Mark Leno kicked the mayor’s race into another gear this week when he released an ad and held a press conference directly challenging Sup. London Breed on her housing policy and saying that she represents the “failed status quo.”
Standing in front of the house on Page Street where Iris Canada was evicted, Leno said that “it’s time to be very clear where the candidates stand.” He asked voters to get “beyond the rhetoric, and look at the record. Everyone wants to say they are a protector of tenants right before Election Day. London Breed has not voted for, advocated for, stood by, and certainly has not fought for the homes or the livelihoods or working families, the elderly, the disabled, those who are depending on rent-controlled units.”
Deepa Varma, executive director of the Tenants Union, talked about the eviction of the 100-year-old Canada by people who wanted to convert her unit into a condo, and said that “one of the first votes London Breed took was to lift the lid on condo conversions.
“From the beginning, London Breed has not been with us,” Varma said. “When it came to buyouts, increasing relocation benefits, she voted against us. On regulating Airbnb and eviction protections, she voted with the real-estate industry.”
Varma noted that on the anti-speculation tax, Prop. G, “Leno helped us get the Democratic Party endorsements. Breed didn’t.”
The Tenants Union has put out “20 reasons you should not vote for London Breed.”
In his ad, Leno, standing in front of a homeless encampment, says that “the status quo has failed us.
“If you are happy with the way things are, vote for London Breed.”
It’s the first time any of the major candidate has directly taken on the positions of Breed, although an independent expenditure committee backing Breed has attacked Leno.
I talked to Leno this afternoon, and he told me that, with absentee ballots set to arrive in about two weeks and the election not much more than a month away, it’s important to clarify the differences between the candidates.
So far – to the frustration of both Leno and Jane Kim – a lot of the news media has suggested that the candidates aren’t that different on the issues. Leno’s attempting to change that narrative.
UPDATE: Breed’s communications director, Tara Moriarty, got back to me with this statement:
“Mark Leno took thousands of dollars from real estate interests as a legislator in Sacramento, and also consistently failed at his job to pass Ellis Act Reform to protect tenants. Since taking office in 2012, London Breed has consistently worked to protect tenants. As a tenant herself, unlike Mark Leno, she understands firsthand the challenges renters face. Her strong tenant protection record includes:
-
Wrote legislation prioritizing neighborhood residents for the affordable units in their community.
-
Is streamlining the process to build rent-controlled accessory dwelling/in-law units to expand our rent-controlled housing stock.
-
Wrote Right to Civil Counsel legislation to provide tenants with legal assistance to fight evictions and keep people in their homes.
-
Saved 104 affordable units at Frederick Douglas Haynes Gardens.
-
Working to pass the Housing for All Ballot measure which will generate $1 billion for housing, including funds to purchase rent-controlled buildings, and build homes for our families, seniors, teachers, and firefighters.
-
Committed to building at least 5,000 homes per year to ease our housing shortage.
-
Driving the effort to build affordable housing on underutilized sites around the City, such as at the former McDonald’s site on Haight and Stanyan streets.
-
Supports reforming San Francisco’s archaic approval processes for code compliant new housing and streamline 100% affordable housing projects.
She did not challenge any of the statements made by Leno or by the Tenants Union, which has a record of more than half a century of representing renters rights.
This latest salvo makes it even more clear that this race is close, that three candidates (Leno, Breed, and Sup. Jane Kim) are in contention, and that there are still voters who haven’t figured out what the candidates really stand for and who to support.
It’s going to be a wild six weeks.
White male tells Black female what is best for her and her community. London Breed has lived her life as a tenant so is probably best positioned to know their needs.
Affordable housing in SF is a gimmick. Until someone has a plan for how to build on the scale 50,000 affordable units — including how you’d pay for it and how you’d get through the anti-development crowd, it Is a rounding error and a gimmick.
Zhoosh drops off when he knows he’s been had.
The first half of the ad is set up to portray that Breed was ousted by conspiring white men to benefit a white man’s (Leno) chances of winning the election. It’s definitely an attack — your version is spin.
