Recently, Supervisor John Avalos claimed to have been possessed by the “spirit of cooperation.” That phenomenon is supposed to explain why he acquiesced to Mayor Gavin Newsom’s request to pull the “must spend” City Charter amendment off the June ballot. (That measure would have given the Board of Supervisors the power to cut money from one place in the budget and force the mayor to spend it on something else, subject to a mayoral veto.)
The problem: Anyone who follows local politics will tell you that the “spirit of cooperation” hasn’t haunted City Hall for some time now.
Just last week, Newsom reportedly said of the “must spend” amendment, “This is a direct assault, and I take this very seriously.” And Avalos dismissed Mistermayor as being “a bit touchy.”
But all of the sudden, Avalos said he’s pulling the amendment because he’s satisfied with the fact that Newsom has respected all the board’s budget changes this year. This, however, is not new information. And this whole story smells. To recap: This is smelly old information.
So, what has happened in the past week or so that caused Avalos to be overcome with the “spirit of cooperation?” Perhaps he got out a Ouija board and summoned the “spirit of reality” for a check on this measure’s chances of being endorsed by voters. I picture the paranormal pollster spelling out “LOL.”
I can think of one other recent development that might be hovering over Avalos’ decision: the growing school of thought that Mistermayor will run for, and win, the lieutenant governor post. If that happens, the progressive majority on the board will choose a new mayor. Avalos might not want to vex a progressive mayor by campaigning for months about the need for a “spirit of checks and balances.”
Avalos tends to bend to the Mayor like did last year during the budget fight, and I'm guessing that when things were getting too fighty, he figured dropping it for now would just make all the angst go down a little....
Posted by: njudah | February 25, 2010 at 09:50
un FUCKING believable. Tossing aside the whole "playing politics" red herring, this measure should have been put on the ballot simply because it's good policy and it strengthens democracy. John Avalos and David Chiu are the Obama of San Francisco.
A couple things, Sweetie Melissa Griffin:
1.) I don't think John "The Nice Guy" Avalos is capable of having other reasons for removing this measure from the ballot (did you see his Chamberlainesque performance after getting Newsom to sign a letter promising he would not fuck him up the ass?)
2.) I don't think that it is a sure bet that it would have lost. Using words effectively to make one's point is, indeed, effective. After all, Matt Gonzalez once got SF to reject naming Candlestick Park after a corporation. And the supervisors were awarded last election with more aides. Besides, I doubt Newsom is nearly as popular as he once was.
Posted by: Matt Stewart | February 25, 2010 at 10:16
@Greg and Matt - Avalos is a nice man, but this is nonsense. Neither the SEIU nor the other progs on the board made a peep when this was sent back to committee. They would be howling if he had simply gone to them and said, "I just think pulling the measure is the right thing to do." Something went on here, and it ain't a group hug.
And the fact that it would fail miserably (and I still think it would, my dear Matty) has less to do with people's love of Newsom (which I agree is thin) than their hatred of the board.
Posted by: Melissa Griffin | February 25, 2010 at 10:48
Yeah, but the legislative branch of government is always unpopular. Why? Because it has no face and, therefore, it can't be personalized or given credit when it's due. I think a better measure of whether the legislative branch is popular (or at least adequate) is to poll supervisors by their district. Last time I checked, incumbents almost always win (and not necessarily because of gerrymandering). And I think "hatred" is a bit much.
Posted by: Matt Stewart | February 25, 2010 at 11:31
Matt - I don't think "hate" is too strong for some people. Though you're right that most people don't feel that strongly. And I don't disagreee that the faceless legislative branch is routinely unpopular. Polls often show that people like their representatives, but don't like congress, etc.
Posted by: Melissa Griffin | February 25, 2010 at 11:39
Avalos, who I met once and seemed to be a decent guy even though we disagree on everything political, polled it or someone else did and told him it would go down in flames. The same thing happened with the proposed tax increases last cycle.
Chris Daly of District Fairfeild, yelling "Fuck," is the face of the BOS to a hell of a lot of people in the city.
Posted by: Howard Epstein | February 25, 2010 at 16:42
Howard, babe, there are two reasons I find you acceptable:
1.) You don't troll your name with a pseudonym.
2.) You are the only living Republican who doesn't foam at the mouth.
As far as Chris Daly is concerned, he's gone in less than a year so you'll have dig up a new discourse.
Posted by: Matt Stewart | February 25, 2010 at 17:13
You have it backwards. He'll have to dig up a new discourse when Chris Daly is gone. Not a moment before. Not while he's still making headlines.
Posted by: generic | February 25, 2010 at 21:33
Matt, given the choice it won't be hard to find someone or several someones.
Posted by: Howard Epstein | February 26, 2010 at 13:50