Sweet Melissa

In case you thought there was a chance in hell that this would pass...

(Before we get into this, let me just say that there is no amount of money you could pay me to constantly deal with parents. School Board members are angels of mercy and the ones I know are damn fine people.) 

Last Tuesday, the Board of Supervisors voted to put a measure on the next ballot (whenever that is) that would allow the Board of Education to increase their pay from $500 per month up to half the regular salary of a first-year teacher in San Francisco – or about $25,000 per year. Only Supervisors Carmen Chu, Sean Elsbernd and Mark Farrell voted “no.”

There are many, many problems with this proposal, but today let us discuss one issue conceded by Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, “The timing of this is a bit funky.” (Never one to be afraid of funky town timing, Mirkarimi voted in favor of the measure.)

Voters are generally in no mood to give raises to anyone, especially people who ran for office knowing they would be paid $500 per month, but the real killer will be the other measures on the next ballot and the voters they will inspire.

The major measure to look out for is a tobacco tax proposal set to be voted on whenever the next statewide election is held, which optimists still believe will be June. The proposal would assess one dollar on every pack of cigarettes sold in California and use it to pay for cancer research. Tobacco companies have defeated similar measures 14 times, mostly by drowning the opposition in millions of dollars. (They spent $66 million on the last one.) Guess who big tobacco is going to mobilize to get out and vote? Hint: it ain't people who like giving money to government employees.

Incidentally, this is also bad news for Governor Jerry Brown’s tax-extending budget proposal.

But the tobacco measure isn’t the only one that will be a problem: the Students First initiative has gathered enough signatures to be on the ballot at the next local election. (November unless there is a statewide special election before that.) That measure is a policy statement that says students should be guaranteed a spot at a school near their home unless parents want to send their kids elsewhere. The whole thing is a Bronx Salute to the Board of Education’s current student placement “system” and it will attract voters who are angriest at the board.

Add to all this the fact there are no real makings of a campaign in favor of increasing the pay for Board of Education members, and you have a recipe for one big funky failure.

One More Reason to Support SB 933

San Francisco Assemblywoman Fiona Ma is supporting a bill that would prohibit retailers from charging a fee for the use of debit cards. Retailers already are forbidden from charging fees for credit card purchases and this legislation — Senate Bill 933 — would extend that prohibition to debit cards.

Opponents of the law, which include British Petroleum, have engaged the services of Woodward and McDowell, a public relations firm that also manages the “Yes on Proposition 23” campaign. Prop. 23 would repeal a 2006 law aimed at lowering greenhouse gas emissions levels.

SB 933 has already passed in the state Senate, with the backing of San Francisco state Sen. Mark Leno. With enemies such as BP waging war against SB 933 through Woodward and McDowell, the bill will surely pass, showcasing the unpopularity of the oppositions’ ­bedfellows.

Some Speculation to Spice Up Your Thursday...

Ever since Public Defender Jeff Adachi began his push for public pension reform by spearheading a City Charter amendment that would require larger contributions from public employees, people have speculated that he’s using the issue to raise his profile in preparation for a run for mayor. “This is his Care Not Cash,” they say — a reference to the reform initiative that arguably swept Mayor Gavin Newsom into office.

But what if it isn’t Adachi (or just Adachi) who’s using the pension initiative to gear up for a mayoral campaign? The couple donating the lion’s share of funding ($150,000) for Adachi’s campaign to put the pension measure on the November ballot also contributed to Matt Gonzalez’s campaign for mayor in 2003. Soon after that, Gonzalez very publicly came out in favor of Adachi’s proposal — even challenging Tim Paulson of the Labor Council to a public debate on the issue. (Paulson wisely declined.)

Gonzalez has thus distinguished himself as the most high-profile progressive to support pension reform. For some folks who are pro-union but concerned about threatened cuts to city services if our pension obligations aren’t amended, his stance is appealing. He came very close to beating Newsom in the 2003 mayor’s race and may now be coming out of retirement on the issue of pension reform.

ALSO: Check out Art Bruzzone who beat me to the punchline by posting this yesterday.

Let the Games Begin! Bay Area Folks on the November Ballot

On Tuesday, California voters determined who will face off in November for key state offices, and San Francisco names had a big day.

Governor

In one corner, we have Republican nominee and Atherton resident Meg Whitman, who has (so far!) spent $71 million of her own money to convince us she’s a fiscal conservative. During her Tuesday speech accepting the Republican nomination, Whitman declared herself the “nightmare” of politicians in Sacramento. I don’t disagree. I feel most sorry for the ones who will have to explain to her the rules governing the state Legislature, including the structural barriers that prevent real reform regardless of who is in charge. Awkward!

