As the person who composes the Living Room Slate, I am threatened with legal action by Joe O'Donoghue unless I comply with the demand to retract a certain statement and to expunge those words from the Living Room Slate web site.
It is standard journalistic practice to stand by a story and offer concession by publishing the letter of complaint itself. In this tradition, I include a link to the correspondence to me, expecting all parties to be satisfied that the matter has thus been dealt with sufficiently. As an additional courtesy, I have taken the extreme step of replacing the sensitive words in the website text with an ellipsis. I fervently hope others will not follow this precedent and require other changes in the Living Room Slate.
To see the actual letters of complaint, click on the link below:
Only two offices to decide, but so much at stake! San Francisco voters asked the Living Room Slate to do a compilation for the mayoral run-off election. So, again with pizza and beer, we went over our interviews with some of the most respected City Hall watchers and workers (even some elected officials!), all protected by confidentiality. We came up with the following. Let us know if it helped.
MAYOR
We sure didn't end up with middle-of-the-road candidates.
Gavin Newsom and Matt Gonzalez represent vastly different spheres. That's too bad, considering how polarized we are as a city. Their biggest challenge, before proposing plans on fiscal sustainability or homelessness, will be to stretch beyond their comfortable constituencies. Can Gavin do more than wave a finger at sprinklers in SROs? Can Matt really empathize with the struggling owner of a 4-unit building?
Let's first see how SIMILAR they are:
Our nearly unanimous support goes to Matt Gonzalez.
First, a few words on Gavin Newsom.
Surprisingly, we had a tough time finding a lot of solid reasons for supporting Newsom, other than simple fear of Gonzalez. We really did try. Contact with bona fide supporters yielded soft statements such as "he's honest," "he really loves San Francisco," and "the Green Party is so left." The least convincing was from a woman who gushed about the Gettys. We were referred to his lovely policy documents, but we saw those as testament to his hard-working team, and not as the brain-child of his own priorities.
The other surprise was our developing sense of pity for Mr. Newsom. Yes, we actually started feeling sorry for him. His personal life is unstable, many of his supporters are selfishly expecting something from him, and any core beliefs are subsumed by the doctrines of his backers. And now he is the next big hope for the Democratic Party. That's a tall, tall order for someone who, arguably, found himself propelled along this far.
The biggest practical problem with Gavin is that we have found him to be closed-minded. Once the agenda is set and, say, Jupiter is aligned with the Chamber of Commerce, other stars in the constellation are wasting their breath in getting him to consider another approach. Privatization of the Presidio, building rights downtown or on Lombard Street, preserving historic cottages -- he too easily ignores all these and so many more citizen concerns, sometimes providing misleading lip service only. We saw many groups who were flattered by a letter his office produced in support of their causes. Not many realized that the letter was worth little more than 37 cents in postage.
Fundamentally, then, we are unable to really trust Newsom. We have experienced his slippery statements so often we are left feeling that he will never really be straight with us. On both neighborhood and city-wide issues, he has repeatedly told us one thing and then voted differently. It's clear that if we want his help, we need to go first to the people he listens to: those backers we mentioned earlier, or the Chamber of Commerce. That's hard to do and it's an unfair, unstated requirement. That's not a quality we like in a mayor.
And back to Matt Gonzalez.
We have mentioned the two largest flaws in his candidacy: the naivete he has shown in handling the Joe O'Donoghue-Walter Wong support, and the treatment the superintendent of public schools is getting from his close colleagues. Our support for Mr. Gonzalez is contingent upon dealing with these two issues right from the start. We must vow to keep watch on Mr. O'Donoghue's next deals, and we must also gather support for Arlene Ackerman. Her threatened departure would be a disaster for a historically shaky school system.
Stylistically, Gonzalez could improve. His scanty eye contact, his infrequent smiles, and his photos make him appear impenetrable and unsympathetic. His lack of polish, though, is reassuring to anyone who has dealt with false promises from smooth officials. We don't buy the opposition theory that he is an unwashed garage band musician who will embarrass us. It would be nice, though, if he warmed up a bit.
Matt could also improve his behind-the-scenes team-work with colleagues, but he hasn't been accused of outright vindictiveness, as Gavin has. Matt has been open to introducing legislation from the grass roots up - in one case, on unwanted chain stores. Gavin is so focused and obedient to the powers from the top that such a bottom-up approach would be unthinkable. No, a Gavin idea, be it Care Not Cash or Workforce Housing or Best Practices, typically has a brilliant title and is well-marketed, but gathers no consensus from the parties concerned. This top-down method rips our city apart, even when the bloody thing passes in an election.
The best reason for our support is that Matt may not always be interested in our cause, but we can trust the honesty in his response. He is able to vote unselfishly. Rather than oppose district elections, which give a greater voice to the little guy, he supports them and is able to build a momentous campaign from that rarest of political creatures: interested young voters. Yes, they're too idealistic and too unrealistic, but how preferable that is to ossified personal and business interests who are backing Newsom.
In the end, we feel strongly that Matt will be more receptive to the concerns of neighborhoods and little people. No, he hasn't always receptive to constituents. But so far, we've fared far, far better with Matt than with Gavin.
What clinches our decision: the way the campaigns are being run. Traditional campaigns with dubious endorsements and outrageous hit piece mailers are tiresome and distasteful. We thought the Newsom advertising to be sickeningly sensationalistic, outlandishly false, and real overkill. Newsom has about $4 million to spend plus all the help the Chronicle can give in the form of Ken Garcia the pit-bull and a 5-part front-page series on homelessness -- just in case voters forget Newsom's signature issue. Gavin should be able to take a more dignified approach. A vote for Gonzalez will send a signal that we've had enough, and we don't like being bought.
DISTRICT ATTORNEY
We just can't stop complaining about Terence Hallinan. He bumbles, he is a sloppy manager, he lets politics interfere with his work. Similarly, we can't stop praising Kamala Harris. A born politician, even her photo practically shakes hands. She's competent, too, and could likely run things a lot more smoothly.
So why do we support Terence Hallinan? Mainly because we trust him more. First of all, his conviction rate is at least adequate, given the liberal juries we have here. His use of diversion programs for non-violent offenders is exactly what we want. We find it troubling that Harris would boost her conviction rate by making less use of these diversion programs.
Second, we don't like the way Harris overstates and fudges her record and experience. We don't like it at all. She has claimed to be co-founder or president of non-profit organizations that turn out to be little more than web sites. She claims to have far more experience than she has. Her assistance from the Willie Brown apparatus has helped propel her campaign immeasurably.
The biggest problem with Harris is summed up in the last three questions or so from this interview, where she demurs on the issue of going after corruption: http://www.law.com/jsp/pubarticleCA.jsp?id=1063212118710
If Hallinan wins, someone else will fill his shoes when his term ends. If Harris wins, we are stuck with her for a very long time, and we simply don't trust her.