Sponsored link
Tuesday, September 28, 2021

Sponsored link

News + PoliticsPeskin event sets stage for epic D3 battle

Peskin event sets stage for epic D3 battle

Packed room shows unhappiness with the mayor’s agenda

Peskin addresses the crowd. Photo by Stewart Bloom
Peskin addresses the crowd. Photo by Stewart Bloom

By Tim Redmond

MAY 20, 2015 – The room was packed, and it seemed as if most of progressive San Francisco was on hand as former Sup. Aaron Peskin formally kicked off his campaign for District Three supervisor last night.

There were union leaders, environmental leaders, Sups.  David Campos and John Avalos, former Assemblymember Tom Ammiano, Community College Board President Rafael Mandelman … and from the energy in the room, you got a sense that there’s a deep unhappiness with the direction of Ed Lee’s San Francisco.

There are political events where the candidate talks about how great he or she is, and Peskin did a little of that, relating his accomplishments as a neighborhood activist, two-term supervisor and chair of the local Democratic Party.

And many of the people at Bitters, Bock & Rye had fond memories of Sup. Peskin, and support his political future.

But overall, the people I talked to were thinking bigger, thinking about the crisis that is San Francisco today, and looking at Peskin as a strong alternative to the Lee Administration and its agenda.

Sandra Lee Fewer gets the crowd fired up. Photo by Stewart Bloom
Sandra Lee Fewer gets the crowd fired up

Sandra Lee Fewer, a member of the SF School Board, talked about the pressures on Chinatown and the housing crisis, and announced: “I am throwing down for Aaron Peskin.”

“This November is when we put a stick in the ground — or when we say, what have we done?” she noted.

She made a veiled reference to the tech crowd taking over the neighborhoods when she said that San Franciscans “can eat a great burrito, but we also have to care about the people who make the burritos.”

Ammiano, who first recruited Peskin to run in 2000, is helping him 15 years later. Photo by Stewart Bloom
Ammiano, who first recruited Peskin to run in 2000, is helping him 15 years later

Ammiano said that the city now has “a basically Republican board.”

Then Peskin took the mic, and talked about the lack of affordability in the city, the huge numbers of evictions, and the overall sense that the San Francisco many of us have come to love is in a state of free fall. “Like the fires that ravaged this city 100 years ago … it is burning out of control,” he said.

“It’s not about getting me back in City Hall. It’s about getting you back in City Hall.”

I haven’t seen much of a grassroots effort for incumbent Julie Christensen. But she’s already raising tons of money from the mayor’s friends and allies – and I can guarantee that Ron Conway will create an independent expenditure committee to attack Peskin.

So this single district race, in which fewer than ten percent of San Francisco voters will have a change to cast ballots, will be a test of the popularity and agenda of a mayor who has no strong opposition – but whose agenda and positions on issues are making a growing segment of the city unhappy.

Which is why money and energy from across this town will be focused on District Three in November.

Tim Redmond
Tim Redmond has been a political and investigative reporter in San Francisco for more than 30 years. He spent much of that time as executive editor of the Bay Guardian. He is the founder of 48hills.
Sponsored link

154 COMMENTS

  1. And as long as the NIMBY left has its say, SF will continue to be increasingly unaffordable. Don’t build anything, get higher housing prices. Its simple. If you can do math. Tim can’t.

  2. Mr Redmond – If you are so opposed to the sitting Mayor, why not interview the few brave souls who’ve stood up to challenge his agenda? Change can’t happen with scorched-earth, winner-take-all thinking. Grassroots can only be cultivated by educating and inspiring people to action.
    For Lee’s challengers, it’s exactly that; not just winning, rather sunshining the facts and creating an informed public conversation about his tenure. A crucial element of doing that is the media, including 48 Hills. One of the challengers, Amy Farah-Weiss ‘Yimby for Mayor’ has asked you to give her a platform amongst progressives and you’ve refused. Is that progressive? Is that constructive action for your purported beliefs? No it’s squandering your leverage to make positive change and is, in effect, censorship.
    I dare you to step up and invite her and other challengers to make their case.

  3. I dont see how anyone who flies out of SF nationally can ever vote for Peskin. Peskin singlehandedly killed the plan to expand runways at SFO so we dont have multihour delays every time there is the slightest hint of fog.
    This is just another example of his single ability – to block things. literally tens of thousands of air travellers are impacted every year by his decision.

  4. “Why do you hate the San Francisco electorate?”

    Hate is your word.

