Four years ago, when then-Assemblyman Mark Leno squared off against incumbent state Senator Carole Migden, it was one of the most divisive intraparty races of the election cycle. We backed Migden in that race, but she came up short.
Now, the legislative districts have been redrawn and for awhile it was feared Leno's seat would be lost. It wasn't, and we are pleased to endorse him in his re-election bid.
One of the state's most high-profile LGBT politicos, Leno has taken on important issues over the years, including the Fair, Accurate, Inclusive, and Respectful Education Act, which ensures that the historical contributions of LGBT Americans and people with disabilities are fairly portrayed in instructional materials. But Leno is more than a "gay" politician. He has authored (and seen passed) bills addressing in-custody informants, gas pipeline safety, and electronic medical records. This year he is working on bills about medical cannabis, location privacy, and strip searches. He is a progressive Democrat who works to build consensus on legislation that helps people.
Of course, most of Leno's time is spent dealing with state budget matters; he is chair of the Senate Budget Committee. In that capacity, he is working to help pass Governor Jerry Brown's tax measure that will be on the November ballot.
"The comprehensive tax measure is critically important," Leno told us, adding that it's a "breath of fresh air" to have Brown in the governor's office after seven years of Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Leno is smart, capable, and gets things accomplished. We recommend Leno for the newly drawn 11th Senate District seat.
Ammiano for 17th Assembly District
In the newly drawn 17th Assembly District, covering eastern San Francisco, we recommend incumbent Assemblyman Tom Ammiano for his third term. Since being elected four years ago, Ammiano has passed some important legislation, including Seth's Law, which tightens anti-bullying policies in schools. A former teacher and member of the San Francisco school board (as well as the Board of Supervisors), Ammiano has championed legislation that will help students. This year he is working on bills addressing discipline policies.
Like Leno, Ammiano has not limited himself to LGBT legislation. He is an advocate of medical cannabis and is trying to work with the U.S. attorney's office to reach an agreement around dispensary operations. He is also one of the few politicians willing to go near the "third rail" of California politics, Proposition 13. The 1970s-era property tax rollback law was passed by voters, but now, some 30-plus years later its effects are being felt as local governments face critical revenue shortfalls. Ammiano wants to start with closing the commercial property tax loophole and, while it's a daunting prospect, the issue should at least be given a full hearing.
Ammiano faces Republican Jason Clark, a young man who faces an uphill fight in one of the state's most liberal districts. Clark has some interesting ideas on tax policy, including taxing pensions of municipal workers. Somehow, we don't see that idea gaining traction.
Ammiano is deserving of another term.
Ting for 19th Assemby District
Phil Ting, San Francisco's assessor-recorder, did not fare well in last year's mayoral race, a consequence, he told us, of so many high-profile folks running. But almost as soon as the results were counted, he launched a bid for this open Assembly seat. (Current Assemblywoman Fiona Ma is termed out.) This race, Ting told us, is "very, very different." For one thing, he has the backing of both the Harvey Milk and Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic clubs, not an easy feat in this politicized city.
Ting is a straight ally who supports marriage equality and other LGBT issues. Running in a heavily Asian district that includes the west side of San Francisco and portions of northern San Mateo County, Ting could help broaden support for same-sex marriage, anti-bullying efforts, and other issues.
He wants to work on economic development and job creation, two areas that are in need of innovative programs. California's unemployment rate, at 11 percent, is above the national rate.
Ting came out of the Asian Law Caucus and said that Asian American attitudes are evolving on LGBT issues. One of the first steps in gaining support, he said, is visibility and same-sex families sharing their stories.
Ting would add an important voice to Sacramento and has our recommendation.
Guillen for 18th Assembly District
In the East Bay, the newly drawn 18th Assembly District includes most of Oakland, Alameda, and part of San Leandro. Abel Guillen, a Peralta Community College trustee, is our recommendation for the seat. (Assemblyman Sandre Swanson is termed out.)
