By Steven T. Jones
New information is still coming in on the breaking news that Ruby Rippey-Tourk got an extended paid leave from the city. I just spoke with Sam Singer, a spokesperson for the Tourks, who said that it was Alex Tourk who asked the city about getting paid compensation for his wife while she was in an alcohol and drug rehab center from May through July. At the time, he didn’t know that his wife had been having sexual relations with the mayor. “Several of her co-workers donated their sick time to Ruby during this time of personal crisis,” Singer said. According to the Controller’s Office, Rippey-Tourk’s final official day of employment was Sept. 1 and it was in September that she received a check for the leave that begun in May, initially as unpaid leave. Payroll records also show that Rippey-Tourk had 7.5 weeks of unpaid leave in 2005 — when her affair with Newsom reportedly took place — and that also appears to be more than she was entitled to. She received $80,195 in compensation in 2005, up from $63,522 the previous year, which was her first in the Newsom Administration.
Asked why Rippey-Tourk didn’t return to her good city job after leaving rehab in July, Singer said, “She just felt it was a chapter in her life that was over and she wanted to move on.” Asked whether Rippey-Tourk may have felt uncomfortable returning to work for a boss who had bedded her during a time when she was having problems with alcohol, Singer refused to comment. But Sup. Jake McGoldrick, who has called for Newsom’s resignation, called the entire episode unseemly and showing poor judgment by someone in a position of authority that Rippey-Tourk trusted. “I think he took advantage of someone who was in a very vulnerable position,” McGoldrick said.
Newsom has refused to answer questions about anything related to the affair. I’ve posed questions about this latest revelation to Newsom press secretary Peter Ragone and I’m awaiting a response.
Steven T. Jones
More on Tourk payments
More on Tourk payments
By Steven T. Jones
New information is still coming in on the breaking news that Ruby Rippey-Tourk got an extended paid leave from the city. I just spoke with Sam Singer, a spokesperson for the Tourks, who said that it was Alex Tourk who asked the city about getting paid compensation for his wife while she was in an alcohol and drug rehab center from May through July. At the time, he didn’t know that his wife had been having sexual relations with the mayor. “Several of her co-workers donated their sick time to Ruby during this time of personal crisis,” Singer said. According to the Controller’s Office, Rippey-Tourk’s final official day of employment was Sept. 1 and it was in September that she received a check for the leave that began in May, initially as unpaid leave. Payroll records also show that Rippey-Tourk had 7.5 weeks of unpaid leave in 2005 — when her affair with Newsom reportedly took place — and that also appears to be more than she was entitled to. She received $80,195 in compensation in 2005, up from $63,522 the previous year, which was her first in the Newsom Administration.
Asked why Rippey-Tourk didn’t return to her good city job after leaving rehab in July, Singer said, “She just felt it was a chapter in her life that was over and she wanted to move on.” Asked whether Rippey-Tourk may have felt uncomfortable returning to work for a boss who had bedded her during a time when she was having problems with alcohol, Singer refused to comment. But Sup. Jake McGoldrick, who has called for Newsom’s resignation, called the entire episode unseemly and showing poor judgment by someone in a position of authority that Rippey-Tourk trusted. “I think he took advantage of someone who was in a very vulnerable position,” McGoldrick said.
Newsom has refused to answer questions about anything related to the affair. I’ve posed questions about this latest revelation to Newsom press secretary Peter Ragone and I’m awaiting a response.
Newsom aide got paid
By Steven T. Jones
The Bay Guardian has learned that Ruby Rippey-Tourk, who left her job as Mayor Gavin Newsom’s appointments secretary last year after having a secret affair with the mayor, received $21,755 in paid leave last year for 534 hours of work that she didn’t do. That amounts to about 13.5 weeks of paid time off, well more than the 10 days vacation time and 13 days of sick leave to which she was entitled. There are provisions in city law whereby other employees may donate some of their vacation and sick time to fellow employees who go out on some form of medical leave, and Rippey-Tourk reportedly left her city job sometime before last May to enter treatment for substance abuse, although city officials may not comment on why an employee took leave for privacy reasons. But the arrangement raises questions about whether Newsom forced Rippey-Tourk from her job and/or pressured employees to give up their paid time off to help buy her silence, questions that Newsom and his administration have refused to address. In fact, they have never answered any questions about the affair or Newsom’s own substance problems from any media outlet. Newsom ignored Guardian questions on the subject earlier today and his spokesperson Jennifer Petrucione told us, “The mayor has spoken on this issue and he has said what’s he’s going to say.” The City Attorney’s Office has put out a statement on the matter, saying they can’t comment on the details for privacy reasons but, “With the full cooperation of the city officials involved, the City Attorney has already begun the process of reviewing the paid leave to Ms. Rippey-Tourk to assure that it was done properly under City laws and procedures.”