    I think I suggested why I’m disgusted with many measures put on the ballot, and approved, yes, by the voters. Its about spending other peoples money. If the voters, say when they approved a parcel tax, had to actually pay a portion of that which they voted for – and then continued to vote for it, my disgust would be allayed. But that is rarely the case.

    As to all the ‘foreign policy’ questions put to the voters, I call that ignorance & delusion (not disgust) and direct my disgust to those who put such measures to the voters – usually prog supes. Delusion bc the vote itself is usually non/ineffective, but its sponsors hope to gain politically by doing so.

  5. Exactly, San Francisco families are concerned that their kids cannot afford to rent or own a home in San Francisco, thanks for the polling confirmation of that. Sandy was correct.

  6. No matter what the matter of policy, you always seem to find fault ultimately with the voters. Why do you hate the San Francisco electorate? They keep on electing conservative mayors, yet you all rail against us for voting for progressive policies. I guess you’d prefer that the rich alone have the luxury to serve on the Board of Supervisors.

  7. “… the voters”

    Yes, the ‘voters’ voted for this; though it wasn’t them that asked for it. And it wasn’t the Mayor, who can put something on the ballot but didn’t. It was the Supes who put this on the ballot.

    Just like when the Supes added another City-financed campaign worker, er, I mean “aide”. The Supes asked and the voters consented.

    Q: how often and when was the last time the voters nixed spending money that didn’t requires a tax increase?

  8. I can’t prove that Peskin wasn’t against the library. It is a fact that he wasn’t able to use his considerable influence within THD to get them to drop their efforts against it.

    But what I actually said above is “Peskin was able to keep the new library site vacant for years.”

    The eminent domain thing was in 2003. The site was vacant until 2014. Christensen fought Peskin’s THD allies vigorously to get the library built, and she won. Peskin might have lifted a finger to help but if he did he failed where Christensen suceeded.

    Peskin can only prevent things from happening, Christensen can make things happen.

  9. Ron Conway, Republican, is a libertarian extremist. Dollars to donuts that Conway offers up campaign welfare to Christensen so that Christensen can continue to vote for corporate welfare for Conway’s holdings.

  10. Your analysis only works if you think that the future will never come and today’s older voters will not be replaced by today’s younger voters. Level two of the game involves strategies to prevent cooption of electeds and aides by creating structures to hold them accountable and by replenishing the bench by creating structures to encourage meaningful participation by younger folks. Today’s progressive insular clique resists any outside input. It appears that they realize they’ve been beat and are playing end game themselves.

  11. “Christensen seems to be able to get things done. For example, Peskin was able to keep the new library site vacant for years. That’s what he does. Christensen managed to get a library built there.”

    You keep repeating that and refuse to provide ONE link that PESKIN was against the library.

    I know someone who is as anti-Peskin as one gets and he doesn’t believe that Peskin was part of the anti-library efforts.

  12. Next time, instead of sarcasm, consider checking the data.
    https://sfchamber.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/2015VoterPoll.pdf

    THE MAJOR ISSUES FACING SAN FRANCISCO ARE…
    COST OF RENTS/AFFORDABILITY OF RENTING 43%
    COST OF OWNING A HOME 35%
    HOMELESSNESS/STREET BEHAVIOR 35%
    CRIME, DRUGS AND GANGS 14%
    CLEANLINESS/CONDITION OF STREETS/PARKS 11%
    JOBS AND THE ECONOMY 10%
    EDUCATION 10%
    TRAFFIC AND PARKING 8%
    MUNI AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION 8%

  13. >”Christensen represents extremists who want to force their vision on the voters because they hate San Franciscans and San Francisco.”

    OK. Thanks. I’d like to hear more about your wisdom but I am due back on Planet Earth in a few minutes.

  14. Exactly. That’s my point. Peskin didn’t like the Pagoda plans so we had a boarded up neighborhood blight for years. Because he can’t create anything, he can only block things.

    Christensen seems to be able to get things done. For example, Peskin was able to keep the new library site vacant for years. That’s what he does. Christensen managed to get a library built there.

  15. I’m not exactly in agreement with what you wrote, but given that voter turnout analysis usually shows that younger people don’t bother to vote, maybe it is a strategy.

  16. Christensen represents extremists who want to force their vision on the voters because they hate San Franciscans and San Francisco. Peskin connects with voters.

  17. The age issue is a live issue. Progressives failed to think long game when they had power and conservatives capitalized on that, coopting the professionals with sinecures that thwarted the rise of younger talent.

