens. It was absolutely devastating,” said Minian.
Donald Trump has promised a mass deportation when he returns to the White House, starting with immigrants with criminal records or previous deportation orders.
“Prioritizing the people who pose the most danger and removing those people, that’s certainly going to happen. But it doesn’t mean that they’re going to just turn a blind eye to everybody else,” said Ira Mehlman, media director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).
That was certainly the case in mid-January when agents from the U.S. Border Patrol arrested 78 people during a three-day operation in Kern County.
MORE: Post-inauguration ICE raids starting as soon as Tuesday, likely in Chicago, sources tell ABC News
The Border Patrol said among those arrested were a convicted sex offender and others with records or warrants for theft and drug possession.
The agency said “Operation Return to Sender” focused on “disrupting the transportation routes used by Transnational Criminal Organizations.”
But agents were videotaped casting a wider net. Footage from a Chevron gas station in Bakersfield shows agents questioning Latino customers.
“Law enforcement goes through these processes all the time. That’s how they identify the people that they’re going to target. It doesn’t mean that there’s going to be racial profiling,” said Mehlman.
Children born in the United States with undocumented parents could again be caught in the net.
In an interview with NewsNation, Trump’s border czar Tom Homan said U.S. born children of undocumented immigrants could be held in halfway houses if they are caught in a mass deportation.
“As Tom Homan has said, that there is no reason why people have to be separated from their families. They can make a choice. It is their choice to either go home with their entire family, or to go home and leave the parts of their family that are citizens in this country,” explained Mehlman.
MORE: SF legal experts worried over growing waitlist of people in need of attorneys for deportation court
Johnson said these type of mass deportations have left a stain in the country.
“We had citizen children who were in effect deported with their parents and in effect told even though you’re a citizen, you’re not a citizen like white Americans,” said Johnson. ” It had tremendous impact on the sense of belonging of people of Mexican ancestry in the United States and it lingers to this day in certain ways.”
Copyright © 2025 KGO-TV. All Rights Reserved.
San Francisco, CA
San Francisco supervisors call for hearing into PG&E’s massive blackout
SAN FRANCISCO – San Francisco supervisors are calling for a hearing by the board into the massive power outage in the city last month.
Calls for a hearing
What we know:
Supervisor Alan Wong and other lawmakers say residents deserve answers about the outage on December 20, which, at its height, affected about a third of the city.
Wong added that the credits offered by Pacific Gas and Electric are insufficient to cover lost food, wages and many other disruptions. The utility has offered customers and businesses impacted by the Dec. 20 blackout $200 and $2,500 respectively.
Wong in a statement said power was gradually restored during the initial outage, but that periodic outages continued for several days and that full restoration was achieved on Dec. 23.
“This was not a minor inconvenience,” said Sup. Wong. “Families lost heat in the middle of winter. Seniors were stranded in their homes. One of my constituents, a 95-year-old man who relies on a ventilator, had to be rushed to the hospital at 2 a.m. People watched their phones die, worried they would lose their only connection to 911.”
Wong’s office had sent the utility a letter after previous outages on Dec. 7 and Dec. 10, regarding the utility’s lack of reliability. The letter called the frequency of the outages unacceptable.
PG&E agreed with Wong’s office’s characterization of service specific to the Sunset District and met with the supervisor.
Despite this development, the root cause of the outage on Dec. 20, that impacted some 130,000 residents citywide, was due to a substation fire near Mission and 8th streets. That fire remains under investigation.
Wong thanked fellow supervisors Bilal Mahmood, Connie Chan, Stephen Sherrill, Danny Sauter, and Myrna Melgar for co-sponsoring his request. The boardmembers have asked board President Rafael Mandelman to refer their request to the appropriate committee.
Wong is separately submitting a letter of inquiry to the SF Public Utilities Commission requesting an analysis of cost and implementation of what it would take for San Francisco to have its own publicly-owned electrical grid.
The other side:
A PG&E spokesperson addressed the board on Tuesday, asking for the hearing to be scheduled after they get results of an independent investigation.
“We have hired an independent investigator company named Exponent to conduct a root-cause investigation. We are pushing for it to be completed as soon as possible with preliminary results by February which we will share with the city,” said Sarah Yoell with PG&E government affairs. “We are proud of our ongoing investments to serve San Francisco.”
Yoell assured the utility would be transparent with whatever they find.
PG&E added that they have met all state requirements and that they have a current Safety Certificate approved by OEIS (Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety).
Loss of inventory
Abdul Alomari, co-owner of Ember Grill in the Tenderloin, said his business lost electricity during the massive outage.
“It’s not just me. Across the street, all these restaurants here, nearby businesses. It hurst a lot of people. I’m just one small voice from so many people here that got hurt,” said Alomari.
He plans to attend the PG&E hearing and said Tenderloin merchants already have a tough time.
“Less people come here, the Tenderloin, Every single bit of help helps. It doesn’t help that every three months we get a power outage for four hours and we lose business,” said Alomari.
He said compensation from PG&E alone is not the answer. He wants reliability and stability.
“That’s only short time if we have things like this happen all the time, eventually it’ll off set what we get,” Alomari said.
The Source: PG&E statement, interviews with the supervisors, interview with a restaurant owner and original reporting by Amber Lee.
San Francisco, CA
San Francisco has a tax plan to save Muni
A parcel tax plan to rescue Muni would charge most homeowners at least $129 annually if voters approve the policy in November.
The finalized tax scheme, which updates a version presented Dec. 8, comes after weeks of negotiations between city officials and transit advocates.
