It’s not a moot question. Already, the Chron’s C.W. Nevius, in an otherwise innocuous column on Question Time, tossed out this nugget:
Lee may be the interim, but don’t kid yourself. There are people right now who are asking him if he’d like to make a run for the office in November.
This, of course, is the problem with the concept of a “caretakler” mayor. There’s no law, no rule that says Ed Lee can’t decide round about mid-summer, shortly before the filing deadline, that he’s changed his mind, loves the job, and can’t resist the siren song of his supporters urging him to seek a full term.
And hey: maybe he does do a great job in the next few months. Why shouldn’t San Franciscans have the right to elect him in November?
Of course, he promised that wasn’t going to be part of the deal. And if he had given any signals that he might want a full term, Sup. Sean Elsbern, who was adamant that he wanted a caretaker, wouldn’t have nominated Lee. David Chiu, who might want to run for mayor himself, would have been a lot less likely to vote for a potential rival. Lee the candidate wouldn’t have gotten the job.
So when he should up for Question Time, one of the supes ought to ask him: Right now, in public, for the record, will you tell us — is there any possibility that you will consider running in November?
I’m not saying the guy should be forced to give up his civic and Constitutional right to seek public office; as I said, that’s why I never liked the caretaker thing. But if he’s thinking of running, the city needs to know that, now, so we can work with him on an honest basis. And if he’s not, he needs to tell Nevius’ sources to quit spinning rumors.