In the other corner, we have San Francisco native Jerry Brown acting like someone’s peepaw in running shorts clutching a new vegetable juicer, vowing to live forever and singing, “You Ain’t Seen Nothin’ Yet!” (Seriously, Brown played that song at his victory speech last night.) It’s as if Brown wants us to believe that during his four decades in office, he was restraining the beast that is his political genius because he wanted to wait until this moment to show us. “I know I ain’t seen nothin’ yet, baby, baby, baby.”

Lieutenant Governor

Now that Mistermayor has won the Democratic Party primary, his transformation from City Executive to Sitting Alternative is almost complete. All that’s left to do is beat Republican candidate Abel Maldonado in November, which may be difficult.

First of all, independent Hispanic voters choosing between Gavin “The Gay Marriage Guy” Newsom and Maldonado, the son of immigrant Mexican-American­ farmworkers, may go with the latter.

Second, when candidates for governor have the means, they often send money downstream to their potential lieutenants. In this case, Jerry Brown has about $16 million in the bank. Plus, it was only about five minutes (OK, months) ago that Newsom was running for governor against Brown, attacking Brown for lacking “fire in his belly.” Newsom isn’t likely on Brown’s Christmas card list, much less his “people to give money to” list.

Whitman, on the other hand, prints money on a machine she bought from the government in an eBay auction. Maldonado can out-fundraise­ Newsom by simply following Whitman around, collecting the $1,000 bills she uses to blot her lipstick.

Attorney General

On Tuesday, San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris happily accepted the Democratic Party nomination for state attorney general, while Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley won the Republican Party nod. This one actually promises to be a fun race, and for once in a San Francisco vs. Los Angeles fight, we have the prettier team.

The neat twist to this race is that Cooley presides over a criminal justice system in Los Angeles that reportedly does the things Harris’ office is now in trouble for not doing: checking the backgrounds of public safety employees and telling defendants about the results.

Add the fact that Cooley has been praised by Republican leaders for landing “more death penalty convictions than the entire state of Texas last year,” versus Harris’ steadfast opposition to capital punishment — even for cop killers — and this matchup between antipodes is bound to get ugly.

Luckily, the enjoyment of political slap-fighting is one pleasure not banned in this state — yet.

I keep picturing a little baby hitting a homerun...

At the Jan. 9, 2008, ceremony where he was sworn in as mayor for a second term, Gavin Newsom announced, “We will create baby savings bonds to deposit $500 for every new resident born in our city.” The baby-bond money would be used to pay for college or first-time homeownership.

That Baby Bonds initiative never made it out of the Board of Supervisors Budget and Finance Committee, mostly because, in 2008, San Francisco’s deficit was about $350 million. (Pdf of 2008 budget study here:  Download County Budget Report.)

Fast forward to 2010, and The City is facing a $500 million deficit: Lieutenant governor candidate Newsom just announced a plan to create college savings accounts for kindergartners. (Do I even need to point out the hilariously convenient timing of the announcement, mere days before the primary election?)

Treasurer Jose Cisneros estimates that the new proposal would cost $200,000 to get started and $400,000 to $500,000 a year once it’s up and running.

I called Jake McGoldrick, a former District 1 supervisor who was the chairman of the Budget and Finance Committee that killed the baby-bond program back in 2008, and asked for his thoughts. “We have had to bail out the schools year after year with the rainy-day fund that now sits empty,” said McGoldrick, who’s now a professor and president of the Adjunct Professors Union at the University of San Francisco.

“This is money we need right now for kids. We’re hardly meeting their needs today.”

“I plan to come to public comment and speak against this [new proposal],” he told me. “It’s not that I’m against the idea behind it. The minute we have a budget surplus, I’d say, ‘Let’s do this.’”

You'd think BP might have better things to do...

Arizona is not the only candidate for the top spot on Santa Francisco’s Naughty List. British Petroleum’s recent decision to give free oil to all manner of marine life in the Gulf of Mexico has angered everyone, including Greenpeace and the tea party movement (whose members obviously have been itching for a reason to declare war on Britain again anyway).

As luck would have it, our very own state Sen. Mark Leno is in a position to score a small but important victory against the oil company. See, the California Senate is currently considering a bill (SB 933) that would prohibit surcharges on consumers who use debit cards. (A 1985 law prevents surcharges on credit card purchases.) Opposing the measure are groups such as the National Federation of Independent Business, the National Grocers Association and, you guessed it, BP.

