Sarah Phelan over at the SF Bay Guardian sure things so.
Read more at SFBG...
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Monday, August 30, 2010
Tough Questions - Candidates please reply
Candidates, this two-part question comes from a resident in the Silver Terrace neighborhood:
"Please give the name of a prominent person or organization who has contributed to your campaign, either financially or through endorsement. What do you tell us to make us confident that you will represent the interests of the voters if our interests happen to conflict with those of said prominent contributor, particularly if said prominent person or organization has in fact contributed to your campaign solely because they want to personally gain from your position as supervisor?"
"Please give the name of a prominent person or organization who has contributed to your campaign, either financially or through endorsement. What do you tell us to make us confident that you will represent the interests of the voters if our interests happen to conflict with those of said prominent contributor, particularly if said prominent person or organization has in fact contributed to your campaign solely because they want to personally gain from your position as supervisor?"
SF Bike Coalition Candidate Questionnaires
Candidates who responded to the questionnaire have a link to a page with their questionnaire response.
* Isaac Bowers
* Kristine Enea
* MjMarie Franklin
* Chris Jackson
* Tony Kelly
* DeWitt M. Lacy
* Steve Moss
* Jacqueline Norman
* Eric Smith
* Lynette Sweet
* Isaac Bowers
* Kristine Enea
* MjMarie Franklin
* Chris Jackson
* Tony Kelly
* DeWitt M. Lacy
* Steve Moss
* Jacqueline Norman
* Eric Smith
* Lynette Sweet
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Something smelly in the D10 race to get Matier and Ross airing
Fog City Journal
A prominent candidate in the race for District 10 Supervisor may soon be heading for the exit signs. That all depends on the veracity of a recent rumor suggesting the candidate in question is a tax dodger, a candidate some downtowners are supporting. Keep an eye out for Phil Matier and Andy Ross’ column. The scoop de la scoop duo are expected to expose all the details this week.
A prominent candidate in the race for District 10 Supervisor may soon be heading for the exit signs. That all depends on the veracity of a recent rumor suggesting the candidate in question is a tax dodger, a candidate some downtowners are supporting. Keep an eye out for Phil Matier and Andy Ross’ column. The scoop de la scoop duo are expected to expose all the details this week.
Saturday, August 28, 2010
DCCC Candidate Questionnaires
A good way to find out how the candidates feel about the issues that are important to all of us (some of these links may not work - the DCCC's own site is a little messed up, so I'll try to get them to fix their site so that we can see all of these).
Candidate Questionnaires for School Board and District 10 Supervisorial Candidates
Endorsements will be made on Wednesday, September 8th, 2010 at Unite Here Local 2, 5:30pm
Isaac Bowers
James Calloway
Malia Cohen
Kristine Enea
Chris Jackson
Tony Kelly
DeWitt Lacy
Steve Moss
Eric Smith
Lynette Sweet
Candidate Questionnaires for School Board and District 10 Supervisorial Candidates
Endorsements will be made on Wednesday, September 8th, 2010 at Unite Here Local 2, 5:30pm
Isaac Bowers
James Calloway
Malia Cohen
Kristine Enea
Chris Jackson
Tony Kelly
DeWitt Lacy
Steve Moss
Eric Smith
Lynette Sweet
Election Rules - Candidates, please make sure your supporters know the rules!
I was talking to one of the candidates for D10 Supervisor recently, and was told that it has been noticed that some candidates' supporters have been taking down signs of other candidates. Not cool, people, and quite probably, not legal.
Candidates, please make sure that your folks know the rules, and please try to make sure that they stick to the rules. We're a community here, and we not only don't want our neighbors to be asked to do, be congratulated for, or be condoned for something that is electorally unethical, but we absolutely want our next Supervisor to show us that they are someone who won't put up with those kinds of shenanigans.
Many of the businesses around D10 have voluntarily put up candidate signs, so if you're having a meeting in one of those businesses that has a sign for another candidate, ask if you can also put up a sign, but don't be so childish as to take down someone else's.
Also, electoral signage placement has a lot of rules and regulations surrounding it, too. We've all seen lots of signs up in store fronts, on abandoned businesses, and elsewhere. There's a 70-day window in which these signs are legally allowed to be up, they have to be a very specific size, and can only be in commercial corridors. Candidates, if your signs don't meet the legally mandated criteria, you may want to rethink keeping them up.
