Election

Election 2010: Wait is on for Labor-Dems

0

Labor Council executive director Tim Paulson isn’t quite ready to give up the ghost on this one, despite a reported 196 Republican seats already won in the House.  “We really don’t know what the final answers are… some things are going well, some things are going not as well.” Most of labor’s most pressing local races – Paulson cited Measure B and the District 6 and District 8 races as examples – have yet to be decided and may possibly not have a confirmed winner until tomorrow. Measure B is going down at the moment, by the way – 51.6 percent “no” votes, still not enough reported at this point to call the race.

So for now, the Labor Council-Democrat Party party at the Great American Music Hall is contenting itself with crudites and tunes by young rock-women, The She’s. Fiona Ma made it up to congratulate everyone who got out the vote for the Dems – Jerry Brown, Pelosi, and Boxer have cinched their races — but Aaron Peskin of the DCCC hasn’t yet made an appearance. Maybe it’s just the dedication showing. “Aaron doesn’t know the polls closed awhile ago,” Paulson announces. 

 

Election 2010: SF Results trickle in, sloowly

0

Slowly, the SF Department of elections is posting results, and a couple of things are clear: The District 2 race is getting very close, D10 is still anyone’s game, and Jane Kim has a sizable lead in D6.


Some things are over: I can say tht prop. B is going down, Prop. L (sit-lie) is going to win, the real-estate transfer tax is going to win — but the hotel tax is going down.  

Election 2010: Prop. 19 loses

4

Okay, I admit it: I thought Californians would come to their senses and vote in large numbers in favor of legalizing pot. And that’s how the polls looked — until Attorney General Eric Holder announced that he would continue to enforce federal law and bust Californians for marijuana offenses. At that point, the voters seemed to collectively sigh and say: Hell with it, if the feds are going to get us anyway, why bother? And that’s when the polls began to shift

The rest of the state props are a mixed bag — the proposal to get rid of the two-thirds vote on passing a budget went through, but so did the mandate that local fees get a two-thirds vote.

Election 2010: More good news on the state front

4

You can put this one in the bank: Brown is the next governor, Boxer remains a senator and Gavin Newsom is going to Sacramento, quite possibly on the coat tails of the man he at one point tried to challenge for the top job. And there’s more good news for Dems: Tom Torlakson looks solid for state superintendent of public instruction and Dave Jones is going to be the next insurance commissioner.


The only top Dem who isn’t faring well is Kamala Harris, who is lagging in her race against Steve Cooley for attorney general. This is a big one: Cooley wants to defend prop. 8.

Election 2010: The judicial race

0

After Michael Nava came in first in the June primary and looked as if he might oust sitting judge Rochard Ulmer, the local judiciary and much of the legal establishment came together and began raising a ton of money to try to crush this upstart. And it’s had an impact; in the early results, Nava is behind. But it’s going to be very close; by the end of the night, the 54-46 margin will get a lost closer. This one’s impossible to call.

Election 2010: Early SF results

1

The absentee votes are in, and it’s a very mixed bag. If trends hold, and the absentees represent the most conservative votes, Prop. B is going down — the result of a very successful labor campaign. Prop. L, the sit-lie law, is solidly ahead. The two hotel tax measures are both losing by about the same percentage, suggesting that the anti-tax group’s focus on just Prop. K, which liberals also opposed, was effective. But it’s still to early to call those.

In D2, Janet Reilly is well ahead. In D8, Scott Wiener is ahead of Rafael mandelman 54-22; that’s going to be hard to make up, even though Mandelman had a strong GOTV drive today.

D6 and D10 are still way up in the air. Jane Kim is ahead in D6, and Marlene Tran — the only Asian in the race, is winning in D10, a testament to the fact that 10 is becoming an increasingly Asian district. But neither of those two will be over tonight, and will come down to ranked-choice voting. 

Election 2010: Newsom in, Harris trailing

0

That’s based on very early results. But with Boxer’s numbers creeping up, and Newsom comfortably ahead, it looks as if San Francisco will be getting a new mayor in January. The very early results have Harris pretty far behind, but those numbers will change. Since the early returns are always conservative, thought, the news for Gav is very good.

Election 2010: Boxer should be okay

0

The earliest results — which would be absentees from conservative areas — have Fiorina slightly ahead, but if typical trends hold, Boxer will be fine. So the question is: If voters support the two Dems at the top of the ticket, what happens to the downticket races? Are there coattails?

Election 2010: Well, there goes $160 million

1

CNN, using exit polls, just called the governor’s race for Jerry Brown. Meg Whitman spend $160 million and is getting trounced. Think of what else that money could have gone for. 

Calls for justice

0

rebeccab@sfbg.com

Since the fatal shooting of Oscar Grant III on New Year’s Day in 2009, a photograph of the 22-year-old African American man from Hayward has become iconic. The picture shows Grant’s smiling face, and the black ski cap and a hooded sweatshirt he was wearing the day it was taken.

It has been copied onto posters and displayed like wallpaper in downtown Oakland cafes and along city blocks, manipulated with different hues and accents to produce scores of flyers, banners, hip-hop album jackets, T-shirts, and even masks. An expansive mural in Oakland displays Grant’s image on a larger-than-life scale, framed with roses.