    There were enough ambitious operators at Peskin’s kick off angling for their own advancement that it reminded me of why I hate progressive politics.

    But Peskin is smart, he knows how to connect with residents.

  18. Putting a CVS-type store on the Pagoda site is something that nobody but and handful of libertarians wanted in district 3. You don’t get it – it is a district 3 supervisor that will represent the wishes of district 3 voters.

    If you have an issue with the 8 Washington site, contact the developer. They can easily build within the existing height limit and make a ton of money. They certainly don’t need to put in a park because there is one across the street.

  19. Which is why Ed Lee’s job approval rating is hovering around 38%, because people like corruption.

  20. A good strategy for Christensen would be to contrast her personal decision making style against Peskins. Christensen seems to look at the facts on any specific situation and tries to come up with the best solution for all.

    Peskin has a knee jerk reaction to try and crush anything that people want to do that might develop anything in D3. For years, the Pagoda Theater was a monument to the damage that Peskin did to his district. There is a reason why several of the restaurants in North Beach ban him. He is good at blocking things, too bad he can’t create anything instead.

    The best solution for 8 Washington might not have been the proposed development, but it isn’t a tennis court and a parking lot full of Audis either.

    Too bad we didn’t have Chistensen back then. I can’t wait to vote for her.

  21. Sorry not to be more precise: what utterly fails to interest the average parent in the city is whatever the word salad ‘pilfered by corruption’ might be intended to mean.

    How does it follow parents care only about the distant future, and not about terrible schools, parks and services today?

  22. If you’re not outraged at Ed Lee’s corruption, then you’re not paying attention.

    Peskin’s record of legislative product stands head and shoulders above most other Supervisors. Perhaps Wiener’s record comes close.

  23. “What is naive is to believe that a campaign fueled by rage can automatically segue into productive action if it’s won.”

    I agree, but it’s too bad you had to invoke ageist bullshit to make your point. But it is also naive to believe that Mayor Lee cares about anyone’s best interests other than his “investors.” And because of that, it is naive to NOT suspect that Christensen will be a rubber-stamp for anything he puts forward.

    Christensen’s avoidance to state definitively how she feels about height limits on the waterfront, how she is fighting the Port’s lawsuit (she isn’t), how she viewed 8 Washington (we got ‘everyone is wrong’ from her, again avoiding anything definitive), her elitist reference to people being evicted as “lower classes”, her absence when longtime district business were facing eviction or other forms of closure – even one that Jerry Brown tried to stop – all demonstrate that she is not worthy of our vote. Maybe she would make a good city-wide supervisor, but I voting for an advocate for those of us who live in district 3.

    I really wish there was an alternative to Peskin and Christensen. So far, there isn’t and I’m voting against Lee and Conway and the Republican party, meaning I’m voting for Peskin.

  24. What they really want is a cushy Sacramento appointment (think Migden on the State Board of Equalization or Dufty backing Campos) where they don’t have to do any real work and collect a pay check because most of these aging Radicals could never hold down a job in the real world.

  25. Big words coming from Sam, the King of Whine. (Your prescriptions for tenants are undone by your open contempt for them.)

  26. I’ll say a few things up front:
    1. I attended Peskin’s party as well as a neighborhood meeting featuring Supe. Christensen the day before, both with an intention of learning about the candidates. I recorded both events and will send them to anyone interested in hearing for themselves.
    2. On the basis of what I’d read and witnessed, I went in with an inclination toward Christensen because of how she carefully reasons through her positions, though we don’t see totally eye-to-eye on a civic issue that I’m very invested in.
    3. I’ll share the consensus impression between me and the person I was with, the better to inform. Then I’ll absent myself from replying to any of the ensuing comments as doing so is too often a nasty time-sink.

    Peskin’s rally consisted primarily of middle-aged+ men. The rhetoric was all imminent domaine, red meat, and rage with no concrete track record and no future plans offered. Finger-pointing and scapegoating of tech types and anybody with money was a given, in a way that would be utterly unacceptable toward any other segment of the population. Intentionally summoning the pitchforks and torches. If war chests of bile could win elections then November’s vote would be a slam dunk.

