The next mayor

Can the left win, or will egos and infighting turn this into a huge missed opportunity?

|
(108)
Players: Supes David Campos, Eric Mar, Ross Mirkarimi, Chris Daly, John Avalos, and David Chiu and former Sup. Aaron Peskin

tredmond@sfbg.com

By the time a beaming Mayor Gavin Newsom took the stage at Tres Agaves, the chic SoMa restaurant, on election night, enough results were in to leave no doubt: the top two places on the California ballot would go to the Democrats. Jerry Brown would defeat Meg Whitman in the most expensive gubernatorial race in American history — and Newsom, who once challenged Brown in the primary and dismissed the office of lieutenant governor, would be Brown's No. 2.

It might not be a powerful job, but Newsom wasn't taking it lightly anymore. "We can't afford to continue to play in the margins," he proclaimed proudly, advancing a vague but ambitious agenda. "There is absolutely nothing wrong with California that can't be fixed with what's right with California."

But around the city, as results trickled in for the local races, the talk wasn't about Newsom's role in the Brown administration, or the change the Democrats might bring to Sacramento. It was about the profound change that could take place in his hometown as he vacates the office of mayor a year early — and opens the door for the progressives who control the Board of Supervisors to appoint a chief executive who agrees with, and is willing to work with, the majority of the district-elected board.

At a time when the Republican takeover of Congress threatens to create gridlock in Washington, there's a real chance that San Francisco's government — often paralyzed by friction between Newsom and the board — could take on an entirely new direction. It's possible that the progressives, long denied the top spot at City Hall, could put a mayor in office who shares their agenda.

This could be a turning point in San Francisco, a chance to put the interests of the neighborhoods, the working class, small businesses, the environmental movement, and economic justice ahead of the demands of downtown and the rich. All the pieces are in place — except one.

To make a progressive vision happen, the fractious (and in some cases, overly ambitious) elected leaders of the progressive movement will have to recognize, just for a little while, that it's not about any individual. It's not about David Chiu, or Ross Mirkarimi, or Chris Daly, or John Avalos, or Eric Mar, or David Campos, or Jane Kim, or Aaron Peskin. It's not about any one person's career or personal power.

It's about a progressive movement and the issues and causes that movement represents. And if the folks with the egos and personal gripes and career designs can't set them aside and do what's best for the movement as a whole, then the opportunity of a generation will be wasted.

Folks: this is a hard thing for politicians to recognize. But right now it's not about you. It's about all of us.

It's an odd time in San Francisco, fraught with political hazards. And it's so confusing that no one — not the elected officials, not the pundits, not the lobbyists, not the insiders — has any clear idea who will occupy Room 200 in January.

Here's the basic scenario, as described by past opinions of the city attorney's office:

Under the state Constitution, Newsom will take office as lieutenant governor Jan. 3, 2011. The City Charter provides that a vacancy in the Mayor's Office is filled by the president of the Board of Supervisors until the board can choose someone to fill the job until the end of the term — in this case, for 11 more months.

So if all goes according to the rules (and Newsom doesn't try to play some legal game and delay his swearing-in), David Chiu will become acting mayor on Jan.3. He'll also retain his job as board president.

Comments

The irony is, there's nothing "progressive" about the Progressives' agenda either. It's all a rehash of failed and discredited Socialist engineering experiments that I'm sure sounded great when they were being bandied about back on the ol' Campus Quad, but which never really had any chance of being self-sustaining outside of those rarified liberal terrariums. If you really wanted to be progressive, you'd stop trying to implement programs that have proven, time and again, to be failures and you'd start "progressing" towards ideas that might actually go somewhere.

Steven, you say "This campaign was simply the latest manifestation of that costly, damaging, and unsustainable trend..."

You inadvertently summed up the end result of the last 10 years of Progressive policies here in the City. You guys are dumber than any Haight Street pit bull. At least they know better than to bite the hand that feeds them.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 11, 2010 @ 10:48 pm

sit-lie lost in the haight. interesting.