The ubiquitous pictures of Grant, the victim of a shooting by police, are a constant reminder that his life was taken suddenly when BART cop Johannes Mehserle shot him in the back on the Fruitvale train platform. At the time, Grant was unarmed and physically restrained, having been arrested following reports of a fight.

Cell phone camera footage of the shooting went viral, and the case drew national attention. The defense argued that it was all a tragic accident, saying Mehserle had mistakenly drawn his firearm when he meant to draw his Taser.

Mehserle was convicted of involuntary manslaughter and his sentencing is expected Nov. 5. With all the attention surrounding the case, this final determination has taken on the proportions of a moment of truth.

Mehserle could be sent to prison for as long as 14 years, or merely be placed on probation. For many Grant supporters, it’s a question of whether the justice system will incarcerate a police officer for killing a young person of color, after so many other youths have been slain in police shootings that never went to trial. For Mehserle’s supporters, the outcome will signify something else entirely.

 

RIVAL NARRATIVES

Mehserle, a white Napa native in his late 20s who resigned from BART after the shooting, was tried on a murder charge. But a jury in Los Angeles (where the trial was moved because of the publicity here) found him guilty of involuntary manslaughter on July 8. Protesters, decrying the verdict as too lenient, converged in downtown Oakland for a street rally directly afterward that later gave way to bursts of rioting and looting.

The grassroots community leaders who urged supporters into the streets aren’t the only people now mobilizing around the sentencing. In the months following the verdict, the law enforcement community rallied in support of Mehserle, whose conviction for on-duty police conduct stood out as a rarity.

The former cop’s supporters have set up websites, hosted vigils, and arranged media interviews for Mehserle and his allies. A website called Justice4Johannes.com decries his conviction, denouncing the justice system as biased against police. “Do not let our officers fall victim to a spineless system,” the website urges, “who would rather protect criminals than protect our law enforcement officers who daily put their lives on the line for you!”

As the date of the sentencing approaches, each side has demonstrated that they are as active as ever. When the Giants played in AT&T Park in October, Mehserle’s father, Todd, made an appearance in McCovey Cove on a stately sailboat with “Free Johannes Mehserle” banners ruffling on its tall masts. But a smaller wooden ketch with activist Jared Aldrich at the helm, hoisted banners that read “Justice for Oscar Grant” and, on another occasion, “Jail Killer Cops.”

On Oct. 23, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) Local 10 shut down Bay Area ports, using a stop-work day to hold a rally at the Port of Oakland calling for the maximum sentence for Mehserle.

“The litany of police killings of innocent young black and Latino men has evoked a public outcry in California,” Jack Heyman, a co-organizer of the rally, wrote in an article in CounterPunch. “Yet when it comes to killer cops, especially around election time, with both the Democratic and Republican parties espousing law and order, the mainstream media either expunges or whitewashes the issue.”

Heyman told the Guardian that he had visited Oakland high school classes to speak about the issue and found that in some classes, every single student raised a hand when asked if they knew the name Oscar Grant. “They happen to be sensitive to the issue of police brutality,” he noted. “A number of them had had problems with police.”

 

PRISON OR PROBATION?

On Oct. 26, opposing briefs on the sentencing were filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court. Defense Attorney Michael Rains submitted a 126-page memo urging the judge to drop the gun-enhancement charge and place Mehserle on probation, which would keep him out of prison. Meanwhile, prosecutors with the Alameda County District Attorney filed a 20-page memo indicating that Mehserle should be sent to prison, but stopped short of advocating for the maximum sentence.

Rains’ motion goes into great detail, quoting from letters sent to the court in Mehserle’s defense, in which the former transit officer is said to be “a gentle giant.” It even goes so far as to suggest that Mehserle’s infant son (born New Year’s Day, 2009) could suffer psychological difficulties later in life if he is separated from his father.

Grant, too, was a father — his daughter, Tatiana, is six — but the prosecution’s motion doesn’t mention how she may be psychologically affected later in life by her loss. Grant supporters sent some 2,000 letters to the judge, according to a posting on civil rights attorney John Burris’ website, but none were referenced in the briefing.

The DA argues that Mehserle intentionally shot Grant, implying that the Taser argument was a fabrication. In the moments following the shooting, the document notes, Mehserle told his fellow officer that he thought Grant was going for a gun. “If the sentence in this case is to serve any purpose whatsoever,” it notes, “it must serve as punishment.”

 

INSIDE THE POLICE LOBBY

The Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC) covered the cost of Mehserle’s defense. The 85,000-member, politically powerful police organization maintains a legal defense fund for officers facing legal troubles.

Technically, Mehserle wasn’t entitled to the financial assistance. According to PORAC’s website, an officer who voluntarily resigns may be ineligible for benefits, and Mehserle quit shortly after the shooting. Still, PORAC stepped up and put itself on the hook for millions in legal fees to ensure he had the best possible defense. PORAC was a driver behind the Peace Officers’ Bill of Rights, which established a unique set of protections for law enforcement officers under investigation for misconduct.

PORAC president Ron Cottingham acknowledged that its decision to fund Mehserle’s defense was discretionary, but declined to say more. It’s possible that PORAC was interested in preventing Mehserle’s trial from setting a precedent for other cases involving officers who use deadly force against unarmed suspects.

