I realize that I still haven't told you about the
Berkeley Timothy Leary Meetup Group that I started in February.
Our next meeting is this thursday, April 2, at 7pm.
The meeting will be at 33 Revolutions in El Cerrito, CA.
(Below) Tim at UC Berkeley around 1956-57
Steve Rhodes asked me to ask Tom Ammiano the following question:
"Ask him what he thought of Bruce Brugmann's endorsement of Angela and if it
was a bit hypocritical for a paper that has decried the influence of money
in politics gave one reason for supporting her that she is rich and can
spend her own money in the runoff."
Steve
http://ari.typepad.com
So I did. Here's
Tom's Response (Small - 3 MB)
I don't have time to transcribe this one. But here's Tom on why you should vote for him today.
Tom Ammiano - Why Vote For Me As Mayor (2 MB)
I don't have time to transcribe this one. But here's Tom on voting "Yes" on Prop B.
This footage is from October 31, 2003.
I took advantage of having access to Tom Ammiano in person Friday to ask him about the other propositions on the ballot. What he said makes sense to me. I hope it will be helpful to you in making your decisions about tomorrow's elections.
Video clip - Why YES On Prop B (1 MB)
This footage is from October 31, 2003.
I took advantage of having access to Tom Ammiano in person Friday to ask him about the other propositions on the ballot. What he said makes sense to me. I hope it will be helpful to you in making your decisions about tomorrow's elections.
Video clip - Why YES On Prop d (2 MB)
Lisa: "What about D? Something about a small business commission?"
Tom: "Eh. You know, it takes the commission that now exists and makes it a charter commission, and people who are involved in small business feel that it would give them more status and a little more juice. I think the jury is out about whether or not that could happen, because a lot of times things are just very decorous. But perhaps it could work, and I'm not against small businesses so, ya know, fine."
This is another great example of why I think Tom Ammiano would be a great Mayor.
He has great reasons for not wanting N to pass, and an excellent alternative to it: providing health benefits and disability benefits for all taxi drivers (not just disability for only drivers with medallions - as N proposes).
More details below.
This footage is from October 31, 2003.
I took advantage of having access to Tom Ammiano in person Friday to ask him about the other propositions on the ballot. What he said makes sense to me. I hope it will be helpful to you in making your decisions about tomorrow's elections.
Video clip - Why YES On Prop N (5 MB)
Lisa: "What about N? For taxi permits..."
Tom: "You know, my father was a cab driver in the 50's and 60's before he died. There were no benefits. There were no health benefits. When he died, we had to practice an Italian-American custom called La Boost (sp?) where people actually come to the funeral, which you don't pay for yet, and they make a donation. And I thought 'ya know, nobody has to go through this.' Particularly Taxi drivers.
However, this is a very self-serving avaricious measure that I think is very dishonest. In the world of taxi drivers there are people with permits and then there are people without permits, and this is a way to get the people with permits only some kind of disability benefits. It really shuts the door on anyone else, and I don't like that. And I tried to get something on the ballot that would encompass not just the permit (medallion) holders, but the other drivers too. To me, there was a way that we could have done it for everyone.
So I'm not supporting N because I think it is dishonest. I don't want to deny disability to people, particularly with my personal background, but there is another way to do it. And by the way, my office worked with the waring parties, and their very very very angry with each other and don't talk to each other a lot. Within the taxi industry there are three or four factions and we are moving towards providing health benefits for all taxi drivers. And if it ever passes, and we get the cooperation of everyone, I'd like to call it the "Joe Ammiano Law," because that was my dad.
Lisa: "So that one you're stronger about. You think it's a big NO on that one."
Tom: "Oh yes. It's going to be very harmful. And we'll just leave it at that."
This footage is from October 31, 2003.
I took advantage of having access to Tom Ammiano in person Friday to ask him about the other propositions on the ballot. What he said makes sense to me. I hope it will be helpful to you in making your decisions about tomorrow's elections.
Video clip - Why YES On Prop C (3 MB)
Lisa: "So what about C? About having the City Controller monitor city services?"