"Sit/Lie Lost In Haight, Won In Pac Heights, Seacliff, West of Twin Peaks" (from sf appeal)

http://sfappeal.com/news/2010/11/haight-voters-rejected-sitlie-but.php

Posted by Guest on Nov. 11, 2010 @ 1:33 pm

Stunning. Just stunning.

Fact - Sit/Lie won in San Francisco.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Nov. 11, 2010 @ 9:53 pm

As this article by Tim Redmond implies, former supe Aaron Peskin (famous for his quote "Payback is a bitch") is trying to carry off a Putsch at the board of supes.

Peskin wants the board to impose himself as mayor on SF, or someone of his choosing, now that Gavin Newsom will go to Sacramento as Lieutenant Governor. The board gets to impose a mayor of its choice on the city if that office becomes vacant.

Peskin's latest maneuver at the board comes through supes Chris Daly, John Avalos, and David Campos. They have just introduced a measure to have the board fill the vacancy in the mayor's office even before Newsom resigns.

Their hope is to carry out a Putsch for Peskin before the new board is seated in January, with four new members.

The SF Bay Guardian has endorsed the Peskin Putsch. The paper wants the board to focus on imposing a mayor to its liking before Peskin and Co lose control of the situation.

Peskin successfully carried off a similar Putsch some time ago at the Democratic County Central Committee (DCCC). He pushed out the amiable and openly gay Scott Wiener as chair of the DCCC and had himself installed in Wiener's place.

Peskin has used his perch at the DCCC as a power base for plotting his rise as mayor via the board. To Peskin's chagrin, however, Wiener was just elected supe from district eight.

Believe it or not, all this ugly scheming by Peskin & Co is being justified in the name of “progressive politics.” But in fact, it’s the sort of cheesy, backroom plotting you find in petty Republican politicians in small towns in Ohio.

The replacement process for choosing a new mayor should be open, honest, and in good form.

Please contact your supe today.

Insist that the board not fill the vacancy for mayor until it actually occurs, that members of the public get a real opportunity to express their views, and that the vote be the result of open deliberations, not backroom deals.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Nov. 11, 2010 @ 2:26 pm

"But in fact, it’s the sort of cheesy, backroom plotting you find in petty Republican politicians in small towns in Ohio."

This is politics!!!! Found in every party, every movement. Not one is immune! With power comes cheesy, pettiness, etc.

Posted by Guest Susan on Nov. 14, 2010 @ 11:03 pm

someone wants boy wonder wiener to be mayor. gag reflex just kicked in.
if boy wonder is mayor (omfg!!) then that would make rafael d8 supervisor. right? that part would be cool but the first part sucks big time.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 11, 2010 @ 2:48 pm

The former is a political ploy in SF.

The latter is a dance where overly confident politicians jump up and down and clap for themselves.

It's easy to see, however, how people confuse the two.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Nov. 11, 2010 @ 2:58 pm

I'm saddened that you seem to be placing the goals of a "movement" above all else. If you're interested in protecting small businesses and the middle class, you need to take a serious look at the business lobby's concerns. It's not just the big corporations, its start ups and entrepreneurs who are worried about the financial ramifications of your "social and economic justice" agenda. And just to be clear, if you don't have an entrepreneurial sector, you don't have job creation. And if you don't have jobs, you don't have a middle class.

For those who think the solution is to tax those millionaires and billionaires until they squeal, here's a question: what's to stop them from moving to Atherton? Then you won't have any rich people to tax. Who will you demonize then?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 11, 2010 @ 3:53 pm

i wish they would move to atherton instead of trying to make sf atherton. they are the same peeps who voted in sit-lie. bye, bye to them.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 11, 2010 @ 4:31 pm

All these progressives move to SF and try and make it some sort of Utopia and then get pissed when the locals have the nerve to not play along.