    While Christensen addressed the neighborhood group as Supervisor, not as a candidate, she was asked pointed questions regarding her stances on hot topical issues, including rent control. She’s not a career politician and has been in office for 4 months, but cited recent actions including addressing the housing crisis: http://bit.ly/1dm6apz.
    She has a 25+ year history of tireless community activism that has produced real projects that have benefitted everyone.
    She’s cool-headed and careful observation of her MO reveals her designer background (Disclosure: I am a designer, as well) in that she is generative, as opposed to destructive; takes in all aspects of an issue; and is adept at collective brainstorming to solve knotty problems.

    I can hear the accusations of ‘naive!’ before they hit this comments page, but I maintain that it defies the evidence of history to assume that a manager’s appointee will be their puppet. It also flies in the face of what we know about human behavior to believe that a campaign fueled by rage will segue into productive action if it’s won.

  27. Yes, parents do not want their kids to have the opportunity to remain living in the city they grew up in. Run with that, please.

  28. A pay increase of 300% if I recall correctly. In those days, Progressives had carte blanche. It’s unbelievable how they managed to squander their power.

  29. The voters alone had the power to change the law, not the supervisors. You not only hate the supervisors, you hate the voters.

  30. Yeah, having record low unemployment and being one of the best cities in the country to find a job really sucks.

  31. really? the voters dreamed up the ballot measure to increase the supervisors pay ? Amazingly revisionist

  32. “…and from the energy in the room, you got a sense that there’s a deep unhappiness with the direction of Ed Lee’s San Francisco.”

    In that room, sure. I wonder if they are aware that they are outnumbered by San Francisco residents who do not happen to be in that room. Probably not.

  33. You’ve confirmed it RichLL. I thought Sam was gone from these threads. Sorry to see that you’re back.

  34. Grabbing statistics out of the air RichLL. That sounds a bit familiar. Are you the latest alias for Sam?

  35. SF’s progressives have been cornered into the nonprofits and unions and have decided to effectively surrender any outreach to defend those institutions, to milk the work of previous generations to extract incomes for themselves until their constituents are gone and the funding dries up.

  36. I hear you, but keep in mind it was a campaign event. A little red meat and hyperbole is the stock-in-trade of campaign events.

  37. Jane Kim would be surprised to know that she is a Republican now….#washedupwhitesupervisorsmatter

  38. He did, but it was back when BOS members only made about $40K – this was before voting themselves higher pay, which probably would have made him ineligible. I imagine he’s sold it, since you’re not allowed to rent out BMR’s and he no longer resides in SF.

  39. Depends how you define the word “progressive”.

    Policies that build no new housing and deter change are better termed “regressive”.

  40. And as we saw with the other recent progressive trustafarian, Chris Daly, if things don’t work out for them politically then they are very quick to put their parental capital to work buying up foreclosures on the cheap and becoming a landlord of homes that are all excluded from rent control

  41. In this age of acquiescence, there are few progressive voices being aired by mainstream media at all. But please don’t assign false equivalency to it by saying either party because there are NO Republican progressives anywhere to be found.

  42. Funny that Peskin took a rental unit off the market without a permit, eh? There’s something untoward about this:

    n 2004, Peskin and his wife Nancy Shanahan may have been the benefit of a “sweetheart deal” in which they received a valuable property on Telegraph Hill at a discount price. In 2002, at a loss of $700,000 from the previous $1.5 million purchase price, the property in question was sold for $800,000 to a trust controlled by Harvey and Tsipora Peskin, Peskin’s parents, who then, in 2004, conveyed nearly 70 percent of the ownership of the property to Peskin and his wife. The Peskins then converted the two-unit building to a single unit without first obtaining city approval.[12][13]

  43. Redmond and Ammiano are jaded, and they know they have failed. During their time the city has gone from the city of love to the city of capital. That failure (as they see it) was on their watch. And the best that either of them now hope for is to slightly slow down the inevitable march of gentrification. They know they have lost the battle for the heart and soul of this city.

    There may be spirited young activists who might step into their shoes. But mostly, unlike Redmond, Ammiano, Daly, Welch, Hestor, Campos, Shaw etc., they don’t own million dollar homes and can’t afford to live here or to move here. Only trust fund progressives can carry the torch.

  44. One could reasonably mount an argument that, by virtue of the ubiquity of the law of unintended consequences, any new policy that appears to help tenants ultimately hurts them. If Ellis becomes so hard or costly to pull off that owners rule out that option, that may inform the decisions they make every time they get a vacancy. They may instead decide to do short-term lets or sell as a TIC.

    That in turn reduces the number of controlled vacant units re-entering the long-term market.

    We’ve had 35 years of such policies and all tenants do is whine that they have a bad deal.