Newsom aide got paid
By Steven T. Jones
The Bay Guardian has learned that Ruby Rippey-Tourk, who left her job as Mayor Gavin Newsom’s appointments secretary last year after having a secret affair with the mayor, received $21,755 in paid leave last year for 534 hours of work that she didn’t do. That amounts to about 13.5 weeks of paid time off, well more than the 10 days vacation time and 13 days of sick leave to which she was entitled. There are provisions in city law whereby other employees may donate some of their vacation and sick time to fellow employees who go out on some form of medical leave, and Rippey-Tourk reportedly left her city job sometime before last May to enter treatment for substance abuse, although city officials may not comment on why an employee took leave for privacy reasons. But the arrangement raises questions about whether Newsom forced Rippey-Tourk from her job and/or pressured employees to give up their paid time off to help buy her silence, questions that Newsom and his administration have refused to address. In fact, they have never answered any questions about the affair or Newsom’s own substance problems from any media outlet. Newsom ignored Guardian questions on the subject earlier today and his spokesperson Jennifer Petrucione told us, “The mayor has spoken on this issue and he has said what’s he’s going to say.” The City Attorney’s Office has put out a statement on the matter, saying they can’t comment on the details for privacy reasons but, “With the full cooperation of the city officials involved, the City Attorney has already begun the process of reviewing the paid leave to Ms. Rippey-Tourk to assure that it was done properly under City laws and procedures.”
Return of Healthy Saturdays
By Steven T. Jones
The city’s long-awaited study of road closures in Golden Gate Park was released yesterday, offering clear evidence that closing JFK Drive to cars on weekends is extremely popular and has no significant negative impacts to attendance at the park’s museums, access by those with disabilities, or traffic congestion in the intersections around the park. Mayor Gavin Newsom last summer vetoed the Healthy Saturdays six-month trial closure after a deceptive opposition campaign that was waged by De Young Museum directors and advocates of unfettered automobile access to the park. At the time, Newsom pledged to study the issue and support it if there was empirical evidence supporting closure, which there now seems to be. Asked about the report today by the Guardian, Newsom said “I haven’t seen that” and ignored further questions on that and other topics. Newsom communications director Peter Ragone told us, “We’re in the process of digesting it and deciding how to move forward.”
Sup. Jake McGoldrick, who sponsored the legislation last spring, said he will reintroduce it at the board meeting this Tuesday and was confident that we’ll see Golden Gate Park partially closed to cars this summer. “It spells out a very positive picture,” McGoldrick told us. “Anecdotally, we knew all this, but now we have the empirical data laid out.”
Death of fun
By Steven T. Jones
We warned last summer that fun in San Francisco was being threatened by NIMBYs and overzealous bureaucrats. Well, now we’ve just seen the sourpusses strike down one of the best street fairs in San Francisco: the How Weird Street Faire, an open air dance party that drew about 8,000 attendees last year.
Based on complaints from 10 residents (who appear to have been whipped up by one particularly vocal opponent of the fair), the city’s Interdepartmental Staff Committee on Traffic and Transportation yesterday denied How Weird organizers their permits, effectively killing an event planned for May 6. Read next week’s Guardian for the details, as well as ways to make public your concerns about maintaining our vibrant urban culture.
Death of fun
By Steven T. Jones
We warned last summer that fun in San Francisco was being threatened by NIMBYs and overzealous bureaucrats. Well, now we’ve just seen the sourpusses strike down one of the best street fairs in San Francisco: the How Weird Street Faire, an open air dance party that drew about 8,000 attendees last year.
Based on complaints from 10 residents (who appear to have been whipped up by one particularly vocal opponent of the fair), the city’s Interdepartmental Staff Committee on Traffic and Transportation yesterday denied How Weird organizers their permits, effectively killing an event planned for May 6. Read next week’s Guardian for the details, as well as ways to make public your concerns about maintaining our vibrant urban culture.
Peter principle
By Steven T. Jones
How has Mayor Gavin Newsom reacted to his press secretary being exposed as a liar who then accuses Newsom of being a liar? By promoting him to the newly created “director of communications and planning.” Amazing. Simply amazing.
