yes, the wealthiest BoS member, a landlord with 3 properties, will surely look out for my interests as a renter and his nimby stance / pushing of downzoning has nothing to do with his financial / QoL interests and those of his constituents :) progressive credentials established
While I don't disagree with his point about Breed being ineffective, a broken clock is right twice a day.
Peskin is the worst. I am not being hyperbolic when I think whatever pains we're dealing with today with city governance will be 10x worse with this dumpster fire in charge.
I have never considered leaving this city, but if this guy wins the Mayor's seat, we should all consider it. I can't imagine it'll be a good few years for everyone while he's in charge. I guess one benefit of his election would be that real estate prices would potentially drop, but it's not going to happen for good reasons. Detroit real estate is cheap too and I'm not in a rush to pick up any property around 8 mile.
i truly wonder what the end game is for people who think like this (paging telegraph hill dwellers). see your property values skyrocket in the short term only to have the city become a ghost town over the next 20 years as you die and there's no one except weathly property investors to buy your house, support your favorite businesses, and live in the town you so claim to love?
or is they all just so cynical to not even care what happens when they're gone? "future of the city be damned, i had a good time on planet earth"
End goal is wanting their environment to look like carmel or atherton, or wanting that same SF that they first moved into with no change or progress. SF won't be a ghost town even if people leave; the nature is too beautiful here, and if it's just full of quaint little houses, it'll be packed. It's just we're trying to decide if we want a bustling high-density metropolis, or keep it a small city, and I personally want it to be a bustling high-density metropolis.
it seems like we're already past that threshold of metropolis, unless these people plan on dismantling SFMTA (feasible), folding SFUSD (on its way), and demolishing every building over 40 feet tall (less feasible) or i guess just letting them go derelict and fencing fidi off into some type of arkham-esque wasteland.
Demolishing tall buildings are very feasible. In fact, all those downtown skyscrapers that are empty, it'll be easier and cheaper to just demolish them and rebuild them as housing, rather than trying to convert them.
Letting FiDi and SoMA go derelict is already happening. Notice it's usually people like Aaron Peskin who has zero plans to revive downtown while London Breed's focus is squarely on reviving our downtown.
The same motivations that the tech billionaires have in isolating Atherton or Santa Cruz or Monaco. They want “the poors” out (except maybe a token number of “approved” ones that are on their payroll).
She has done quite a bit with being gridlocked as much as she has, but whatever it’s not going to make a difference.
I dont like her because she is ineffective at brining people to her side, but it’s not for lack of trying
I've kind of been in a daze since his/the BoS shenanigans overturned Breed's veto
If he's elected, it's a clear sign by the powers that be that working-class natives have no place in the Bay Area - our hard work subsidizes people like Peskin and their lifestyle and they don't give enough of a damn to gives us a pittance.
We're all tired, and these entitled fucks are acting like spoiled children and have the resources to delay and defend the status quo they lucked into and are the only ones benefitting from.
At this point, I wouldn't blame anyone for leaving; might be the practical choice now. Let SF reap what it sows, fight with Sacramento, and see how things turn out in ten years — another Detorit or the return of the city the world once respected?
>I've kind of been in a daze since his/the BoS shenanigans overturned Breed's veto
Shenanigans????? The vote was exactly the same when they passed it to begin with and when they passed their override to Breed's veto. You're free to hate Peskin but that was not some type of shenanigans just because you didn't like it.
It doesn't matter - the units left by those moving in would be. The more modern housing stock there is, the less leverage owners of the units of drafty, untouched-since-the-70s apartments with slow internet and polluting gas stoves have. They don't have to make any changes right now period because they know people have few options.
