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

Guardian's Endorsements

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 11 , Oct 23, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      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

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

    • 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 2 of 11 , Oct 23, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        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.


        > 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.


        Yes, you did.


        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.


        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.


        (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.


        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.


        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

        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).


        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 3 of 11 , Oct 24, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          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.

        • 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 4 of 11 , Oct 24, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            FRONTLINES SPIN BULLETIN NR. 2 – 10/24/2000

            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

            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

            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
            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

            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.