By Luke Thomas
October 1, 2009
Hold on to your nellies, foggers. The 2011 race for mayor and the 2010 race for District 8 supervisor just got a little bit more interesting.
Former District 7 Supervisor Tony Hall and BART Board Director Tom Radulovich have not ruled out possible candidacies.
“People are asking me to seriously consider running,” Hall told FCJ. “I feel that the need for a real Mayor who is willing to work for the benefit of all San Franciscans and the common good of the City as a whole has never been more evident than now.”
Former District 7 Supervisor Tony Hall.
Hall, you’ll recall, was forced to drop out of the 2007 race for mayor and, subsequently, the 2008 race for District 7 supervisor when a “politically motivated” anonymous complaint filed with the San Francisco Ethics Commission triggered a four-yearlong investigation into alleged campaign finance violations by Hall in connection with his 2004 re-election campaign for supervisor. Hall believes the anonymous complaint was penned by attorney Jim Sutton on behalf of Mayor Gavin Newsom and Supervisor Sean Elsbernd to eliminate Hall as a threat to Newsom and Elsbernd’s respective re-election campaigns.
The investigation, which cost taxpayers as much as $1 million to prosecute, resulted in Hall being found not guilty on the most serious charge of money laundering – a violation which carried a maximum $240 thousand fine – after Hall attorney David Waggoner exposed evidence of evidence tampering.
“You can bet that if I do run, it will be to fix this City as opposed to climbing the political ladder,” Hall said, taking a stab at Newsom’s foundering gubernatorial misadventure. “The real question is, are enough people ready and willing to sacrifice to get the job done?”
In the 2010 race for District 8 supervisor, Radulovich, who, in addition to his duties as BART Director, heads up Livable City, a non-profit that promotes mass-transit and bicycle/walking-friendly neighborhoods.
“I am considering a run for D8 Supervisor,” Radulovich responded to FCJ inquiry. “I have my hands more than full this year between BART and Livable City. BART especially has had numerous crises, and deserves my full attention. I have given myself until December to decide finally, one way or the other.”
BART Director Tom Radulovich.
In 2002, Radulovich ran for the open District 8 supervisor seat vacated by Mark Leno. He placed third with 19.26 percent of the vote before a runoff between Supervisor Bevan Dufty and San Francisco Ethics Commissioner Eileen Hansen.
Radulovich is a well-respected expert on transportation issues in a world threatened by climate change and dwindling oil and gas reserves. His candidacy, should he officially declare, will inevitably pose a threat to the (so far) declared candidacies of Scott Wiener, Laura Spanjian and Rafael Mandelman.
Luke Thomas
Luke Thomas is a former software developer and computer consultant who proudly hails from London, England. In 2001, Thomas took a yearlong sabbatical to travel and develop a photographic portfolio. Upon his return to the US, Thomas studied photojournalism to pursue a career in journalism. In 2004, Thomas worked for several neighborhood newspapers in San Francisco before accepting a partnership agreement with the SanFranciscoSentinel.com, a news website formerly covering local, state and national politics. In September 2006, Thomas launched FogCityJournal.com. The BBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox News, New York Times, Der Spiegel, San Francisco Chronicle, San Francisco Magazine, 7x7, San Francisco Examiner, San Francisco Bay Guardian and the San Francisco Weekly, among other publications and news outlets, have published his work. Thomas is a member of the Freelance Unit of the Pacific Media Workers Guild, TNG-CWA Local 39521 and is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists.
Follow Me:
The Hunger Site
October 8, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Two really interesting items in this comment thread:
First, Ruth R Snave finally admitted his gender is male! “One such constituency is “the gray gays†– older gay men (like myself)â€
Second, Snave is actually offering good advice to progressives. It doesn’t matter how sound your reasoning on why you think it is not a conspiracy theory to state Gavin will appoint someone in D8. Newsom and the mainstream media will paint it that way anyway. And they’ll get away with it just like they do with portraying Daly constantly in a negative light. And Greg did it, too. I did not call it a conspiracy theory. I said it will be portrayed that way. You might be proven right at some point but is that more important than winning the district race? Snave is telling you that strategy won’t play well in his district and he is basing it on events we can all research rather than simple conjecture. Why repeat that strategy over and over if it has not been effective?
October 7, 2009 at 9:32 pm
Hope said:
“Vocalizing†it is a waste of time without a plan to prevent it. It just provides fuel for them to call the left a bunch of conspiracy theorists, crazy, and all the other labels mainstream media readers and voters want to believe. They do that shit because they can get away with it because the left thinks complaining about it is organizing against it.”