Tom: "You know, Jake Mc Goldrick is going to kill me for this. I'm not real happy with this one. They cleaned it up quite a bit and, ya know, I'm OK with it. But personally, if it didn't pass, I wouldn't kill myself. It's one of those things where a conservative group, called S.O.S., wanted to, in their words "have more open government and honest government," but it really is a little more self-serving than that. I think Jake Mc Goldrick did a really good job of cleaning it up and making it palatable. It will give the Controller of our city the ability to audit independently, and I think that's a fine idea. However, I think there are better ways to do it. We could have a General Manager that's elected. The Controller is appointed by the Mayor for 10 years. We have a very good controller. However, I still think there'd be a better way to do what this measure is supposed to accomplish. But I will vote for it."
Lisa: "You will vote for it?"
Tom: "Yeah. But it's not one of my favorites."
So I've let Tom talk a lot about how he feels about the various issues, and I suppose my strategy was that doing so would speak for itself with regard to why I'm supporting him for Mayor.
However, as I was wrapping up my archive of his interview, I came across this clip (5 MB) of him explaining in more detail about the six million dollar renewable federal grant he was able to obtain from the Shrub Administration.
This achievement demonstrates several of the reasons why I think Tom would be a great mayor:
1. His ability to work within the system to accomplish results, even if the people running "the system" are questionable, to say the least.
2. His ability to create "real" solutions to "real" problems, such as homelessness, as opposed to taking the easy way out, like blaming the victims. (Such as I believe to be the case with "Care Not Cash" and its new bastard brother Proposition M.)
3. His ingenuity in coming up with something like a renewable grant that can continue to bring money into the city to help the less fortunate, rather than come up with strategies that will actually cost the city over $900,000 and give police unprecedented power to arrest people for literally doing nothing.
But I'll let Tom explain the details to you in his own words:
Tom Ammiano On The 6 Million Dollar Renewable HUD Grant (Small - 5 MB)
The words below came after our discussion of Prop M (2 MB).
Tom: "...like my ability to get six million bucks from the Bush government two weeks ago, so we could have supportive housing and services for the mentally ill and homeless. Now that's real, and that's happening as we speak."
Lisa: "Right. I actually wanted to ask you more about that, because you brought that up in the debate. (6 MB) After a Judge sort of threw out "Care Not Cash" that you were able to get some money to actually build some housing? Could you talk some more about that?"
Tom: "Yeah. It's not for "building housing," actually, but I understand why people think that. I mean it could eventually. But it's six million bucks of support from HUD, which is Bush, and I actually worked with Mayor Willy Brown.
See, because, what Gavin has not been able to do is take the partisanship out of the issue. And I'm willing to sit down with whomever and even compromise, so that we come up with real solutions. So it's six million bucks from HUD for supportive housing and direct services."
"So you take a hotel that's there already and you rehab it. And we've done this, but only for a very tiny amount of people. You rehab it and provide the room, which is housing, particularly for the mentally ill and people who have been ill and homeless on our streets for over a year. That's about 2,000 of them -- even if "Care Not Cash" was something that could work, it wouldn't affect these people, because they're mostly under SSI and Federal programs -- and then provides all the services right there in that facility. And we've already started in the Bay View little Ramada Inn there, has been rehabed. A woman named "Mother Brown" is actually the recipient of some of this money. And the rooms are full already with the services being provided and we're going to expand that so we can meet the needs of 1,000 or more people that are on our streets. And this is a renewable grant. That's the beauty of it. So, with our success that we're proving this year, we have a really great shot at getting that six million next year as well. So that, again, that's real."
This footage is from October 31, 2003.
I took advantage of having access to Tom Ammiano in person Friday to ask him about the other propositions on the ballot. What he said makes sense to me. I hope it will be helpful to you in making your decisions about tomorrow's elections.
Video clip - Why YES On Prop E (6 MB)
Lisa: "E. It just says "ethics reform."
Tom: "Oh. This is good. I sponsored this with the Ethics Commission. Basically, it's about conflict of interest. A lot of times, people will be in city government such as a department head, or a commissioner, or the mayor, or a supervisor, and then they no longer do that. But, because their faces are recognizable. Because the juice is still there, even though they're gone, they have undue influence on decision making, and they also get more access, and they can also bring people in. So this really tightens that and says if you were a mayor or supervisor or commissioner or department head or have been involved in any way on that level, you can not come back and lobby for issues. In otherwords, giving you an insider's advantage. If we're really gonna have honesty in government, we need a lot of campaign reform and we need a lot of ethics reform. And Prop E addresses that, and I think it's great. We should be very proud of it."