Posted by matlock on Nov. 11, 2010 @ 5:37 pm

They already know all this. In fact, they're counting on it. They know the wealthy will leave first, then the families, then anyone who has a job at all. They want the City to go broke, and the State, and the Country too. Because once the money runs out, they want government to start appropriating the private property of individuals citizens so it can be "redistributed" it back to their supporters. This process will then be repeated over and over until the government owns everything. It's called Communism.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 11, 2010 @ 10:58 pm

We must all come together to stop the downtown political shenanigans and ensure Chris Daly gets to choose our next mayor!

Posted by Guest on Nov. 11, 2010 @ 5:56 pm

The entrenched dysfunctionality of our local progressive sect may serve to thwart the Peskin Putsch.

Granted, The Six Guys Club are united in their hope of imposing an ideologically driven mayor on the city. What they have never won through the ballot box, they now seek to grab through a coup.

However, their common hope has to deal with their individual ambitions. Moroever, they have all have a penchant for shooting themselves in the foot and grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory.

I'll never forget the time I witnessed supes Chris Daly and Jake McGoldrick standing in front of the press box at supes, each snarling "Kiss my ass!" at the other. This scene is an example of what I mean.

Each of the Six Guys looks at himself in the mirror and thinks: I would be such a better mayor than any of the other Guys!

Each has his knife in hand, ready for slashing his way to the top of the totem pole, if the opportunity should present itself. Each lives in a world of ideological fantasy that often sharply diverges from reality.

So there is still some hope for democracy in SF.

Testosterone, ambition, and folly may yet save us all.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Nov. 11, 2010 @ 6:38 pm

Do you seriously think it's any different behind the scenes anywhere? Get a reality check.

Posted by Guest Susan on Nov. 14, 2010 @ 11:07 pm

So the Peskin Putsch may not come off, after all.

The Six Guys Club may be forced to consider the common good. They may have to do more than grab power for "one of our own" (in the infamous words of David Campos).

Imagine that.

Click here:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/cityinsider/detail?entry_id=76908&tsp=1

Posted by Arthur Evans on Nov. 11, 2010 @ 8:30 pm

Hey, Tim, your reminder of Newsom's dismissive evaluation concerning the importance the office of Lieutenant Governor...

"Newsom, who once challenged Brown in the primary and dismissed the office of lieutenant governor, would be Brown's No. 2"

is a joke that's getting pretty stale. In the future, when your looking for snarky things to write about California politicians, why not use one of my favorite Jerry Brown bons mots. When Jerry, then just a little over 6 months into his term as Attorney General and visiting the State Building in San Francisco at the time, returned to his official vehicle and found that it had been broken into and burglarized, he dropped this little gem...

"I'm going back to Oakland. I've never had my car broken into there."

Priceless. An Attorney General whose first instinct, when confronted with the severity of San Francisco's crime problem, is to turn tale and run across the Bay. Bravo, Jerry. But, where will you run to when things get tough in Sacramento? Maybe the White House! No, wait, you tried that already. Twice.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 12, 2010 @ 2:18 am

The mayor basically said so today. So they can scheme and plan all they want but he's going to wait until the new board is seated before resigning.

Sorry fools - outfoxed by Newsom again!!

(cue screams from The Guardian newsroom)

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Nov. 12, 2010 @ 12:19 pm

You and arther evans need to get a room, Lucretia.
Then in private, he can reveal his Peskin Putsch and you can undress to his heavy breathing as your Progressive Putsch comes into view.
Then you can fall into bed. rubbing your putsches together passionately, furiously, with mad abandon. Until you collapse in a tangle of conservative internet orgasm.
Then, in the afterglow, you can collaborate on putsch-centric messages for your your "friends" on the internet.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 12, 2010 @ 1:28 pm

That's essentially what Newsom is trying to do. It's a vindictive power grab. But he has to resign before the new board is seated, and the old board still has 5 days to pick the mayor.

Posted by Greg on Nov. 12, 2010 @ 1:14 pm

Really? Who said that?