PORAC also played a role in the BART civilian oversight structure that was ultimately approved by the California Legislature. The transit agency’s lack of civilian oversight became a flashpoint in the wake of the shooting, prompting Assemblymember Tom Ammiano to draft legislation that would have created an Office of Citizen Complaints (OCC) for BART patterned after the system in place in San Francisco. PORAC fought it and the effort was stymied.

“PORAC … will actively oppose your bill as it is written,” Jesse Sekhon, president of the BART Police Officers’ Association, wrote in a letter to Ammiano’s office. “They also said that they will have every law enforcement agency in the state oppose the bill.” Ammiano’s bill would have prevented police officers from serving in oversight roles and would have granted more power to the OCC.

The bill that went forward instead, Assembly Bill 1586, was crafted by BART, supported by PORAC, and introduced by Assemblymember Sandre Swanson (D-Oakland). Under this system, the oversight process begins with a police auditor selected by the BART Board of Directors, and a citizen board — which may include police officers.

According to Lynette Sweet, a member of the BART Board who spoke about the bill during a community meeting in Oakland in August 2009, PORAC opposed Ammiano’s bill because it would have allowed the state to direct municipalities throughout California to create civilian-oversight offices. “PORAC doesn’t want to see that happen. So we’ve now become the lesser of two evils for them,” she said.

On Oct. 29, BART held a dedication ceremony for the new police auditor office and honored Swanson for bringing the legislation forward. The transit agency has initiated a search to fill the civilian-oversight positions. But the rifts in the community over this shooting are far from healed.

On one side, a politically powerful and financially robust police lobby is actively influencing civilian-oversight legislation and spending top dollar trying to keep Mehserle out of prison. On the other, a grassroots community movement furious about police brutality against black and Latino youth is gaining momentum.

Only Judge Robert Perry knows what his own personal interpretation of justice is, and he alone will determine if or for how long Mehserle will spend time behind bars. If he is spared from prison, the community will be outraged. If he is incarcerated, Mehserle supporters will be outraged. But regardless of the decision, Mehserle’s life will go on.

Editor’s Notes

1

tredmond@sfbg.com

Here’s what really scares me about Republicans in Washington: they don’t want the economy to get better.

I’m not just saying that they’re wrong on the issues, or that their prescriptions — tax cuts for the rich, fewer regulations for big business, privatization of health care and Social Security — will only make things worse. I’m saying that, right now, in November 2010, the GOP leaders want continued high unemployment. They want Americans to suffer. They want conditions to get worse and worse — because all they really care about right now is defeating Barack Obama in 2012. And they know and I know and everyone else knows that if the economy improves, he’ll be a two-term president.

I’m not the only one who sees this open conspiracy. Former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich has been Twittering about it, and bloggers have been floating it out, but the mainstream news media doesn’t’ seem to want to take the risk of saying what’s right in front of everyone’s face: Republicans are lying, outright. They’ve campaigned on the promise that their ideas and agenda will put America back to work — but they know that’s not true. What the agenda is going to be is obstruction.

The Democrats have never done that, at least not in recent history. Oh, they fought W. on all sorts of policy issues, but they never tried to make sure that the country collapsed. That’s a big difference between the two parties, and it comes down to a basic question: How many people are you willing to hurt, how much suffering are you willing to promote, just to get back in power??

I’ve been talking to a lot of political activists, elected officials, and outside agitators of late about the next president of the Board of Supervisors (with all that implies) and I keep hearing the same name: David Campos.

Campos has been one of the great success stories of the class of 2008, an effective legislator who can work with just about everyone. He’s a solid progressive, but with a gentle personality — someone who sticks to his principles but doesn’t pick personal fights. I don’t know how he puts together six votes, but he might surprise us.

I’m writing this the day before the election and it comes out the day after, by which time Jerry brown will be the governor-elect, Barbara Boxer will have won another Senate term, and the Giants will be holding their World Series victory parade. You read it here last.

Alerts

0

news@sfbg.com

WEDNESDAY, NOV. 3

 

SPUR’s Election Wrap-up

The San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association’s post-election discussion and analysis session is popular with political junkies of all ideological stripes. Although it’s hosted by a knowledgeable duo — Barbary Coast Consulting founder Alex Clemens and political consultant David Latterman — a wide variety of political analysts always show up to create a lively, insightful discussion. Bring a bag lunch and your two cents.

12:30 p.m., $5 or free for members

SPUR office

654 Mission, SF

381-8726

 

Revolution is not a Tea Party

As the dust begins to settle on the midterm elections battlefield, come discuss how the country’s political fervor affected the national discourse on issues like immigration and civil rights. Was the Tea Party an actual grass roots revolution or merely a large angry mob? How long will the virulent xenophobia and nativism continue, and what can be done to counter it?

7-9 p.m., free

Revolution Books

2425 Channing Way

Berkeley

revolutionbooks@sbcglobal.net

THURSDAY NOV. 5

 

“Tranny Fest: San Francisco Transgender Film Festival”

Come one, come all: ladies and gentlemen, transgender, and gender queer. Now in its 12th season, Tranny Fest will open Thursday, with performances by Landa Lakes, Butch Tap, Thisway Thataway, and Psychobabble, among others. The festival continues Friday and Saturday with short films and videos by transgender and gender variant artists. Advance tickets will be available for the event.

Thurs.–Sat., 8–10 p.m.