Why is it you think they didn’t mention in the ad that the ouster was also meant to benefit Kim? It’s obvious why: it didn’t fit the IE’s narrative that Breed was ousted because she was a woman of color.
https://www.facebook.com/itsourtimesf/videos/919659374866799/
Of course. I think Conway’s fingerprints are all over it. He can’t “openly” assist Breed, as he has proven to be quite toxic, but he can persuade others to do so, and even “reimburse them” for doing so. This is the sort of thing that needs to be outlawed, but unfortunately, the Supreme Court did a stupid thing that allows it.
Arjuna was formerly PaxSF. S/he have never had much success backing their rhetoric.
Do you know if it’s true that Breed paid off campaign debt with pre-paid debit cards?
Isn’t London Breed the candidate who ran for supervisor, claiming then that she would fix the homeless crisis, only to spend years not doing squat? Isn’t she the President of the Board for over three years, who saw the wait list for shelter for the homeless increase well over 50% in her tenure?
Seriously… she already made promises she’s flat-out failed to keep. Why vote for more empty promises from someone who won’t even be accountable for the ones she’s already broken?
Frankly, I don’t consider Leno or Kim to be great candidates…
But when their main opponent is someone previously accused of being “pay for play”, not out of vindictiveness, but by a friend and crony, caught on a concealed recording by the FBI…
Well, Breed is ethically suspect. And when you are ethically suspect, you should do things to prove to others that you actually have integrity, like signing Leno’s pledge, which nearly all the other candidates have done…
What you *shouldn’t* do is have close ties to a sleazy superPAC run by a close political friend who previously ran another superPAC for Ron Conway, which is funded by Facebook execs, venture capitalists, and real estate developers who are drooling at the idea of having their property values go up because suddenly their zoning changed favorably, their property became more valuable for selling, and they can evict all their old rent-controlled tenants before tearing down and building luxury condos in the sky.
So yeah, maybe Leno is a bit of a yawn… but at least he’s not a puke.
London Breed is corporate greed.
Breed never adequately explained why a buddy of hers at an org in the Filmore — a friend in the black community she had said lots of good things about in the past, attended events for, talked up his org, and politically assisted — would talk to a person claiming to be a developer asking for some help / advice, and get recorded without their knowledge, saying that Breed was pay for play.
The simple fact is, NONE of her behavior with how she funds her campaign and runs her campaign shows ANY particular tendency towards being ethical that would lead someone not to believe these recordings.
They might not have been enough firsthand evidence to put her away, largely because her payouts were reportedly handled in very discrete, untraceable ways, but would I vote for her? HELL NO.
If she wanted us to believe she was ethical, she could have signed the pledge nearly everyone else did not to take all the corporate money she’s pocketed.
He was the editor of the Bay Guardian for ages, and was a reporter before that.
You are a liar. And London Breed is a lying crook, who is the only serious candidate who isn’t signing on to keep big, unrestricted money out of her campaign.
She is also the only candidate to have a crony of hers get caught by the FBI saying that she’s pay for play.
Sleazier still, the superPAC that made the big ugly gender / race wedge issues about some fictional boy’s club keeping her out of power — run by Jane Kim and Leno, presumably — was supposed to be led by “concerned women”, but the sources we now know for much of the money is a combination of developers, real estate interests, and a bigtime venture capitalist / former exec at Facebook, who used a huge contribution via his wife as a way to funnel money into Breed’s campaign.
Sleazy. Perhaps there was a reason why a friend of Breed’s was caught on tape telling the FBI that she was pay for play.
Your detailed knowledge of the SuperPAC’s ad just shows how attached at the hip London Breed’s campaign and her SuperPAC are, despite oftentimes difficult to enforce campaign laws against it.
