Monday, April 19, 2021
News + Politics $1 million in tech and real-estate money pours into...

$1 million in tech and real-estate money pours into June SF election

Airbnb, Google, Facebook, PG&E, the Association of Realtors, big landlords and developers are funding an effort to keep their allies in charge of the Democratic Party. We follow the money


The tide of tech and real-estate money flowing into the June 7th San Francisco election is now at more than $1 million, a stunning sum that’s paying in part for an all-out effort to keep the supporters of Airbnb and the developers in control of the city.

This is more than a record; it’s an ocean of big money the likes of which I have never seen in this kind of election.

Ron Conway, Big Tech's power broker, is among those behind the pro-real-estate slate for DCCC
Ron Conway, Big Tech’s power broker, is among those behind the pro-real-estate slate for DCCC

Records on file with the Ethics Commission show it’s mostly coming from a few sources: Airbnb, Google, Facebook, Ron Conway, PG&E, the Association of Realtors, the Building Owners and Managers Association, the founder of Medium, the developer of the Monster on Mission, and a few other tech and real-estate interests.

Much of the money has gone to support the candidates in the real-estate slate for DCCC, although Airbnb has also given money to initiatives sponsored by the mayor, Supervisor (and DCCC candidate) Mark Farrell, and Sup. (and DCCC candidate) Malia Cohen.

A group funded mostly by progressive labor unions has raised $70,000 – a tiny fraction of what the tech and real-estate industry is spending.

And most of these right-wing groups still have cash in the bank, so in the next two weeks they will be able to fund a barrage of phone banking, mailers, and get-out-the-vote efforts.

They operate, of course, under misleading names like the Committee to Expand the Middle Class (funded to the tune of $450,000 by Airbnb) Progress San Francisco (funded by Conway, Google, and Facebook) and San Francisco Democrats United for Progress (funded by BOMA and the Realtors).

And if you ever wondered whether all that money makes a difference in how the body politic behaves, just take a look at the vote Wednesday night at the Democratic County Central Committee on a measure that would force Airbnb to be accountable for listing units that are clearly illegal.

As my friend at the Examiner, Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez, notes in a brilliant analysis of the events:

Deep in the California State Building on Wednesday, the Democrats instead approved a strange, alternate-universe measure that weakened that support.

For funsies, I’ve dubbed this political maneuver the “Tom Hsieh Sway,” in honor of the democratic board member who deftly delivered Airbnb a win.

Snap your fingers. The first step in the Tom Hsieh Sway was to secure votes beforehand. Airbnb’s money conquers all.

The tech-hotel giant contributed $20,000 to a political committee to support Hsieh and his political allies on what they call the “Progress Slate” candidates running for DCCC this June. Airbnb contributed $2,500 to each of Hsieh’s allies on the committee: Zoe Dunning, Mary Jung, Rebecca Prozan, Alix Rosenthal and Leah Pimentel.

Gee-whiz, such a coinkydink the people taking money from Airbnb voted against a measure to call for its regulation.

Hsieh engineered what has become common at the not-so-D triple C: Instead of just voting against a measure that would harm his benefactors, he amended it to death, turned it into something no progressive could support, and then won its passage.

The original measure was introduced more than a week ago, was circulated, on the agenda … no secret. The Hsieh amendments came up only on the floor, were never circulated in advance – but somehow, many of his allies on the panel knew all about them in advance.

“What has been unique, and not in a good way, is the practice of gutting the resolutions that come before this body with ‘friendly’ motions to amend,” said DCCC Member Megan Levitan. “If you agree with it, support it, if you don’t, don’t.”

Oh, but Hsieh and his allies will never do that: In fact, in one of the most blatant examples of this technique, Josh Arce managed to gut a police-accountability measure – without ever going on record voting against police accountability.

As we noted at the time:

This seems to be the new strategy the conservatives are employing at the DCCC – let someone work for weeks or months on a carefully worded resolution, then substitute another one that undermines it at the last minute.

It allows the members to say they voted on, say, police reform – without doing anything of the sort. And it allows them to avoid taking a stand.

It’s yet another sign of the takeover of the local Democratic Party not only by allies of developers and the real-estate industry but by people who are unwilling to show any backbone at all on anything at all.

In this case, all of the people who got money from Airbnb voted to gut a resolution asking the supervisors to support reasonable regulations on Airbnb. All of the people who are independent of the tech-and-real-estate money voted the other way.

It was, in essence, a party-line vote – and since the real-estate-and-tech-company interests currently control the DCCC, they won.

That’s the way they want it to continue.

Let’s look at who’s paying to try to buy your vote June 7.