OK, that's all from today's soapbox.
Candidates, please make sure that your folks know the rules, and please try to make sure that they stick to the rules. We're a community here, and we not only don't want our neighbors to be asked to do, be congratulated for, or be condoned for something that is electorally unethical, but we absolutely want our next Supervisor to show us that they are someone who won't put up with those kinds of shenanigans.
Many of the businesses around D10 have voluntarily put up candidate signs, so if you're having a meeting in one of those businesses that has a sign for another candidate, ask if you can also put up a sign, but don't be so childish as to take down someone else's.
Also, electoral signage placement has a lot of rules and regulations surrounding it, too. We've all seen lots of signs up in store fronts, on abandoned businesses, and elsewhere. There's a 70-day window in which these signs are legally allowed to be up, they have to be a very specific size, and can only be in commercial corridors. Candidates, if your signs don't meet the legally mandated criteria, you may want to rethink keeping them up.
OK, that's all from today's soapbox.
Friday, August 27, 2010
Candidate Events?
To all the candidates for D10 Supervisor - if you're planning an event for your supporters, for people who want to meet you to find out more about you, or if you'll be spotted at a particular D10 location where someone can buy you a coffee and grab your ear for a few minutes, please post in the comments section!
# Malia Cohen - Office Grand Opening 08/28/10 10AM – Noon @ 570 Barneveld Ave
# Kristine Enea - Office Grand Opening 08/28/10 9:30AM - 11AM @ 3801 Third Street
# Lynette Sweet - Office Grand Opening 08/28/10 11AM - 2PM @ 1599 Revere Ave
# Malia Cohen - Office Grand Opening 08/28/10 10AM – Noon @ 570 Barneveld Ave
# Kristine Enea - Office Grand Opening 08/28/10 9:30AM - 11AM @ 3801 Third Street
# Lynette Sweet - Office Grand Opening 08/28/10 11AM - 2PM @ 1599 Revere Ave
Record Number of Home Foreclosures in Bayview-Hunter's Point - SFNewsfeed.us
SAN FRANCISCO (8/25)- Bayview, Hunters' Point -- A thriving blue-collar district of San Francisco, with some of the best weather, tastiest restaurants and absolutely stunning views. Who can afford to live there? Not many.
Keep reading at SFNewsfeed.us on Facebook...
Keep reading at SFNewsfeed.us on Facebook...
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
D10 Meet and Greet at Velma's
Last night's D10 Meet and Greet at Velma's Jazz Club, hosted by The Concerned Citizens of the Southeast Sector of San Francisco, was a good opportunity to get to meet all the candidates, as one of the people in that room last night will be our next Supervisor.
For video of the event, click here. For another blog entry on the night, go to San Francisco FYI.
Leah Pimentel did a great job of moderating the event, and Velma Landers and her team were wonderful hosts, with food from Jordan's House of Ribs (4004 3rd St at Hudson), Auntie April's (4618 3rd St at McKinnon), and La Laguna (3906 3rd St at Fairfax) served up by local youth from the Old Skool Café, who also performed a powerful spoken-word piece at the end of the evening's program.
Most candidates were present, with notable exceptions being Dianne Wesley-Smith, Nyese Joshua, and Malia Cohen. Not sure why they didn't show, especially since Ms Wesley-Smith and Ms Joshua had both so vociferously disrupted the last meeting complaining that they weren't included, but I hope they're all OK and look forward to seeing all who missed this event at the next one.
After eating, meeting, and greeting, candidates were asked to speak for three minutes to outline their platform and to tell us what they wanted their legacy to be if elected, two tasks that not every candidate was able to completely accomplish.
Some candidates were able to distill down their major accomplishments, and to talk specifically about the people they'd met in the community and how they planned to help them/us. A couple of the candidates have done really great things for our community, and those who have, stood out above the rest. Some candidates attempted to inflate their resumes by claiming successes that were not entirely, or even necessarily, of their own doing. This is a reminder that we, the voters, need to do our homework and call these candidates out on their purported accomplishments. Proximity to good fortune does not mean that they're the one responsible for it.
