Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Examiner Endorsement

Expand Messages
  • RSilverberg@acsa.org
    The Examiner endorsed Gerardo Sandoval for District 11 supervisor because he has some great ideas. I called the Examiner a week ago and they said they
    Message 1 of 11 , Oct 23, 2000
      The Examiner endorsed Gerardo Sandoval for District 11 supervisor because
      "he has some great ideas." I called the Examiner a week ago and they said
      they weren't endorsing. Did any of the other District 11 candidates get a
      questionnaire from the Examiner? I didn't. Did any of the other
      candidates have an interview with the Examiner? I didn't. How do they
      know if the rest of us have some great ideas too.

      As a matter of fact, the only ideas Mr. Sandoval has come up with so far
      is offering empty office rental space in District 11 to the displaced
      non-profits, which Carlos Petroni can tell you I have discussed at our
      District 11 debates. Mr. Sandoval was seen at the recent District 11
      Council debate with a Frontlines newspaper in front of him where he had
      highlighted some of Mr. Petroni's ideas.

      I guess it should be flattering, but does District 11 want a supervisor
      that can't come up with anything on his own, who hasn't lived here long
      enough to have any ideas about what is needed, or even cared because he
      has never been involved in any neighborhood or district activities or
      projects. All Mr. Sandoval can do is tell us how great he is and list all
      his credentials for the job, most of which are stretched beyond belief.

      REB
    • Steve
      FYI: I sent this to the Bay Guardian this morning. Steve I m very disappointed at the Guardian s endorsements for this election. These are some of my
      Message 2 of 11 , Oct 23, 2000
        FYI: I sent this to the Bay Guardian this morning. Steve

        I'm very disappointed at the Guardian's endorsements for this
        election. These are some of my disagreements:

        Proposition A:

        The Guardian's endorsement of Proposition A is a real drag. Most of
        what the Guardian's staff wrote about it seems to indicate that they
        strongly disagree with the proposal. Yet, the "whoever-takes-the-
        decision" endorsed it. C'mon, there is no plan for the money and the
        control of the funds will be in the hands of a corporate-controled
        non-profit. What is next, the Guardian switching to support the
        privatization of the Presidio. This runs directly against previous
        Guardian's positions.

        District 6: Chris Daly over Beryl Magilavy?:

        Here, again, the Guardian's is inconsistent. Preferring Daly over
        Magilavy secures Dittenhafer a shot at the runoff. Bad choice. Since
        then the Guardian split from Ammiano's choices? Since then they
        switched to divide the opposition to the machine?

        Leland Yee for Supervisor?

        I do understand that Leland is no friend of Willie, but he is a right
        winger, anti-union, who tried to be on Willie's side and was
        rejected. I also understand that he is running against right winger
        Hsieh supported by the machine. He was instrumental in creating the
        right wing group SF Neighbors Association and helped run it until
        Brown took control of it and booted out Yee. Is there any principple
        in calling for a vote for a right winger because he is no friend of
        Willie? What's next? An endorsement of a Republican?

        District 11

        I do understand that the Guardian hates Carlos Petroni because he'd
        been a thorn on the side of the Guardian from the left (he is
        actually the only progressive running in that area of the City). But,
        endorsing Sandoval who made two contributions for the maximum allowed
        under the law to Willie's re-election campaign against Ammiano? Check
        it out, the paperwork is available at the Ethics Commission. He is
        being dennounced as a carpetbagger and as a matter of fact his
        $70,000 campaign funds came from outside the District, mostly from
        corporate donors, including alcohol interests, law firms linked to
        Brown and lobbyists. Sandoval has also publicly defended Brown in the
        District's forums and, according to a Chronicle reporter he ardently
        supported Willie when they interviewed him.

        School Board Endorsements:

        The Guardian endorsing the same people for the School Board than
        Willie Brown? Almost, Brown endorsed three of the four candidates
        endorsed by the Guardian.

        I'm particulary worried about the Guardian's endorsement of Mauricio
        Vela. He was probably independent from the machine two or three years
        ago, but no more. In the last two years he struck big financial deals
        with the Mayor's office to fund some of his projects in Bernal
        Heights which makes him a prisoner of the machine.

        Why the Guardian did not endorse Mark Sanchez, the candidate of
        Teachers4Change - and the only teacher running - the organization
        behind most of the criticisms and mobilizations against the Edison
        Project and Mary Hernández. By the way, is the Guardian going to
        forcefully campaign for Hernandez' defeat?