I actually disagree. Look, there are basically two possibilities -Gavin either tries to make this sort of deal, or he doesn’t. If he does, and the “conspiracy theory” as you call it has previously been vocalized, then the “conspiracy theorists” are proven right all along, and it becomes a lot easier to denounce as the kind of corruption they warned about in the first place.
If he doesn’t, then we have nothing to worry about. Go ahead, call us conspiracy theorists. And if part of the reason that he doesn’t try it, is to show that we’re conspiracy theorists, then I say it’s a small price to pay.
And besides, this is hardly the stuff of wild-eyed conspiracy theory, especially considering that Gavin has already done this with D7. Given that history, pretending that the thought hasn’t crossed Gavin’s mind, pretending that he’s not thinking of a way to make it happen… isn’t going to make it less likely.
October 7, 2009 at 12:42 pm
In a post above, Greg says:
“I actually think that bringing up the possibility beforehand innoculates voters against it, makes it easier to denounce it as corrupt, and ultimately makes Gavin less likely to try and do it.”
There is some grousing about Gavin Newsom among the voters in district eight. But anyone who thinks they view Newsom as the embodiment of evil is seriously self-deluded.
Progressives made the same mistake about Willie Brown, the first time that Bevan Dufty ran for supe, against Eileen Hansen. The progressives put stickers all over the place, depicting Dufty as a marionette, controlled by Willie Brown.
Although there was some grousing about Brown in the district at the time, the voters did not share the progressives’ demonic view of Brown. The stickers backfired, making the progressive backers of Eileen Hansen look paranoid and goofy. Dufty on.
The puzzling thing is that the progressives keep making the same mistake over and over again.
What gives?
October 7, 2009 at 11:57 am
I think you guys think you’re a lot more important than you actually are. If you went to the dog/kids park in Noe Valley, and hung around all day, maybe 10% of the people there would have heard of ANY of the candidates. I thought I was a junkie until the first couple announced (but I do know who Tom Radulovich is and he has my vote).
In Noe you have 1000’s of new transplants in Noe who work down south. They live in SF because they want to live in a walkable, nice place, but they need good mass transit options. If some candidate says the wrong thing about the Google bus, kiss those votes goodbye. I think this is where Radulovich’s cred will help.
And all those people have 2 year old kids. A candidate who promises to get a little dirty with the school board to improve the current school assignment system will garner a lot of sympathy. While in theory the SFUSD board is independent, the traffic, environmental, and safety problems caused by the current assignment system are high level issues the city should address.
October 7, 2009 at 7:25 am
“Vocalizing” it is a waste of time without a plan to prevent it. It just provides fuel for them to call the left a bunch of conspiracy theorists, crazy, and all the other labels mainstream media readers and voters want to believe. They do that shit because they can get away with it because the left thinks complaining about it is organizing against it.
October 6, 2009 at 11:22 pm
Hope,
Regarding that rumor, I think the downtown powerbrokers are already looking for every way possible to install their man. And of course the best way of doing that is to fuck democracy and install their man before the voters have their say.
My vocalizing it doesn’t make it any more likely. You can be 100% sure they’ve already thought of it. It was Willie Brown’s preferred MO, and Newsom has already done it twice. In the case of the rubber stamp that occupies D7, it was done in a very deliberate and clumsily obvious manner.
So the only thing that would stop Newsom from doing it again is if he can’t. Some kind of corrupt deal for D6 or D10 is probably out of reach. Daly would never do something so vile, and one would hope that Maxwell has enough integrity to not go along either. But Bevan? Who knows.
And bringing it up beforehand doesn’t make it more likely, it just makes us more prepared. I hope that you’re right that voters in D8 would be smart enough to see right through it, but again, I don’t know. I actually think that bringing up the possibility beforehand innoculates voters against it, makes it easier to denounce it as corrupt, and ultimately makes Gavin less likely to try and do it.