Lisa: "Can you give an example of when that kind of thing happens?"
Tom: "Well let's say Mayor Willie Brown will, after 8 years, no longer be the Mayor, but he certainly will have juice with certain commissioners because he appointed them, and their term goes beyond his. And so it wouldn't be (can't make out exact word) of him currently to give them a call and say 'I want to introduce you to this developer' etc. and so forth. There's been a number of supervisors, Michael Yahi comes to mind, who, after they were not voted back in office, you start to see them in the halls, using some of the connections they had with the different departments to lobby for certain issues."
Lisa: "So it would make that illegal?"
Tom: "Yes."
Lisa: "Isn't that just going to drive it 'behind close doors' so to speak?"
Tom: "No, actually, it's going to flush it out. This comes on the heels of the disclosure and the Sunshine that we also sponsored. So, some people would say 'alright, I will disclose that I, as a previous supervisor, went and talked to so and so. So what?' So alright fine, now you disclose it, and now we say because of the position that you held before, it's a conflict of interest defined by the State, and particularly by San Francisco, in a very stringent manner. You can't do it. But the average citizen should be able to come in and have the same kind of access that you're trying to say you have because you used to be a super or mayor. So it really does level that playing field."
This footage is from October 31, 2003.
I took advantage of having access to Tom Ammiano in person Friday to ask him about the other propositions on the ballot. What he said makes sense to me. I hope it will be helpful to you in making your decisions about tomorrow's elections.
Video clip - Why YES On Prop I (4 MB)
Lisa: "How about 'I'? Child care for low income families."
Tom: "I think it's a very good concept, but I also think this was put on the ballot as an opportunistic measure. It doesn't really talk about how it's gonna be done or where all the money is gonna come from. It's like, you know, alright, I'm gonna put something on the ballot like "be nice to old people," "don't beat up the disabled," "let's have childcare." Well, who's gonna vote against that? But the real proof in the pudding is how are you gonna make it happen, and what was your background? Now everyone has religion lately about public schools, because it's the mayor's race. Alright fine, we don't need purism and motivation. I'm the person in terms of public education with my background in education as a Board of Education member. My own kid went to public schools. My late lover taught for fifteen years. I don't feel proprietary, but I certainly feel prepared. And what we have proposed is a 60 million dollar set aside from the city government rewriting its mission for universal preschool, for arts and music for libraries in health, and for PE and sports, and that's going to be a charter amendment I hope to see on the ballot in March. And I think the buzz out there is that this is really a good thing for our public schools in San Franciso. So in terms of Prop I, I think it's a nice gesture. Again, pass or fail it's not going to make that much of a difference."
Lisa: "So you would say No? To vote No on it?"
Tom: "No! I would say "fine."
Lisa: "To go ahead and vote for it?"
Tom: "Yes. But understand that it's not always going to meet with the promises, and that it's a Mayoral election device too."
This footage is from October 31, 2003.
I took advantage of having access to Tom Ammiano in person Friday to ask him about the other propositions on the ballot. What he said makes sense to me. I hope it will be helpful to you in making your decisions about tomorrow's elections.
Video clip - Why YES On Prop L (6 MB)
Lisa: "How 'bout Prop L. The minimum wage."
Tom: "Very very good. I championed "living wage" as a supervisor. It took me two years and I got it done, along with providing health benefits for people who do contracting work for the city. I think that Prop L is a very logical next step. It's the brainchild actually of Barry Hermanson, whose a small business man who understands the market in a way that doesn't rip people off. And he knows that if you pay people more than the minimum wage, which is a ridiculous amount of $6.50, that they'll have a few extra nickels in their pocket, and that they'll tend to spend that in the neighborhoods they live with. And I will say this about Gonzales, he sponsored it with Barry. And they both make a very very good point which is "hey, when there's a downturn in the economy, it's not just Chevron that hurts." It's the janitors and the people who are waiters and waitresses and the people doing physical labor, and "hello?" what are we going to do about them?"
So this is a very very reasonable minimal step to at least improving the quality of life issues for working people so they don't always have to choose "should I get some medicine? or should I put food on my table." And yes it gets that dramatic for some people.