        College Board Endorsements

        I always though that the Guardian was against privatization of
        education. So, why is the Guardian endorsing two candidates - at
        least - who are on record supporting joint corporate-non-profit-
        public ventures at City College? I'm talking about Gaddi and Scott
        Brown.

        What is next? An endorsement of the Gorish alternative because a
        "vote for Nader is a vote for Bush." I hope not.

        Steve
      • Carlos Petroni
        ... because he has some great ideas. I called the Examiner a week ago and they said they weren t endorsing. Did any of the other District 11 candidates get
        Message 3 of 11 , Oct 23, 2000
          RSilverberg@a... wrote:

          > The Examiner endorsed Gerardo Sandoval for District 11 supervisor
          because "he has some great ideas." I called the Examiner a week ago
          and they said they weren't endorsing. Did any of the other District
          11 candidates get a questionnaire from the Examiner? I didn't. Did
          any of the other candidates have an interview with the Examiner? I
          didn't. How do they know if the rest of us have some great ideas too.

          Carlos Petroni answers:

          No, I was not contacted, interviewed, called or otherwise consulted
          in any shape or form by the Examiner. I did not try either, though.

          Rebecca:

          > As a matter of fact, the only ideas Mr. Sandoval has come up with
          so far is offering empty office rental space in District 11 to the
          displaced non-profits, which Carlos Petroni can tell you I have
          discussed at our District 11 debates.

          Carlos:

          Yes, you did.

          Rebecca:

          Mr. Sandoval was seen at the recent District 11
          > Council debate with a Frontlines newspaper in front of him where he
          had highlighted some of Mr. Petroni's ideas.

          Carlos:

          This is very funny. Particularly because he read from my proposals
          once I departed from the meeting. I heard that story from other
          constituents in the District who were present when he did that. But,
          again, Sandoval is the one running on a 2 inches by 3 inches
          platform. Literally, that's the extent of his writen proposals - a
          business card with a 4-point program. I understand why he need to
          steal ideas from other candidates.

          Rebecca:

          (Sandoval)has never been involved in any neighborhood or district
          activities or projects. All Mr. Sandoval can do is tell us how great
          he is and list all his credentials for the job, most of which are
          stretched beyond belief.

          Carlos:

          Yes, that's true as well. While I have many differences with you
          Rebecca, and other candidates such as Douglas Moran, I do recognize
          that you and Doug had been involved in District's politics and tried
          - in your case with some success - to rally support from the
          District. Douglas talk with pride about the things he had done.

          Even nutty candidate Steve Currier was "honored" by Amos Brown when
          the "incumbent" told the audience in one of the forums that Currier
          lobbied him so much that he though Steve was a "piece of the
          furniture" from his office. Myrna Lim had been active in some
          communities of our District. Even Huber, the Republican, can claim
          some activities involving neighbors in our District.

          In different circles - I'm not a Democrat, but a progressive left
          candidate - I had been active with young people and workers in
          District 11 for years. Of course, I don't share you approach to
          politics and your set of activities, or that of other candidates.
          Support for your candidacy, that of other candidates and mine from
          the District was evident at the forums. We were able to bring our
          supporters and people attending reacted to our presentations.

          Amos Brown and Gerardo Sandoval had no supporters or recognition from
          those attending the forums. That, in my opinion is the ultimate
          judgement passed by people of this District to carpetbaggers such as
          Amos and Gerardo. The fact that neither gerardo or Amos can mobilize
          volunteers from the District and that both raised their money outside
          the District and the City (and among corporate types) and that both
          supported and contributed to Willie's campaign ... is very telling!

          Don't swallow the line of the Examiner. They are NOT looking for
          candidates with good ideas, but a candidate they can safely support
          to replace Amos once they found out that he is losing, and losing
          big. As Myrna Lim put it: "Sandoval is the second horse." The
          examiner is NOT interested in finding out what's going on in our
          District, they never did (nor did the Chronicle or the Guardian for
          that matter). They are just interested in getting somebody elected
          that will be a docile puppy of the machine.

          FYI, I'm enclosing a letter I sent to the Examiner related to their
          coverage - or lack thereof - of the supervisorial race in District
          11. And don't worry, just spread the word about Gerardo's
          opportunism. An endorsement or two will not confuse may voters.