October 6, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Oh, almost forgot (must be the alzheimers setting in)….while they’re running for mayor/supervisor/dog catcher, et al, how about a forum on the parking meter scandal, candidates?????….you guys and gals have plenty of money in the city’s kittie, it’s what you spend it on that has created many of our current problems….and your response is to never take a hard look at what you throw money at, it’s always hire more meter maids, jack-up the parking meter rates, and tag, tag, tag!!!!……and you know what is worse?….take your ticket down to the SFMTA on van ness to protest it. HA!….if it weren’t so down-right depressing it would be funny….they purposely have you waiting so long that you leave, the place is crowded worse than St. Anthony’s or Glide at meal time, and IF you have the patience of Job and hang around to protest your ticket, guess who hears your protest????…..you got it, an EMPLOYEE of the Parking and Traffic gang!!!!….that’s like trying to suit Coca-Cola in Atlanta….ever heard ole BEV standup and say that ain’t right??? Hell no, he and the rest of ’em want your money so bad. What a joke….no way you or any other present elected bum getting my vote, Bev…..and if I could contribute money to your campaign I’d have to tell you I don’t have any more disposable income thanks to your support of DPT and TAG,TAG, TAG!….and before you bike geniuses tell me that i would not get the tickets if i gave up my car, you have no clue as to how people have to get by in big City’s….yours is a myopic view.
October 6, 2009 at 11:53 am
Oh, candidate BEVAN, let’s chat about the wasteful F line Streetcars…..didn’t the City spend hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on our Muni subway from Castro to the Embarcadero????…..so you think we need these old relics on Upper Market street every weekday morning to jam the commute traffic????…..take your blindfold off, BEV! There’s practically no one on these things…..the F Cars are for the tourists, baby, and they don’t get up at 7 or 8 in the morning…..if you and the guy in Room 200 REALLY wanted to help the city’s financial crunch, you would start the F cars at Van Ness going EAST where ther tourists are and start them at 9 or 10 in the morning…..these streetcars are nice and nostalgic, but PLEASE, there’s practically no locals on them from Van Ness WEST….we built the METRO subway for the LOCALS, BEV!!!
Don’t get your panties twisted because the F car wouldn’t go to the Castro—-that’s the tail waggin the dog, baby…..the metro cars serve the Castro just fine…..don’t you guys have half a brain??….by taking the F car to commence at Van Ness and start-up at 9 or 10 in the morning means less labor costs and less maintenance costs…..NO BRAINERS are not in the lexicon of EAST-SIDE legislators!!!!
October 6, 2009 at 11:44 am
Has anyone tried to make it onto the Octavia freeway entrance going around Mint Hill in the morning??? Talk about the Duboce Triangle getting what it deserves!….nothing but car grid-lock there because DUFTY, NEWSOM et al won’t buck the bike lobby and go for the natural right hand ramp from market st….ergo, Buchanan, Waller, Haight, Laguna are all jammed with cars from Market St. all during the morning commute time as they circuitously whittle there way to the onramp…..another genius-inspired progressive-agenda item……
October 6, 2009 at 11:21 am
The West side of town is the reason we have fresh air in SF. So not uncoincidentally do we get a breath of fresh air than from Tony Hall on that side of town.
Stagnant is the word most associated with the east-side thinkers, even though they would have the masses believe they are “progressive”. Progessive to them is bicycle takeover, more weed for car and cicycle drivers, plaza’s on through streets like 17th and Castro that only create traffic hazards and appease the Castroites (didn’t someone tell us that there is a major financial deficit in SF but we have money for these “pathetic plazas”???).
Doesn’t matter who represents District 8 (Castro, Noe Valley, etc.)….the Castroites have the votes and the hell with Noe Valley and the Upper Market….as long as 8 is gerrymander as it is, forget conservative-moderate politics and issues being discussed, much less considered. Dufty does not have a snow ball’s chance in hell….he’s mr. fencesitter (isn’t his adopted baby named “Chain Link”????!!!)…..hottest places in hell are reserved for fencesitters (no, gay issues are not on the table because he’s going to vote for every one of them anyway)……they may as well make the Castro and Duboce Triangle the whole District 8—-cut loose the rest of us so we can find someone who WILL represent us.
October 5, 2009 at 2:54 pm
For the record, I am absolutely NOT advocating anyone not run for elected office. We are all enhanced when more people become interested locally in politics.
Plus how do we know yet that Tom wouldn’t make a better candidate than Raffie? Since both run in the same political circles, though, there should be some planning, discussion, and consideration of the best course of action. Everyone who wants to run should run so long as they put forth their best effort. All obstacles can be overcome if you look at the situation honestly and objectively (aka don’t surround yourself with yes men.)
And, don’t even start that rumor of Newsom appointing someone in D8. Ain’t gonna happen. D8 residents would be outraged. Anyway, it’s D6 and D10 those developers want.