I'd like to take a moment to make a personal comment on a theme in a couple of candidates speeches, and one that was brought up at the debate a few weeks ago as well. I truly hope that this doesn't get me into too much hot water, but a couple of candidates have mentioned their race and that of other candidates as being a factor in their ability to represent the district. Yes, D10 has a great if turbulent African American history, and yes, according to California Urban Issue Project stats, 1/3 of the city's Blacks live in D10. However, our diverse district is currently only 28% Black. The rest: 18% Latino; 21% White; and 33% Asian. No matter who gets elected, our Supervisor is going to be of a different racial background than at least 2/3 of the district. So for a candidate to say that because they're of one race and not another means they 'look like a D10 voter' is ludicrous. ALL the candidates look like D10 voters, no matter their race. I hope most of us would agree that candidates should stop using race as some kind of metric by which we, the voters, should judge them. We want a supervisor who can bring the most jobs, the safest streets, the best
schools, the greatest opportunities, and the smartest development to D10 that will benefit all of us. Their race has nothing to do with their ability to do these things, and I hope that the candidates abandon their racial line of reasoning in seeking our votes.
Looking forward to the next debate and/or event.
For a humorous take on the meeting, check out Beth Spotswood's blog
For video of the event, click here. For another blog entry on the night, go to San Francisco FYI.
Leah Pimentel did a great job of moderating the event, and Velma Landers and her team were wonderful hosts, with food from Jordan's House of Ribs (4004 3rd St at Hudson), Auntie April's (4618 3rd St at McKinnon), and La Laguna (3906 3rd St at Fairfax) served up by local youth from the Old Skool Café, who also performed a powerful spoken-word piece at the end of the evening's program.
Most candidates were present, with notable exceptions being Dianne Wesley-Smith, Nyese Joshua, and Malia Cohen. Not sure why they didn't show, especially since Ms Wesley-Smith and Ms Joshua had both so vociferously disrupted the last meeting complaining that they weren't included, but I hope they're all OK and look forward to seeing all who missed this event at the next one.
After eating, meeting, and greeting, candidates were asked to speak for three minutes to outline their platform and to tell us what they wanted their legacy to be if elected, two tasks that not every candidate was able to completely accomplish.
Some candidates were able to distill down their major accomplishments, and to talk specifically about the people they'd met in the community and how they planned to help them/us. A couple of the candidates have done really great things for our community, and those who have, stood out above the rest. Some candidates attempted to inflate their resumes by claiming successes that were not entirely, or even necessarily, of their own doing. This is a reminder that we, the voters, need to do our homework and call these candidates out on their purported accomplishments. Proximity to good fortune does not mean that they're the one responsible for it.
I'd like to take a moment to make a personal comment on a theme in a couple of candidates speeches, and one that was brought up at the debate a few weeks ago as well. I truly hope that this doesn't get me into too much hot water, but a couple of candidates have mentioned their race and that of other candidates as being a factor in their ability to represent the district. Yes, D10 has a great if turbulent African American history, and yes, according to California Urban Issue Project stats, 1/3 of the city's Blacks live in D10. However, our diverse district is currently only 28% Black. The rest: 18% Latino; 21% White; and 33% Asian. No matter who gets elected, our Supervisor is going to be of a different racial background than at least 2/3 of the district. So for a candidate to say that because they're of one race and not another means they 'look like a D10 voter' is ludicrous. ALL the candidates look like D10 voters, no matter their race. I hope most of us would agree that candidates should stop using race as some kind of metric by which we, the voters, should judge them. We want a supervisor who can bring the most jobs, the safest streets, the best
schools, the greatest opportunities, and the smartest development to D10 that will benefit all of us. Their race has nothing to do with their ability to do these things, and I hope that the candidates abandon their racial line of reasoning in seeking our votes.
Looking forward to the next debate and/or event.
For a humorous take on the meeting, check out Beth Spotswood's blog
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
D10 SE Comunity Center Candidate's Debate
Last night's nine-candidate debate at 1800 Oakdale was exciting!
Nine candidates were selected from those who'd returned a questionnaire to the Young Democrats who hosted. Candidates were selected by committee vote, which didn't sit well with some candidates not invited.