          LETTER TO THE EXAMINER:

          Dear Editor:

          Obviously, Rachel Gordon does not know anything about District 11 and
          she did not do any homework to write her article about it (9 From
          District 11 Vie for Supervisor, October 16, 2000). It is also obvious
          that she neither attended the various forums and debates in our
          District nor she ever contacted me or other candidates to write her
          story. These are some important points she missed:

          1. Amos Brown has no strong ties to the OMI neighborhood as stated in
          Gordon's article. He is rejected throughout the District as
          demonstrated by those attending the forums held throughout our
          neighborhoods, including the OMI, Excelsior, Crocker-Amazon,
          Ingleside, and Cayuga. Amos Brown is opposed by the majority in the
          African American community, as well as among Latinos and Asians,
          working class families and union members in the District for his
          record as an incompetent public official and his mean and divisive
          proposals.

          2. The issues of "law and order" pushed by Amos Brown were
          overwhelmingly rejected at these forums. If Rachel Gordon would have
          called me and other candidates and attended the forums and debates
          she would have learned that issues of economic development, greening
          of the District, education, the expansion of SFO runways, tax
          devolution, political reform are the core issues that interest voters
          in the District.

          3. Calling Sandoval a "major challenger" does not reflect reality.
          Sandoval is a newcomer to the District who has no support other than
          from some members of the local political machine - and from outside
          the District - who are looking for a replacement for Amos Brown.
          Myrna Lm called him appropriately "the second horse." He has no
          supporters in the District and got only three contributions from
          residents in the District for his campaign. At forums held throughout
          the District he had no supporters and his lack of a platform and his
          lack of knowledge about the District were clearly rejected.

          4. Rachel Gordon failed to disclose the fact that I'm the only
          progressive and independent candidate running for Supervisor in this
          District; that my campaign relies on many volunteers and is running
          the most effective, grassroots campaign. This was clearly showed at
          the forums and debates in which the majority of those in attendance
          supported my campaign.

          5. All other candidates are in one way or another linked to the
          political machine and are trying to replace Amos Brown as its
          representative in the District. Both Silverberg and Sandoval are
          strong supporters of Mayor Brown as is Amos Brown. With the exception
          of John Huber - a Republican rebuffed by his own party - all other
          candidates are functionaries of the Democratic Party (members of the
          State, County and local Central Committees).

          Sincerely,

          Carlos Petroni, Candidate for Supervisor

          District 11

          (415) 452-9992

          374 Madrid Street

          San Francisco, California 94112
        • Rebecca Silverberg
          Thanks, Carlos. I have admired you from afar for years. Although I don t always agree with your solutions, I appreciate the issues you raise that the other
          Message 4 of 11 , Oct 24, 2000
            Thanks, Carlos. I have admired you from afar for years. Although I don't
            always agree with your solutions, I appreciate the issues you raise that
            the other "mainstream" politicians and press are reluctant to address.
            Most of all, I admire the fact that you are doing something, anything,
            which Mr. Sandoval is not.

            To set the record straight, the Excelsior District Improvement Assn. and I
            supported Willie L. Brown for Mayor because we needed what he could give
            us, which included extra street sweeping, more emphasis on graffiti
            abatement, more money for childcare and parks. We met with all three
            candidates before making that decision: Jordan, whom we had supported
            against Brown four years earlier, was a dotty has-been; Reilly--I don't
            support anybody who hits other people, whether drunk or sober; Willie
            Brown made us promises, some of which he kept. In the runoff there was
            Tom Ammiano who didn't have a snowballs chance in the Excelsior, so we
            backed what we assumed would be the winner. Cheap and tawdry, yes, but
            politically astute too.

            As for my loyalty to Mayor Brown, I am a member of the Coalition for San
            Francisco Neighborhoods and a close personal friend of Doug Comstock.
            With him I fought, and continue to fight, the 49er stadium, and worked on
            passage of the Sunshine Initiative. I am a signatory and strongly support
            Props L, M, and O (I worked with Commissioner Paul Melbostat and Common
            Cause to develop the Prop O language) because they are right and Mayor
            Brown is wrong. I take no money from the machine or the anti-machine
            machine and make my decisions based on what I feel is best, right or
            wrong, for my neighborhood.

            The only reason I'm telling you this is because your opinion of me does
            matter, more than Willie Brown's does.