And how is the mayor resigning 5 days later than you expected him to "a power grab?" He's giving up his office - which is difficult to understand as a "power grab."

LOL - the "Newsom coup" doesn't have the same ring as "progressive putsch."

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Nov. 12, 2010 @ 1:38 pm

An apologist for all the progressive schemes and bullshit, then complains when the favor is returned.

Newsom is a real piece of work, but he is just playing the game by the standard rules, the rule is to get over any way you can.

Far too late for so called progressive to complain about the rules of the game at this point.

Posted by matlock on Nov. 12, 2010 @ 5:43 pm

You and arther evans need to get a room, Lucretia.
Then in private, he can reveal his Peskin Putsch and you can undress to his heavy breathing as your Progressive Putsch comes into view.
Then you can fall into bed. rubbing your putsches together passionately, furiously, with mad abandon. Until you collapse in a tangle of conservative internet orgasm.
Then, in the afterglow, you can collaborate on putsch-centric messages for your your "friends" on the internet.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 12, 2010 @ 1:28 pm

The Six Guys Club, the all-male clique that runs the supes, hopes to impose a mayor on the city who is "one of our own."

They don't even make a pretense about considering the common good or having an open process. Their effort is just a bald power grab, and everybody knows it.

History is full of attempts by schemers hoping to impose their will on the people through coups. So we can't accuse the Six Guys of not having any precedent for their ploy.

But what's progressive about it?

This question has yet to be answered.

They also seem to be shooting themselves in the foot already, which we've all come to expect from this crew. In the latest issue of Fog City Journal, Chris Daly directs a hot-air blast against his fellow Guy, David Chiu.

Without Chiu, there are only five Guys. Not enough for the coup they have in mind.

Sorry, Guys.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Nov. 12, 2010 @ 2:45 pm

As it is painfully obvious upon reading these comments that "Matlock" and "Lucretia Snapples" are the same person changing names, I must wonder--you accuse Haight Street sit/lie types of having no life, what kind of useless shitlump Internet troll sits on a magazine's comments board all day to ceaselessly reiterate the same tedious line about the supposed fascism of the Left?

At least shake up the syntax a little. Pretend a little harder.

Posted by Burgie on Nov. 12, 2010 @ 5:33 pm

from sfist posted by porkbun:

"a slight tangent. I like that the troll on SFBG uses the handle "Lucretia Snapples." It's catchy.
Reply | August 25, 2009 12:23 PM"

also from sfist posted by smb October 28, 2010 12:36 PM
"For a vicious and hilarious flame-war on Prop L (going back to March 2010) check out sfbg.com - google Arthur Evans or Lucretia Snapples and dig in..."

haven't we had enough of these politically-driven garbargy trolls?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 12, 2010 @ 6:57 pm

This genius can really connect the dots. It's like reading National Review and World Net Daily and proclaiming that one has the answers to the supposed question of Obama's birth certificate.

In short - "Porkbun" and :anonymous guest" don't know shit. And they never will.

And "garbagy" is not a word. The proper adjective is "trashy."

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Nov. 12, 2010 @ 9:47 pm

Wow someone struck a nerve.

"In short - "Porkbun" and :anonymous guest" don't know shit. And they never will."

So very angry and impulsive.

Posted by D10 on Nov. 19, 2010 @ 1:43 pm

You and arther evans and matlock (aka Aunt Bee's Anus) need to get a room, Lucretia.
Then in private, he can reveal his Peskin Putsch and you can undress to his heavy breathing as your Progressive Putsch comes into view.
Then you can fall into bed. rubbing your putsches together passionately, furiously, with mad abandon. Until you collapse in a tangle of conservative internet orgasm.
Then, in the afterglow, you can collaborate on putsch-centric messages for your "friends" on the internet.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 12:18 am

I love watching the Six Guys scheme and plot, hoping to impose "one of our own" on the voters.

I remember when SF progressives took on Willie Brown for doing the same thing.