$12–$15 sliding scale

CounterPULSE, SF

1310 Mission, SF

www.freshmeatproduction.com

 

Evening with our poet laureate

In addition to California poet laureate emeritus Al Young, Revolution Books will also host jazz/blues music, guitarist Trevor Michaels, and other poems and song.

7 p.m.–9 p.m., free

Revolution Books

2425 Channing Way, Berk.

510-848-1196

SATURDAY NOV. 6

 

Green Festival San Francisco

Here’s more proof that green is the new black. One of the largest sustainability events in the country will be held at the San Francisco Concourse. The eco-confab includes lectures from Bill McKibben, Daniel Pinchbeck, Amy Goodman, and others. Vendors, workshops, music and an array of organic beer, wine, and vegetarian cuisine will also be on hand. Admission discounts are also available to students, seniors, cyclists and public transit riders.

Sat.–Sun., 10 a.m.–7 p.m.

$10–$25

Concourse Exhibition Center

635 Eighth St., SF

www.greenfestivals.org/sf

Election Night Parties

7

These are heady days to live in San Francisco, what with the Giants’ World Series victory last night, Halloween festivities the night before, and today’s Dia de los Muertos, which I believe is Spanish for Election Night (okay, we know they’re different, but given this year’s electoral slate, we couldn’t resist). It’s also a big election for The City, with our own Gavin Newsom and Kamala Harris seeking statewide office, a pivotal Board of Supervisors election, and some controversial propositions.

As usual, we’ll be covering and blogging all the election action live on this site. But if you’d like to get out there and mix and mingle with the politicos yourself, here’s the list of parties, which will be updating as we learn about more of them:

Board of Supervisors

D2

Janet Reilly – La Barca Restaurant, 2036 Lombard St. @ Fillmore

D6

Debra Walker- 8-10pm Outsider (894 Geary) and 10-12:30am, Great American Music Hall, 859 O’Farrell

Jane Kim: Public Works, 161 Erie Street @ Mission

Jim Meko- Campaign HQ, 364 10th Street

James Keys- Amsterdam Cafe (937 Geary, between Larkin and Polk)

Theresa Sparks: Don Ramon’s, 225 11th Street

Glendon “Anna Conda” Hyde: Eagle Tavern, 12th and Harrison

D8

Rafael Mandelman – Pilsner Inn, 225 Church St., @ Market

Scott Weiner: Harvey’s. 500 Castro @ 18th

Rebecca Prozan: Noe Valley Tavern, 4054 24th St., between Noe and Castro

D10

Lynette Sweet: Campaign HQ, 1 Rhode Island

Chris Jackson: Campaign HQ, 93 Leland Ave.

Dewitt Lacy: Bloom’s Saloon, 1918 18th @ Missouri

Steve Moss: Goat Hill Pizza, 300 Connecticut

Tony Kelly, Potrero Hill Neighborhood House, 953 DeHaro,

Malia Cohen: Poquito’s, 2368 3rd Street

SF School Board

Kim-Shree Maufas – Circulating with stops at Walker Democratic Party parties.

Hydra Mendoza: Mercury Lounge, 1582 Folsom St., @ 11th St.

Margaret Brodkin: home, 45 Graystone Terrace

Emily Murase: 6-9pm 142 Clearfield Drive (Between Ocean and Eucalyptus

Interest Groups

SF Labor Council/Democratic Party: Great American Music Hall, 859 O’Farrell St.

League of Pissed Off Voters: El Rio, 3158 Mission

Conservatives/Tea Party California Council: Pirro’s Restaurant, 2244 Taraval

SF Propositions

No on B – Great American Music Hall, with Dems/Labor

Yes on Prop B/Adachi: Lava Lounge, 527 Bryant Street

Yes on D, Mercury Lounge, 1582 Folsom @ 12th

No on L: Great American Music Hall, with Dems/Labor

Yes on L: Hobson’s Choice, 1601 Haight

State and Federal Races

John Dennis for Congress: Nectar Wine lounge, 3330 Steiner (off Lombard)

Jerry Brown for Governor: Fox Theater, 1807 Telegraph Ave, Oakland

Gavin Newsom for Lt. Gov: Tres Agaves – La Plaza De Agave Room, 130 Townsend @ 2nd

Kamala Harris for Attorney General, Delancey Street Foundation, 600 Embarcadero

 

Rebecca Kaplan for Oakland Mayor: Everett & Jones BBQ, 126 Broadway, Oakland

Sorting out the Kim and Walker claims

2

As the District 6 supervisorial race winds down, we at the Guardian have been inundated by calls and messages by Debra Walker supporters saying how nasty Jane Kim supporters are being, and by Kim supporters complaining that Walker’s people are being mean. And while we’d be the last ones to say that we told you so, everyone should remember that politics is nasty business, particularly when two progressive candidates are targeting the same voters.

It’s not worth trying to sort out the street-level accusations, but it’s worth pointing out some dubious claims in the mailers both sides have sent in recent days, punches and counter-punches that began last week with a mailer by Walker’s camp claiming Kim moved into the district to run for office. Kim’s people dispute that she moved into D6 simply to run, and they note that progressive politicians such as Chris Daly and and Matt Gonzalez were also recent transplants when they decided to run for supervisor.