The Airbnb Committee, known as the group that wants to save the middle class (by driving renters out of the city) got $450K from that company, and $50,000 each from Paul Graham, CEO of Y combinator, Jessica Livingston, an investor in Y Combinator, and Sam Altman, president of Y combinator.

None of those people live in San Francisco; they’re all in Palo Alto.

Some of that money went to Props. A, B, and D. The rest has gone to elect the real-estate slate.

Then there’s the Progress SF slate, which has raised $292,000, with $25K coming from Ron Conway and $21K from Robert Rosania, developer of the Monster in the Mission.

Conway lives in Belvedere. Rosania lives in New York.

There there’s $50K each from Google and Facebook (which apparently suddenly care a lot about the workings of the SF Democratic Party – or maybe just got a call from Ron), $50K from Evan Williams, the founder of Medium, and $30K from Kevin Systrom, founder of Instagram.

Why did Google and Facebook suddenly get interested in who runs the SF Democratic Party? Why do Evan Williams or Kevin Systrom care? I don’t know. Is it possible that Conway called them up and said: We need to control the DCCC so we can get our people elected to the Board of Supervisors and keep the city friendly to tax breaks and loose regulations for Big Tech? That is, of course, how the system typically works.

Remember, the DCCC is not just a low-profile group that runs the local party. It has the ability to endorse candidates for local office — and in November, when thousands of voters who don’t pay that much attention to local politics but want to defeat Trump, go to the polls, that endorsement will be a major factor.

That’s why the big money is really here: These moguls want to control the city government, now and in the future.

Now let’s go to San Francisco Democrats United for Progress – which has as its treasurer Tom Hsieh Jr, the same person who gutted the Airbnb resolution. (Oh, and Ethics Commission records show he also plays a big role in the Progress SF group, and he is, of course, running for his own re-election, and he is also a campaign consultant getting paid to work on various campaigns.)

That committee raised a total of $125,000, with $25K coming from BOMA, $21K coming from Russ Flynn, one of the city’s biggest residential landlords, and $30K from the Association of Realtors.

The committee also got $40K from the Alliance for Jobs and Sustainable Growth PAC, which is funded in part ($5K) by Thomas Coates, one of the most notorious landlords in California and a man who has spent much of the past few years trying to repeal rent control statewide.

Follow the money: The Alliance also got $70K from the Committee on Jobs Government Reform Fund, which received $50K from Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and $25K from the family of the late Republican GAP mogul Don Fisher.

So PG&E, the Fisher family, and an anti-rent-control property owner are sliding money into the “Democrats United for Progress.”

That gives you a sense of who wants the real-estate slate to stay in power. And this is the Democratic Party in one of the most progressive cities in the nation?

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.


  1. … [Trackback]

    […] Informations on that Topic: […]

  2. No, nobody labels newcomers by race but racists – stop it already. You made the whole premise up, and you’re very clearly overcompensating.

  3. Newcomers are overwhlemingly Asian and Latino, I already told you that. You hatred of newcomers has a distinct racial cast.

  4. Projecting? Did you learn that word from years of therapy? You sound like a racist and I will call you out on it everytime .

  5. Dog whistle racism is still racism even though white people think they can away with it by speaking in code.

  6. Nor did I.
    What you are guilty of is assigning a race to a group of people by profession, or newcomer status to the City.

  7. I called YOU a superior effete elitist. I didn’t create a class of people I don’t like and tag them with a derogatory name.

  8. Tech Bros is about as derogatory as your choice of pejorative “superior effete elitists” – I’m debunking the idea of putting people in boxes by race/ethnicity, and you’re worried about a negative portrayal towards tech equating it towards Trump racism?? Tech is no more a race than NIMBYS are a race, you prejudiced concern troll.

  9. Your need to put people in boxes so you can demonize them might not be Donald Trump text book racism, but its a first cousin. “Tech Bros” is a derogatory term used by superior effete elitists like you.

  10. I will call out your racism every time I see it. If you complained about saggy pantsed wearing thugs, I will call you out for that kind of racism as well.

  11. Newcomers aren’t a race.

    Your obsession with Asians and inserting them as victims in such a way belies the real prejudice and oppression they’ve experienced. The bias is all yours, because when you read tech industry, you see one ethnicity, or race then you cast them as stereotyped. That bigoted thinking is all in your own head. I’m going to vote for “fetish”.

  12. Asians aren’t newcomers, and you’re not saying anything mind blowing when stereotyping tech workers as Asians. Tech workers are mainly Asian and White, and Asians are less likely to be CEO’s.

    You’re also off base when characterizing the hate towards the tech bro stereotype as hatred towards Asians. The tech bro image, the condo yuppie moving into the Mission, the Silicon Valley – these are not images people characterize as Asians, even in instances when that fits.