Back to being the Chron
By Steven T. Jones
Since breaking the Newsom affair story, the Chronicle has done little to further their story, content to fill the papers with boring reaction pieces. And now, they are apparently back to Newsom cheerleading with the front page story “Newsom’s reelection prospects look good,” in which they interview only Newsom backers to reach their entirely unsupported conclusion. And yes, this piece of garbage was the work of the paper’s most misleading political hack, Carla Marinucci (who hasn’t yet answered by e-mail with questions about the story).
Meanwhile, buried in the Chron but played a bit more prominently in the Examiner is the real news of the day: Newsom will pay Alex Tourk his promised salary of $15,000 per month out of his own pocket. That’s because of the questions about the legality of using regulated campaign money for such payoffs.
Question: If the guy who betrayed you and fucked your wife had to pay your salary until you found a new job, how much of a hurry would you be in to find one? Alex, you’ve been through a lot, it might be time for an extended vacation.
Don’t cry for Newsom
By Steven T. Jones
So the Examiner thinks we should all just back off of Mayor Gavin Newsom, in the process contradicting its own reporter’s story a few pages earlier on how brittle and unaccountable Newsom has been behaving. If the mayor had announced he was taking some time off to deal with his problems, then the Ex editorial might have a point. After all, Newsom clearly has some problems and it can’t be easy dealing with a pack of reporters who have questions that he’s not willing to answer. But Newsom wants to stay on the job, and that job is a difficult one that entails dealing with the media and the Board of Supervisors. Newsom refuses to answer legitimate questions, but its the job of journalists to keep asking them until he does, and the job of supervisors to help lead this city. While the Ex editorial got it embarrassingly wrong, the Chron editorial was right on. This mayor has an obligation to engage with supervisors and the media, and his scripted and controlled town hall meetings, like the one planned for this Saturday in Bayview, don’t count. We deserve an honest, engaged, and accountable mayor. He chose the job, and now he chose to remain in that job without taking any time off and to run for reelection. Newsom’s problems are of his own making, and he’s making them worse by behaving as if he deserves a free pass.
Into the void
By Steven T. Jones
Mayor Gavin Newsom has refused to take any questions about his affair or drinking problem — and we don’t intend to turn to his press secretary for answers anymore — so I called his campaign spokesperson Eric Jaye this afternoon to pose a couple questions and let him know that we expect to pose a few more directly to Newsom, whether or not he wants to answer them. Luckily, we’re patient and we buy our ink by the barrel, so we’re in no hurry.
Jaye said the reports that Alex Tourk is still being paid by the campaign (potentially a violation of campaign finance laws) is not accurate. And he said Ruby Tourk never received any payments either. “There have been no payments whatsoever to anyone (connected to the scandals) for anything. We won’t do anything until three attorneys sign off on it,” he told us. “We don’t want to compound an error in judgment by making a campaign finance error.” But Jaye did say the campaign feels an obligation to help Tourk make ends meet until he can find a new job, a task that he expects to have good legal advice on in the next day or two. “He’s a great guy who doesn’t deserve any of this…We don’t right now know how to pay him or if we can through the campaign.”
The other big question was how Newsom can expect to seriously deal with his alcohol and other personal problems while reengaging with his job as mayor and standing for reelection. No surprise that Jaye feels like Newsom is up to it, but he did say the campaign comes last on that list: “The priority is for Gavin Newsom to do what he has to do to be a better mayor and be a better person…In the scheme of things, the campaign comes after that.”
Does that mean that the campaign could get squeezed out once Newsom learns about what kind of program he’ll face at Delancey Street Foundation and if the job of being mayor is made all the tougher by his recent scandals and his handling of them? Might Newsom not run? Jaye categorically rejected the idea that Newsom might not run, noting that he might have less time to personally campaign, but the campaign will move forward anyway. “Absolutely he’s running to reelection and he’s going to run a successful campaign.”
The ick factor
By Steven T. Jones
There are lots of icky aspects to Mayor Newsom’s sex scandal, most not actually involving the sex which, lets face it, involved two hot young people. No, the icky parts deal with the betrayal of a close friend, the reckless disregard for his public responsibilities, and what it says about Newsom’s character. And for me, someone who first heard the rumors early last year, one of my big “what a jerk!” moments came last June when the mayor-appointed Taxi Commission sacked the mayor’s hand-picked director, Heidi Machen, and the Chron asked Newsom to comment on the embarrassing political gaffe. What did he do? He actually blamed Ruby Tourk, the appointments secretary who he had been sleeping with and who was off in rehab dealing with the aftermath of the affair and her substance abuse issues. What kind of person does that? Probably someone who needs more intensive counseling than it sounds like he intends to seek as he continues to run the city and run for reelection.
