Who should be the next Mayor?
Who should be the next District Attorney?
Find out why.
The Living Room Slate - November 2003 Edition
Vote with confidence! Just say no to slick mailers, staged campaign photos, and skewed editorials!
After downing pizza and beer in the Living Room, we agreed the best we could on San Francisco's gnarly ballot, and the results are below. Some phoned in their insights, others e-mailed their opinions, and all represented a wide range of political interests, from Republican to Green. We used first-hand information when we could, getting to know candidates and even the players behind the measures. Confidentiality guaranteed honest thoughts. Interestingly, race, gender, and sexual preference did not enter our discussions.
We welcome your polite feedback -- did the LR Slate help? If you are on this list by accident (always a possibility), say so and your name will be promptly excised with a courteous apology.
And now, more or less in ballot order, this year's Living Room Slate -- blissfully free of political paybacks, favors, and paid endorsements:
Mayor
This is the Big One. Our choice will have a huge effect on our immediate quality of life. But don't worry -- any of these candidates will create less harm than the outgoing mayor.
Eight years ago, we treated ourselves to a stylish and talented tactician. The result is evident: a decimated budget and shaky infrastructure. Alarming demographics like an African-American population below 8% of total, and ever fewer families and children. An international airport terminal that is an ode to poured concrete and enriched mayoral friends. A new hosable Union Square that resembles a Marriott Hotel lobby.
It gets worse: commissions are too often populated by loyalists with few qualifications. Department heads are left to fend for themselves. Entire branches of government are pitted against each other. As one extremely well-placed City Hall person said recently: "This place stinks from top to bottom." We could go on, but let's just be grateful this town runs at all.
So -- are we better informed this time? How carefully do we read Fang-owned newspapers? Do we now know who Joe O'Donoghue is? The candidates have been groomed with new suits, bleached teeth, and practiced gestures and sound bites. Look below for a mayor who 1) is free of political obligation (to avoid more corruption), 2) can unite a very divided city, and 3) has solid financial acumen (we're set to drown in red ink).
Angela Alioto
Has enough friends that she can afford to speak her mind. Fearless and ready to challenge anyone. Promises to clean house of underperforming or unqualified city employees. Happy to be provocative. Full of energy. Unfortunately, she has demonstrated political clumsiness by unintentionally attacking would-be supporters. Cozy with unions who are long past simply helping laborers. Dependent on staff and supporters for files and info that don't always appear; annoying when she is adamant yet careless with facts. Supporters love her outrageousness, legal success and rough edges, and they even set her positions.
Campaign style: Luxe but scrappy. Diamonds and t-shirts. Slash 'n burn. Cup runneth over. Confusing shake-ups at headquarters.
Tom Ammiano
One of the more politically sophisticated choices. May not always lead effectively, but knows his way around and doesn't fall into traps. Another go-round on the campaign trail has burnished his role as ultra-Broker, mediating amongst fractured city interests. Ready to mend more bridges and repair budgets. Can rest upon the laurels earned while being the only supervisor to reach out to the little people during the pre-District Supervisors days. Unfortunately, receives too much shorthand direction from an infamously snippy and aloof aide. Has stumbled on important past political decisions, and occasionally disappointed the faithful. Bonus - the voice actually grows on you!
Campaign style: Cheerful and steady march through the trenches, though grim compared to the exhilarating "Go Tom Go" write-in days. Stable army of believers steadily doing what they can on a shoe-string -- and they know how.
Matt Gonzalez
You want politically clean and unfettered? How about cultured and intellectual? Those descriptions alone draw serious votes, and some terribly glam endorsements like Michael Moore and the Ratcliffs of the Bayview. Likes to take the pure position after meaninfgul discussion. One of the very few candidates to insist on the necessity of trimming back the waddling city payroll. Star of the increasingly divisive and doctrinaire local Green Party. Drawbacks: not naturally drawn to non-criminal justice subjects like city planning, though this shortcoming will likely improve. Lone-wolf style of leadership doesn't naturally bring differing sides together, though that shows signs of changing as well.