Yet it’s probably going too far to label this “last-minute lies being spread,” as the latest Kim mailer contends. Another Walker mailer says that Kim is under investigation by the Ethics Commission for illegally coordinating with an independent expenditure mailer funded partially by Willie Brown, which Kim’s camp calls another lie.

It was a story first reported by the Guardian, then picked up by the Bay Citizen, which quoted Ethics head John St. Croix as saying the situation appeared to violate campaign finance law and “warrant an investigation.” Ethics can’t confirm when it is doing investigations, so it might be going to far to say Kim is under investigation, although the incident does appear to involve improper behavior that is probably fair game for criticism.

The mailer also included a Walker campaign accusation that Kim “took off on an all-expenses-paid trip to Vegas – and charged it to the School District” while it was laying off teachers and wrestling with a $40 million deficit. That also has a kernel of truth to it, even that it sounds worse than it was and is probably being blown out of proportion.

The Kim campaign says the trip to speak at a national education conference was paid for jointly between the conference organizers and the school district, which covered about $600 worth of hotel and meal expenses. Again, the accusation has some nasty implications, but it’s probably not an unreasonable accusation during the heat of an election season.

The hit on Walker that the Kim campaign sent out in response also seems to fudge the truth just a bit, but in this case it was in exaggerating Kim’s experience not in criticizing Walker (except for the line that Walker was “Appointed by City Hall insiders” to her spot on the Building Inspection Commission, rather than “Elected by the people,” as Kim was to the school board).

But three of the five claims that Kim makes seem to apply more to Superintendent Carlos Garcia and his administrative staff than to the part-time school board members: “Experience Administering A Budget of $400+ Million,” “Experience Overseeing Over 1,000 Employees,” and “Experience Bargaining With Labor Unions.”

Yet by tonight, all these claims and counter-claims, and all the street-level mudslinging that has been going on, will hopefully fade into memories of a heated political campaign. Hopefully. But if this inter-progressive-movement fight ends up handing this seat over to downtown-backed candidate Theresa Sparks, then the nastiness could be just beginning, because both campaigns will have some explaining to do.

Guardian: Endorsements for small business in San Francisco

1

Alas, this year some of the small business groups and leaders in San Francisco, such as the Small Business Advocates and Scott Hauge at Small Business California, once again came out with endorsements that were virtually identical with those of the downtown/Chamber of Commerce/PG&E/landlord/real estate gang. (See Guardian blogs.) Their candidates were, and the big downtown money went to, Steve Moss in District l0, Theresa Sparks in District 6, and Scott Wiener in District 8 and they all backed the Sit-Lie Ordinance and took identical positions on all the other local props.
There are many small business people who do not subscribe to the downtown line and vote more independently. I decided this year to do a special blog and email blast on the endorsements of the Guardian, which are done from the perspective of an independent, locally owned and operated alternative newspaper. I think it’s also good for people to know that there are a lot of independents and progressives out there in the small business community who support such things as public power, a city health plan for workers, more progressive taxation, and foot patrols by police for the neighborhoods and not just kicking kids off the sidewalks. b3

To the small business community in San Francisco:

Here are our 2010 endorsements of state and San Francisco candidates and propositions from the San Francisco Bay Guardian, a locally owned and operated, independent alternative weekly newspaper in San Francisco. The Guardian is a newspaper that is of, by, and for small business. We always question candidates carefully on their small businesses record and policies and consider small business to be a crucial criterion for candidates and propositions in our endorsement process. In a major story on the Guardian in its pre-election Sunday edition (Oct. 31), the Chronicle reported that Guardian endorsements “are widely considered the most influential in this left-leaning town.” We have done endorsements in every election since our founding in 1966.

For us, this is a serious, intensive process of many months: we interview all the major local candidates, put up podcasts of interviews on our website at sfbg.com, do extensive independent checking on the candidates and issues and their background and record and do independent reporting on the campaign and issues. You may agree with us; you may not. But you can have faith in our one and only campaign promise: Our Clean Slate represents what we think is best for San Francisco and San Francisco small business.
b3

 

 

Provisional votes count

1

With the election just days away, what should you do if you were issued a vote-by-mail ballot, but can’t mail it and want to vote at the polls, instead?

According to the San Francisco Department of Elections, you have the right to cast a provisional ballot at your local polling place. (If you don’t know where your polling place is, click here to look it up.)

But what if you show up at your polling place, and your name isn’t on the official roster of registered voters for the precinct and your voting eligibility cannot be verified by the pollworker?
Again, you can cast a provisional ballot.

The same holds true for folks who moved to San Francisco, but forget to re-register to vote here. Or want to vote a party ballot that does not match their registration. Or are a first-time voter listed in the original roster with “ID Required” printed under your name but are unable to show acceptable identification, which includes a valid California state driver’s license, a California state identification mumber or the last four digits of your Social Security number.)

So, how do you actually cast a provisional vote?
A poll worker will hand you a a ballot and a provisional ballot envelope.
You’ll need to complete the voter’s section of the provisional envelope. (This involves filling in your name, date of birth, current address and previous address).
You’ll need to sign the declaration confirming that you are a resident of San Francisco and are eligible to vote in this election.
You’ll need to remember to sign your name at the bottom of the envelope.
You’ll need to mark your ballot cards for the candidates and measures you support.
You’ll need to insert your ballot cards into the provisional envelope, seal it and return it to the poll worker.
You’ll need to keep the six-digit number printed on your provisional voter receipt.