Lisa: "And just to play devil's advocate. What about the argument that it would somehow put business out of business and blah blah blah."
Tom: "It's an old saw. And if you were paying what you should be paying in the beginning, you wouldn't even be thinking that way. You get better worker morale. You get more productivity if people are making a more decent wage. And we... give exemptions to smaller businesses. The deal is that when people have more money to spend that actually revitalizes the economy. So the argument that it would hurt business is really only coming from a very small sector who's really not interested in sharing any kind of profits. That's mostly the restaurant association and some of the businesses who back Newsom, and it's a phony argument."
This footage is from October 31, 2003.
I took advantage of having access to Tom Ammiano in person Friday to ask him about the other propositions on the ballot. What he said makes sense to me. I hope it will be helpful to you in making your decisions about tomorrow's elections.
Video clip - Why YES On Prop G (3 MB)
Lisa: What about "G," the "Rainy Day Fund?"
Tom: "Yeah, I think that's really good. Of course, it's mine. But the interesting thing is that you have broad support for it from the business community, from health advocates, from progressives. It's just a matter of fiscal prudency that doesn't hurt anybody. When you're in good times, you take some of that money and put it away, so when you're in bad times, the "boom bust cycle" or "spend and purge" as we call it, doesn't mean laying off people, doesn't mean cutting services, doesn't mean, gee what about this Sophie's Choice that we usually have to face with our social services. You take that money that you put away during good times and you withdraw it for the bad times and it's just a great equalizer. It's a great budget device. I mean there's a lot more to having a effective budget for all people, but this is a very significant way to do it. We should have done it years ago. So I'm hoping that it will pass quite handily."
This footage is from October 31, 2003.
I took advantage of having access to Tom Ammiano in person Friday to ask him about the other propositions on the ballot. What he said makes sense to me. I hope it will be helpful to you in making your decisions about tomorrow's elections.
Video clip - Why NO On Prop M (2 MB)
Tom Ammiano Says:
"M is bad. M is bad medicine. M is the same one trick pony that Newsom has propelled himself into the public eye with. It's criminalizing poverty without any solutions to poverty. It just simply sweeps. It's mean spirited. It's shallow. There are already laws on the books. And I find that this one note Johnny (Newsom) is getting very very tired. I mean, that should really indicate why he's unfit to be Mayor of San Francisco."
This footage is from October 31, 2003.
I took advantage of having access to Tom Ammiano in person Friday to ask him about the other propositions on the ballot. What he said makes sense to me. I hope it will be helpful to you in making your decisions about tomorrow's elections.
Video clip - Why Yes On Prop K (1 MB)
Tom Ammiano Says:
"Let's see, Prop K. That's a little bump in your sales tax that you've been paying for the past 20 years. If you've been around long enough. And it really has been helpful to the Muni, to ladder(?) crosswalks, more traffic signs, traffic calming, bicycle paths. You name it. If it deals with transportation, Prop K will take care of it. So I would really urge a strong vote for Prop K."
This footage is from October 31, 2003.
I took advantage of having access to Tom Ammiano in person Friday to ask him about the other propositions on the ballot. What he said makes sense to me. I hope it will be helpful to you in making your decisions about tomorrow's elections.
Video clip - Why Yes On Prop J (3 MB)
Tom Ammiano Says:
"Prop J, you know. I really think it's unnecessary. I think, for Angela, it was a way to attach herself to a ballot measure so she could get some mileage out of it. It's an old trick. We all do it from time to time. If it fails, I don't really see any great consequences for San Francisco, because we already have that political will in and around the homeless -- and again, (the bill is) just trying to capitalize on that without really trying to come up with solutions that are verifyable. Like my ability to get six million bucks from the Bush government two weeks ago, so we could have supportive housing and services for the mentally ill and homeless. Now that's real, and that's happening as we speak.
(from later in the interview)
Lisa: So getting back to J. Would you say "No"? Or would you say go ahead and pass J?
Tom:
I'd say go ahead and pass J. It's not going to hurt anything. I just think that you don't want to make any empty promises.
Lisa: But it's not crucial?
Tom: Yeah.
This footage is from October 31, 2003.
I took advantage of having access to Tom Ammiano in person Friday to ask him about the other propositions on the ballot. What he said makes sense to me. I hope it will be helpful to you in making your decisions about tomorrow's elections.