Education, and the funding for it, is Guillen's main issue. He told us that community colleges in California have been hit hard by budget cuts, the Peralta district alone has slashed 600 classes in the last two years, including basics like English and math. Community colleges are often the starting point for university-bound students, but the budget cuts, coupled with high tuition in the UC and CSU systems, means that access isn't available to everyone.
"We really need someone who understands higher education and economic development," Guillen told us.
He's in favor of an oil severance tax. "We're the only state that doesn't have one," he noted, and said that could raise $1.2 billion. What cannot continue to happen, he said, is to balance the state budget on the backs of students.
Guillen would also be the Legislature's only out Two Spirit member; he recently came out publicly and said that if elected he would join the LGBT Legislative Caucus.
Guillen is a good fit with the progressive East Bay district.
Kline for SJ City Council
The city of San Jose has been without an out LGBT member on its City Council for several years, since Ken Yeager was elected to the county Board of Supervisors. This year, voters in the city's District 6 can change that by electing out gay candidate Steve Kline, whom we recommend.
Incumbent Pierluigi Oliverio is an ally �" he supports marriage equality, for example, and we have no fault with him. It just seems to us that Oliverio is absent on LGBT issues and a voice seems to be missing on the City Council. It was Kline who recently raised concern of the Billy DeFrank LGBT Community Center being put up for sale due to the dissolution of the state's redevelopment agencies, and is just one example where having an out LGBT person on the council would be influential.
Kline would provide that voice.
(photo: Jane Philomen Cleland)
Flanagan for Alameda County judge
There is one open judicial seat in Alameda County and we recommend attorney Tara Flanagan for the position.
Flanagan, an out lesbian, has the experience and qualification. She is a former prosecutor and legal aid attorney who is currently in private practice. She believes that the judicial system should treat everyone fairly. She has also been a temporary judge since 2006, so is familiar with the process. She is backed by numerous judges, elected officials, and community leaders. In a county where only 30 percent of the judges are women, Flanagan would add some much-needed diversity to the bench.
DCCC Endorsements
For decades, the principal functions of the Democratic County Central Committee have been basics associated with grassroots politics: voter education, registration, and turnout to elect Democrats to office and achieve electoral aims on ballot measures that reflect the party's values. The central committee oils the machine of the political process for the party and makes it function smoothly. Additionally, because it is non-paying and not glamorous, it is a good starting point for young, energetic aspirants to elected office. It's a way for them to pay their dues, so to speak, and to become candidates themselves. In recent years, however, we have observed the DCCC straying from its principal functions and becoming increasingly ideological, dividing between the "progressive" and the more "moderate" factions of the party, and often seeking to drive policy more than sticking to its core missions. We are troubled by the increasing number of local elected office holders also seeking seats on the DCCC. Their name recognition gives them an advantage in these entry level positions and makes it harder for the younger, worker bees, who are the future of the party, to get started.
The B.A.R. sent each of the candidates a detailed questionnaire asking their opinions on the concerns expressed above and their own personal motivations. The responses were very thoughtful and helpful to us. It definitely changed some opinions we had going into the process and now realize that there is no simple solution to these complex issues. We have been convinced that it is not democratic to ban elected office holders from running for the DCCC. Not only have voters already rejected that proposal at the ballot box, but many elected office holders remain just as committed to the core missions of party organizing as they ever were. However, we agree with one candidate who opined in her response that elected officials should "self-regulate" when considering a run and make sure that they are doing so for the right reasons.
Likewise, we don't buy into the idea of any sort of slate, whether it be based on gender or gender identity, sexual orientation, political philosophy or ideology, or race. We looked for diversity, balance, conscientiousness, and willingness to work hard for the core missions of the party in a non-confrontational and hopefully respectful fashion as well as for those who hopefully will be our future Democratic candidates for elected offices in our city, state and nation.