Ok, but how will you know if your provisional ballot was actually counted?
Call 1-866-325-9163 or visit the Department of Elections website   no sooner than 41 days after the election.

And to verify your provisional ballot on-line, you’ll need to provide the six-digit number printed on your provisional voter receipt.

Vote early, vote often!

Steve Moss: The big duck goes on and on and on

30

And so you will remember, from my earlier blog (STEVE MOSS: THE BIG DUCK) that I asked Steve Moss some questions in the critical District 10 race. He answered but ducked the questions, so I put forth the relevant follow up questions. No answer at all. But the blog comments provide some interesting back and forth with Moss supporters and others in the district.  (Yes, I don’t like anonymous comments and I always sign my comments as Bruce and B3.)

Moss told us in the Guardian endorsement interview that he fully supports more sunshine and accountability in non profits. So let’s take him at his word on this one and raise again the questions he has been ducking. PG&E has invested millions of dollars over the past 10 years into Moss, his non profit (and by extension his for profit firm and the Potrero View, which he now owns and uses for his personal and political agenda.)

More, Moss’s non profit collected $1,290,000 in the past three years from the California Public Utilities Commission for energy efficiency projects, according to SF Power’s annual revenues in its 2008 to 20l0 report on its website. Loretta Lynch, former president of the CPUC, explained to us that this money for energy efficiency programs are funded by ratepayers, not utilities, and that PG&E decides each year whether Moss/SF Power gets any of this money and how much. Lynch lives on Potrero Hill.

The report also disclosed that SF Power got $150,000 from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commisson in 2008 and $125,000 in 2009.) Both the CPUC and SF PUC are widely recognized PG&E- friendly bastions. Moss got hundreds of thousands more in previous years since he incorporated his non profit in 2001.  And, according to a statement in the report, Moss is still hustling money from the big polluters in District 10 (from PG&E, Mirant and its power plant and the mayor’s office et al).

This district has been brutalized for decades by PG&E, for starters with the belatedly shuttered Hunters Point power plant and with the still fuming Potrero Hill power plant, and with the concentration of gas pipelines under the district. If elected, Moss would be the first supervisor in memory who would be a direct financial captive of PG&E.

It is only fair to the residents and businesses in his district that Moss explain before election day some basic questions: how much money in total and by year has PG&E invested in him and his non profit and profit businesses? Why has he been secretive about it?
Will he keep hustling PG&E and Mirant for more money if elected? Will he cut his ties to PG&E and the non profit/profit firms and when? How can his constituents trust him considering PG&E’s investments in him?

Other critical questions concern the $250,000 or so investment that the downtown/Chamber/PG&E/real estate/landlord/BOMA gang has made in Moss and his campaign with the full expectation of getting good returns with friendly votes that would most likely be inimical to the interests of his district. Given the huge, unprecedented money gushing into his campaign from commercial landlords, developers, PG&E, and the Chamber gang, how can district residents and businesses trust him on the critical issues of public power, closing down the Potrero power plant, tenant rights, land use, Lennar and other big developments, affordable housing, and protecting the neighborhoods and small businesses?

The critical pre-election question: If Moss can’t answer these key questions fully and forthrightly, and he keeps the Big Duck going, how can he be trusted as a district supervisor?

Full disclosure: I look out from my office window at 135 Mississippi St. at the Potrero Hill power plant, pumping out poisons every minute of every day, courtesy of PG&E and Mirant, and the PUC/City Hall.

Tony Serra weighs in on the election

10

Tony Serra, the legendary local lawyer and one of my favorite members of the legal profession, sent us this photo with his commentary on the Nov. 2 election. It’s hanging from his office out at 506 Broadway.


I just talked to Serra, and he said he’s had great feedback. “Channel Five came out and did a story,” he said. “They managed to shoot it so the lightpost covered up the U and the C. They interviewed people on the street, and a lot of them were cheering me on.”


His critique of the GOP candidates doesn’t mean he’s a Jerry Brown supporter; Serra has sworn off electoral politics, which he told me is part of the corruption of capitalism. But he’s happy to go after Meg and Carly: “I’m not going to let those two motherfuckers buy the election.”


I told Serra he’s always been one of my heroes. Still is. 

Democracy = cheap drinks and free sex toys

0

Voting’s pretty good as it stands — representative government, dictator avoidance, all that jazz. But this fall, the choose-this-or-that got a little nutty. Have you seen the voter’s pamphlet? The ballots alone are four double-sided pages long. After all that paperwork, you’re gonna need a pick me up on Nov. 2. 

Call upon this pleasure two-pack of election day specials – yes, the title of this post is an accurate descriptor – to lift the weight you’ve been carrying on your back called “the future of California is in your hands.” Cheap drinks and free sex toys. Oh yeah, and check our complete endorsements for the low-down on just what’s on those ballots this year for San Francisco and East Bay.