But today they've turned into Willie Brown!

The difference is that Willie Brown dresses better.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 11:04 am

It's official! It's a Putsch Pushin' Threesome!
Arther evans and matlock (aka Aunt Bee's Anus) need to get a room with their third split personality, Lucretia.
Then in private, he can reveal his Peskin Putsch and they can undress to his heavy breathing as their Progressive Putsches comes into view.
Then they can fall into bed. rubbing their putsches together passionately, furiously, with mad abandon. Until they collapse in a tangle of conservative internet orgasm.
Then, in the afterglow, they can collaborate on putsch-centric messages for their "friends" on the internet.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 12:14 pm

Okay, I was mistaken in saying that the only difference between the scheming Willie Brown and the scheming Six Guys is that Willie Brown is a better dresser.

As we see from this thread, he's also better spoken.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 1:27 pm

There isn't one.
They all seem to be personalities from a single blithering, hate filled, attention starved schizophrenic.
They are all obsessed with rubbing together their progressive putsches and their peskin putsches while hoping others will watch them.
They all have the same message and writing style...
How about it putsch rubbers?
Are you really all the same 1 or two people?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 2:10 pm

You really, really do.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 2:47 pm

How can he get laid when you Prop L supporters keep running off all the Homeless?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 6:13 pm

The Six Guys and their supporters would have us believe that anybody who criticizes their scheming tactics is a schizophrenic or a troll. They also claim that the different posters on this thread who criticize the Six Guys are one and the same person.

Wrong on all scores.

Many voters across the political spectrum are turned off by the obvious scheming by the Six Guys to impose "one of our own" as mayor. This behavior brings to mind the sort of scheming that prevailed during the regime of Willie Brown.

Also, for the record, I post here only under my own name. I have no idea who other posters are.

What we have here are the usual diversionary tactics by the defenders of the Six Guys. This behavior brings to mind their previous diversionary attacks on supporters of the sit-lie law, the care-not-cash measure, and Newsom's candidacies for mayor.

Their diversionary tactics failed in each case.

There's no substitute for discussing an issue on its merits. Those who persistently fail to do so, and who lurch off on diversionary ad hominem tangents, lose credibility with the electorate.

Then again, winning over the electorate doesn't seem to be their goal.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 2:38 pm

wtf? has anyone not realized that arguing with venus fly trap arthur evans is pointless? he's only here to score points with anyone who will walk into his trap. like a venus flytrap, he attracts flies. he's as useful as used toilet paper. good for attracting flies. same goes for the other inflamed sock puppets matlock and lucreatia snapples. all a pile of garbage. if they were a hive of bees, they would fly backwards while madly inflamed about progressives.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 4:29 pm

are always very interesting.

You can't seem to put your views into any sort of coherent post, but resort to personal attacks instead.

The frustration and anger that the revealed world view true believer shows is quite symptomatic of the whole thinking pathology, be it right or left side true believer. That others don't "get it" really makes posters like this bitter and angry.

"Guest" moves to SF expecting a revealed world Utopia and finds out that there are already people here and they don't agree with guest, this makes guest angry.

Posted by matlock on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 5:51 pm

"has anyone not realized that arguing with venus fly trap arthur evans is pointless? he's only here to score points with anyone who will walk into his trap. like a venus flytrap, he attracts flies. he's as useful as used toilet paper."

This has to be Barbara. The reference to used toilet paper is a dead giveaway. Barbara can't go more than a few minutes without mentioning used toilet paper. It has something to do with her homeless sexual fetish I think.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 6:21 pm

i agree with Posted by Guest on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 2:10 pm. all 3 have same writing style. 5.51pm reads just like venus fly trap arthur evans wrote it. identical words. i'm originally from sf. fly trap evans is not. he moves to sf and tries to impose his right-wingnut world view on sf.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 6:35 pm

Guest on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 6:21 pm is also written by fly trap evans. same writing style. he hates the homeless.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 6:50 pm

Arthur, I'm glad you believe in redistributive taxation. The problem is, it's easy to say the federal government should do that, but duck the issue right here at home. And when you promote Scott Wiener for mayor, you are supporting someone who does NOT believe that San Francisco should make it a priority to raise revenue from taxing the wealthy to pay for local services. That's where I think you're being inconsistent.