I find it strange how her close friend Andrea Shorter who is running the superPAC also ran a prior one for Ron Conway, attacking Jane Kim in her prior race vs. Wiener. I also find it odd that Shorter seems to have in-depth information on Breed’s biggest donors, and has somehow managed to funnel a lot of big donor money from people who have maxed out contributions into her superPAC. I also find it pretty revolting that Breed has linked to the superPAC, apparently leveraged endorsements that Shorter’s superPAC lined up or otherwise notified Shorter of such endorsements ahead of time, and that Breed apparently repurposed some of the SuperPAC’s content, which could be seen as an improper donation to her campaign.
There needs to be an investigation, and a complaint to the FEC, because this kind of stuff isn’t supposed to happen… the FEC has been castrated by the current administration, but that’s no excuse to violate the letter of the law because you can get away with it.
All the evidence suggests that Breed and Shorter are basically crooks in cahoots. Maybe there was some truth in those secret FBI recordings of Breed’s friend, who told them that she was pay to play.
Sure, the political establishment isn’t going to take that case to trial, but the fact is, no other candidate in this race has been accused of being for sale… and given that, it doesn’t help that she was practically the only serious candidate to be a part of Leno’s ethical campaign pledge.
Is Breed lying? Nobody knows… but why would they vote for her, when she’s the only candidate in the race shown to be untrustworthy?
” I’m not going to call any names, but they’re very organized, and they monopolize a lot of the affordable housing developments.”
That’s worse.
Very good analysis, Voltaire. The supply/demand imbalance is behind the acute statewide housing shortages throughout California. Local jurisdictions do whatever they can to foil new housing construction. NIMBYs rule in California.
And yes, does anybody read these flyers? I only look at the endorsements. SEIU means keeping the defined-benefit pension debacle intact, Police/fire means keeping the defined-benefit pension debacle intact. Tech/Ron Conway means doing the evil techie bidding. Etc., etc. But the flyers are nice for starting campfires when you visit state parks.
Yeah your original comment, your smarmy and totally insincere original comment really added to the discourse.
In single-family neighborhoods it is not so much architectural character as it is quality of life.
That statement could win her some votes of those who are more likely to turn out to vote.
If you didn’t participate in this discours with your infantile name-calling, need for attention and sheer stupidity, this forum would be a lot more useful.
London Breed has been the President of the Board of Supervisors for over three years now, with a pro-mayor majority for most of that time, and she accomplished nothing.
San Francisco’s waitlist for shelter for the homeless just kept growing and growing and growing… from about 650 people when she started, to over a thousand today. She resided over giving tents away for free to homeless people, who were forced out of the downtown to underpasses and such during the World Series… and then used our tax dollars again to destroy those tents and trash their last few belongings.
London Breed had her chance. Now it’s our turn to fix things.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DbHUMeqU8AEP2SI.jpg
Gee, we’ve had a black mayor and a woman mayor and a Conway-owned mayor.
But we’ve never a gay mayor, and that would be a major change.
You’re just being homophobic.
Mark Leno… isn’t he the old white male who Willie Brown appointed to the board of Supervisors in 1998 who now wants us to vote for him as mayor because he represents “change” ??? This old white male (not a property owner) says … yawn!
I Ididn’t say it did. But they rarely report anything that shows their candidate behind. And Breed is their candidate.
Denial is not just a river in Egypt. Why not admit you have no real arguments? Oh, wait, you just did!!!
This was just the latest poll I could find anywhere. The Chron didn’t commission it.
Hi folks, my (rather long but heartfelt) comment got deleted as potential spam. So I am re-posting it. Thanks for listening.
Does a large portion of voters actually read 48 Hills or the copius mailbox flyers telling us who is the more-Progressive—next-candidate? Does anyone besides unionized city employees with a strong interest in their benefits and pensions, or club members with an axe to grind and a stomach for shrill arguments pay attention to endorsements and arguments by the myriad “Democratic” clubs? I don’t. And I don’t suspect even the most frequent voters do; you know, the ones who are going to show up on an odd election day in June.