Straight Up Vote

Bring your voter’s stub (this works if you’ve voted by mail or in-person) for a 50 cent drink at participating bars. Velvet Cantina, Tonic, and the Elite Cafe are all participating, but most participants are slopping around in the Castro. Anyway, find a list of all those aiding and abetting on their website. 

www.straightupvote.org


Vibrate the Vote

After you chuck that ballot down the appropriate chute, head to any Good Vibrations store, where dropping the name of this paragraph on election day will score you a free Pearl Drop vibrator. The generous giveaway is a part of an online voting contest that can enter you to win the top-rated toys on the Good Vibes website. 

www.goodvibes.com

 

Al Franken’s Oatmeal

2

I can’t stand all the fundraising e-mail blasts that fill my In Box during election season, but this one I liked. Former author and Saturday Night Live writer Al Franken has been pretty low-key since taking his U.S. Senate seat earlier this year following a close and bitter race. Now that he’s getting used to the job, hopefully he’ll loosen up and write more missives like this one, whose subject line was simply titled “Oatmeal.”

Dear Friend:

Here are two thought experiments.  Indulge me, won’t you?

It’s the morning after Election Day.  8 a.m.  You stumble out of bed.  Make some oatmeal.  Turn on the TV to find out what happened in that Senate race, the one that was too close to call all night.  But you gave $5 to the DSCC by clicking on this link.  And, lo and behold, your favorite Democrat — maybe Russ Feingold or Patty Murray — pulled it out by a few votes.  Oatmeal never tasted so sweet. 

But there’s another way it could go.  8 a.m.  Oatmeal.  TV.  But in this example, you DIDN’T give to the DSCC.  And, by a few hundred votes, some Tea Party extremist is now a U.S. Senator-elect — and Republicans have captured the majority.  How’s that oatmeal taste now?

You still have time to decide which scenario will become reality.  But when I say “time,” I don’t mean days.  I mean minutes.  Don’t wait for tomorrow.  Don’t even wait to read the rest of this email.  Click here right now and make a contribution of $5 or more — it will be matched two to one, tripling its impact!

You’ve seen the polls — we’re neck and neck in race after race.  Moving the numbers just a little bit could mean the difference between victory and defeat — trust me, I’ve been there.

And nobody moves numbers like the DSCC.  Thanks to people like you clicking on links like this one, we’ve pulled ahead in California and Connecticut and tied it up in Colorado and Pennsylvania.

But with just hours to go until the polls close, every minute counts.  Your contribution won’t be funding some far-off future plan — it’ll be the money that goes out the door first thing tomorrow.  It could be your $5 that makes the difference for Barbara Boxer, keeps Sharron Angle or Rand Paul out of the Senate, or even saves our majority.

So make a contribution of $5 or more to the DSCC right now — it’ll be on the air in a battleground state or in the field as part of a get-out-the-vote program by tomorrow morning.  And, even better, it will be matched two-to-one, tripling its impact.

If you want to know why I’m standing with the DSCC in the final days of this election, here’s why: On November 3, I don’t want my oatmeal to taste like regret.  I want my oatmeal to taste like victory.

How about you?

Thanks,

Al Franken

SF vote-by-mail provides early political snapshot

6

San Francisco’s Department of Elections had received 41,620 vote-by-mail returns so far That’s a fifth of the 210,993 vote-by-mail forms that were requested this year.
And while we don’t know which districts these folks voted in, we do know how they were registered: Over half were Democrats (24,153 votes), a quarter were decline-to-state (10,563 votes), and a fifth were Republican (5,565 votes).

I was surprised to learn that there are more vote-by-mail requests from folks registered with the American Independent Party (573) than with the Green Party, but not surprised to see that 200 folks were registered as Libertarians and 81 as Peace and Freedom Party.

Unfortunately, we can’t compare SF’s vote-by-mail snapshot with the statewide picture.
According to folks at the California Secretary of State’s office, votes won’t be broken down into vote-by-mail categories until after the election is certified…

Fall election ’10 clip out guide

15

Click here for the San Francisco Bay Guardian’s complete endorsements — and happy voting. CLICK HERE for the printable PDF from our home page.


 

NATIONAL RACES

U.S. Senate

Barbara Boxer

 

Congress, 6th District

Lynn Woolsey

 

Congress, 7th District

George Miller

 

Congress, 8th District

Nancy Pelosi

 

Congress, 9th District

Barbara Lee

 

Congress, 13th District

Pete Stark

 

STATE RACES

Governor

Edmund G. Brown

 

Lieutenant governor

Gavin Newsom

 

Secretary of state

Debra Bowen

 

Controller

John Chiang

 

Treasurer

Bill Lockyer

 

Attorney general

Kamala Harris

 

Insurance commissioner

Dave Jones

 

Board of Equalization, District 1

Betty Yee

 

Superintendent of public instruction

Tom Torlakson

 

State Senate, District 8

Leland Yee

 

State Assembly, district 12

Fiona Ma

 

State Assembly, District 13

Tom Ammiano

 

State Assembly, District 14

Nancy Skinner

 

State Assembly, District 16

Sandré Swanson

 

STATE BALLOT MEASURES

Prop. 19: YES, YES, YES

Prop. 20: NO

Prop. 21 YES

Prop. 22: NO

Prop. 23: NO, NO, NO

Prop. 24: YES

Prop. 25: YES, YES, YES

Prop. 26: NO, NO, NO

Prop. 27: YES

 

SAN FRANCISCO CANDIDATES

Supervisor, District 2

Janet Reilly

 

Supervisor, District 4

No endorsement

 