Introduced by Sen. Jenny Oropeza, D-Long Beach, the bill was heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee on April 27, where it passed. Despite being in the middle of the oil spill crisis, BP made sure a representative was there to testify against the bill. Leno is on that committee and not only voted in favor of the bill, but he’s a co-author.

If, as is widely rumored, Leno runs for mayor, I think thumping BP on behalf of consumers will be worthy of a campaign flier almost as slick as the recent spill. 

"He's an interesting cat": Jerry Brown on Prop 13

Constant Readers,

The lovely ladies of NARAL invited me to sit in on their statewide candidate forum yesterday. I have a lot to write about the candidates for Attorney General and Insurance Commissioner, but I wanted to get this post up ASAP.

Below is a video of Jerry Brown's rambling, 4-minute answer when asked by the moderator "What about Prop 13? And what can we do to repeal it?"

SPOILER ALERT! He says don't bother trying to repeal it, the effort will fail.

Also: Brown's "solution" to the state's budget problems is to engage in a collective discussion about priorities. Which is the same speech I gave when running for Sophomore class president. He owes me an apology for stealing that absurd political gold.

(I couldn't get a good shot of him from my table, so I taped the large screen where he was being cast. Also, the audio is not great, so I put on my headphones and played like a court reporter. The transcript is below.) 

Jerry Brown on April 10, 2010 from Melissa Griffin on Vimeo.

-Melissa

TEXT OF ANSWER

Moderator: What about Proposition 13 and what can we do to repeal it?

Brown: Well, okay when you say Proposition 13, the revenue after 13 - the assessment of property - it’s risen considerably because of the rise in the value and change of real estate. Right now, if you put on the ballot: Get Rid Of It, it’s not gonna pass.

People, and I’ve been reading the history of California taxation and this goes back into the 30’s. Property tax battles have gone on a long time and some of those people actually vote for taxes; a lot of time they vote for tax reductions. And I would say that when you have the legislature enjoying only 15 percent favorability and the Governor enjoying only 25 percent, to think that people would say, “Ok we’re gonna listen to that group” is very unrealistic. I think the government is going to have to win the confidence of the people. That’s our first job: to restore public confidence and to reprioritize how we spend our money.

I have no doubt that the economy of California is going to come back. Already the revenues are up 2 billion over what the Governor was predicting in his budget that was actually finished in December. So revenues are coming back. The gap - the deficit - is about 17, 18 billion now. The gross state product - which is the wealth generated in California - is about 1.7, 1.8 trillion. Even last year it was just about that in a very bad year - so the deficits about one percent of the wealth creation so going forward the revenues and the spending can be brought into line but we do have to make some tough choices at every level.

And I believe the key here is for Californians to engage in a great discussion about: What we do really expect from our government? What is it really doing? And can we make a collective decision, and decisions on these key points: the university, higher ed, K though 12, prisons, jails, water, energy, transportation. These are all segments that we have to decide how much money goes to it and unfortunately a lot of people believe that this money is not being well-spent.

And the job of the governor to so conduct a budgetary process that every one of those legislators understands and owns every key element of that budget and the process is sufficiently transparent and accessible to the people of the state that everyone can be part of this discussion. What do we need to spend going forward? Because ultimately it does take a vote of the people, it takes a very large majority and two-thirds in the state legislature so if you’re asking about Prop 13 I’m not recommending that we repeal it. I think a lot of homeowners - I remember when it was there - I remember in 1978 when the highest turnout of people turned out in that election. I know a lot of people are engaged in voter registration, getting people to vote. Well in that election, people [were] pouring into the precincts.

The highest ever in the history of the state came out to vote because they felt the property taxes were rising so rapidly. People were actually seeing their taxes double in just a few years. So that’s why it happened. That memory is seared into people. And I think any changes to the tax structure are going to have to work around that. Certainly in the next couple of years.

Why I don't get invited to holiday parties...

With Meg Whitman inching past Jerry Brown in the polls, Democrats are rightfully concerned. Whitman has engaged in a media blitz not seen since Ross Perot bought airtime to show us pie charts and Texas politics, “If you see a snake, just kill it — don’t appoint a committee on snakes.”

If Whitman’s campaign strategy is to use the Jedi mind trick of forcefully putting thoughts in people’s heads, Jerry Brown’s campaign strategy appears to be “playing hard to get.” See, Brown doesn’t appear to have much in the way of a campaign going. Oh, I know he’s trying to show he’s creative and forward-thinking, but, as political strategies go, just because something is “unorthodox” doesn’t mean it is effective.