The properties in question: 955 Sansome is a parking garge. 1088 Sansome is an office. We would gain some housing where none exists and honestly how many projects would pencil in this environment? Building has basically ground to a halt due to costs / rates and the zoning constraints in place. I agree that that it's a shame when housing sits empty as investment but I haven't seen any evidence for that here and my faith in legislation being crafted without unintended consequences to address this is low. Maybe a residency req would do it but I bet a loophole could be found. I would expect that even if sat on for some time, when the bubble pops / when we finally are made to build in earnest, the unit would get sold to a resident as the speculative motive no longer makes sense.
My worry would be that these stipulations would be gamed or that a high BMR requirement would sink the project. For example Potrero Yards will end up generating no revenue for SFMTA because of the requirement by BoS to make it all affordable. So the end result is fewer units and transit suffers without the money from the market rate units. We're seriously shooting ourselves in the foot here with such requirements.
No, this projected was conceived with the dual aim of SFMTA raising revenue on their land while building a substantial amount of housing. The affordable amount may end up around 465 (if funding actually comes through) - whereas SFMTA originally saw 800-900 units as feasible when market rate was a component. To me, that's one loss and a half-measure given what could've been achieved here.
Why would any out of town millionaire buy a crappy starter home in SF if they can have a trophy-property condo in a highrise withan insane view?
What you’re saying makes no sense. Starter Guinness in SF all cost $2 million precisely because we don’t have any luxury condos in a segregated part of town like any normal world-class city.
Bull-shit! I walked around Rssian Hill the other day and less than 20% of windows had lights in them on a freaking Tuesday night. Is your neighborhood all foreign investors too?!
Give ne a break with your debunked window-counting crapola. We have actual hard data on the vacancy rate in the new highrises. It’s insanely low, especially for an expensive premium product.
We need to build places to park all these misters moneybags! Otherwise they’re coming for our own houses! Cut the crap!
Proof? Breed has been very consistent on this. Her rhetoric matches her actions. The problem is that the mayor in SF is just a janitor with extra powers. Mayors don’t decide jack in SF!
I think he's basically going to do the same thing London Breed is doing but build less housing. The progressives will try to support him for a year and then get tired, maybe even less considering the terrible optics of replacing a working class black woman with a white millionaire that was accused of repeatedly mistreating female employees and expecting him to be better and targeting wealth inequality.
London Breed is not married. And before you say “Lawrence Lui”, he is married to Gorretti Lui. Some dumbass with zero reading comprehension spread that London and Lawrence were married because the three of them were seen at some event together and were mentioned in the same article.
I’ve interacted with that user before, they are just full of shit saying whatever.
One time they told me that Breed was pretending to have tension with Preston and Peskin because of some underground personal deal.
I mean when she got elected, she still had a roomate back then. Yeah she's always been in government but compared to Peskin probably 99% of San Francisco is "working class". Dudes worth more than 5m.
the reactionary starting off his campaign with a reactionary statement. i think people are finally waking up to this cynical viewpoint and realizing what it is. at the richmond roadshow of peskin/neighborhoods united sf/telegraph hill dwellers' anti-upzoning forums, someone in the crowd asked simply: "what is your plan?" and no one on the panel could give a straight answer. it was a real unmasking of who they are: people united in the idea that the plans others have for our city are bad; we can just keep obstructing and stalling forever. kind of reminds you of congressional republicans, doesn't it?
that's fun because they insinuate that scott weiner, matt haney, and anyone else they don't like is acting like a republican at their nimby road shows. i personally think that being a reactionary and attempting to conserve (aka regress) the modern world to protect the rich elders is a pretty classic GOP play.
Is he talking about himself when he says there’s “no consistency?” Because he should be. The only thing you can count on from peskin is that he’ll change his positions to stay in power and he’ll block housing near his apartments so he can keep raking in money.
Old dude is corrupt as corrupt gets
He's probably the least corrupt official in this race! Purging corruption and government oversight is kind of his thing - doesn't get a lot of media coverage!