Campaign style: Non-slick. Stand in the surf, righteousness will keep youthful devotees doing the paddling. Good people, shaggy organization. No smiling.
Susan Leal
Ms. Efficiency! Not a natural politician, but a sharp manager and astute decision maker. If only city government ran as well as her Treasurer's Office. On decent terms with everyone at City Hall. Savvy; seems ready to broaden beyond the moderate slot she's constantly put into. Twelve months on the campaign trail have left their mark; she now makes eye contact and has warmed up considerably. Unfortunately, still tarred by her proximity to Barbara Kaufman during the bad old days on the Board of Supervisors.
Campaign style: Get good people and make them work. Occasional overexertion. Self-starter.
Gavin Newsom
Many supporters simply feel the other candidates don't look, act, or sound right. Some just want to join with what looks to be a winner. Consistently pleasant and presentable. Exceptional ability to memorize data and morph it polysyllabically into spoken paragraphs, with appropriate emphasis and magnificent eye contact. Unfortunately, his best record is with the Big Business set, who see him as obedient. Ineffectual with or uninterested in the Presidio, the dot-com agony, and corrupt city departments. Needlessly enrages advocates and constituents by pushing pre-made policy in a top-down manner (think Care Not Cash), rather than reaching out to various factions. Privately adversarial, especially with other supervisors. His drum-beat has been "change," but he is the closest heir to the current mayor.
Campaign style: Best that money can buy: an amazing $2.6 mil, not counting the sideshow campaigns. Smooth performances; sleek and well-fed operation; effective administrative protection; access to the guy not guaranteed. Blow off the enviros. Double-wide campaign signs with audacious defacements and bullet holes; heckling countered by socialite applause; frayed marriage; fury in the Mission.
Jim Reid
If you were on the street, wouldn't you want one of his well-built, well-designed little houses? To date, his is the best immediate solution to local homelessness. Righteous anger over Willie Brown, smoothed over with olive branches for all. Pragmatic and determined, but hasn't yet garnered a constituency. That really needs to come first.
Tony Ribera
Basic, affable guy with beautiful intentions but little breadth. Former police chief would not likely get the SFPD much fresh air. Credit due for sticking to his basic Republican roots. Campaign mailers: "God Bless America and God Bless George W. Bush."
Our pick? Let's just say there was only one candidate for which everyone had respect: Susan Leal.
District Attorney
Bill Fazio - Experienced; knows the Hall of Justice by heart. Sunset District-style reality. Hard, conservative edges appear to be softening. Good relationship with the SFPD -- perhaps too good. Likely to prosecute white collar crime or go after misappropriation of public funds. Still tainted by former pro-death penalty stance. If quality-of-life crimes are your priority, vote for Fazio instead of Prop M.
Terence Hallinan - Well-meaning, honest, but not a good manager. Great record on domestic violence and a good start on past public school fund debacles. Allowed his relationship with the SFPD to deteriorate to the point of no return. If you believe any District Attorney would have had trouble with Fajitagate, you may still believe in Hallinan.
Kamala Harris - Ambitious to a fault, and very smart. Social climbing friend of the mayor, with whom she is still politically associated. Not terribly experienced; regarded as not having paid enough dues to be D.A. Has stated she is specifically uninterested in rooting out government corruption.
Our pick? We couldn't agree between Fazio and Hallinan.
Sheriff
Before you automatically vote to reelect Hennessey, remember that those cold-cell strip searches are happening under his watch -- and who's watching him? Still, not worth considering his opponent, Carrasco.
Measures
Many of these measures are in response to an atrocious mayoralty. Others are
"candidate star vehicles" for people who want to be mayor.
A - School Bonds - Yes. Schools are really a part of our infrastructure, unless you like the idea of a city without families. This is the best time to give the schools money -- Superintendent Ackerman is the best one to handle these bonds. Just look at the ballot handbook for the precise plan on how the funds are spent.