Posted by tim on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 7:10 pm

Thanks, Tim, for your issue-focused post above.

You say:

“when you promote Scott Wiener for mayor, you are supporting someone who does NOT believe that San Francisco should make it a priority to raise revenue from taxing the wealthy to pay for local services.”

The strength of the progressives is that they support social and economic justice. But they are weak when it comes to public safety.

The strength of the moderates is that they support public safety. But they are weak when it comes to social and economic justice.

The ideal candidates for me are those who are strong in both areas. But they are hard to find in SF. So I have to take them one at a time, assessing their positives and negatives according to the pressing needs of each situation.

On the whole, in the district eight race just concluded, Scott Wiener seemed better to me than Rafael Mandelman. That’s because public safety is much on my mind now.

But the best candidate of all for me would have been Scott Mandelman or Rafael Wiener.

I couldn’t find him, though.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 8:06 pm

arthur says @ 8:06pm that public safety is much on his mind now. why so afraid arthur? why so paranoid? the crime rate is lower all over. public safety = sit law for arthur. sit-lie makes criminals out of homeless. its been said many times here but arthur can't get that. with arthur one goes in circles. around and around. it's why i asked has anyone not realized that arguing with venus fly trap arthur evans is pointless? same goes for having discussion with him.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 10:26 pm

A quote from Arthur Evans

"What Are There No Women on the Progressives' Mayoral List?
All those testosterone faces at the top of this article. Whatever happened to women in our local progressive sect? Or is it still taboo to raise this question at The Guardian?"

Another quote from Arthur Evans

"I couldn’t find HIM (emphasis added), though."

You couldn't find him? Why were you only looking for a him? How about a HER?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 13, 2010 @ 11:08 pm

When progressives look down their noses at voters who are concerned with public safety, they cut off their own noses to spite their own faces.

This was the mistake of Eileen Hansen, Alix Rosenthal, and Rafael Mandelman in their respective races in district eight.

It was also the mistake of progressives in backing Terence Hallinan, the most incompetent District Attorney in living memory.

Sects that are religious can get away with a self-righteous disconnect from reality. They don't seek to elect anybody to office.

But sects that are political, which aim to elect their adherents to office, get Darwin Awards as a result.

Some sects never learn.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Nov. 14, 2010 @ 4:24 pm

Against the Peskin Putsch of your divergent personalities Matlock (Barney Fife's Ball Sack) and Lucretia's Nipples.
Terence Hallinan won, dumbass.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 14, 2010 @ 8:27 pm
Posted by Guest on Nov. 14, 2010 @ 8:28 pm

He's right. They're acting like right-wing Republican schemers in small Middle American towns.

Click here:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-ap-us-san-franci...

Posted by Arthur Evans on Nov. 15, 2010 @ 9:48 am

Saying that progressives are like small town republicans is like Arthur Evans looking through a telescope while Matlock rubshis Peskin Putsch and whispers about Galileo.
Then the Monty Python Mayor begins slowly rubbing Arthur's Peskin Putsch while Matlock and Lucretia's Nipples look on, dripping saliva and obsessing over progressives.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 15, 2010 @ 4:14 pm

See link below for column by Randy Shaw criticizing Chris Daly's push for a hasty process in appointing the interim mayor.

Shaw is a powerhouse in the city's nonprofit political complex. This is one the three mainstays of power for the Six Guys Clubs. The other two are the unions and the cannabis capitalists. So the Six Guys had better listen up.

Here's the dish:

http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=8674

Posted by Arthur Evans on Nov. 15, 2010 @ 4:31 pm