Video clip - Why Yes On Prop H (1 MB)
Tom Ammiano Says:
"Prop H is very important. Not just cause I wrote it. But it is about police reform. People are hungry for that across the class spectrum and across the political spectrum. People want police reform. It's being spun as being anti-cop. It's being spun as a political power grab. That's nonsense. We really need Prop H."
This footage is from October 31, 2003.
I took advantage of having access to Tom Ammiano in person Friday to ask him about the other propositions on the ballot. What he said makes sense to me. I hope it will be helpful to you in making your decisions about tomorrow's elections.
Video clip - Why Yes On Prop A (2 MB)
Tom Ammiano Says:
"I think one of the most import ones to me is Prop A, which is the School Bonds. The new Superindendent, like her or not, has really cleaned up the act of the school district. The clearance of the state in terms of honest finances. So Prop A would really help our schools a lot. In San Francisco, we like public schools. So I would say hooray for Prop A."
This footage is from October 31, 2003.
Here's
Tom Ammiano explaining why he's a better choice for Mayor than Angela Alioto. (Small - 3 MB)
Lisa:
The other person I wanted to ask you about was Angela Alioto.
Tom:
Well, you know, Angela is a very interesting person. She has a lot of personality, but I don't think she has a lot of substance. I worked with her on the Board many years ago, and she can certainly put her heart behind an issue. But when it really came to taking on business, and when it really came to taking on established practices, she's more a woman of Pacific Heights.
I think people need to remember that this is also a "money" person. Now a money person doesn't have to be necessarily an "evil" person. However, I think there is a disconnect with a lot of the working class people and culture in San Francisco. I think she's been somewhat removed, and she certainly has interrupted her political career for the past 12 years, and I don't think she's in the loop in the same way. She didn't support District Elections, and now she says she does.
So there's a lot of reinvention on her part, and I think it would be a big mistake to have her as Mayor of San Francisco. I think, we'd, if anything, have some chaos. If you look at her contributors, they're a lot of the same developers that have been around for a long time, and lobbyists, and we've really gotten away from that. We certainly don't want a mayor that encourages that. And definitely Newsom could do the same thing.
This footage is from October 31, 2003.
Here's
Tom Ammiano explaining why he's a better choice for Mayor than Gavin Newsom. (Small - 4 MB)
Lisa:
What separates you from Gavin?
Tom:
Well, I think there's a class background that can't be discounted. And, as with Matt, the number of years of legislative history. He's pretty skimpy. He's been on about as long as Gonzales, but he hasn't really accomplished very much.
Also, he doesn't get along with any of the Board members. He's at war with most of them. It's one thing to fight with people. We all do that. You want that in a democracy. It's not "the Stepford Supervisors" by any means. But then there's a time to put it aside and work in a common way. And I don't see that with Newsome in any way. So, he gets elected Mayor and we're going to have that wide gap again between Supervisors, elected by neighborhoods by the way, and a Mayor who does not like District Elections and wants to go backwards.
He's supported by Feinstein. Feinstein wants to end District Elections. She's not supportive of comperable work. She's not supportive of police reform. So he, really, for a younger person, really does not represent the future. He represents the past and going backwards, and I think that's a big difference.
This footage is from October 31, 2003.
Here's
Tom Ammiano explaining why he's a better choice for Mayor than Matt Gonzales. (Small - 5 MB)
Lisa:
What separates you from Matt Gonzales? A lot of people are on the fence about who they're going to vote for, and I thought we could clear that up.
Tom:
Well, a lot more years of experience. And legislative history. I know that sometimes people think "gee, legislative history" is a little boring. However, I come from this activist background. And then, when I was about 49, I took all the social justice issues I knew about and all the populist issues I knew about and put them together and got elected, and I've been enacting those for years.
Living Wage, District Elections, Environmental Issues, and I think that that's a big difference.
Also, I taught school for 25 years, and I think that taught be a lot about not only the economy, but about the diversity in San Francisco, and the job market in San Francisco, and I'm very very supportive of public schools, and I have that hands on experience. And I have a kid, and my kid went to public schools.
So, you know, I think someone like Gonzales is going to find out that there ain't no free lunch for anybody, and you just can't coast on rhetoric and verbage or personality. You're really going to have to prove that you've produced something other than a different voice...
