Lessons of the Avalos campaign

The mayoral candidate demonstrated what can be accomplished with a new kind of progressive leadership


By N'Tanya Lee

It's the middle of the night. His two kids and wife are home in bed. Supervisor John Avalos, candidate for mayor, heads downtown in his beat-up family car. He parks and walks over to 101 Market Street, and casually starts talking to members of OccupySF. He's a city official, but folks camped out are appreciative when they see he's there to stand with them, to try to stop the cops from harassing them, even though its 1 a.m. and he should be in bed.

John Avalos was the first elected official to personally visit Occupy SF. It wasn't a publicity stunt — his campaign staff didn't even know he was going until it was over. He arrived and left without an entourage or TV cameras. This kind of moment — defined by John's personal integrity and the strength of his personal convictions — was repeated week after week, and provides a much-needed model of progressive political leadership in the city.

John Avalos is more than "a progressive standard bearer," as the Chronicle likes to call him. He's also a Spanish-speaking progressive Latino, rooted in community and labor organizing, with a racial justice analysis and real relationships with hundreds of organizers and everyday people outside of City Hall. He's demonstrated an authentic accountability to the disenfranchised of the city, to communities of color and working people, and he knows that ultimately the future of the city is in our hands.

Some accomplishments of John's campaign for mayor are already clear: He consolidated the progressive-left with 19%, or nearly 40,000, first-place votes, despite the confusion of a crowded field; he came in a strong second to incumbent Ed Lee despite being considered a long shot even weeks before the election; after RCV tallies, he finished with an incredible 40% of the vote, demonstrating a much wider base of support across the city than he began with, and much broader than former frontrunners Leland Yee and David Chiu, who outspent him 3-1. He won the Castro, placed third in Chinatown (ahead of Yee), and actually won the election-day citywide vote. Not bad. In fact, remarkable, for a progressive Latino from a working class district in the southern part of town, running in his first citywide race.

I believe John Avalos demonstrated what can be accomplished with a new kind of progressive leadership — and suggests the elements of a new progressive coalition that can be created to win races in 2012, and again, in 2015.

It's Monday afternoon, 1:35pm, time for our weekly Campaign Board meeting. John rushes in, after a dozen appointments already that day. The rest of us file into the 'cave' — the one private room in Campaign headquarters, with no windows, a makeshift wall and furniture that looks to be third-hand. The board makes the key strategy, message, and financial decisions. There are no high paid political consultants here. Most of us are, or have been, organizers. Today, we need to approve the campaign platform. Finally. We've decided to get people excited about our ideas, an agenda for change. We leave the meeting excited and nervous, wondering if anyone will get excited about the city creating its own Municipal Bank.

We were an unlikely crew to lead a candidate campaign — even a progressive one in San Francisco. We come from membership based community and labor organizations, and share a critique of white progressive political players and electeds who spend too few resources on building power through organizing and operate without accountability to any base. We are policy and politics nerds, but we hate traditional politics. Seventy percent of us are people of color — Black, Filipina, Latino, and Chinese. We are all women except John, the candidate, and nearly half of us are balancing politics with parenting.


I have never seen a large project in sf that didn't evoke excessive handwringing and world will end hyperbole. You seem to fit the baby boomer NIMBY stereotype to a t. Every answer which is not yours is "not the right answer"

Posted by Guest on Nov. 27, 2011 @ 6:20 pm

Not that it really matters but I predate the baby-boom and was never a hippie.

Posted by Patrick Monk. RN on Nov. 27, 2011 @ 11:34 pm

..is now an even bigger price we have to pay for freedom, especially when 'large' projects are proposed by speculators and developers and supported by our corporately selected government which routinely dismisses or ignores genuine public comment and concerns, being primarily concerned with ensuring contributions to finance their next selection.
Can it sometimes appear like an 'over-reaction', maybe, but someone has to try and stop these bastards from paving over what little is left of 'Paradise' just to put up another parking lot that will remain half occupied most of the time because less people can afford to drive and have to rely on public transportation like the Central Subway that will get them nowhere.

Posted by Patrick Monk. RN on Nov. 27, 2011 @ 10:15 pm

For getting to CalTrain, MOMA, the shopping heart of the city and ChinaTown.

I can't wait to never have to take the pox-ridden 30 bus again.

So bring it one. We'll use it. It links up all the major centers of attraction, and will be great for commuters, tourists, shoppers and conventioneers.

Posted by Anonymous on Nov. 28, 2011 @ 7:28 am

bye bye old guard. Your collective voice is getting less shrill every day.
Soon it will be just a whisper, and then it will be gone.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 28, 2011 @ 7:59 am

are a sufficient number of affleunt and successful voters here, that the heydey of the socialists has passed.

Although they had some fun along the way, the left never succeeded in ruining this city. They wanted to turn this city into a more dismal version of Bucharest on a wet Febraury day, but they failed.

Posted by Anonymous on Nov. 28, 2011 @ 8:36 am

I wish that in the future I would not have to say "I told you so," and not just about the subway either.

Posted by GrannyGear on Nov. 29, 2011 @ 4:09 pm