B - Safety Employees Retirement Benefits - No. It'll pass, though, since nobody ever wants to to be the one to say no, particularly to safety workers. We even caught a huge loophole in the last sentence of the Controller's Statement on page 57 of the ballot handbook! We're getting awfully testy about all these retirement benefits every election cycle.
C - City Services Auditor - Yes. We really fear these set-asides piling up, which require a portion of the city budget to be "set aside" for the issue du jour. However, we do need some serious auditing: there are too many sole-source and "self-renewal" contracts, which invite rampant fraud. The Treasurer has been the only one to complete the required self-audit on time. Important bonus: the audits could help make back the amount of the set-aside in the city budget.
D - Small Business Commission - Generally, we haven't found commissions on anything set our problems straight. So why make this into a permanent fixture? We're tempted to recommend a no vote, just on principle. However, if you believe passionately, as we do, that small businesses are the difference between us and an Interstate outlet mall town, you will be tempted to vote yes.
E - Ethics Reform - [sigh] Solves some problems but creates others by going too far. We don't for a minute think that this will really ream out the deep politicking that goes on in City Hall. We're irritated, also, at how hastily it creates limits with a machete where a scalpel is needed. Forces some good people to remain at pasture. Regretfully, on balance, no.
F - Targeted Early Retirement - No, and we're so sorry about this, as we are desperate to reduce the astounding size of our city payroll. We tried an early retirement thingamabob in 1991, and we're not convinced it saved money. This is supposed to be a nice way to ditch city employees, but is likely instead to entice mid-level know-somethings to take off. There's simply no better way to solve the problem than to roll up the sleeves and lay off your unnecessary and poorly performing employees, as unpleasant as that may be.
G - Rainy Day Fund - Yes. Our experience with the dot-com boom and bust proves yet again that you can't count on a charming mayor to operate a city with financial common sense. Tagged as a candidate "star vehicle," but we still believe in it.
H - Police Commission - Yes, certainly. Do you really believe that the San Francisco Police Department or the current commission will suddenly sharpen up and get tidy -- on their own? Fajitagate proves that politics are growing like mold everywhere. This is worth a try.
I - Child Care for Low Income - Yes, but mainly as a message that our drastically declining children's population needs to be addressed. We would say no to this unfunded mandate, as a "candidate star vehicle" with no teeth, but we're concerned about what a "no" vote would imply.
J - Facilities for the Homeless - No. Homelessness is a problem with very deep roots. Among other things, it has to do with poor governance, and with the general concentration of wealth into the hands of a few. While we certainly want to assist the vulnerable homeless, the three shrimpy sentences in the legislation of a candidate's "star vehicle" simply didn't seem careful. Who would define these vulnerable populations? Is there any clue to the cost? We would prefer a solid set of policies on homelessness -- including consideration of vulnerable populations -- that are generated by a competent city government. (So far, the only solid step has been taken by Jim Reid for Mayor, see above.)
K - Transportation Sales Tax - Yes. Even if we're not sure yet about the Central Subway, there is no question public transit will save our necks. A continuation, not an increase, in our current sales tax. Let's get those matching Federal funds.
L - Minimum Wage - Yes. Times will be tougher on non-profit employee training programs, but the sky won't fall, as is always predicted.
M - Solicitation Ban - No. Anybody remember Frank Jordan's proposal to ban ATM panhandling? We already have sufficient laws regarding aggressive solicitation. We may need more enforcement of these laws, but this "candidate star vehicle" as "Care Not Cash Part 2" struck us not as courageous, but as just another mean whack at the homelessness pinata. See Prop J above.
N - Taxi Permit Holder Disability - No. We want to be compassionate, but this has a loophole you could drive a Checker cab through. Just yell "pinched nerve!" and then hang on to your money-making medallion until your dying breath. The lesson here is that this town's taxi situation needs a very thorough shampooing.
Want to forward the Living Room Slate? Just be sure to add any comments separately, without altering the original.
Click here to forward this article.