The format of the debates led to some fireworks. The questions were not always easy, either. The first round saw one question go to three candidates, then another question to the next three, and so on until everyone had answered two questions.
This was followed by a lightening round, in which candidates had ten seconds to name a city supervisor-passed law from the past year that they would not have voted for. This showed us who'd been paying attention to the workings of city hall, and who'd simply been out campaigning. Enea, Jackson, Bowers, Smith, Kelly, and Moss all came up with a city-passed law they disagreed with and answered the question. Sweet and Lacy tried to get around the question by mentioning state laws they disagreed with, but weren't let off the hook by the moderator, and came up empty in the end. The rest said they liked all the laws passed this year, and wouldn't have voted against any of them.
Some candidates were prepared with specific examples of what they'd done already and had specific plans of what they'd do as our Supe, while others stumbled to fill their 60 second answer with anything substantive. Some awkwardness ensued in the second part of the debate where one candidate had to ask another something. For instance, Enea asked Cohen a reasonable Hunters Point policy question, and got nothing more than a, "As Supervisor, I'll continue your PAC work," answer.
In another exchange, Smith asked Kelly how Kelly felt that he, as a white man, was qualified to represent D10. This was one of the few times that the crowd reacted negatively to a question. With a very even racial mix throughout D10, something Steve Moss pointed out in answering one of his later questions, no one candidate is ever going to racially match 3/4 of the people they represent.
Some candidates - Bowers and Lacy among them, suggested opening up the port as a way to stimulate out local economy immediately. Moss suggested funding replacement of old refrigerators in 30000 if the city's rental units as a way to create jobs. Enea suggested bringing police and community members together to get to know one another, especially with the number of new officers we have on our streets.
These are just a few of the things that come to mind in recalling last night. I think the winners of the night know who they are, and those who performed badly, for whatever reason, need to prepare better, figure out some answers to the tough questions, or else get out of the race. Some candidates showed their abilities to work alongside others, while others clearly showed they weren't ready for primetime and were running on name-recognition alone.
One of the candidates not invited made her presence known by disrupting an otherwise polite debate. Not the way to endear oneself to the crowd, I'm afraid. With 20+ candidates, it simply would have been impossible to have had them all up there.
I think the next event is at Velma's on August 24th. Velma's - one of D10's great night spots.
This was a great and tough debate, and I strongly encourage participation in future events to get to know the candidate who speaks to you. If anyone else out there has thoughts on last night's meeting, please add your thoughts or even give a different perspective to what I've recalled.
The best way to get a full sense of these meetings is to come and listen for yourself!!
Nine candidates were selected from those who'd returned a questionnaire to the Young Democrats who hosted. Candidates were selected by committee vote, which didn't sit well with some candidates not invited.
The format of the debates led to some fireworks. The questions were not always easy, either. The first round saw one question go to three candidates, then another question to the next three, and so on until everyone had answered two questions.
This was followed by a lightening round, in which candidates had ten seconds to name a city supervisor-passed law from the past year that they would not have voted for. This showed us who'd been paying attention to the workings of city hall, and who'd simply been out campaigning. Enea, Jackson, Bowers, Smith, Kelly, and Moss all came up with a city-passed law they disagreed with and answered the question. Sweet and Lacy tried to get around the question by mentioning state laws they disagreed with, but weren't let off the hook by the moderator, and came up empty in the end. The rest said they liked all the laws passed this year, and wouldn't have voted against any of them.
Some candidates were prepared with specific examples of what they'd done already and had specific plans of what they'd do as our Supe, while others stumbled to fill their 60 second answer with anything substantive. Some awkwardness ensued in the second part of the debate where one candidate had to ask another something. For instance, Enea asked Cohen a reasonable Hunters Point policy question, and got nothing more than a, "As Supervisor, I'll continue your PAC work," answer.
In another exchange, Smith asked Kelly how Kelly felt that he, as a white man, was qualified to represent D10. This was one of the few times that the crowd reacted negatively to a question. With a very even racial mix throughout D10, something Steve Moss pointed out in answering one of his later questions, no one candidate is ever going to racially match 3/4 of the people they represent.
Some candidates - Bowers and Lacy among them, suggested opening up the port as a way to stimulate out local economy immediately. Moss suggested funding replacement of old refrigerators in 30000 if the city's rental units as a way to create jobs. Enea suggested bringing police and community members together to get to know one another, especially with the number of new officers we have on our streets.
