Jane Kim D-6 campaign ethics probe

from the Bay Citizen

San Francisco ethics officials are set to probe Jane Kim’s campaign for supervisor after an independent expenditure committee with apparent ties to her retained consultant, Left Coast Communications, sent leaflets to residents on Kim’s behalf, an apparent breach of campaign regulations.

The Bay Guardian first reported this as connected to former mayor Willie Brown, (the article now has numerous links, including some history with the Residential Builders Association and Joe O'Donoghue which helped to start Randy Shaws BeyondChron

The nastiest salvos in that debate have recently been fired at the Bay Guardian and the San Francisco Democratic Party Central Committee accusing us of being part of a political machine supporting Walker and excluding Kim (who got the Guardian's #2 endorsement) – by Randy Shaw on his Beyond Chron blog. Shaw is one of two staff writers on the blog, along with Paul Hogarth, a Democratic Party activist and Kim campaign volunteer.

Shaw founded and runs the nonprofit Tenderloin Housing Clinic, which has millions of dollars in city contracts to administer SRO leases through Mayor Gavin Newsom's Care Not Cash and other programs. He started BeyondChron a few years ago with seed money from Joe O'Donoghue, who was then president of the Residential Builders Association, a developer group that has sometimes clashed with Walker in her capacity as a member of the city's Building Inspection Commission.

On Oct. 5 and then again on Oct. 12, Shaw wrote and prominently posted long stories promoting Kim's candidacy and attacking us and the DCCC for not supporting her more strongly. In the first one, “In District 6, Jane Kim takes on the machine,” Shaw defended Burton but shared the Guardian's criticism of how Brown behaved as mayor.

“Brown’s power was strictly personal, as became clear when his chosen Supervisor candidates were defeated in the 2000 elections,” Shaw wrote, criticizing political machines and writing that the progressive political movement is not “served when those seeking to run for office feel they must choose between 'playing ball' with political insiders and giving up their dreams.”

But is it possible that Shaw's strident campaigning against Walker – indeed, his protege Hogarth planned to challenge Walker before Kim decided to get into the race – was prompted by Walker's unwillingness to “play ball” with Shaw and his RBA backers? Should we be concerned that it's actually Shaw who's trying to build his own little political machine?

I've tried to discuss these issues with Shaw and Hogarth, including sending them a detailed list of questions (as has Guardian Executive Editor Tim Redmond), but they've been unwilling to respond, just as they were unwilling to contact us before writing two divisive hit pieces that were riddled with inaccuracies that they've refused to correct.

and now with an update recently added over the weekend with current D-6 supervisor Chris Daly

UPDATE: Daly and I just connected and he had an interesting take on all this. He noted that when Brown was mayor, the base that he
brought together included the RBA, Rose Pak and the Chinatown power brokers (who also seem to be backing Kim, who used to work as an activist/organizer in that community), and, improbably, both Labor and Downtown.

"But that's not Gavin's alignment, his alignment is just downtown. The RBA guys hate Gavin, mostly just because of who is is, a silver spoon guy who never worked a day in his life," Daly said. So Matt Gonzalez, the board president who ran against Newsom in 2003, formed an alliance with the RBA and O'Donoghue, who already had a long relationship with Shaw, both personal and financial.

Daly also said that he thinks it's a personality clash more than anything else that is driving Shaw's opposition to Walker: "He just doesn't like Debra." In turn, that sort of personality-based politics -- more than any differences in ideology, vision, or qualifications -- is souring people in the two political camps on one another as this close election enters the home stretch. But will those resentments linger after this election? Probably, Daly said, although he plans to actively try to mediate the divide once the dust clears on this race.

"Luckily, we have a lot of young people entering the progressive movement," Daly said. "There's always a rejuvenation going on and one day the new leaders will be like, 'Why do that guy and that guy hate each other?' 'I don't know, I think it had something to do with the 2010 election."

but the comments are even more revealing and goes into the history of why there is a progressive battle/split this year


On the O'Donoghue/Walker clash. It began when Joe's people were clear-cutting and building the phony live/work structures SOMA that followed their
'Richmond Specials' of the preceding decades (guy's gotta eat). Joe and his RBA were rolling along with little opposition with the notable exception of two LGBT ladies named Debra Walker and Krissy Keefer (who later ran for congress against Pelosi). Joe and his thugs threatened the ladies who were protesting the planned destruction of a dance studio. It was reported and blackened his name and he's hated them since. Keefer still runs a big dance studio (Dance Mission) and Walker has remained in the public eye. In her year's on the DBI Commission Debra never blinked when O'Donoghue/Willie/Gavin commissioners attacked her relentlessly. Their number one ally? That would be Randy Shaw.