  45. I am suggesting that a grown man who can’t be assed to support himself for all this time may lack the ambition and commitment that is required.

    I am glad you support the idle rich, however

  46. “Left wing” is a subjective word, it can mean different things to different people. Some Democrats are no more “left wing” than their Republican colleagues. There are very few truly progressive politicians in the United States of either party.

  47. “Sandy Fewer nailed it when she said that few of her friends’ kids had any hope of remaining in San Francisco.”

    They certainly never will if there’s no housing left for them anywhere, and Tim and Peskin and you and your friends will do what they can for that cause.

  48. Amazing that little tiny Richmond CA could take on Chevron and win, while in SF the progressives fade into irrelevance.

  49. SF politico Progs are not just reactionary, they’re also insular and cliquish. There is no progressive bench that I can determine. Where are the successors to Campos, Avalos or Mar? Does anyone think the termed out supes’ current aides can mount a campaign in a hostile environment with nothing but a cursory nod from the lame duck incumbent? Where are the fundraising machines? Where is the carefully constructed public resume of any of these media nobodies?

    But most importantly– where is the crossover platform that can reach those being screwed by gentrification and the housing crisis but also engage the moral sense of those pouring into the city? The techies are a mixed bag. There ARE the libertarian owners– the CEOs of Uber, AirBnB, etc. and the investor class. But the techie workforce– the coders and engineers and designers– are socially progressive, yet SF political progressives have nothing so far to offer but veiled and not-so-veiled hostility.

    Sadly, Redmond-Ammiano and their ilk fundamentally don’t care. They really are locked in a time warp. More’s the pity…

  50. NYC has a progressive mayor. Philly just nominated a progressive to be the Democratic mayoral candidate. Progressives here have become so reactioary and so isolated that they can’t even field a candidate. They are fading into irrelevance.

  51. Lee approved Campos’s revised Ellis payout scheme less than a week ago. While a bit myopic, that legislation means well, and it certainly doesn’t serve the needs of selfish, egotistic investors.

  52. 48 Hills in 2020:

    “The broom closet was packed, and it seemed as if most of progressive San Francisco was on hand”

    “Progressive” San Francisco is aging, and their constituents are moving away.

    As Leon Trotsky would put it, progressivism in San Francisco is headed for the ash heap of history.

  53. The average San Franciscan with kids is none too pleased with how awful SFUSD is, how abysmal city activities for kids are and how minimal parks and even playgrounds serve families. He cares about the fact that the city treats dogs better than kids.

    He does not care about.. whatever that is described above.

  54. The issues stand for themselves, and I anxiously await the campaign that condemns voters’ kids as being too dull to survive in San Francisco. Bring that shit on, troll!

  55. What a strange conflation.

    John Dennis runs to the left of Pelosi on a number of things and the lemmings still vote for her.

    In first year philosophy classes they have things like this.

    A donut is round
    donuts taste good
    A tire is round
    tires taste good

    Gary wears a tin foil hat
    tin foil hats keep out bad thoughts
    tin foil makes a microwave spark
    Gary makes a microwave spark

  56. From the article the usual suspects are backing Peskin such as unions, while the author also makes the observation that the other side doesn’t have grassroots support.

    The inference here seems to be that grassroots supports Peskin, meaning good. I wonder who the grass roots police union is supporting?

  57. LA has crappy transit, a strong police force, weak rent control and little in the way of strict zoning. It is hardly a left-wing nirvana.

    The minimum wage hike doesn’t take full effect until 2021 and exempts employers with less than 25 workers, which is many service jobs.

  58. The question you are deflecting was very simple. What paid work has Peskin been doing?

    If you don’t know the answer, why not just admit that?

  59. He lives off his capital (or his parents’ and in-laws’ anyway). Whether that is invested in RE, stocks or something else, we don’t know.

  60. There is another, and more plausible, reason why these ageing lefties are all so gung-ho for Peskin. It’s not that they even like him that much. Nor is Peskin a particularly reliable left-wing vote in the way that Campos is.

    Rather it is desperation. The left is now in a minority on the board even if Kim (voted for the Twitter tax break) and Mar (voted for 8-Wash) don’t break ranks. And a fortiori way short of the ability to beat a mayoral veto.

    Peskin is the last chance saloon here. If he loses in November then, along with Lee’s landslide re-election, the Progressives then really face a future with little power and influence. They will continue to be side-lined.