How do City voters usually vote? For the status quo, whether that is described as Progressive or Liberal or whatever. Most voters operate from a fear-of-change, gut-based, poorly informed stance.
Our housing crisis (which includes homelessness, not a separate issue) gets nibbled at around the edges. Meanwhile, tenants mostly vote against what would result in thousands of more units, and home owners preserve their neighborhoods’ architectural character (Hello, Forest Hill!), while the population of who can afford to live inside those little houses changes dramatically.
I know Mr. Redmond and 48 Hills and the Bay Guardian before this work hard and mean very well. But to my mind their understanding of the causes and therefore the solutions to our housing woes is nearly 100% wrong. I can only hope (and vote and volunteer) again and again for candidates and legislation that change the status quo.
Everybody decide, of course, for yourselves. I think London Breed is the best of the lot this time round when it comes to getting housing built and listening to others. But I see no radical change on the near horizon, mostly because we San Franciscans aren’t yet convinced we have to do some very hard, new things.
Does a large portion of voters actually read 48 Hills or the copius mailbox flyers telling us who is more-Progressive-the-next-candidate? Does anyone besides unionized city employees with a strong interest in their benefits and pensions, or club members with an axe to grind and a stomach for shrill arguments pay attention to endorsements and arguments by the myriad “Democratic” clubs? I don’t. And I don’t suspect even the most frequent voters do; you know, the ones who are going to show up on an odd election day in June.
How do City voters usually vote? Usually for the status quo, whether that is described as Progressive or Liberal or whatever. Most voters operate from a fear-of-change, gut-based, poorly informed stance.
Our housing crisis (which includes homelessness, not a separate issue) gets nibbled at around the edges. Meanwhile, tenants mostly vote against what would result in thousands of more units, and home owners preserve their their neighborhoods’ architectural character while the population of who can afford to live inside those little houses changes dramatically.
I know Mr. Redmond and 48 Hills and the Bay Guardian before this work hard and mean very well. But to my mind their understanding of the causes and therefore the solutions to our housing woes is nearly 100% wrong. I can only hope (and vote and volunteer) again and again for candidates and legislation that changes the status quo.
Everybody decide, of course, for yourselves. I think London Breed is the best of the lot this time round when it comes to getting housing built and listening to others. But I see no radical change on the near horizon, mostly because we San Franciscans aren’t yet convinced we have to do some very hard, new things.
LOL.. You are really funny today. A real guilty pleasure is laughing at Geek__Girl’s version of reality. I know it’s wrong,, but so what.
I said the article was from the Chronicle. The Chronicle tends to carefully choose what it reports in order to favor the candidates he supports. If they are reporting a poll showing Leno leading, it is likely that others show him more ahead.
Just as an FYI, here is the truth about the poll. In Geek__Girl’s version of reality it was from the Chronicle, for everyone else:
She did not “explain what she meant.” She went on with a diatribe against how “affordable housing” is allocated. You are not an honest person at all. You have already been caught in a blatant lie about the campaign video that attacked Leno.
Now, you see, here is a perfect example of your lying. You say it does not say one negative word about Leno. Of course it does. It is an attack ad against Leno, among other things.
It starts off with KPIX, in a segment taken out of context, about the “alleged” backroom deal. It then says that “This guy (Aaron Peskin) cut a deal with these guys “Farrell and asking, concerning the allegations of backroom dealings, “Any truth to them?” Then it shows Aaron Peskin saying “I don’t want to comment on that.” There is no context, but it is implied that it was about the vote. Given the sleazy nature of the whole ad, it is probably not remotely that. Then it continues saying this was “All because they felt their power was threatened by Breed,” not that she was attempting an unethical ploy. It implies that the KPIX anchor was claiming that Peskin cut a “backroom” deal with Farrell and Sheehy to help Leno. So, yes, it does not say “one” negative word about Leno, it says quite a few. It distorts what KPIX’s coverage actually said, it implies that London Breed was somehow “robbed” of something she was entitled to, and just generally is a total crock.
So, please, cut the crap. You don’t do a good job of lying at all.