Go Giants!


Chris Daly delicately intervenes

@matlock - You don't know shit about fuck...

But I do.

Even though I have consistently scored the highest on the Bay Guardian report card, I've never received the deference that they've given to many others. Even in their first endorsement of me, the Guardian felt it necessary to take me to task for style (which, of course, was used on a mailer against me.) They've never really understood that this is battle, and you do what you need to do to deliver for your people. The Bay Guardian lacks political discipline and probably will never get it.

* reply

Posted by Chris Daly on Oct. 15, 2010 @ 8:44 am


I am so grateful that finally someone in the press has called out Enrique Pierce and the Jane Kim campaign / staff for their unethical and SHADY tactics. Pierce and his staff person Sunny Angulo, (Jane Kim campaign manager) have been going around for years calling everyone elitists, claiming they don't
pass the progressive litmus test. What a crock! There is nothing progressive about setting up a carpetbagger to run, funded by Rose Pak / Walter Wong + Willie Brown, all while breaking the law. SHAME! To top it off they are race baiting any group or person who does not endorse or support Jane Kim. These are the most vile, bottom feeder, despicable tactics I could ever imagine. Calling it "Progressive" all the while? Please, don't come back around later and ask why people think progressives are a joke! District elections and carpetbagging CANNOT go hand in hand. Let's keep it real people, this is the height of hypocrisy.


I am thermonuclear pissed. I believed in her. I walked a precinct for her in the TL last Saturday and now I have to haul my ass over to Debra Walker and say I'm sorry.

I want an apology from JK.

SF Progressives Have Become As Cheesy As Everybody Else

Wow, what a revealing thread!

Look at all these people who call themselves progressives - acting just like petty Republican schemers in a small town in Ohio.

Whatever happened to the inspiring visions of SF progressivism? The intelligence? The eloquence? The benevolence?

Answer below -

The politicians have co-opted it all.


The silence from Fog City Journal and Beyond Chron is deafening.

Like Soviet TV, Beyondchron

Like Soviet TV, Beyondchron is beaming cultural programming into the web browsers of its loyal readership while they figure out how to spin Enrique and Willie's failure to cover tracks, just like when the dictator finally died, Soviet TV would interrupt its political broadcasts to beam somber music into the
workers' hovels.


Silence from SFGate.com/Chronicle (a.k.a. willie's World)

Guess I will not expect a peep about this from the San Francisco Chronicle since Willie Brown is their employee ...


SF Progressivism Has Honorable Roots But Suffocates Today

Progressivism in SF in the 1970s and early 1980s was a populist reform movement that opened the city's windows to more inclusive vistas. Two people who led the way, initially, were Harvey Milk and George Moscone.

After they were assassinated in 1978, Mayor Dianne Feinstein, a moderate, sought to reverse their legacy. She opposed rent control, equity pay for women, reforms in the police department, and reforms on behalf of immigrants, workers, and gay people.

Harry Britt, who succeeded Harvey Milk at the supes, was able to outfox Feinstein on many fronts and keep the reform agenda alive, to his credit. However, he eventually got bored with his job at City Hall and offended many by his lack of social skills.

Art Agnos and Co succeeded to the leadership of the reform movement. And that's when many problems started to emerged. Agnos and his lieutenants were nasty, dishonest ideologues.

They regarded themselves as the guardians of The One True Politics. They demonized anyone who didn't fall in line. The movement started turning into a Pharisaic sect.

Chris Daly succeeded Agnos and Co as leader. He had all of Agnos's faults and none of his virtues. He poisoned the well of political dialogue at City Hall to a degree that hadn't been seen in living memory.

At the same time, outside forces started infiltrating progressive groups and co-opting them for their own perks, power, and money. These co-opting forces included the nonprofit political complex, the unions, certain favored real-estate developers, and the cannabis capitalists.

Daly combined the dogmatism of the sect with the economic and political clout of the co-opting forces. The result is progressivism as it exists today in SF - a new, suffocating status quo, entrenched with its own power, money, and ideology.

This is a familiar pattern in history. Reforming forces gain power and then become a new status quo, which must be challenged anew.

It's time for a new, post-progressive reform movement in SF.

This entry was posted in SF politics and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Post a comment or leave a trackback.