What Progressives Can Do Without A Mayor’s Race

by Randy Shaw, 2007-08-13

In the first eight months of 2007, progressives missed important opportunities by devoting so much time to finding a candidate to run against Mayor Newsom. There is not only no ballot measure to attract progressive voters in November, but there is nothing set for February or June 2008; and the deadline for February charter amendments will pass this week. Rather than continue mourning the absence of a strong mayoral challenger, progressives need to seize the moment to address their priority issues: more affordable family housing, particularly in the Mission, reclaiming the tens of millions of dollars downtown businesses annually saved from the 2001 elimination of the business tax, and dramatically improving MUNI service, far beyond what can be achieved from the November reform measure. These and other issues require organizing, not simply running a “progressive” mayoral candidate.

With the drama of “Will San Francisco Progressives Find a Challenger to the Mayor” now behind us, it is time to find out whether the city’s progressives are as committed to working on issues as they are to backing candidates.

For all of the obsession with 2007’s bizarre process of progressive candidate selection----highlighted by a June 2 Progressive Convention designed to pick a candidate, which boomeranged by turning activists against Matt Gonzalez for his refusal to base his plans on another’s timetable---one would think that the only route to social and economic justice in San Francisco is through the Mayor.

Ironically, the person who has most correctly argued that Mayor Newsom was not the driver of many progressive actions during his term---Supervisor Chris Daly---was the public figure most obsessed with finding a mayoral challenger. But as Daly knows, and the history of progressive politics in San Francisco confirms, activists, not Mayors, shape the city’s drive for social justice.

The rather immediate question for progressives is whether they can coalesce behind any “big ideas” for the February 2008 ballot. That election features the presidential primary, and could have one of the best progressive voter turnouts ever.

Absent the mayoral candidate focus, progressives might have come up with a major charter amendment for February. But this now appears too late, and with June expecting a lower turnout, charter change---including an affordable housing set-aside---will be pushed back to November 2008.

But there is still time to put regular initiatives on the February 2008 ballot.

What should they be? I’ll leave it to groups to organize behind various proposals, but we do know that an affordable housing funding allocation for the Mission District---as opposed to an annual set-aside—does not require a charter amendment.

That would be one way to positively channel activist anger over the Board’s 6-5 approval of 3400 Cesar Chavez St. And those involved in that fight represent a ready-made campaign organization for passing the initiative.

There are a whole bunch of housing and tenant proposals that are still eligible for February, and those who expected to spend the next three months working for a Gonzalez or Daly now can work on passing these proposals.

Supervisor Peskin has certainly not allowed mayoral politics to slow him down; he’s been a buzzsaw of activity in recent months. His Muni reform measure on the November ballot is a good first step, but transit activists need to come up with their own proposal---one that includes preventing future fare increases.

Such a proposal would require organizing, as opposed to asking Supervisors to put it on the ballot.

San Francisco progressives seem to devote ample energies to walking precincts for candidates; can this energy not be reallocated to organizing riders for broader MUNI reform?

Housing and MUNI are just two obvious ideas, and activists know many more. Some could pass the Board and be signed by the Mayor without needing to go to the ballot.

But if there really is a “Progressive Agenda” whose implementation Mayor Newsom is preventing, then activists must try to make it happen over the mayor’s opposition.

Otherwise, the “progressive” challenge to the mayor becomes mere personality-driven rhetoric, without a core connection to the city’s problems.

Send feedback to rshaw@beyondchron.org