Smoove and Patricio bring the Love
By Steven T. Jones
Someone has posted a video on You Tube of DJs Smoove and Patricio (two rocking local DJs who also happen to be good friends of mine) dropping the bass at the Anon Salon float at last year’s Love Fest. Happy people, fun times, City Hall in the background…nice! Bonus points to readers who can find me in the clip.
Newsom’s other Peter problem
By Steven T. Jones
At the end of yesterday’s sex scandal whirlwind, I finally got a chance to talk with Newsom press secretary Peter Ragone about the scandal that got pushed aside by the larger scandal: Ragone being caught using pseudonyms in online posts and then lying to cover it up. Contrary to how this has been cast by the Chronicle and KCBS, Ragone has not truly owned up to what he did or shown any signs of wanting to restore his damaged credibility — something he’ll surely need as he tries to manage the other scandal and help Newsom re-engage with the public and the Board of Supervisors.
Newsom’s apology
By Steven T. Jones
There were lots of different ways that Gavin Newsom could have reacted to news that he was having sex with an at-will employee who was also married to his close friend and top adviser, but almost all of them involved an apology. Here’s what he chose to say this morning, in its entirety, followed by why I think he has fallen short and sown the seeds for dragging out this scandal longer than necessary:
“Thank you for coming here on such short notice. I want to make it clear that everything you’ve heard and read is true and I’m deeply sorry about that. I’ve hurt someone I care deeply about, Alex Tourk and his friends and family, and that is something I have to live with and something that I’m deeply sorry for. I am also sorry that I’ve let the people of San Francisco down. They expect a lot of their mayor and my personal lapse of judgment aside, I am committed to restoring their trust and confidence and will work very hard in the coming months to make sure the business of running this city is framed appropriately. I also want to extend a personal apology to everyone in our administration, to my staff who I just met with, to my friends and my family members. I am deeply sorry and I am accountable for what has occurred and have now begun the process of reconciling it and will now begin working aggressively to advance our agenda in this city and to work hard to build again the trust, to restore the trust, that the people of San Francisco have afforded me. I appreciate everyone taking the time to be here today. Thank you very much.”
No joy
By Steven T. Jones
Contrary to the demented hopes of conservative ideologues like the Examiner’s Ken Garcia, there is no joy on the left over the sordid sex scandal that has now engulfed Mayor Gavin Newsom. Sure, it opens up this year’s mayor’s race and illustrates some of the character flaws of Newsom’s administration, which have manifested themselves in how he conducts himself professionally, not just personally. But nobody’s happy to see this, not the Guardian (which has also heard these rumors for the last six months but couldn’t confirm the story enough to print it) nor the politicians and activists on the left. Several of them happened to be gathered last night when the news hit, and I can tell you there was no glee in that room. Sup. Chris Daly’s public comments have been respectful and reserved and in private, he genuinely felt bad for Alex Tourk. Everybody did. Matt Gonzalez, who has been rumored to be considering a run for mayor, spent more time considering how this incident places City Hall in a bad light and in legal jeopardy than he did calculating his own prospects. And my sweetie Alix Rosenthal, who is president of the National Women’s Political Caucus, and the other women in the room are bracing for attempts to inappropriately delve into Ruby Tourk’s private life and are ready to fight back if Newsom’s people or their proxies go that route.
In the coming days or weeks, after the shock of this wears off and it becomes acceptable to make jokes or calculate its political implications, we’ll rejoin the battle for this city’s soul and actively try to help point the way forward from here. But today, we’re all just shaking our heads.
More fallout?
By Steven T. Jones
Now comes word that Alex Tourk has resigned as the campaign manager for Newsom’s reelection. For “personal reasons.” Yeah right. Does this have something to do with Newsom standing by Ragone, again, just as he did when he let his old chief of staff Steve Kawa resign after a power struggle with Ragone? Or was it something that happened while Newsom was in the Swiss Alps? Or maybe it was actually “personal reasons” associated with some nasty and persistent rumors that have floated through City Hall? Who knows? Whatever it was, we’ll all probably have to find out for ourselves rather than count on Newsom’s people for the straight scoop.
Ragone comes clean? Not yet.
By Steven T. Jones
According to KCBS radio, mayoral flack Peter Ragone has finally admitted to both posting on SFist and other blogs under a false name and lying to reporters about the existence of his imaginary friend, John Nelson. Newsom, who just returned from 10 days in Switzerland, reportedly expressed his displeasure with Ragone, but downplayed the incident.
