by Noel Brinkerhoff All Gov
Taking a cue from North Dakota, a large number of state governments are considering the establishment of a state bank.
In the wake of the financial and mortgage crises, proponents are pushing for states to rely less on large national private banks and establish state-run financial institutions.
North Dakota serves as the model for this new experiment that 17 states are looking at. However, the state bank in North Dakota, the only one of its kind in the U.S., is not new, having been in operation since 1919.
With the Bank of North Dakota, financing is made available to support loans to students, farmers and others, while the bank’s profits go into the state budget to help provide more revenue for government programs.
Some states, such as Idaho and Vermont, have introduced legislation to study the idea of starting a state bank. Other states, like New Hampshire, Virginia, Hawaii, Washington and California, are debating bills that would create a state bank.
Ordinance to prevent local police officers from becoming involved in FBI in discussion
Compiled by the El Reportero’s staff
As this edition was on its way to press, the San Francisco Supervisors would hear on March 1, the testimony of civil rights advocates and community members in support of the Safe San Francisco Civil Rights ordinance (File #120046).
The goal of the legislation is to bring the SFPD’s JTTF activities back under local control and to prevent local police officers from becoming involved in FBI intelligence abuses, including surveillance without suspicion, profiling and the improper use of informants. As a member of the Coalition for a Safe San Francisco, the National Lawyers Guild San Francisco Bay Area Chapter (NLGSF) strongly supports this effort.
“The legislation poses the question of who should control the SFPD’s counterterrorism activities — the FBI or San Franciscans? We believe our city should be governed by state and local civil rights laws, local polices and local values,” explained Supervisor Jane Kim.
More than 60 civil rights, community, and legal organizations have signed on to support the ordinance, an outpouring fueled in part by the revelation that the SFPD entered into a secret agreement with the FBI in 2007 that sacrificed state and local civil rights protections and forfeited direct control and oversight of SFPD officers to the FBI. FBI questioning, border harassment, and police interrogations has led San Francisco community members to demand assurance that our City’s officers are following local guidelines and ensuring that our civil rights are upheld. In a letter dated February 27th, the SFPD acknowledged that this agreement remains in effect and that they have nothing in writing from the FBI indicating they have released the police department from any of its highly restrictive provisions.
The ordinance already has several co-sponsors. The mayor has yet to take a position.
The hearing will feature testimony from dozens of individuals and organizational representatives who will describe the impact of racial and religious profiling and the chill caused by these tactics in several San Francisco communities, including Nadia Kayyali from the NLGSF.
The legislation is modeled closely on a measure enacted last year in Portland, Oregon with the unanimous support of the mayor, city council and police chief of that city.
(This report was furnished by the National Lawyers Guild SF Bay Area).
