Mayor Gavin Newsom addresses supporters at Yoshi's in San Francisco following his victory over LA Councilwoman Janice Hahn in the Democratic Primary race for Lt. Governor. Photos by Luke Thomas.
By Luke Thomas
June 9, 2010
Chalk yesterday’s California and San Francisco elections results up to a victory for Progressivism. With all votes tallied, PG&E’s $48 million campaign to hoodwink the California electorate into voting against its best interests was defeated, as was Mercury Insurance’ Prop 17. Progressives also maintain control of the all important San Francisco Democratic County Central Committee (DCCC), wrested from Party moderate control by Chris Daly and Aaron Peskin in 2008.
Mayor Gavin Newsom was a big winner as well, winning the Democratic Party primary for Lt. Governor and preserving his totalitarian appointment authority over the San Francisco Film Commission (Prop C). If Newsom defeats Republican incumbent Abel Maldonado in November, he will vacate the Office of Mayor in January, availing a golden opportunity for a Progressive takeover of Room 200.
The scandals involving the office of San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris did not seem to have an impact on Dem voters who nominated her for Party representation over former Facebook Privacy Chief Chris Kelly in the race for California Attorney General. She faces Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley, a Republican, in November.
San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris.
In the two San Francisco races for Superior Court Judge, Progressive Michael Nava pulled off a stunning victory in defeating Richard Ulmer by 2,697 votes. As did Progressive Linda Colfax who roundly defeated Prosecutor Harry Dorfman by 16,832 votes. Because Nava did not receive over fifty percent of the vote, he will face Ulmer in a runoff in November.
On the local San Francisco ballot, voters made clear they want their high-speed rail terminus located at the Transbay Terminal at First and Mission streets (Prop G), though from a practical standpoint locating the terminal at 4th and King streets may make more sense. Voters also approved Prop A which authorizes a special parcel tax “to improve earthquake and fire safety and implement critical capital maintenance of schools and facilities.” Voters also approved Prop B which authorizes the issuance of a $412 million public bond for earthquake safety and facility maintenance expenditures. Prop D, a measure affecting how City employee retirement benefits are calculated, also passed. Voters also want to know how much taxpayer money is being spent on police security for dignitaries (Prop E). Prop F, a renters financial hardship measure, was narrowly defeated.
Statewide, voters approved Prop 13 which modifies how earthquake building-retrofits are taxed. Prop 14, which establishes open primaries and all but eliminates the possibility for third-parties to compete, passed. Voters failed to pass Prop 15, a public campaign finance measure that would have helped overcome special interest domination of electoral outcomes.
But of all the California races yesterday, none was arguably more important than Prop 16. If passed, the PG&E-sponsored measure would have enshrined in the California Constitution a two-thirds vote threshold against public power competition from municipalities and community choice aggregators.
Asked why the 1,830,278 Californians, who voted for Prop 16, could be so dumb, Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, who spearheaded a $100 thousand campaign to defeat PG&E’s $48 million campaign, said: “PG&E has been on the airwaves right from the beginning. They targeted the ill-informed, undisconcerting voter.”
Voter turnout in San Francisco was a paltry 23 percent. Though figures for California turnout have not been published, the turnout is also expected to be very low. In previous election cycles, low voter turnout has favored conservative outcomes.
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
June 11, 2010 at 7:55 am
richmondman has a point: why is it a great victory to sneak public power in the back door, even though it fails every time city voters have had a chance to vote on it?
June 10, 2010 at 9:11 pm
h.
So called richmondman just arrived at his office at the chamber of commerce at 8:01, after spending the whole night trying to come up with an original thought. Like Gavin is actually mayor of this city.
When the real fact is that he is quiting his job as salesman for the Lennar Corp., and Aaron or some other ‘bad’ progressive will ask them to leave along with thier ballpark. colin campbell
June 10, 2010 at 10:41 am
Richmondman,
What’s your actual name? I’m Harold Brown (aka ‘h’) and everyone else here uses their actual name. Stand behind your statements with your name. Are you a coward?
h.
