Newsom's interests vs. San Francisco's
I was writing a story about the long-term damage that Prop. H -- which will entitle every land owner to build new parking lots, regardless of their traffic-inducing impacts or the desires of certain neighborhoods to limit parking -- could do to San Francisco when Mayor Gavin Newsom called me. Actually, it was just Newsom's voice in a robo-call urging me and others to vote against Prop. E, the mayoral question time measure, arguing that it won't fill any potholes or put more cops on the street. Although Newsom is on record supporting the muni reform measure Prop. A and against Prop. H, the campaigns are frustrated that Newsom has done nothing to fundraise or campaign for them. "I think he's focused on his own race and also question time. That's where he's spending his resources," Newsom spokesperson Nathan Ballard told me when I asked about it.
So, there are two important measures on the ballot which will have a long term impact on quality of life in San Francisco. And there's a measure that only affects Newsom personally, and perhaps his long term political ambitious if question time shows he can't handle real unscripted debate. And Newsom ignores the big measures to focus on the small. If there was ever a telling testament to Newsom's priorities -- placing his own interests above San Francisco's -- this is it.
P.S. The Examiner had an interesting interview with London Mayor Ken Livingstone, who has a monthly question time with that city's legislators that it tough but ultimately good for him and for democracy. "It keeps me in touch with the people." One more reason Newsom should embrace it instead of fighting it.
digg •
del.icio.us •
sphere •
google
•
Comments (4)
From the Examiner's article:
" London Mayor Ken Livingstone — who does a monthly 2½-hour question time with the London Assembly — agreed that the events are “purely political” and often “tedious and nitpicking.” Because questions — often hundreds — are submitted to him ahead of time, he said his staff spends hours researching and writing responses, only about 20 of which get aired in public"
If San Francisco's 'question time' is to be based on London's model, then perhaps it would be better if we simply eliminated the Board of Supervisors from these events. I could support 'question time' if it meant the mayor spent a month being questioned by the public. But it will not benefit anyone to give showboating politicians yet more time to hog the public spotlight with tedious theatrics and insubstantial discussion.
Frankly, I resent that Chris Daly continues to misuse the city's political and financial resources to wage his personal hate campaign against the mayor. Daly and his supporters need to grow up already.
Posted by jeff | October 30, 2007 10:37 AM
I think what you mistake as a "personal hate campaign" is strong and just opposition to selling our city out for profit and forsaking all of the everyday people's concerns--actually that and accountbility, and including people in the discussion of change when it affects them.
I wish everyone could come back to using non-inflammatory language. Always have to wonder what is up when a person uses it. Using language like that Chris is hate filled, you know, not talking about what makes you say such a strong, defamatory thing about one of the few elected officials in this city who actually fights for the people's interests and not major corporations.
Posted by Aimee Patten | October 31, 2007 04:20 PM
> I wish everyone could come back to using non-inflammatory language. Always have to wonder what is up when a person uses it.
How do you declare that Newsom is 'selling out our city for profit' and then in the same breath proclaim your desire that 'everyone could come back to using non-inflammatory language'?
Why do you view criticism of Chris Daly as a personal assault on Daly, yet justify the mean-spirited histrionics of Newsom's critics as 'strong and just opposition'?
Clearly, Daly is no prince. His belligerence and hostility have been well documented, not just by his opponents but by many of his ideological allies as well. What too many of his supporters excuse as his passion for a cause, most others recognize as bullying, petulance, and childishness.
In that regard, his 'question time' is a fraud. Allowing him to usurp still more of the public venue with his adolescent tantrums will not serve any productive purpose.
And if political discourse in San Francisco has become coarse, meaningless, and hostile, it is due to the extremist elements in San Francisco, all of whom proclaim themselves to be progressives. And like all extremists, they never see themselves as doing anything wrong.
Posted by jeff | October 31, 2007 09:26 PM
Whatever, dude. I am not perfect and never professed that I was. It's not such a big deal. Have you learned how to play nice yet? Well I have been trying to, sincerely hope you have, too;-)
Posted by Aimee Patten | June 27, 2008 08:43 AM