I think my legislative history -- the length of it, the social justice ground, the comprehensive and very wide wide number of issues I've dealt with over the years -- I think that's what people would like to see in a Mayor.
So I just set up an in-person interview with Tom Ammiano for Friday afternoon. I'll be videotaping the interview and making it available here.
Since the purpose of this interview is to give you a chance to know Tom better, so you'll vote for him next Tuesday, I thought I'd give you a chance to send me questions ahead of time. Please email me at lisarein@finetuning.com with your questions and I'll work them into the interview on Friday.
Thanks!
I think Tom Ammiano is the best choice for the next mayor of San Francisco.
I'm providing some clips of him from the debate to give you a better idea about who he is and where he stands on the issues.
This clip is from the Mayoral Debate that aired on KPIX Channel 5 on Tuesday, October 14, 2003.
Tom Ammiano On Allocating Funds To Defend Tenants From Unfair Evictions (Small - 4 MB)
Question from Hank Plante:
Plante: "Supervisor Ammiano. You and I have talked about the fact that you support using public funds for lawyers to defend tenants in some wrongful eviction cases. There was a letter to the editor in the Chronicle this week that says "well, does Ammiano also have a plan to provide lawyers to the landlords who are abused by publicly-funded lawyers?"
Ammiano: "Who wrote that letter? Was that you Hank? You know, Supervisor Yee, some years ago, did introduce legislation that would provide eviction assistance to landlords who felt that they were victimized by tenants and that passed. We all voted for that. The issue of supplying community groups for defense of unjust evictions has precedence in New York, has precedence actually here in San Francisco. So, you know, as long as there's balance, I don't see anything wrong with that. And I also think, when we do contract with community groups or non-profits, we do ask them to provide services that ordinarily the city cannot provide. I don't see a balanced approach being a wrong approach in this case. I do think there are people, landlords, small landlords particularly, you have to distinguish between small landlords and ones like Leona Helmsley, and tenants who do not have the wherewithall to take legal action when they're facing an unjust eviction. So, I don't have a problem with that, and I also don't think that means an either or situation, as the letter writer was advocating.
I think Tom Ammiano is the best choice for the next mayor of San Francisco.
I'm providing some clips of him from the debate to give you a better idea about who he is and where he stands on the issues. (Complete transcript available below.)
Below: Tom holding up his Muni Fast Pass
This clip is from the Mayoral Debate that aired on KPIX Channel 5 on Tuesday, October 14, 2003.
Tom Ammiano On Parking vs. Public Transit (Small - 6 MB)
Question from Rachel Gordon:
Gordon: "Supervisor Ammiano. You've been a solid supporter of the city's "Transit First" policy, but there are a lot of people who live in San Francisco, who visit the city, who have stores in the city, that say "There's just not enough parking." It's really a maddening situation for a lot of folks. Number one: Do you think that there's a parking problem in San Francisco? And if you do, how should that problem be addressed?"
Ammiano: (Holds up his Muni Fast Pass high, and then puts it back in his pocket.)
"I think there is a parking problem in San Francisco, and I think we need to revisit some of the issues. You know, depending on what part of the city you live in, the parking takes on a different complexion. If you're in a part of the city that is not served by public transit as often as the Downtown area, then you're gonna rely on parking more. And we need to look at that and try to change that. If you're in a part of the city that has a lot of public transit, but somehow it's not reliable enough, or perceived to be not safe enough, then you need to put monies into that. I think it's also a regional issue among the metropolitan transportation commission, and I really lobbied hard for more money for Muni. Muni has a 730-750,000 ridership. I think it deserves more money from regional bodies. At the same time, we need to look at what might convince people to leave their cars. And that would be alternative transportation, such as high speed rail, which is going to be coming to San Francisco we hope next year. Looking at what we can do in terms of bicycle lanes, alternative ways of getting people to and from, and also, I think the dedicated funding to Muni is starting to show improvements, but I think that more improvement is needed. And when that happens, we may in fact be able to reduce that reliance on whether or not there's a parking space or not.
Gordon: "Can I ask just a quick follow-up question? Would you support the construction of parking garages or parking lots in neighborhood commercial corridors, if that's what the residents and the merchants demanded? Like the inner Sunset, or Northbeach, or the Richmond District?"