Our recommendations for DCCC in the 17th Assembly District are: David Campos, David Chiu, Matt Dorsey, Bevan Dufty, Zoe Dunning, Gabriel Robert Haaland, Leslie Katz, Rafael Mandelman, Hydra Mendoza, Carole Migden, Justin Morgan, Joaquin Torres, Christopher Vasquez, Scott Wiener
Our recommendations for DCCC in the 19th Assembly District are: Kat Anderson, Kevin Bard, Kelly Dwyer, Tom Hsieh, Mary Jung, Siki Kott, Meagan Levitan, Arlo Smith, Jim Weixel, Jason Wong
RCCC
With only 9 percent of registered voters in San Francisco, the Republican Party also has a central committee, the RCCC.
In the 17th AD, we recommend Jason Clark, an openly gay incumbent who was the only person in that race to return his questionnaire.
In the 19th AD, the number of people running for positions does not exceed the number of seats available so they will not be on the ballot.
Ballot measure endorsements
San Francisco Propositions
Proposition A: Garbage Collection and Disposal. NO.
San Francisco is the greenest city in North America. Seventy-eight percent of San Francisco waste is recycled or otherwise converted to useful purposes rather than being dumped in a landfill. The city currently contracts with Recology, a local, employee-owned company, to collect and dispose of waste. Rates are set by a Rate Board consisting of the Chief Administrative Officer of the City, the Controller and the Public Utilities Manager. It has been remarkably successful, resulting in San Francisco being named Greenest City in the Country by the International Green City Index.
Prop A is an initiative that seeks to divide waste management collection and disposal into five separate contracts: one for residential collection, one for commercial collection, one for the recovery and processing of recyclables and compostables, one for transportation to disposal sites, and one for actual disposal. Each contract would be citywide and subject to public bid, and no single company could provide both recycling recovery services and garbage disposal services. The Board of Supervisors would approve the maximum rates that residential and commercial customers would pay.
This is truly a solution in search of a problem. It puts San Francisco's environmental progress at risk and invites large multi-national companies to bid on the more profitable contracts while leaving the less profitable contracts to others. It emphasizes profit over environment. It would likely cost many good-paying local jobs. And who wants the Board of Supervisors to set rates rather than the independent Rate Board that currently sets rates? One only has to look at the broad opposition to Prop A to see its lack of support. Opposing Prop A are the Democratic and Republican parties, the chamber of commerce and the San Francisco Labor Council, the San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association, the Harvey Milk and Alice Toklas LGBT Democratic clubs, and many more. As the saying goes: "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Vote NO on A.
Proposition B: Coit Tower Policy. NO.
Prop B is a nonbinding policy statement to limit outside activities in and around Coit Tower and setting priorities for funds generated from its operation.
Coit Tower and Pioneer Park, sitting high on Telegraph Hill are iconic, historic landmarks, different but just as important to the fabric and legend of San Francisco as City Hall, the Golden Gate Bridge, or the Opera House and are entitled to the same care and conservation from those responsible for their stewardship. Designed by famed architect Arthur Brown Jr. in 1933, Coit Tower was made possible by a generous gift from the eccentric Lillie Hitchcock Coit in 1929 "to add to the beauty of the city I have always loved." Inside the monument are more than 3,500 square feet of murals depicting California life as it appeared to the broad range of artists selected and funded by the Public Works of Art Project, one of the most innovative pilot federal programs of the New Deal. Decidedly leftist in their political slant, these museum-quality murals, mostly fresco, tell the stories of different slices of life in San Francisco and California during difficult but important times. They must be respected and preserved. If you have never seen them, take an afternoon and spend it at Coit Tower. It's as important a monument and museum as we have in San Francisco. And when you go, you will see what this ballot proposition is all about. The Tower is nearly 80 years old. It is showing its age. Water has seeped into the interior and caused some peeling of the art.