Supervisor, District 6

1. Debra Walker

2. Jane Kim

3. Glendon “Anna Conda” Hyde

 

Supervisor, District 8

Rafael Mandelman

 

Supervisor, District 10

1. Tony Kelly

2. DeWitt Lacy

3. Chris Jackson

 

Board of Education

Margaret Brodkin

Kim-Shree Maufas

Hydra Mendoza

 

Community College Board

John Rizzo

 

BART Board, District 8

Bert Hill

 

Assessor-Recorder

Phil Ting

 

Public Defender

Jeff Adachi

 

San Francisco Superior Court, Seat 15

Michael Nava

 

SAN FRANCISCO BALLOT MEASURES

Prop. AA: YES

Prop. A: YES Prop. B: NO, NO, NO

Prop. C: YES

Prop. D: YES

Prop. E: YES

Prop. F: NO

Prop. G: NO

Prop. H: NO

Prop. I: YES

Prop J: YES

Prop. K : NO

Prop. L : NO, NO, NO

Prop. M: YES

Prop. N: YES

 

EAST BAY ENDORSEMENTS

BART Board District 4

Robert Raburn

 

Berkeley City Auditor

Ann-Marie Hogan

 

Berkeley City Council District 1

Linda Maio

 

Berkeley City Council District 4

Jesse Arreguin

 

Berkeley City Council District 7

Kriss Worthington

 

Berkeley City Council District 8

Stewart Jones

 

Berkeley Rent Board

Asa Dodworth

Lisa Stephens

Jesse Townley

Pam Webster

Dave Blake

Katherine Harr

 

Oakland City Auditor

Courtney Ruby

 

Oakland Mayor

1. Rebecca Kaplan

2. Jean Quan

 

Oakland City Council District 2

Jennifer Pae

 

Oakland City Council District 4

Daniel Swafford

 

Oakland City Council District 6

Jose Dorado

 

EAST BAY BALLOT MEASURES

Berkeley Measure H: YES

Berkeley Measure I: YES

Berkeley Measure T: YES

Oakland Measure L: YES

Oakland Measure V: YES

Oakland Measure W: YES

Oakland Measure X: NO

Oakland Measure BB: YES

 

The. Rent. Is. Too. Damn. High!

3

 

As continued reports of unprecedented, record-breaking amounts of cash from corporate real estate developers and big landlords flood the Board of Supervisor races, the damaging impact of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision is becoming more and more clear. But even worse, Thomas J. Coates, a far-right extremist Republican real estate developer and landlord, is trying to buy the Board of Supervisors so that he can end rent control. Last week, Coates made the largest donation to supervisors races in the 150-year history of San Francisco.

Who is Coates? He spent more than $1 million on Proposition 98 in 2008 trying to repeal rent control statewide. He was the largest single contributor to that campaign, which was so extreme that even Gov. Schwarzenegger and former Republican Gov. Pete Wilson opposed it. Coates gave the maximum contribution allowed by law to George Bush and Dick Cheney’s campaign and funded GOP candidates across the country. Now he’s spending more than $200,000 to elect anti rent control San Francisco supervisors: Mark Ferrell in District 2, Theresa Sparks in District 6, Scott Wiener in District 8, and Steve Moss in District 10.

With this one donation, the stakes in this election for every San Franciscan — especially renters and progressives — became even higher. By spending his fortune here, Thomas Coates hopes to erode San Francisco’s strong rent control laws by electing supervisors who are less sympathetic to renters. Through influencing the election of the supervisors, he also influences the selection of the interim mayor (since the supervisors will choose the next mayor by a majority vote if Gavin Newsom is elected lieutenant governor), which would result in an anti rent control mayor.

To make matters worse, workers and their families are already on the defense fighting Jeff Adachi’s anti-labor ballot initiative proposal (Proposition B), which would make city workers pay huge increases in their health care coverage. Adachi is mischaracterizing his initiative as pension reform even though the bulk of the cuts will come from forcing low-wage workers to pay for their children’s health care.

Wall Street speculators crashed the stock market, causing workers’ pension funds to lose billions and wiping out retirement savings. The losses require local and state governments to spend more to keep the funds solvent. So who do Gov. Schwarzenegger, Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman, and Adachi blame? The victims: the workers.

Renters and city workers aren’t the only ones under attack. Newsom’s cynical sit/lie initiative (Proposition L) demonizes young homeless kids. Many of these youth are queers who ran away to San Francisco because it is a queer haven, and others are abused kids who left home because it wasn’t safe. If Prop. L passes, for 12 hours a day these kids will be criminalized if they sit or lie on the sidewalk.

All this in one of the most progressive cities in America? If we are under attack from conservatives in San Francisco on some of the most fundamental issues of our city, it’s no wonder the Tea Party is raging in the rest of the country.

Now more than ever we need labor, progressives, and renters to come together to fight back by voting Tuesday, Nov. 2. Harvey Milk once said, “Give ’em hope.” Show us that hope on Election Day by voting for progressive supervisors, rejecting Adachi’s so-called pension reform, and opposing the so-called sit/lie ordinance. Remember to vote and vote for Debra Walker in District 6, Rafael Mandelman in District 8, No on B, No on K, No on L, and Yes on J and N.

Gabriel Haaland is a local queer labor activist.