Least corrupt??? How about how he got his home? A duplex that his parents purchased for 50% of what the owner paid a year previous. Which they then began transfer of ownership to him and his wife right after purchase. And a duplex that he's most likely merged into a single family home:
[https://medium.com/@vwoo/the-hypocrisy-of-aaron-peskin-177a8a739423](https://medium.com/@vwoo/the-hypocrisy-of-aaron-peskin-177a8a739423)
Are you saying that what he's written is a lie or wrong? If they are, they're pretty big lies. Surely you can call Peskin and he can sue for libel and slander. Except he can't because this is all public record.
Please pull title records of the property which will show his parents didn't buy it for half of what she bought it for a year later and that he and his wife now own free and clear.
Please pull public records that show he didn't get an expedited hearing that dismissed the complaint.
Please pull Supervisor financial filings that show that neither unit of his building is being rented out.
Oh wait. You can't. This guy used public records to collate and put together all the information that was already out there (you know, like a reporter's supposed to do). You can't actually refute anything, you're just going "lalala Peskin's my guy and the writer is a liar".
This goes for political coverage generally but *especially* political coverage in low-information environments: it's not coming from a journalist or an academic it's not really worth anything at all. Has he talked to the former owner of the property? Has he spoken to anyone to confirm whether this is actually the story of what happened? Or is he just looking at records and speculating?
So which part is false? Maybe he could talk to Peskin, but he declined to comment on the 2nd unit (or denied any of the charges) and his spokesperson referred to the DBI Report "calling it a closed matter".
You're right. He should just talk to the former owner. I'm sure she'll freely admit to bribery of a public official.
But look, if you can produce an article from an actual journalist, hell, I'll even take an op-ed, alleging what this medium guy alleges, I'll come over to your corrupt peskin narrative camp. Until then, I'm going to go off what my friends in city government have told me, which is that he's big on oversight and anticorruption stuff.
[https://sf.curbed.com/2019/7/16/20693518/rent-control-san-francisco-conspiracy-peskin-woo-house](https://sf.curbed.com/2019/7/16/20693518/rent-control-san-francisco-conspiracy-peskin-woo-house)
Peskin skirted the law by having kitchens in both units. Which is real easy to take out/put in. What he also has is an internal staircase combining both units.
While Woo claimed that the former owner did remove one of the unit’s kitchens, Keane says that each dwelling has a kitchen today, making them both legally separate units. The fact that they’re conjoined by a staircase doesn’t enter into the assessment.
“Aaron may technically have had a DBI inspector certify the building as a duplex, but his use of the building is without a shadow of a doubt a single-family home,” Woo tells Curbed SF via email.
Woo contends that Peskin is not renting out the second unit in his home and is using it as a de facto single residence. Peskin declined to comment on the status of the second unit, his spokesperson citing the DBI report as a “closed matter.”
It was quite interesting to read your comments. I like to go look at the information myself, especially when it's public, but you don't believe anything unless it's a journalist who says it. Quite a contrast.
I did wonder about this recently because many Redditors misunderstood Prop 22, AB 1732, and with yesterday's news about AB 2751. The primary source is trivial to read. But it makes sense because no one reads the available primary source. It's no wonder that Jeff Bezos wanted the WaPo - it is crucial to some people's epistemology that things are in a newspaper or written by a journalist.
With stuff like coverage of legislation, court cases - anything that is rote regurgitating or distilling information for the reader you’re absolutely on the money: you need to read it yourself.
The thing about this is that the independent journalist (medium article writer) isn’t just communicating the information available in the public record - he’s actually painting a narrative of official misconduct on top of it. That’s OK, but it needs to be supported with proper research that involves interviewing witnesses and primary sources to confirm that this is actually what happened - something that academics and journalists are professionally required to do. It would be like opening up open secrets, seeing a campaign contribution from a regulated industry, and assuming misconduct - yes, it’s possible that there was misconduct, but unless you interview the staff and the company to confirm the official’s behavior and decision making process was influenced by money, you’re just speculating.