    Two other factors combine to make this even worse. First Campos, Avalos and Mar are all termed out next time, and both Mar and Avalos are to the left of their constituency meaning that their successors may well be more moderate.

    Second, the voters are becoming more moferate as the demographics change. We have already seen Breed and Kim replace more stalwart lefties like Mirk and Daly. This trend will continue and D3 is one of the most affluent districts.

    So the issue here is not that the left will regain power if Peskin wins. They won’t even if he does. The real issue is that if Peskin loses, the progressives’ dance with real power is over.

    No wonder they are pulling out all the stops.

  61. So, once you’re termed out, all you have to do is wait around for a little bit to get your job back? Seems weird. I hope Campos doesn’t come slithering back in four years.

  62. It is noteworthy that Aaron Peskin has never had any job off of the city payroll (unless he worked part time while getting his BA degree at UC Santa Cruz).

    I don’t think that anyone could prove that he couldn’t find any useful work over the past few years, but you guys have some serious ignoring to do over the fact that he has been unemployed for 8 years.

  63. Ammiano said that the city now has “a basically Republican board.” This type of statement makes progressives appear incredibly divorced from reality

  64. Nobody had to beg Peskin to get back in the race. And he would have thoroughly enjoyed telling Rose Pak to shove it.

    And BTW, you are not the only one with a negative impression of Peskin. Anecdotally, when you mention Peskin’s name many people make a face that looks like they are smelling feces. There are lots of stories about how ‘The Emperor’ disrespected supplicants who came before him.

    But not everyone shares your obsession with Ron Conway. The fact that Peskin is such an obviously flawed individual will be a factor in the election.

  65. Your envy and jealousy of those who do not have to work for a living exposes you as a fraud.

  66. More parents would choose me for that role than you. You don’t even have any kids.

    You should speak for your own constituency i.e. single childless white male tech workers who help gentrify the Mission by buying a condo there

  67. LOL to all four of those allegedly more left-wing cities.

    Portland is probably the closest, but no cigar.

  68. >What makes you think that Peskin was jobless?

    Perhaps the fact that he didn’t have a job.

    Oh yeah, he worked for his wife’s part time non profit. I forgot.

  69. “Peskin clearly isn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer but even he isn’t stupid enough to provide an unnecessary quote about blocking a library when he has associates to do it for him.”

    Yes, because he knew back then that Rose Pack, his former enemy, was going to beg him to enter the race, so he remained silent. Or something. Have you ever seen Peskin speak? He can barely control his anger and attitude. If he was against the library, there would be lots of incendiary quotes that would be easily accessible.

    FYI, it wasn’t just THD. The historical society or some other group fought the tearing down of the old library, a building that was supposedly so unique that I’ve seen thousands just like them across the country.

    Christensen deserves credit and so does Peskin.

  70. I’m waiting for you to show one link where Peskin stood up to the Telegraph Hill Dwellers when they tried to block the library.

    I already sent you a link showing where Christensen fought them; Peskin apparently was too busy being unemployed to speak up against THD’s efforts.

  71. Between Daly and Peskin, they passed enough popular legislation to throw downtown and the billionaires into a well funded reaction that made all future comers political offers that they could not refuse. McGoldrick was pretty effective as well. There are plenty.

  72. Peskin had that lot seized to become a park, even though Park & Recs protested about scarce resources used to build a park next to a huge playground and less than 800 feet from Washington Square.

    The land then sat there, like the Pagoda theater, until Julie Christensen fought THD to get the new library see: http://www.thd.org/semaphorearchives/semaphore187_40-pp_web.pdf

    Yes, THD opposed the library and there is a clear paper trail showing that Christensen fought them. Is there a shred showing that Peskin lifted a finger to opposed the group that he is closely associated with?

    Peskin clearly isn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer but even he isn’t stupid enough to provide an unnecessary quote about blocking a library when he has associates to do it for him.

    Also, the new Library could have been built upon the footprint of the old one.

  73. Aren’t you the one who didn’t know the history of the North Beach library? I’m still waiting for you to provide a link that shows that Peskin fought the new library.

  74. You can disprove us with just one example of Peskin doing useful work, yet you cannot, and instead lamely ask people to prove a negative

    Gary, nobody doubts your passion but you are a really bad debater.

  75. Not taking the bait. It is up to RichLL to prove to us that Peskin couldn’t find any useful work.

  76. Here is what I asked of you first:

    “Please provide evidence that Peskin could not find any useful work since he left office.”

    I didn’t make the nearly slanderous claim that Peskin could not find any useful work – you did. Back it up with evidence or shut up. It is that simple.