    You routinely evoke Asians in posts, to the point where it might be a pride thing, or I’m guessing more likely a fetish thing, who knows, but you often do it in a manner that’s off base, and this isn’t the first time it’s being addressed.

  13. A majority of tech workers are Asian. Lots of racist people try to disguise their prejudice by claiming that black is white or in this case Asian is white. White people don’t like the newcomers who are mostly people of color and they can’t believe that white people can be displaced.

  14. Agreed, S. The corporate news media keep consolidating and slashing their staffs and news coverage, in order to pad their executives’ and shareholders’ wallets. They are, in effect, enablers of the backroom dealing that they’re supposed to be exposing and fighting.

  15. It’s not prejudice to disagree with the theory that people usually characterize newcomers to San Francisco as Asians. I read more mentions of “young White tech bros”.

    Also, not for nothing, but the old Irish union guys weren’t talking about Asians circa 1965. Your timeline is off.

  16. Poorly conceived developments and failing infrastructure have taken their toll on most San Franciscans.

    You don’t have to be biased against Asians or anti-growth to hate what the City is turning into. And if you’re going to talk race demographics, the newcomers people complain about are mostly characterized as Caucasian

  17. The majority of San Franciscans support building more market rate housing and the majority of San Franciscans like tech and think that its effect on San Francisco is overall good.

    It is only the dwindling minority of curmudgeonly Boomer home owning NIMBYs that hate the new comers: the mostly Asian young people who have been revitalizing San Francisco.

    That is how democracy works. You can’t get a majority to agree with your anti-growth policies and will continue to lose until you wizen up.

  18. Is SEIU putting money into the DCCC races? I didn’t see it mentioned above. If so, how much?

  19. Dupe, Hac, Barf, etc. – couldn’t possibly be coming from the same umbrella. Goodness, no.

  20. Best of all, taxpayers are on the hook for costs related to this popularity contest for political parties. (they’re on the hook for the RCCC one too, but no one cares about it with their registration numbers in the high single digits). Maybe we should have the parties reimburse the Elections Dept. for the costs of running their little party contests instead of making all taxpayers, even those registered NPP pay the cost

  21. I guess they’re trying to drain the meaning of the word “Progress” and “progressive” in a political context the way they did the meaning of affordability? I’m not falling for that even where my views align with them. Good job alienating San Franciscans from all sides, political types. Keep at it.

  22. “It’s mostly coming from a few sources”

    Tim writes “mostly” because his SEIU paymaster is also among the of pay-to-play bribers.

  23. We need a lot of energy to fight the machine and a lot of people who care enough to do something about it. The desire for change is out there and the corporate entities know it. They know they have gone too far and the only way they can win is by confusing the voters with messages that sound good, but are money grabs by the forces of gentrification that want to bleed every dollar they can out of the people they want to control through centralization of power. A series of ballot initiatives were announced this week from the so-called “progressive coalition” on the Board of Supervisors that could disperse that power if the voters can be reached.

  24. Ethics needs to start working soon along with a people’s advocate or we all live in a slime hole of dirty money and politics that solve nothing but padding pocketbooks of the rich. This whole election is becoming a joke and we need the public in general to awaken to the concerns of money over-riding people

Comments are closed.

More by this author

Radical right group is trying to attack public-sector labor in SF

Anti-union mailers are going to workers home addresses -- but really, this group is looking pretty desperate.

Breed won’t promise to spend real-estate tax money on rent relief

The voters approved Prop. I last fall to support tenants and affordable housing, but the mayor says she will use the money for her own priorities.

Reese Erlich, foreign correspondent and radical reporter, is dead at 73

After a life of progressive politics, ground-breaking journalism, and social activism, a legendary writer loses battle with cancer.

There’s a lot more to the GG Park debate than cars v. bikes

This is part of a huge discussion the city needs to have about transportation -- and equity -- in a post-COVID world.

SF could have affordable Internet for everyone for $35 a resident

Why isn't the Breed Administration moving for municipal broadband? That's The Agenda for April 11-18

Most read

COVID outbreaks continue in workplaces in California

The pandemic is far from over -- particularly for workers in vulnerable occupations.

Money for ‘safe sleeping’ sites — or permanent supportive housing?

Legislation by Sup. Rafael Mandelman aims to get people off the streets -- but homeless advocates are not supporting it. That's The Agenda for April 18-25

New COVID-conscious Kapwa Gardens celebrates Filipino culture

Outdoor activity site in SOMA Pilipinas district was designed with safety in mind as people begin to gather again.

What’s going on with the Armory?

10 years ago, an almost unbelievable, incredibly San Francisco thing was happening. A thriving online BDSM/fetish empire,, was taking over the 200,000-square-foot San Francisco...

You might also likeRELATED