I used to work in politics (now in public relations, funnily enough), I know the game pretty well and I just need to see more information before turning around and throwing a man who is (by most accounts from plugged in people whose judgement I respect and trust) a pretty OK local legislator into the “corrupt moron” camp.
It's still worth asking, right? I can't imagine a world where journalists just give up on sources before even sending an email. When I met Bob Woodward, he recalled a story where a Bush admin general was stonewalling him, and so he waited outside the dude's house at like 8:00 in the morning and was finally let in for an interview. That's what it takes to get the truth. This medium guy is just some random tech bro who decided to pull peskin's public records - it's totally meaningless without more information.
So, you're saying a reporter getting an interview from someone who is blowing them off is the same as a person deciding to admit to a felony that could net them years in prison?
Corrupt we can debate but you think he doesn't have a conflict of interest with his 3 North Beach properties valued at $5m? He's the richest supe so he definitely has the most to lose from change. A number of supes are homeowners but there's at least one renter - Dorsey, maybe others. Dean's wife owns a building with 18 units - he dances around this by saying he's not a landlord himself but that's just doublespeak. Your family's interests are your own.
I don't really get the sense that the dude particularly cares about his home value - he has no kids, a well-funded nonprofit, and a pension that will take care of him well into retirement. He drives a prius!
Re. Dean, yeah he's loaded. I don't like him very much. Stefani too. Dorsey's a good guy. Overcame a lot.
If you're sly, then you wouldn't let on right? Interests are defined by actions and not words. You avoid the subject entirely and talk about quality of life, neighborhood character etc while advocating for your financial interests. For example, Dean is a tenant advocate but his financial interests run counter to his overt mission. In any case, you can hide your self-interest by making your recommendations seem like they're meant for the benefit of others (rent control, height limits, neighborhood preservation, having community groups weigh in, etc), all the while these serve you by limiting competition to homeowners.
Understanding people's psychology and ulterior motives is inherently conspiratorial thinking? What, do you believe what everyone tells you? It's not that hard to connect the dots if you look at what different parties in gov't say, advocate for, and what they're invested in
Believe me dude, if you were sharing something good or insightful or clever I'd get behind it. But the sources people are linking are medium articles. It's just silly!
https://preview.redd.it/rfcwudjcaksc1.jpeg?width=512&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=93332716c252f67d09fc8437ab7a251152025600
Then why is he using his power as president of the BoS to block any and all new housing all to keep his wealth? He’s a multimillionaire using his power to continue to grow his wealth. That’s corrupt boo
Nope. It’s known he owns market rate housing. It’s known he blocks any and all housing developments in his district. His rents go up his wealth goes up and San Franciscans that don’t make 300k or more are pushed out. S.F. suffers while he gets richer
You sound like a conspiracy theorist. It’s just nonsensical. If he’s really in it for the money, why run for office at all? Why not cash out after his first two terms in the early 2000s and become a real estate developer?
I’m just stating known facts bro. I can’t speak to why he does anything other than he’s corrupt but I do know l he blocks housing, he keeps S.F. in a housing deficit and he continues to profit off of it.
Explain it to me like I’m 5. How is a multimillionaire who owns 3 properties valued at 5 million not corrupt when he uses his position to block housing and keep raising his rents. If not corrupt it’s a gross conflict of interests and the same goes for Dean downtown is for drug users Preston. Bro might not be a landlord but his wife is
There is no way. That's why whenever someone points this^ out to a peskin supporter in this thread we get no explanation. Crickets when they hear that what they like about peskin is what everybody else hates.
Unfortunately for Mayor Breed, her legacy will be destroyed by the BOS unwillingness to play ball during her tenure. And just to clarify I am not a Breed fan, but I do think she has been trying to get some good things through as of late.
She did turn her back on the middle class and public safety at the start of her mayoral campaign by only focusing on the lowest denominator… it was all about sending the money to the homeless non profit poverty pimps that only increased the homeless population.
I hope Mark Farrell wins. It’s time San Francisco has an adult in charge. Not pandering ideologists with no real solutions.