These are just a few of the things that come to mind in recalling last night. I think the winners of the night know who they are, and those who performed badly, for whatever reason, need to prepare better, figure out some answers to the tough questions, or else get out of the race. Some candidates showed their abilities to work alongside others, while others clearly showed they weren't ready for primetime and were running on name-recognition alone.
One of the candidates not invited made her presence known by disrupting an otherwise polite debate. Not the way to endear oneself to the crowd, I'm afraid. With 20+ candidates, it simply would have been impossible to have had them all up there.
I think the next event is at Velma's on August 24th. Velma's - one of D10's great night spots.
This was a great and tough debate, and I strongly encourage participation in future events to get to know the candidate who speaks to you. If anyone else out there has thoughts on last night's meeting, please add your thoughts or even give a different perspective to what I've recalled.
The best way to get a full sense of these meetings is to come and listen for yourself!!
Monday, August 9, 2010
D10 Candidates Split on Lenar Plan - SFBG
D10 Candidates Split on Lenar Plan
San Francisco Bay Guardian, by Sarah Phelan
One of the key questions at the Potrero Hill Democratic Club’s forum for D. 10 candidates revolved around Lennar’s Candlestick Point-Hunter’s Point Shipyard redevelopment plan.
Keep reading...
San Francisco Bay Guardian, by Sarah Phelan
One of the key questions at the Potrero Hill Democratic Club’s forum for D. 10 candidates revolved around Lennar’s Candlestick Point-Hunter’s Point Shipyard redevelopment plan.
Keep reading...
Saturday, August 7, 2010
Friday, August 6, 2010
Adachi’s pension reform and the D. 10 candidates - SFBG
San Francisco Bay Guardian, by Sarah Phelan
As pretty much everyone knows by now, Jeff Adachi collected enough signatures to place a charter amendment on the November ballot that would reform the city’s retirement and health benefits plan. His amendment has become such a hot political topic that the Potrero Hill Democractic Club asked the 15 candidates who spoke at the club’s August 2 and 3 District 10 forums what they thought of Adachi’s “smart reform."
Keep reading...
As pretty much everyone knows by now, Jeff Adachi collected enough signatures to place a charter amendment on the November ballot that would reform the city’s retirement and health benefits plan. His amendment has become such a hot political topic that the Potrero Hill Democractic Club asked the 15 candidates who spoke at the club’s August 2 and 3 District 10 forums what they thought of Adachi’s “smart reform."
Keep reading...
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Potrero Hill Democratic Club - D10 Supervisor Forum
From San Francisco FYI net:
On Monday, August 2nd and Tuesday, August 3rd I had the honor of attending 2010 District 10 Supervisor Candidate Forum sponsored by the Potrero Hill Democratic Club.
It was sort of like "Ground Hog's Day"- same place, same time, same people - different candidates.
Keep reading...
On Monday, August 2nd and Tuesday, August 3rd I had the honor of attending 2010 District 10 Supervisor Candidate Forum sponsored by the Potrero Hill Democratic Club.
It was sort of like "Ground Hog's Day"- same place, same time, same people - different candidates.
Keep reading...
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Filing fees and public financing as clues to 2010 supervisor races - SFBG
08/03/10 - San Francisco Bay Guardian
by Sarah Phelan
For months now--and in a few cases, over a year- a bunch of dedicated residents have been campaigning in the hopes of becoming the next supervisor in districts 2,4,6,8 and 10. But now comes the moment of truth:
Between July 12 and August 6, all these potential candidates must file all necessary paperwork and pay all necessary fees to qualify for the November ballot.
And, provided they get enough signatures, they can submit a petition in which each signature represents 50 cents towards offsetting their $500 candidate-filing fee.
These signatures are called signatures-in-lieu (or SIL) and they provide an interesting data point if you are trying to figure out who has community support and/or money.
A spokesperson for the San Francisco Elections Department recently told me that the point of the signature-in-lieu petition is to allow anyone to get on the ballot, regardless of their financial circumstances—provided they have valid support.
“If they were to collect, let’s say, 1,000 valid signatures, then that totally offsets their candidate filing fee,” the Elections spokesperson said. “But if they go over 1,000 signatures, they don’t get extra money back.”