On Easter Sunday, I was having dinner with one of the wonkiest people I know. A former elected official, he remains active in politics and shares my love of funky, arcane details. As with most conversations these days among the civic chattering class, the subject turned to Brown’s unenthusiastic campaign.

“What if Brown drops out of the race?” I asked.

“Oh!” his eyes widened.

Here’s what we put together: If Brown stays in the race long enough to win the party primary in June, the field would be clear of gadflys and single-issue activists running for the Democratic nod. (Pdf of full list of candidates here: Download Gov Candidates.) Once it’s Brown versus some Republican (let’s just pretend there’s still a question about who that will be) Brown could drop out of the race. At that point, volunteered my dinner companion, the state Democratic Central Committee would appoint Brown’s replacement, which could be anyone — a moneyed Democrat like Steve Westley, a popular politician like Dianne Feinstein, or even a young lieutenant governor candidate.

Democratic groups like Level the Playing Field 2010 are raising money to defeat a Republican candidate (rhymes with Whitman) and a substitute Democratic Party candidate could just as easily benefit from those efforts.

“It’s a thought,” he grinned.

“Pass the cornbread.” 

He'd go to Sacramento to be Governor, but Lt. Gov? Prolly not.

A recent poll showed Mistermayor as a front-runner if he were to enter the race for lieutenant governor, and since then local wonks have been chirping about whether he will run.

Here is my 2 cents, er, chirps: The answer is no.

It just doesn’t make any sense. Why would Mayor Gavin Newsom go all the way to that sad little place called Sacramento just to hold Meg Whitman’s umbrella? And while serving on the Agriculture and Water Transition Task Force (not making that one up) might be tempting, I doubt the lieutenant governor gets a security detail or even keys to the office supply cabinet.

Not Mistermayor’s style at all.

There’s another issue at play here, though: Who becomes mayor if Newsom leaves office a year early?

Let’s assume he’s elected lieutenant governor and takes office in January. The Board of Supervisors would then appoint a new mayor who must serve at least four months but could serve up to a year, depending on the date of the next election, when voters would finally have a say. (Charter sec. 13.101.5.)

The board-appointed mayor need not be a supervisor. It could be anyone. Yes, anyone. (Mayor Griffin?) With a progressive majority at the board, I think the prospect of a year with Mayor Chiu, Mayor Peskin, Mayor Daly or Mayor Campos is frightening enough for Newsom to forgo the glint of glory that comes with the office of lieutenant governor.

Odds and Ends: Kamala's Co-Author, Brain-Melting, Security Costs and a Holiday Miracle

Many of you might wake up on Christmas morning to find a copy of San Francisco District Attorney (and State Attorney General-hopeful) Kamala Harris’ book “Smart on Crime, A Career Prosecutors Plan to Make Us Safer” under the tree. If you enjoy that read, just wait until January 2010 when Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman’s new book “The Power of Many; Values for Success in Business and in Life,” comes out. Both books were co-authored by Joan O'C. Hamilton, who obviously has found a niche.

Speaking of sharing ideas…

Mistermayor is backing a proposal by the Commission on the Environment's policy committee that would require cell phone radiation absorption levels be posted next to the price tag of any cell phone sold in San Francisco. Maine Rep. Andrea Boland, D-Sanford has out-crazied even our fair city by stating that she’ll propose a law in January requiring cell phones to sport a label that says “Warning” in large, red letters and (I’m not making this up) a graphic, in color, of a child’s brain next to the warning. You win, Andrea.

Speaking of copying San Francisco…

The San Francisco scuffle about the cost of having the police guard Mistermayor while he was campaigning for governor appears to have inspired city council members in Washington, D.C. Last week D.C. councilmember Phil Mendelson asked the D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier for detailed financial information about Mayor Adrian Fenty's security detail. It seems Mayor Fenty is on a cycling team and has been using motorcycle escorts so his team could ride in unauthorized places and run red lights.

Stay away from Critical Mass, Mistermayor.

Speaking of Police…

Back in June the Board passed a resolution, sponsored by Bevan Dufty, demanding that the San Francisco Police Department properly staff its Fraud Section. With only eight officers to deal with over 1,000 cases per year, it was reportedly taking about one year to even begin investigating a given case.

I called police department spokeswoman Lieutenant Tomioka last week to see if there had been any progress in getting more staff in the section.

Tomioka told me a string of facts that basically amounts to a Christmas miracle: the Fraud Section (now called the Economic Crimes Unit) has just added 7 whole brand new inspectors to its ranks, bringing the total number to 15 inspectors and one civilian support staff member. According to Tomioka, the change was made in early December as part of some larger departmental changes.

See, it’s not all bad news.

Happy Holidays, San Francisco!