Ammiano: "It's not my druthers. But believe me, and you know, if you looked at the whole equation and there wasn't that kind of reliable public transit. If they wanted some combination of retail, car share in-fill on top of the parking lot with affordable housing or senior housing, it might take the sting out of it for me. But I would rather work primarily on providing alternatives to that. But, obviously, that should be on the table, because I know it is important to people."
I think Tom Ammiano is the best choice for the next mayor of San Francisco.
I'm providing some clips of him from the debate to give you a better idea about who he is and where he stands on the issues. (Complete transcript available below.)
This clip is from the Mayoral Debate that aired on KPIX Channel 5 on Tuesday, October 14, 2003.
Tom Ammiano On "Care Not Cash" (Small - 6 MB)
Question from Barbara Taylor:
Taylor: "Supervisor Ammiano. Voters, as you well know, passed "Care Not Cash" by a fairly substantial margin. But you opposed its implementation at the Board. As Mayor, would you continue to ignore the wishes of the voters if you don't agree with them?"
Ammiano: "I think that we did honor the wishes of the voter by voting on the "Real Care, Real Services" proposition, or I guess I should say "resolution," passed by the Board at the behest of Supervisor Daly and Ma. We did change the fact that we were saying, not "shelter," but real "housing." And the Mayor signed off on it. So, in my mind, we did honor the will of the voter. And then I think there's a bigger question here too: what was the will of the voter, aside from the very specifics of "Care Not Cash," and that was to provide solutions, which are housing and services. I have worked through the Department of Public Health to get a grant for six million dollars from HUD, working with the Mayor's office, about providing that supportive housing, and that's going to start immediately. And I think that does also honor the will of the voters.
So, while I did oppose "Care Not Cash" in its conception on the ballot, and then the judicial system thought we shouldn't do it, and then our Budget Analyst thought we shouldn't do it -- we still went ahead and did endorse the will of the voters. And we had to make some compromises about that and that's what this situation's all about."
Taylor: "Some might call that just political spin. The real question is: What's your view of when voters pass something? Do you feel that you have an ob(?) that's just advisory in nature? Or that you can put whatever your interpretation might be on the situation and act accordingly?"
Ammiano: "It's not so much my interpretation, but I do think that certainly, primary to me, is honoring what the voters want. And that doesn't just happen out of context. They might want something that's illegal, which is what the judiciary decided. They might want something that really can't happen because they weren't given the full information, as the Budget Analyst has said. So, you know, in honoring the will of the voters, you want to be there for them, and then you also want to take those other things into consideration. Spin or not spin, it's all about solutions. And "Care Not Cash" did have some deficiencies that I think we've taken care of."
I think Tom Ammiano is the best choice for the next mayor of San Francisco.
I'm providing some clips of him from the debate to give you a better idea about who he is and where he stands on the issues. (Complete transcript available below.)
This clip is from the Mayoral Debate that aired on KPIX Channel 5 on Tuesday, October 14, 2003.
Tom Ammiano On Whether He's Become A "Moderate" (Small - 4 MB)
Question from Hank Plante, CBS Channel 5 Political Editor:
Plante: "Supervisor, Good Evening."
Ammiano: "Good Evening."
Plante: "You've lost the earring. You're wearing better suits. We no longer hear you talking about taxing the rich or every stock transaction in the City, as you once did. My question might be obvious to you. Have you moved to the center for political expediency?"
Ammiano: "I think that you can redefine what "the center" is. I remember Diane Feinstein in the early days of her administration, had some very social justice positive positions -- still defined as a "moderate." If she was in Nebraska, she would have been a "Trotsky-ite." So I think there's a perception of relativity there about that. I'm still the same guy I've always been. Certainly I've been in office a long enough time to understand that bringing people together can stop some of the dysfunctions that happen here in San Francisco. Whether it's landlords or tenants, or whether it's the environmentalists vs. Muni, or whether it's AIDS activists vs. Kaiser. I don't know if that's "the center" or not, but I see a wisdom in that, that a mayor needs to have. So, I can't give you a definitive "yes" or "no." I think that "centerness" depends on the eye of the beholder. I think I'm a more "centered" person. Whether I'm in the center of the political spectrum or not, I can't tell you. But I will tell you, I'm still as honest as I've always been and as hard working as I've always been, and that will never change.