The plan lowers the levels previously proposed for owners of apartment and condo buildings. They would still pay a $249 base tax up to 5,000 square feet of property, but additional square footage would be taxed at 19.5 cents, versus the previous 30 cents. The tax would be capped at $50,000.
The plan also adds provisions limiting how much of the tax can be passed through to tenants in rent-controlled buildings. Owners of rent-controlled properties would be able to pass through up to 50% of the parcel tax on a unit, with a cap of $65 a year.
These changes bring the total estimated annual tax revenue from $187 million to $183 million and earmark 10% for expanding transit service.
What you pay depends on what kind of property you or your landlord owns. There are three tiers: single-family homes, apartment and condo buildings, and commercial properties.
Owners of single-family homes smaller than 3,000 square feet would pay the base tax of $129 per year. Homes between 3,000 and 5,000 square feet would pay the base tax plus an additional 42 cents per square foot, and any home above 5,000 square feet would be taxed at an added $1.99 per square foot.
Commercial landlords would face a $799 base tax for buildings up to 5,000 square feet, with per-square-foot rates that scale with the property size, up to a maximum of $400,000.
The finalized plan was presented by Julie Kirschbaum, director of transportation at the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, at a board meeting Tuesday.
The plan proposed in December was criticized for failing to set aside funds to increase transit service and not including pass-through restrictions for tenants.
The tax is meant to close SFMTA’s $307 million budget gap, which stems from lagging ridership post-pandemic and the expiration of emergency federal funding. Without additional funding, the agency would be forced to drastically cut service. The parcel tax, a regional sales tax measure, and cost-cutting, would all be needed to close the fiscal gap.
The next steps for the parcel tax are creating draft legislation and launching a signature-gathering campaign to place the measure on the ballot.
Any measure would need review by the city attorney’s office. But all stakeholders have agreed on the tax structure presented Tuesday, according to Emma Hare, an aide to Supervisor Myrna Melgar, whose office led negotiations over the tax between advocates and City Hall.
“It’s final,” Hare said. “We just need to write it down.”
San Francisco, CA
Claims in lawsuit against Great Highway park dismissed by San Francisco judge
SAN FRANCISCO – A San Francisco Superior Court judge dismissed claims in a lawsuit against Proposition K, the ballot measure that permanently cleared traffic from the Great Highway to make way for a two-mile park.
One advocacy group, Friends of Sunset Dunes, said the legal action affirmed Proposition K’s legal standing and called the lawsuit against the park “wasteful.”
Proposition K passed with more than 54% of the vote in November 2024, but the debate didn’t end there. The Sunset District supervisor was recalled in the aftermath of that vote by residents in the district who argued their streets would be flooded by traffic and that the decision by voters citywide to close a major thoroughfare in their area was out of touch with the local community.
What they’re saying:
Friends of Sunset Dunes hailed the judge’s decision in the lawsuit, Boschetto vs the City and County of San Francisco, as a victory.
“After two ballot measures, two lawsuits, three failed appeals, and dozens of hours of public meetings and untold administrative time and cost, this ruling affirms Proposition K’s legal foundation, and affirms the city’s authority to move forward in creating a permanent coastal park to serve future generations of San Franciscans,” the group said in a statement.
The group added that their volunteers are working to bring the coastal park to life. Meanwhile, “anti-park zealots continue to waste more public resources in their attempt to overturn the will of the people and close Sunset Dunes.”
“Now that they’ve lost two lawsuits and two elections, we invite them to accept the will of San Franciscans and work with us to make the most of our collective coastal park,” said Lucas Lux, president of Friends of Sunset Dunes.
The supervisor for the Sunset District, Alan Wong, doubled down on what he had stated earlier. In a statement on Monday, Wong said he is “prepared to support a ballot initiative to reopen the Great Highway and restore the original compromise.” The compromise he’s referring to is vehicles allowed to drive along the highway on weekdays and a closure to traffic on the weekends.
Wong, in his statement, added that he’s talked to constituents in his district across the political spectrum and that his values align with the majority of district 4 residents and organizations.
When he was sworn in last month, Wong indicated he was open to revisiting the issue of reopening the Great Highway to traffic. He also said he voted against Proposition K, which cleared the way and made Sunset Dunes official.
Engardio’s two-cents
Last September, Joel Engardio was recalled as the Sunset District supervisor in a special election. The primary reason for his ouster was his support of Sunset Dunes, the park which also saw the support of other prominent politicians, including former Mayor London Breed, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and State Senator Scott Wiener.
Engardio on Monday issued his own statement after the judge dismissed all claims in the lawsuit against Prop. K.
“It’s time to consider Sunset Dunes settled. Too many people have seen how the park is good for the environment, local businesses, and the physical and mental health of every visitor,” Engardio said. “Future generations will see this as a silly controversy because the park’s benefits far outweigh the fears of traffic jams that never happened. The coast belongs to everyone and it won’t be long before a majority everywhere will embrace the wonderful and magical Sunset Dunes.”
-
World1 week agoHamas builds new terror regime in Gaza, recruiting teens amid problematic election
-
News1 week agoFor those who help the poor, 2025 goes down as a year of chaos
-
Science1 week agoWe Asked for Environmental Fixes in Your State. You Sent In Thousands.
-
Business1 week agoA tale of two Ralphs — Lauren and the supermarket — shows the reality of a K-shaped economy
-
Detroit, MI4 days ago2 hospitalized after shooting on Lodge Freeway in Detroit
-
Politics1 week agoCommentary: America tried something new in 2025. It’s not going well
-
Politics1 week agoMarjorie Taylor Greene criticizes Trump’s meetings with Zelenskyy, Netanyahu: ‘Can we just do America?’
-
Health1 week agoRecord-breaking flu numbers reported in New York state, sparking warnings from officials