The Board of Supes, the Planning Commission, the Police Commission, and much of City Hall is on an August break—which means the mayor and Sups. Aaron Peskin and Ahsha Safai will have more time to focus on running for mayor, and Sups. Dean Preston, Connie Chan, and Myrna Melgar will have more time to focus on their re-election.
And since the most recent campaign finance reports are out, the news media has been all about the money.
I’ve looked at the reports, too; if you want some light reading, go to sfethics.org, click on campaign finance disclosures, type in the name of a candidate and look for Form 460.
Here’s what stands out:
All the major candidates for mayor have the money they need to run serious, credible campaigns. So do all the major candidates for supervisor.
That’s in part thanks to the city’s public financing system, which matches local contributions of up to $150 five-to-one.
The data is still a little messy: Some of the candidates have qualified for public match, but the cash hasn’t come in.
But the bigger issue is the independent expenditure money and the Democratic County Central Committee loophole.
San Francisco law is clear: No candidate can accept more than $500 from any individual, and corporations can’t contribute to local campaigns.
But many of the folks running for supervisor also ran for the DCCC in March, and since that’s a state-law race, contributions are unlimited. Two partners in Y Combinator together gave Bilal Mahmood $25,000 to run for DCCC; he was free to use that money to improve his name recognition in District 5, where he is running for supe.
Then there are the IEs.
The Chron’s useful chart, which shows how much money is pouring into each campaign, doesn’t distinguish between IEs and direct contributions, making it appear that, for example, Daniel Lurie is good at raising money from the grassroots. Actually, the vast majority of the money that is supporting Lurie—and Mayor London Breed, and Mark Farrell—is coming from Lurie’s family, and a very small number of tech and real estate billionaires.
That’s the oligarchy that is seeking to take over San Francisco.
There is, at this point, no well-funded IE supporting Peskin or Ahsha Safai, making it appear they have less money.
The interesting element of all of this: Lurie’s supporters have spent millions. Farrell’s supporters have spent millions. Breed’s supporters are spending millions.
And a far as I can tell from all the polls, very little has changed from this spring, when they all started spending.
The polls show that Breed, Farrell, and Peskin are at the top, with somewhere between 20 and 30 percent (with the margins of error). Farrell hasn’t moved much; he’s at about 25-28 percent, and it seems as if he is maxing out; the Republican/right wing in this city is real, but limited.
Breed remains stuck where she was in the beginning; her savage attacks on homeless people haven’t, so far, made much difference. She’s the incumbent; everyone already knows about her record, and most of the voters have probably made a decision about her.
Reality: This race is going to be close, and will come down to ranked-choice voting second-place votes. The big money coming in after Labor Day isn’t going to be promoting Breed or Farrell; it’s going to attacking Peskin, and if Breed’s IE folks see an opening, attacking Farrell. Telling voters how wonderful your candidate is has had only limited impact; telling them how horrible your opponent is the next step.
I don’t see the big money moving Lurie at all; where is he going to go for votes?
What I do see is Peskin, Lurie, and Farrell trying to make nice with Safai, since he’s likely to be the first one eliminated under the RCV calculus. Breed doesn’t seem to want to make nice with anyone.
Get ready for a crazy fall.
Full disclosure: My son and daughter both work on the Peskin for Mayor campaign.