Coit Tower and Pioneer Park are under the jurisdiction of the city's Recreation and Park Department. The murals inside are maintained by the city's Arts Commission. Both being city agencies, they are confronted with the same budget cutbacks and reduction of services facing the city generally. This is no excuse not to take proper care of city treasures. But it does provide a context to begin the analysis. The murals were last restored in 1989. Recent deterioration has caused some new damage. Rec and Park has recently transferred $250,000 to the Arts Commission to repair and restore the murals. This will give the Arts Commission sufficient resources to conduct a professional study of necessary repairs and then to undertake them.
Coit Tower itself needs infrastructure repair and continued maintenance. As it remained seismically sound following the 1989 earthquake, it was not included in the bond measure passed by the voters, which has permitted the repair and upgrade of other city monuments built around the same time, such as City Hall, the Opera House, and Bill Graham Auditorium. In meetings with the Bay Area Reporter editorial board, the heads of the Rec and Park Department as well as the commission which oversees it described to us the major study currently being undertaken to ascertain what damage has been done to the tower and what repairs are necessary. They commit that they will follow the recommendations of the study and fund the necessary repairs.
Prop B, while nonbinding, sets as policy that outside activities, including rental events by private organizations, be strictly limited. This focus is misdirected. Public buildings should be available to the largest numbers of people possible. And outside of public opening hours, activities are an important source of revenue that helps support not only the maintenance of Coit Tower but other recreational facilities around the city, such as parks and playgrounds. The issue isn't the number of activities held but that the level of security present be sufficient to assure the safety of the facilities and the people attending the event. Outside events are managed by an exclusive concessionaire under contract with Rec and Park, not unlike a private caterer. The department is currently preparing a request for proposal (RFP) to find a long term (and more satisfactory) concessionaire to manage the facility on a day-to-day basis. They assure us that any new licensing agreement will contain provisions that any rental of the facility for private usage will obligate the user to pay for additional department security to assure that no damage is caused to the tower or to the art.
Prop B would also tell the city how to spend the revenue from operations. We consistently oppose ballot measures that "set aside" revenue and direct it be used for specific purposes. That type of "ballot box budgeting" is not good public policy. While these are particularly difficult economic times, we are convinced that Rec and Park and the Arts Commission are both serious about their commitment to Coit Tower and its preservation as one of San Francisco's most iconic landmarks. Vote no on B.
State Propositions
Proposition 28: Limits on Legislators' Terms in Office. YES.
This is an initiative constitutional amendment that seeks to address a problem we all saw coming when term limits were imposed on the state legislators 20 years ago, i.e. that elected officials subject to term limits would spend most of their time in office looking for their next job in order to extend their political careers by rotating from one office to another and never really master the job they have. We opposed term limits then and still think they are undemocratic, but that's not the issue on the ballot. Prop 28 modifies the current law to imposing a 12-year limit on the time a person can spend in the Legislature. It improves the current law in that it permits the office holder to spend his/her entire 12 years in one chamber, the Assembly or the state Senate. Or s/he can divide the 12 years between the two bodies but isn't required to do so. This will permit the legislator to better understand the issues as well as the body in which s/he serves and reduce the influence of lobbyists and special interests. It is an improvement on a seriously flawed concept. Vote YES on Prop 28.
Proposition 29: Imposes Additional Tax on Cigarettes for Cancer Research. YES.
This initiative statute would impose an additional $1 tax per pack of cigarettes distributed. The tax revenues are required to be deposited into a special fund to finance research and research facilities, tobacco-related diseases, and prevention programs. Smoking is the leading cause of cancer, the world's most deadly killer. The cost to our health care system is staggering, not to mention the pain caused to the families and loved ones affected by smoking-related disease. In spite of the evidence, many young people start smoking. While only one factor, there is a certain price point where kids think twice and smokers wonder if it's worth it. Public health experts estimate Prop 29 will stop 228,000 kids from smoking and will save the lives of 104,000 smokers who quit. And the money will fund research on cancer and tobacco-related diseases. This is a no-brainer. Vote YES on Prop 29.