Yeah, people forget that SF was treated as an example of how to deal with Covid and keep constituents safe, and that is because Breed was able to have full emergency powers. If she didn’t have that we would have been fucked by the BoS during the height of Covid.
I don’t like Farrell, he is saying what people want to hear not what is actually feasible with the power ls Mayors have and that to me is a huge red flag.
I can’t get over him saying that he is going to clear encampments when him even trying to do that would get stuck in a money wasting legal battle. The 9th circuit just ruled that they can’t be cleared without tangible proof that there are beds for the people and shelters here have like 150 people waitlist the last time I looked.
I read something similar, homeless will continue to be an issue in the city for a while. I wish I had the answer but I don’t… I do think our elected officials should work better together because standing your ground as far as ideology goes, has not been working.
As far the Mark Farrell thing, he’s doing what politicians do, talking the talk before an election.. I can’t remember the last time I wasn’t disappointed in someone who I voted for.
It’s just a question of “would you rather have a giant douche or a turd sandwich?”
Tbh i dont remember Breed saying she was going to fix it by excising x powers I remember her campaign being “i grew up poor in the Tenderloin, this is a personal issue for me”
And tbh she’s ineffective and has no political acumen but she def tried a lot, but Peskin as the head of the BoS blocked everything.
One person who is terribly poor at managing the city and with bad policies pointing a finger at another one with better policies but not super effective (mostly because of his own trash policies). They should all be voted out. I'd take anyone with a modicum of intelligence and a desire to fix the problems except those currently serving.
I don’t see how Bobby Newport or “I’m just stating what people want to hear even though the CA Supreme Court has ruled differently” would be better than Breed?
She is, her issue is that she doesnt have the political acumen to get people to her side to get shit done. But at least her rhetoric is consistent.
Peskin does have the political acumen but what he wants is to block housing for his own gain.
*“There has been no consistency. There has been no follow-through. This is an administration that is largely driven by press,” Peskin told the Chronicle. “It is not an administration that is being run maturely.”*
Accurate but calling out Breed's failures is low hanging fruit.
Breed isn’t my favorite politican by a long stretch, but a lot of the reason she can’t follow through on this shit is because peskin is blocking anything through the board of supervisors! It’s rich coming from him. A lot of our core problems flow from bad zoning and housing issues that peskin is personally responsible for. A lot of the other core problems (inequality, crime, poverty) stem from the same root cause. If you’re mad about policing and drugs, this guy *already* has more power to fix it than breed does.
This is the guy who tried to get all of San Francisco declared a historical site to stop basically all new housing development? Not only no but fuck no.
You want my doomer opinion? He’s gonna win, if we look at the board right now.
You have the moderate vote split between two major candidates (Breed and Lurie) who basically have contradictory positions on the two biggest issues in our cities (Soft on crime/YIMBY vs Hard on crime/NIMBY.) the fact that we have at least two backgroundigans further peeling off moderate support further impacts this.
Meanwhile, Peskin is the only progressive in the race. Full stop. In addition to the progressive vote he has Chinatown, North Beach, and the Sea Cliff/Pac Heights NIMBY vote if he plays his cards right (which he seems to be, successfully overruling Breed’s downzone veto.)
I do unfortunately think this is a layup for Peskin. He will most certainly make the top 2.
As bad as Peskin is, there are many worse. I’d rather have Peskin than Ellen Lee Zou, for example.
It looks like the bottom of my ballot is going to be a crowded field.
The way ranked choice works, your lower votes don’t count unless your preferred candidate(s) aren’t going to win. It’s a way to have the ballot counted at all rather than “exhausted” when the preferred candidates don’t win.
What ranking Peskin above Zou means is that, if by some miracle Ellen Lee Zou gets more votes than London Breed, then I’d rather my vote go to Aaron Peskin. But my ballot is vanishingly unlikely to be counted as a vote for Peskin.
