September 25 2002

San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown sharply criticized the Board of Supervisors Friday as he discussed the challenges facing the city in a "perfect storm" brewing from the tech downturn, last year's terrorist attacks, and the "ass-backward voters" who put the current board of supervisors in office.

"All we need to do is dump one or two of these jokers" to put the city back on the right track, Brown urged his audience [at a] San Francisco Business Times breakfast [event].

San Francisco Business Times, 9/20/02

I am opposed to Proposition D and greatly concerned about its potential negative impact on our economy and our utility service reliability.

Mayor Willie Brown, 9/12/02 letter to city commissioners

MAYOR BROWN HAS a little more than a year left in office, and he's preparing to go out in embarrassment and disgrace.

Instead of recognizing that the voter revolt in 2000, in which a strong progressive majority was elected, was a direct referendum on his leadership and happened largely because of community outrage at the way he was selling the city to developers, Brown is trying to blame the voters and trash the current board.

And instead of recognizing that all of the facts, and all of the evidence, and everyone with any sense in town, including his own top energy adviser, support public power, he's still siding with Pacific Gas and Electric Co., the bankrupt private utility.

It's the last straw for any hope Brown had of leaving office with a shred of political credibility, and it's clear and final evidence that he should never again hold any public office or position of public trust.

• • •

Since the mayor can't seem to get this straight, let's go over the facts:

• Proposition D won't have a negative impact on the economy – quite the opposite. The negative impact that Brown ought to be worried about is the city's continued reliance on PG&E. As we pointed out in "PG&E's $620 Million Shakedown," 9/4/02, PG&E's high rates are sucking $620 million a year out of the San Francisco economy. Soaring PG&E bills have forced some small local businesses to shut their doors (see "Feeling the Crunch," 9/4/02), and the high cost of electricity has worsened the local recession and slowed any chance of economic recovery in San Francisco.

In communities that have public power, low rates (an average of 20 percent lower nationwide, according to the American Public Power Association) have helped lessen the impacts of the recession.

• PG&E has put the city at terrible risk because of its lack of system maintenance and the unreliability of its service. The company's local infrastructure is ancient; its power plant at Hunters Point is filthy and inefficient, putting the entire community at risk. There's only one transmission line linking the city to the peninsula – a situation that led to the long, economically damaging blackout of 1998.

In contrast, during the worst days of the energy crisis, when PG&E's customers were hit with unpredictable rolling blackouts that endangered public health and safety (not to mention the economy), the city of Los Angeles had abundant, reliable power. That (according the Los Angeles Times, among other sources) was because L.A. has public power.

• Prop. D is such a straightforward, simple proposal that – other than the mayor – almost every elected official in the city, and almost every credible candidate for any public office, has come out in support of it. The only real opposition to Prop. D comes from PG&E.

What Brown is saying by defying fact and logic is that the interests of PG&E outweigh the interests of the city, his constituents, and even many of his other political causes. (Brown, for example, supports Proposition A, the plan to raise $1.3 billion in revenue bonds to rebuild the Hetch Hetchy water system. But the fact that some key backers of Prop. A – including the Chamber of Commerce and Sen. Dianne Feinstein – are opposing Prop. D is damaging Prop. A's campaign and its chances of passage.)

Brown has made it clear that he wants to be known as the mayor who sided with PG&E to the bitter end – and if he decides to run for state senate (most likely against Carole Midgen, who saw the light a long time ago and strongly supports public power), or if he decides he wants to chair the state Democratic Party, or if he seeks any other position in the public sector, he will have to answer a fundamental question: Based on your past record, can you ever be trusted to uphold the public interest over the interest of a corrupt private institution like PG&E? And the answer, now and forever, is no.

• • •

Brown's "reception" for No on D takes place Mon/30, from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m., at the Sony Metreon's SoMa Room, at Mission and Fourth Street. There is no indication on the invitation of a minimum contribution or that admission is by invite only.

A strong public presence at the event (outside the doors, if the PG&E crew won't let the public in) would send a clear message to anyone who shows up to help the mayor and PG&E: San Franciscans fed up with the utility's lies are watching – and anyone who decides to attend, to help PG&E at a time like this, will be making an indelible statement about his or her political priorities and allegiance. The same goes for any group or individual that appears on a PG&E flyer to oppose public power.

There are no excuses in San Francisco 2002. You're with the mayor and PG&E, or you're with the public interest. It ought to be a simple decision.