October 5, 2009 at 2:18 pm
No candidate can win in district eight, which Includes the Castro and Noe Valley, by scoffing at the quality-of-life concerns of residents. Several important constituencies share these concerns.
One such constituency is “the gray gays” – older gay men (like myself) who have lived in a neighborhood for a long time, whether as tenants or home-owners.
These residents have developed a sense of neighborhood pride. They don’t want to see their neighborhoods trashed by public addicts and alcoholics, acting abusively with impunity. These residents won’t support politicians who look down their noses at their concerns.
Another important constituency is heterosexual couples, and/or lesbian couples, with young children. They are now a large group in Noe Valley and have become increasing important in the Castro. These couples, especially the women, are very sensitive to crime and grime.
They want an environment that will be a healthy and safe one for their young children. They won’t support politicians who look down their noses at their concerns.
Yet another important constituency consists of young, professional gay Asians (Gaysians). In recent years, they have become increasingly evident in the Castro.
Although they are fun-loving like anybody else, they mostly come from family backgrounds and cultural traditions that insist on personal responsibility and respect for the common good.
They don’t like seeing their neighborhoods trashed by abusive people who share neither of these values. They won’t support politicians who look down their noses at their concerns.
In recent races in district eight, the candidates who packaged themselves as “the progressive alternative in this race” scoffed at residents with quality-of-life concerns.
Eileen Hansen refused to talk to voters who had such concerns. Alix Rosenthal was even worse, advocating that the neighborhood be made more “freaky.”
Today, Rafael Mandelman is the candidate who is packaging himself as “the progressive alternative in this race.” So far, he has given every indication of repeating the mistakes of Eileen Hansen and Alix Rosenthal. He will share their fate.
Politicians who package themselves as “progressives” would do well to remember something City Attorney Dennis Herrera once said, to the effect that quality of life is a progressive issue.
He’s right. Throughout the U.S., most people who call themselves “progressives” support efforts to make the lives of ordinary people safe, clean, and peaceful.
In SF, however, people who call themselves “progressives” often scoff at such concerns.
Go figure.
October 5, 2009 at 10:14 am
Folks should listen to Hope (while it may be too early to handicap supe races, she has a record of being spot on when she does handicap them). Are you listening, Tom?
Besides that, Newsom may well have some dirty tricks up his sleeve a la Elsbernd. I wouldn’t be surprised if by the end of this thing, Weenie not only has the incumbent endorsement, but he WILL be the incumbent. I’m sure Newsom’s little brain is working overtime trying to find some plum gift for Bevan in exchange for an early exit, and the chance to appoint Weenie.
If this starts looking like it’s likely to happen, then progressives need to be unified in calling it out as the bullshit that it is. And if our votes are divided at that time, then our goose is cooked.
October 5, 2009 at 7:10 am
Same opinion for D8, IRV notwithstanding. Rank choice voting is a great resource if used wisely.
It’s way too early to start analyzing the supe races. However, Weiner already has Newsom’s endorsement, and D8 has some loyalty to Gavin on the gay marriage issue. If (or, in my opinion, when) Herrera also endorses Weiner, that will strengthen Scott’s name recognition. If Dufty doesn’t get his feathers ruffled and do a revenge endorsement of Spanijian, Weiner may well have the incumbent D8 supe endorsement, too.
Progressives need to consider the benefit of rallying mostly around one solid candidate to even get to IRV. The so-called progressive board majority elected last November has been resoundingly substandard coming together on issues. Voters are disappointed. The supes have done business behind closed doors and bickering in public, building a record that’s no help to future progressive candidates. Remember, some of those progs barely won their districts even with Obama screaming “change†at the top of his lungs.
October 5, 2009 at 7:00 am
Another potential D8 debacle ?
Deja vue all over again ?
It appears that Tom Radulovich may be smitten with the seven year itch and once more the ‘progressive’ vote may be split, depriving us of a strong and principled representative, one who would have stood up against the corporate interests. Radulovich’s last run for D8 supervisor netted him about 5,000 votes. If he had not siphoned off those votes it is almost certain that Eileen Hansen would have been elected and some of the excesses of the last seven years might have been mitigated. Who knows, with a less co-opted Board we might even have been spared the Newsom regime.
I agree with Greg that Mandelman is the one we should be supporting.
Please Tom, reconsider, don’t be a party pooper again. I suggest a nice long relaxing bath in a tub of warm calamine lotion.