    And given how often you resort to “red-baiting” with your idiotic comparisons to communism, you have no room to complain about anyone mentioning race.

    Again, you are a pathetic troll.

  77. The question had the present tense in it – who IS one of the best community people?

    Seems you have no answer.

  78. Obviously Gary has no answer which is why he is calling anyone who asks a troll. A sure sign he is bluffing.

  79. No @GarySFBCN, what DID Peskin do for the past 8 years?

    We’re talking age 43-51. Most people do have some type of job during those ages.

    Did Peskin?

    Shouldn’t be that hard to answer.

  80. One simple question and you could not answer it.

    Jeez, man, at least try and make it difficult for me.

    Time for a race card maybe?

  81. I am a parent and you are not. I talk to a lot more parents than you do. I live in the immediate vicinity of a lot more parents than you do. You are wrong.

  82. The average San Franciscan with kids out in the neighborhoods is none too pleased that the City is being pilfered by corruption and that their kids can’t live in the city they grew up in.

  83. Can you give an example of someone who you think is one of “the best community people”?

    Other than Peskin, of course.

  84. Many US cities have governments that are more liberal and progressive than San Francisco which has entered a retrograde state having been purchased by conservative billionaires.

  85. The fact that Peskin could not find any kind of useful work or occupation ever since he left shows a man devoid of ambition and commitment. Kinda like Daly and (soon to be) Mirkarimi.

    Some lefties go on and achieve at least something (Ammiano). Others, like Peskin, never adjust and slowly rot and rust away.

  86. The percentage of voters in SF who have children is smaller than any other comparable city. So their influence at elections is correspondingly lower. Moreover, given that it takes a lot of money to raise kids in SF, those voters are more moderate anyway.

    The average SF leftie is single, childless and, often, rather sad.

  87. Yes, it’s great how Tim saw a bunch of usual suspect leftie whiners in one room and inferred from that that there is widespread dislike of Ed Lee. In fact, of course, he continues to be very popular and all the progressive “leaders” are too scared to run against him.

  88. Sure, there are still a few communist countries and the inevitable US college towns.

    But I doubt that even 1% of US towns and cities have a government more left-wing than the SF BofS. Calling them Republican is ridiculous – even Farrell would be deemed a left-winger in almost every other US city of comparable size.

    Your real complaint is that the Board has become slightly more moderate in the last few years. That is of couse because the voters have become more moderate.

  89. You have to go back further regarding the library. It was Peskin’s vision that that lot should be part of a library/park complex. He used eminent domain to purchase the lot – which was a parking lot – from the unwilling owner, who was seeking a height variance to build a apartment building on that strip of land. It was a nasty fight, but Peskin won. The new library would not exist had it not been for his vision and tireless efforts to seize that lot.

    And people keep insisting that Peskin was against tearing down the old library, but I’ve never seen any evidence of that. THD was against it, but I can’t find one quote from Peskin. Please to provide a link if you can find one.

    As for the Grand Prix, the first year of the race, more than 2,500 parking spots were eliminated in our neighborhood and Fisherman’s Wharf to make room for the race and it wasn’t necessary to do so for a bike race. Hundreds of cars were towed. It pissed off so many people in district 3 that I’m surprised that there wasn’t a protest. But in the end, the race sponsors owed almost $400k to the city and the couldn’t pay it. Cancelling the race may be unpopular city-wide but in district 3, people were happy about it. My issue is that there could have been some middle-ground solution, but none of the people involved wanted to compromise, especially the sponsors.

  90. No offense but you’ve got the North Beach Library exactly backwards. Peskin and the Telegraph Hill Dwellers tried to block it; David Chiu and Chrisensen fought for it. That’s why Christensen’s appointment was held in front of the library. Google it if you don’t believe me.

    I’ll give it to you, he did cancel the bike race, so I guess he does have a legacy to point to after 8 years.

  91. Yes, I’m sure.
    There are probably many examples of great leaders who can never rise above the city alderman level.

  92. For me, Peskin is a mixed-bag. The revered North Beach library is a Peskin legacy – it wouldn’t exist without his efforts. He also got the idiotic Gran Prix cancelled. That event was costing taxpayers and the sponsors owed money to SF. And he tried to get a Home Depot into SF.

    But his obvious past conflicts of interest, his almost prude-like approach to drinking/entertainment venues, and his anger-management issues are all negatives, so choosing to vote for him is a big deal for me.