Apparently, both men think that’s the end of this, but it isn’t. I had an appointment with Ragone scheduled for 4 p.m. today, but he has pushed that back to tomorrow. I’ll be curious what he has to say, and what “lessons” he’s learned, as he obliquely told the Chron. He directly lied to me and other journalists, a lie that KGO-TV broadcast the other night. Ragone needs to issue a public apology, he needs to directly apologize to me and others, then he needs to explain how the incident and other recent offenses have changed him and what he intends to do to restore his damaged credibility. Until he does that, none of us should believe anything that we hear from the Mayor’s Office.
SockPuppetGate redux
By Steven T. Jones
SFist has a nice wrap-up on the fallout from its outing of Newsom flack Peter Ragone as a liar, but the Chron’s Matier & Ross not only buried the story halfway through today’s column, they also missed the point. Ragone didn’t just get his “hand caught in the cookie jar” by pretending to be someone he’s not online — he appeared to have told journalists and the public direct and bald-faced lies to cover up what he did, a sin for which he still hasn’t come clean.
That was the focus of the resolution Board of Supervisors president Aaron Peskin proposed during yesterday’s meeting, which calls for all public information officers on the city’s payroll to abide by ethical standards accepted by the public relations industry, including honesty. After all, these people work for us. We pay their salaries, not Gavin Newsom, and we don’t pay them to subvert the public interest in honest, open government. Kudos to Peskin for trying to take the high road on this sordid incident.
Peter’s principles (or lack thereof)
By Steven T. Jones
Before hitting the latest news of ethics problems in the mayor’s office, and the brilliant segment that KGO-TV’s dogged investigative reporter Dan Noyes has done to highlight them, it’s important to offer some context and perspective.
Mayor Gavin Newsom imported veteran Democrat Party flack Peter Ragone to be his press secretary upon taking office three years ago. Ragone didn’t really know San Francisco that well, but he seemed to understand the national political landscape and therefore became a trusted adviser to our ambitious mayor. The gay marriage move was brilliant, shoring up Newsom’s support in the city’s queer community and positioning him as a civil rights leader for future campaigns.
Yet along the way, Ragone seemed to forget that Newsom was the mayor of San Francisco at a time when progressives controlled the Board of Supervisors and couldn’t simply be dismissed. Over and over, Ragone spun stories to reporters about the incompetence and/or malevolence of progressives or other critics of the mayor — often attacking or belittling the journalists when they expressed skepticism — until he had very little credibility left with any of us (something I say as someone who regularly talks with journalists from all the other major news outlets in town).
So when the SFist discovered that some posters to their site were actually coming from Ragone’s computer, and Ragone avoided answering questions about it and opted to instead claim on the site that allegedly pseudonymous John Nelson was a real person, his best friend actually, who often stayed at Ragone’s house during the early morning and late night hours when he posted — most people simply assumed Ragone was lying.
I wanted to give Ragone the benefit of the doubt and asked whether I could meet John or otherwise get some verification for his existence. Ragone said no, and said, “I don’t think I’d like to see my friends and family put through the wringer of San Francisco politics.”
Virtual Newsom
By Steven T. Jones
Mayor Gavin Newsom may be unwilling to appear in person before the Board of Supervisors, but he’s using his trip to the World Economic Forum to reach out to citizens of the virtual world Second Life. The cyber-Gavin gave a long but not terribly illuminating interview, although he did joke that we now have a virtual mayor “just in case the public gets fed up with the real me.” I listened for some of the “new ideas” he claimed he would bring back from the Swiss Alps, but instead it sounded like he developed some new sympathies for poor, misunderstood corporate titans, such as the oil executive who wants to save the world for his children. How touching.
Will the real Peter Ragone please stand up?
By Steven T. Jones
The scrappy political blog SFist has consistently, insightfully, and with an infectious sense of voyeuristic glee been dogging Mayor Gavin Newsom and his many missteps of the last year, becoming a go-to site for local political junkies. As such, Newsom’s prickly press secretary Peter Ragone and a few other Gavin supporters have taken to posting comments defending their guy.
Well, now it seems the SFist has caught Ragone apparently pretending to be a John Nelson, posting comments slamming SFist and slobbering all over Newsom. Like the SFist, I called Ragone’s numbers trying to get a comment and/or confirmation, but was unsuccessful.
What the hell is going on in the mayor’s office? Has their bunker mentality completely overwhelmed their sense of ethics, accountability to the public, and service to the city? Personally, I’m going to redouble my efforts to dog the mayor and put some hard questions to him — as soon as he gets back from skiing in Switzerland with his girlfriend.