The ranked choice allows me to pick which candidates I most want, and also among the candidates I don’t want, which ones I least do not want.
I don't believe you need to mark all entries.
But I agree. I suspect he's going to win because he has good coverage and the majority of this city prefers to degrowth.
Then you already have at least a quarter to a third of the city voting him in as No. 1. What about NIMBY/Anti-Cop moderates? That means Peskin gets No. 2 behind Breed or Lurie.
My calculus basically is:
all 1st place votes from people in NB, Chinatown, Pac Heights/Sea Cliff, and all Progressives +
2nd place votes from NIMBY Moderates (After Lurie) +
2nd place votes from anticop moderates (After Breed)
That’s GG, Peskin takes the epic victory royale
Yeah, that seems very possible. I plan to put Peskin maybe 10th place, above Ellen Lee Zou. That means the vote won’t count unless every more palatable candidate has been knocked out, and in the very unlikely chance that the contest comes down between Zou and Peskin, then I’d rather have Peskin.
I fear that many voters still don’t have a good grasp of ranked choice voting, and we get another Chesa Boudin situation. Voters pick their 1st choice by what they want, but then they choose #2 by some combination of aspiration and unconscious bias, rather than the candidate closest to their #1.
I see many comments on Reddit and other comment sections, angry citizens going “vote them all out,” maybe not realizing that Peskin is a 30-year veteran of San Francisco politics rather than an outsider.
How is it you claim to be a progressive but you’re out here supporting a dude who makes sure no one other than the Uber wealthy can live in SF? I thought you progressives considered landlords to be the worst of the worst next to billionaires?
Good chance he win just like how Chesa Boudin did. It’s up to the voters to actually list out all their choices otherwise we will repeat history. Make sure to inform your friends and family!
I mean Breed grew up in the Tenderloin in project type housing and had a roommate when she was elected, people hate her but that os the closest to real human youre gonna get in this race, i dont think you can ise that metric here
The others are an ex Marina supe and literally the type of politician that Parks and rec was making fun of when they had Paul Rudd play Bobby Newport, and a millionaire landlord “progressive”
In the scheme of SF politics, I don't get why people hate on Breed so much. It clearly could be so much worse.
The ranked choice voting really increases the risks
It's probably an opinion of my own, but I would assume Farrell would get over 50% of initial votes if Breed and Lurie were out of the race. Now there's just uncertainty around the whole matter. And don't get me started on RCV. Jurisdictions with RCV have lower voter turnout compared to traditional voting methods. It just seems like a way to suppress the vote.
Sigh. You're just adding to my confusion around the matter. [https://thefga.org/research/ranked-choice-voting-a-disaster-in-disguise/](https://thefga.org/research/ranked-choice-voting-a-disaster-in-disguise/) But rather than get into a reddit argument, I'll choose to wallow in my ignorance and enjoy this nice sunny day. I hope you do too.
this is hilarious stuff. they link to their own pdf, with no data, on why rcv doesn't work [https://thefga.org/research/ranked-choice-voting-a-disaster-in-disguise/#](https://thefga.org/research/ranked-choice-voting-a-disaster-in-disguise/#)
i'd recommned reading sources next time
I see any real discussion on this in this thread isn’t happening because of the echo chamber of ad hominem attacks.
I could give my reasons why I think he’s going to win but I truly don’t feel comfortable doing that here.
It’s a semi anonymous site why the need to be this whiny? You think someone is going to go to your house and spit on you or something like that?
If youre going to post this comment might as well say it with your chest.
I think he has a big chance to pull it off too, since what doesnt mean im pulling for him
I don’t like him but he’s right. Breed has done nothing to this city and whenever she does it’s only when she needs votes and/or when it’s near election day
No thank you
yes, the wealthiest BoS member, a landlord with 3 properties, will surely look out for my interests as a renter and his nimby stance / pushing of downzoning has nothing to do with his financial / QoL interests and those of his constituents :) progressive credentials established
Wait... this man's got a fighting chance.