    The seriousness of this vote is demonstrated in Rose Pak’s support for Peskin. They were once enemies.

    This vote is about Conway. The city has gone downhill since he started meddling.

  93. I’d love to vote for “someone new” who isn’t a rubber-stamp for Mayor AirBnB and who isn’t afraid to tell us, her constituents, what she believes.

    What we got was someone who conceals her ideas with vague language, and when she does speak, she is a gaffe factory.

    Peskin also has issues but, so far, he has my vote. My vote is based upon 50% of what is good for district 3 and 50% against Conway.

    Conway said that he was to take back SF from progressives. I say take SF back from selfish, egotistic investors and their puppet mayor.

  94. Peskin gets it right much more more often than he gets it wrong.

    The best community people who seek office don’t seek a new career that requires strategizing for advancement.

  95. You don’t have to like the policies that got us here in order to support Peskin.
    But is sure helps.
    Really, the way that things are…why would we want to try someone new when we have the same-old, same-old to turn to???

  96. If Peskin was an effective leader he would have left a legacy he could be proud of. Apparently he didn’t.
    If Peskin wasn’t stupid he wouldn’t have picked David Chiu as his anointed successor. He had all the time in the world and he picked David Chiu.
    Yeah…I want that guy back and making decisions for us again. He’s a friggin genius.

  97. So her kid’s friends aren’t as bright as the young people who are training for and getting high paying jobs and enjoying San Francisco?
    That’s very sad.

  98. San Francisco went down the tubes once the rich vanquished the progressives and began to prosecute their looting of the City in earnest.

  99. I don’t doubt for a moment that there was a lot of pro Peskin and anti Ed Lee sentiment in a room full of invited Peskin supporters.
    But outside that room I think that people can spot a failure when they see one.
    Peskin was President of a highly supportive BOS for 8 years.
    How did that work out for us? What did Einstein say about insanity?
    Newsom is Lt Gov, Chiu is in the State Assembly. If Peskin was an effective leader he would have an upward career trajectory. He wouldn’t have spent the last 8 years waiting to get his old job back.
    Oh yeah, he was President of the DCCC.
    And how did THAT work out for you guys?

  100. You don’t know me or who I’ve voted for, Marcos (it wasn’t Lee). Ammiano’s remark is still bullshit.

  101. Many cities have more liberal or progressive governments than San Francisco.

    The 2000s called and they want their Boards of Supervisors back from you.

  102. The Republican party remains anti-gay, anti-women’s right to choose, anti-poor and is full of dim-witted, racist nutcases who support the idea that one way to guarantee entry into heaven is to refuse baking a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.

    Ron Conway, a lifelong stalwart Republican, is supporting Christensen. So is Mayor AirBnB.

    You don’t have to like Peskin to vote against Christensen. Enough said.

    Let’s run Conway out of town and into a gated enclave in some banana republic where he belongs.

  103. Ammiano can’t be serious. In any other city, SF’s BoS would be considered extreme Left.

  104. If it seemed as if all the progressives in San Francisco were packed into one room, that’s probably correct. The left is dying off in this town as people realize how selfish and short-sighted their policies are.

  105. Looking forward to November. Sandy Fewer nailed it when she said that few of her friends’ kids had any hope of remaining in San Francisco. That’s the kind of issue that plays in San Francisco’s neighborhoods where district elections are won and against which trollish recitals of the scripture of libertarian capitalism have little truck.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored link

Top reads

Sorting out the upcoming election madness

Plus: Private electric-car charging in neighborhood curbsides? And a key vote on housing in the Tenderloin. That's The Agenda for Sept. 27-Oct. 4

A new dark-money group with GOP support seeks to raise crime fears

A misleading mailer attacking the record of DA Chesa Boudin hits the streets—but who paid for it?

Robots in the crash pad: The twisted takeover of the Red Victorian Hotel

How Haight Ashbury countercultural ideals were distorted by a tech "co-living" experiment, and a trans performance community was displaced.

More by this author

A new dark-money group with GOP support seeks to raise crime fears

A misleading mailer attacking the record of DA Chesa Boudin hits the streets—but who paid for it?

While people sit in jail cells, SF courts delay criminal trials

Judges hear civil cases while violating the law and delaying the right to a speedy trial for criminal defendants, public defender says.

A car-free JFK Drive in Golden Gate Park is finally close to reality

But there are some complicated equity issues that will require a lot more discussion.
Sponsored link

You might also likeRELATED