June 10, 2010 at 8:01 am
Let us not forget that the residents have said “NO” to CCA in San Francisco EVERY TIME IT HAS COME UP FOR A VOTE. But progressives know what is best for the rest of us, so it will be shoved down our throats without a a vote. Welcome to Venezuela! And remember, every day with Newsom as Mayor is one without Aaron Peskin – so count your blessings.
June 9, 2010 at 8:55 pm
We should be so lucky to have Gavin Nuisance pack off to Sacramento, but sadly San Francisco is cursed by this dyslexic grandstander. A guy who wants to throw the schizophrenics back on the streets and develop the mid-Market Street area at the same time. What scares me is that he can fool people like Steven Spielberg who donated to his run. Actually, Able Maldonado might surprize him, and then OH NO!!!!!! Another year of living …………….
June 9, 2010 at 8:39 pm
The victory of Prop 14 is as shocking to me as the Supreme Court ruling that ended limits on campaign contributions from corporations.
No one calling themselves a progressive should be proud of this disaster.
To be a political insider today, one must cast their glance away from such atrocities.
More:
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/04/11/18644434.php
June 9, 2010 at 8:27 pm
The advance of Newsom’s career makes my hair stand on end because, for one, the multinational non-profit–so-called–corporation his wife’s father founded, Conservation International, is one of those that pushes the people off the land in the name of the critters for the corporations. They’re responsible for, e.g., denying the Bushmen access to water in their ancestral homeland, the Kalahari Desert, http://goo.gl/y1VS Consider that the next time you hear Newsom goin’ on about all the great things he and the wife are gonna do someday for Africa, just like his pal Reverend Rick Warren.
June 9, 2010 at 7:02 pm
We’ll soon see how much money was spent to defeat Prop F. But if the number of citywide mailers sent by the San Francisco Association of Realtors is any indication, we should expect to see a well-financed campaign. Propaganda works.
June 9, 2010 at 5:46 pm
Chalk yesterday’s California and San Francisco elections results up to a victory for Progressivism.
We did loose one with Prop F. but the milestone that San Francisco enjoys in yesterdays result were great. As SF goes us folks that came from here to there are leading the world.
June 9, 2010 at 5:40 pm
Let’s see, Meg Whitman bought the Republican nomination for governor for $81 million — $71 million of her own money — to garner 1,101,074 votes or $73.56 per vote just to win the primary. Over the last five California gubernatorial elections, the winning candidate has won with 52%, or about 4,446,480 votes. At $73.56 a vote, Meg Whitman will have to spend $327,083,069 to win the governorship. That’s $100 million more than John McCain spent running for president in 2008. It’s $58 million more than George W. Bush spent, running in 2004. That’s obscene. Hopefully, some of this campaign spending will trickle down to help California’s struggling economy.
June 9, 2010 at 4:37 pm
Yeah,
It was Gerardo Sandoval who last beat a sitting judge. Guy was a Republican as was Ulmer until Arnie appointed him at which time he became an independent in anticipation of a challenge like Nava’s.
Sandoval, I believe, won by under 100 votes.
Go Nava!
h.
June 9, 2010 at 3:41 pm
I am forever trying to figure out what makes Aaron Peskin as a “progressive” in San Francisco besides voting pro-tenant.
June 9, 2010 at 3:30 pm
Thanks David. Corrections made.
June 9, 2010 at 1:22 pm
Thanks Luke! Just two minor things: Nava will face Ulmer in a runoff this November because he was just shy of the 50% needed to win outright (though most of Dan Dean’s votes will go to Nava and higher voter turnout will also benefit Nava). And, Dorfman was not an incumbent judge, but a homicide prosecutor. Both Nava and Colfax will be great judges, and were far more qualified than any of their competitors.