            REB
          • Frontlines Staff
            FRONTLINES SPIN BULLETIN NR. 2 ����� 10/24/2000 SOFT MONEY SHIFTS TO NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNING By Frontlines Staff We received word that supervisorial candidates
            Message 5 of 11 , Oct 24, 2000
              FRONTLINES SPIN BULLETIN NR. 2 – 10/24/2000

              SOFT MONEY SHIFTS TO NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNING
              By Frontlines Staff

              We received word that supervisorial candidates Aaron Peskin (District
              3)) Chris Daly and Beryl Magilavy (District 6); Matt Gonzalez
              (District 5); Eilen Hansen (District 8); Leland Yee (District 4) and
              Marie Harrison (District 10) are to be heavily targeted in the last
              10 days before the election by a coalition formed by the Independent,
              Robert Barnes, Joe O'Donaghue (who is now furious since Eilen Hansen
              refused publicly to accept his support against Mark Leno with whom
              the "Gentrificator" had a grudge), several Democratic Clubs including
              the Alice Toklas l/g/b/t/ club and Construction trade unions, among
              others.

              The attacks will include ads and articles in newspapers, mailings and
              phone banks as well as massive literature droppings in 200 selected
              precincts. The idea is to launch damaging if unproved attacks giving
              the challengers no time to respond since they will be made few days
              before Election Day.

              Tons of "opposition research" collected by private investigators for
              months (similar to the already used against Leland Yee and the old
              trick of making some alleged supporters of the targeted candidates
              to go public, recant and denounce them will be widely used, we are
              told. Connections between these candidates and Clint Reilly will also
              be raised in a similar way as it is already being raised in mailings
              against Prop L. In today's political environment in the City, the
              fact that Reilly dumped over $80,000 of his own money and counting on
              behalf of most these candidates and propositions like L is the
              equivalent to an endorsement by the Republican Party: the kiss of
              death.

              Behind this large operation is the thinking that none of these
              candidates or issues has sufficient strengths on the ground to
              withstand an all out assault of this type.

              The money for this operation will come, as always in this City, from
              Bechtel, Exxon, PG&E, Bank of America (PACs and big shots of these
              corporations and other big businesses, Shorenstein holdings and the
              Chamber of Commerce. Fisher's GAP, executives of Wells Fargo and
              the
              newly created Dot.Com are expected to generously contribute to this
              fund. Accountability is not an issue for the organizers of this
              political blitzkrieg since information about contributions will reach
              the voters too late to influence the trends created by such massive
              campaign. The deadlines for late contribution reports are too close
              to Election Day as to have any effect in public opinion.

              While pumping tons of money by special interests in local campaigns
              was widely expected - and already happening - this new massive
              campaign will be a significant shift from a "positive" campaign on
              behalf of machine's candidates to highly negative campaigning paid by
              for soft money. Apparently, "positive" campaigning for Willie Brown's
              candidates and issues failed to produce significant results
              in most races, with the possibly exception of that on behalf of Mark
              Leno.

              The opening salvos of that concerted campaign were yesterday's "State
              of the City" speech by Mayor Willie Brown and a 2-page advertisement
              paid by for O'Donaghue in today's Independent and a column in the
              same paper written by Warren Hinckle against Aaron Peskin. Local TV
              stations and dailies will contribute their quota of dirt as well.
              Part of this strategy included the unannounced invasion of Hallinan's
              offices by a couple of dozens members of the "preachers for the
              machine" coalition led by "law and order" right wing crusader Amos
              Brown denouncing the DA for not being right wing enough when
              prosecuting petty crime.

              Sure losers from the machine as Amos Brown and Alicia Becerril will
              receive more than $200,000 in extra help trying to stop their certain
              demise from the "Willie Brown's leadership" and other equally fake
              "independent committees" in the next few days. This same coalition
              will dump more than $200,000 more into the campaign to defeat Prop. L
              as well. So far, the "independent committees" have pumped over $1.2-
              Million trying to avert the upcoming defeat of several candidates of
              the machine. It is estimated that, when the dust settles, more than
              $3-Million will be spent by soft money contributors to support and
              defeat candidates and local propositions.

              According to apologists of this campaign, only 25% of the electorate
              is worried about this infusion of capital to distort the political
              process. These cynics take for granted that this same 25% are
              already voting AGAINST the political machine. So, who cares?

              Be prepared for a nasty 10-day pre-electoral period.
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.