A person who doesn’t live in reality calling others fools…now that makes sense.
And that was from the Chronicle. I imagine other polls may show him even more ahead.
So it would seem.
Wasn’t there someone else who ran for office, who’s only real marketing strategy was her gender and not her positions? She lost.
Arjuna and fool are synonymous.
I know, and I included that quote but also the followup where she explained what she meant and it was worthwhile. I know that if you cherry pick one line out of context you can use it to mislead people. That is what progressives do, honest people don’t.
But you see, she doesn’t. She uses the word gimmick in the paragraph to describe an allocation problem within the system. She doesn’t “describe affordable housing as a gimmick” as you say.
Don’t you ever stop to wonder why progressives have to lie so much? Is there something inherent in the position that seems to require people to abandon any effort to provide facts with honesty and integrity?
It never bothers you at all?
It is a story about Leno calling Breed out on her record, which tries to run away from. You are simply a fool.
She said, “What everyone talks about, as a gimmick, is “affordable housing.”“ you are the one trying to lie. She labeled affordable housing as a gimmick. She is objecting to lotteries instead of being able to award it to friends.
Breed was trying a very unethical ploy to have excess power and a major conflict of interest. She was NOT “entitled” to be Interim Mayor, was not “entitled” to hold on to her seat as a Supervisor, and be the President of the Board, while also remaining as Acting Mayor” simply because she thought the votes would allow it. She overreached and got her hand slapped. Implying it was anything more than the Supervisors being outraged at her abuse of power is an outright lie.
Here is another quote by LB in this block of text (hasn’t the editor heard of paragraphs?)
“I’m not saying this as if I’m proud, but I’m the only one of the candidates who supported Sit/Lie. I didn’t support Sit/Lie because I thought it was going to fix the problem, I just thought it would bring attention to the problem in a different way so that the city could begin to really aggressively address it a little bit better from a law enforcement perspective”
She uses the term “everyone” but then goes on to describe affordable housing as a gimmick. So what flight505 said is not a stretch.
Embedded in this is a lie by London Breed — “We build tons of units of affordable housing.”
This is RIGHT out of the progressive playbook. She used the word gimmick to describe a problem within the allocation of affordable housing, and gave detail on what she identified as a problem. So progressives fall all over themselves to say that she called affordable housing a gimmick.
Progressives lie constantly.
If anyone is interested, here is what she said:
After Breed was elected to the Board, Hoodline published an interview with Breed.
In the interview, she called affordable housing a “gimmick.” A bit later, she made a remarkably reactionary statement about immigrants’ access to public housing.
“And sometimes, the people who are in these different public housing developments — and I’m not discriminating against anyone, but sometimes they’re not even U.S. citizens — we are not doing enough to look at the people who are here now, and how we can help protect the folks who are here now and give them access to affordable housing. We’re so concerned about people coming from another state, or people coming from another country, making San Francisco attractive for everybody — except people who live here!”
https://hoodline.com/2013/01/meet-london-breed-your-new-supervisor
Over a month ago the Chamber of Commerce funded poll had Breed leading by a few points. YIMBYs, developers and realtors hope London Breed wins. More and more people are getting hip to Breed’s actual record. The truth will set you free.
The “ deal” was a legislate vote… so the IE paid for an ad about how the IE did not like the outcome? Maybe the message should be about plans and policies rather than whining.
The latest poll has Leno ahead by 1 point in the first round, and by 4 points after RCV tallying.
Leno is trailing in the polls, and so we get this. A story about nothing.
Tim Redmond is not a journalist.
Just as an FYI, the ad in question never says one negative word about Leno. It talks about the deal set up to prevent Breed from continuing as acting or interim Mayor and says that it was for “this guy” over a picture of Leno. That’s it.
The ad is 1:15 long and the picture of Leno is up for probably less than 2 seconds. You can click on the link Tim provides to see for yourself.
Just in case you’re not familiar with 48 Hills “journalism”.