And, as of July 26, Elections started to look at candidates’ SIL petitions to get an idea of who will owe what come Friday, when the filing fees are due. This is done by figuring out of the signatures are valid or not. To be valid, a signature must come from a person who resides in the geographical area that is covered by the race.
In D. 10, none of the candidates has so far succeeded in qualifying for a complete waiver, which is an interesting statistic in a race that remains wide open at this point.
But Steve Moss came close (1097 sigs submitted, 955 are valid). Chris Jackson came fairly close (904 submitted, 802 valid), Marlene Tran got half way (718 submitted, 574 valid) as did Lynette Sweet (509 submitted, 479 valid), and Malia Cohen secured a third of needed sigs to waive the fee (504 submitted, 338 valid).
Fellow D. 10 candidate Tony Kelly told me that he decided not to concentrate his energies on signature-in-lieu gathering, based on on-the-ground intel that Jackson and Moss had already done a thorough job of knocking on doors and asking for folks’ sigs.
Kelly said he’s focusing his efforts on qualifying for increasing levels of public financing. And so far, Kelly is one of eight candidates in D. 10, who have either qualified or are under review for public financing, making D. 10 the top public financing district, citywide, with $233,065 distributed, as of July 30.
Leading the D. 10 public financing pack is Malia Cohen with $53,671 in public funds disbursed. She is followed by Moss ($53,284) and Jackson ($50,220). Kelly is in fourth place ($39,548), Kristine Enea is in fifth ($26,342), DeWitt Lacy is sixth—and Lynette Sweet and Eric Smith’s public funds applications are still under review.
by Sarah Phelan
For months now--and in a few cases, over a year- a bunch of dedicated residents have been campaigning in the hopes of becoming the next supervisor in districts 2,4,6,8 and 10. But now comes the moment of truth:
Between July 12 and August 6, all these potential candidates must file all necessary paperwork and pay all necessary fees to qualify for the November ballot.
And, provided they get enough signatures, they can submit a petition in which each signature represents 50 cents towards offsetting their $500 candidate-filing fee.
These signatures are called signatures-in-lieu (or SIL) and they provide an interesting data point if you are trying to figure out who has community support and/or money.
A spokesperson for the San Francisco Elections Department recently told me that the point of the signature-in-lieu petition is to allow anyone to get on the ballot, regardless of their financial circumstances—provided they have valid support.
“If they were to collect, let’s say, 1,000 valid signatures, then that totally offsets their candidate filing fee,” the Elections spokesperson said. “But if they go over 1,000 signatures, they don’t get extra money back.”
And, as of July 26, Elections started to look at candidates’ SIL petitions to get an idea of who will owe what come Friday, when the filing fees are due. This is done by figuring out of the signatures are valid or not. To be valid, a signature must come from a person who resides in the geographical area that is covered by the race.
In D. 10, none of the candidates has so far succeeded in qualifying for a complete waiver, which is an interesting statistic in a race that remains wide open at this point.
But Steve Moss came close (1097 sigs submitted, 955 are valid). Chris Jackson came fairly close (904 submitted, 802 valid), Marlene Tran got half way (718 submitted, 574 valid) as did Lynette Sweet (509 submitted, 479 valid), and Malia Cohen secured a third of needed sigs to waive the fee (504 submitted, 338 valid).
Fellow D. 10 candidate Tony Kelly told me that he decided not to concentrate his energies on signature-in-lieu gathering, based on on-the-ground intel that Jackson and Moss had already done a thorough job of knocking on doors and asking for folks’ sigs.
Kelly said he’s focusing his efforts on qualifying for increasing levels of public financing. And so far, Kelly is one of eight candidates in D. 10, who have either qualified or are under review for public financing, making D. 10 the top public financing district, citywide, with $233,065 distributed, as of July 30.
Leading the D. 10 public financing pack is Malia Cohen with $53,671 in public funds disbursed. She is followed by Moss ($53,284) and Jackson ($50,220). Kelly is in fourth place ($39,548), Kristine Enea is in fifth ($26,342), DeWitt Lacy is sixth—and Lynette Sweet and Eric Smith’s public funds applications are still under review.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)