October 4, 2009 at 2:58 pm
I agree with Hope. I like Radulovich, but he’s getting a late start, and in his past run for this office he didn’t seem to be able to pull it together. We already have a terrific candidate in Rafael Mandelman, so I’m just afraid Radulovich could play spoiler. And yes, it’s true that IRV was supposed to mitigate that effect. And it has, but not entirely.
As for Tony Hall, I think he’s setting his sights way too high. He’s far too conservative to be elected mayor. Way too conservative for me, too, but I do like the fact that he isn’t bought and paid for. He’s generally been a straight shooter, and I’ll take an independent conservative over a machine hack any day. I’d love to see him run for his old seat, currently occupied by, well, a machine hack. In fact, he’d be perfect. He’d be an able representative, ideologically aligned well with the conservative constituency of D7 homeowners, but he’d do it without being a total downtown call-in vote.
October 4, 2009 at 9:25 am
I agree with Hope Johnson. IRV has proven to not mitigate this. In addition, resources would be split which weakens each candidacy.
October 3, 2009 at 3:58 am
I mean to end by saying that we know where Scott Wiener, and Dianne Feinstein, Mark Leno and Fiona Ma stand on the environment, because we know where they stand on the Afghanistan War. The approach of the Blue Angels Air Show is already rattling my brain.
October 3, 2009 at 3:39 am
Regarding, again, Scott Weiner’s support of Feinstein, Leno, Ma in opposing Democratic County Central Committee support for a resolution calling on Nancy Pelosi to demand an exit strategy before further funding the Afghanistan War, http://www.fogcityjournal.com/wordpress/2009/07/24/feinstein-leno-ma-oppose-afghanistan-exit-strategy-resolution:
Note that Scott Weiner, and Dianne Feinstein, Mark Leno, and Fiona Ma have, by opposing this resolution, become open champions of global warming and environmental destruction, because war is the leading cause of both. The U.S. Armed Forces are the single largest consumer of fossil fuels in the world, and U.S. wars, including the War in Afghanistan, are, more than anything else, wars for oil, including all the oil the oil transport corridors required to keep the U.S.Armed Forces fighting for more oil and oil transport corridors.
All this talk about green jobs and the green collar economy is garbage—distraction—-as the U.S. continues to escalate all its hugely fossil fueled wars for more fossil fuels.
So we know where Scott Wiener, and Dianne Feinstein, Mark Leno, and Fiona Ma stand on the Afghanistan War, as Barack Obama contemplates putting 40,000 more pair of “boots on the ground,” with no end in sight.
October 2, 2009 at 1:15 pm
Mr. Hall needs to think this through seriously before announcing his candidacy or further discussing a potential run. After creating a stir in both the last mayor and supervisor races then dropping out, he runs the risk of becoming the candidate who cried wolf.
Mr. Radulovich would make a fine, even formidable, supervisor candidate, being well respected by many. However, if both Radulovich and Mandelman remain in the race, they will split votes and essentially give the election to Scott Weiner. Weiner, who is very smart and a remarkably hard worker, is quickly becoming the candidate to beat.
October 2, 2009 at 8:15 am
Just read something I missed here, in Fog City, last July: Feinstein, Leno, Ma—(and District #8 Candidate Scott Wiener)—Oppose Afghanistan Exit Strategy Resolution, http://www.fogcityjournal.com/wordpress/2009/07/24/feinstein-leno-ma-oppose-afghanistan-exit-strategy-resolution/
I suppose that Scott Wiener is Bevan Dufty’s heir apparent, but I’d like to think this city might have enough soul left to instead support Tom Radulovich, or someone else less likely to line up with the Democratic County Central Committee’s warmongers and profiteers.
October 1, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Tony Hall and Tom Radulovich would both add important perspectives to the races for mayor and supervisor, respectively, should they run. However, both are likely to come across as over-the-edge, to the major block of voters in each race.
Tony Hall will stumble when asked about reproductive rights for women and marriage rights for gay people. Tom Radulovich will stumble when asked about getting the city’s public addicts and alcoholics under control.
The typical San Francisco voter wants candidates who are strong in both social justice and public safety.
They’re hard to find!
October 1, 2009 at 9:31 am
Tom Radulovich is singular in my mind, among San Francisco politicians, because, amidst all the talk about green jobs, he said he’d like to see a conversation about creating social value rather than creating jobs.