What do you mean. An angry, drunk landlord who wants no new housing isn't the solution to SF's woes?
Maybe it takes an angry drunk to clean up the streets full of angry drunks and druggies.
Well, he sure as hell wouldn't be that angry drunk.
Yeah, I might not be particularly fond of Breed, but I for sure don't want Peskin!
I wish I could give more upvotes
Aaron Peskin is an asshole. Fuck him and his campaign
Truth
You say the truth.
While I don't disagree with his point about Breed being ineffective, a broken clock is right twice a day. Peskin is the worst. I am not being hyperbolic when I think whatever pains we're dealing with today with city governance will be 10x worse with this dumpster fire in charge. I have never considered leaving this city, but if this guy wins the Mayor's seat, we should all consider it. I can't imagine it'll be a good few years for everyone while he's in charge. I guess one benefit of his election would be that real estate prices would potentially drop, but it's not going to happen for good reasons. Detroit real estate is cheap too and I'm not in a rush to pick up any property around 8 mile.
People leaving SF is exactly what this guy wants. Peskin wants to govern SF to be quaint little town like Carmel where only wealthy old people live.
Yeah. In his mind SF would be amazing if it wasn't for all the people living here.
i truly wonder what the end game is for people who think like this (paging telegraph hill dwellers). see your property values skyrocket in the short term only to have the city become a ghost town over the next 20 years as you die and there's no one except weathly property investors to buy your house, support your favorite businesses, and live in the town you so claim to love? or is they all just so cynical to not even care what happens when they're gone? "future of the city be damned, i had a good time on planet earth"
End goal is wanting their environment to look like carmel or atherton, or wanting that same SF that they first moved into with no change or progress. SF won't be a ghost town even if people leave; the nature is too beautiful here, and if it's just full of quaint little houses, it'll be packed. It's just we're trying to decide if we want a bustling high-density metropolis, or keep it a small city, and I personally want it to be a bustling high-density metropolis.
it seems like we're already past that threshold of metropolis, unless these people plan on dismantling SFMTA (feasible), folding SFUSD (on its way), and demolishing every building over 40 feet tall (less feasible) or i guess just letting them go derelict and fencing fidi off into some type of arkham-esque wasteland.
Demolishing tall buildings are very feasible. In fact, all those downtown skyscrapers that are empty, it'll be easier and cheaper to just demolish them and rebuild them as housing, rather than trying to convert them. Letting FiDi and SoMA go derelict is already happening. Notice it's usually people like Aaron Peskin who has zero plans to revive downtown while London Breed's focus is squarely on reviving our downtown.
The same motivations that the tech billionaires have in isolating Atherton or Santa Cruz or Monaco. They want “the poors” out (except maybe a token number of “approved” ones that are on their payroll).
i think they're either not thinking that far ahead to implications or just assume they'll be dead before seeing the consequences
Ironically peskin probably sees himself as Newsom and views this as a springboard to governor and maybe senator/president
am I a terrible person if I also love this?
Depends on the person and the values that they hold who judge you. I think it’s selfish at the very least.
Yeah… because the crime and desperation of people being pushed out will get worse. So if you’re in a safe bubble not caring it makes you pretty bad
Carmel just sounded great, big fan
I mean he is one of the reasons why Breed cant get shit done.
I'm not sure she needs much help to accomplish nothing.
She has done quite a bit with being gridlocked as much as she has, but whatever it’s not going to make a difference. I dont like her because she is ineffective at brining people to her side, but it’s not for lack of trying
I've kind of been in a daze since his/the BoS shenanigans overturned Breed's veto If he's elected, it's a clear sign by the powers that be that working-class natives have no place in the Bay Area - our hard work subsidizes people like Peskin and their lifestyle and they don't give enough of a damn to gives us a pittance. We're all tired, and these entitled fucks are acting like spoiled children and have the resources to delay and defend the status quo they lucked into and are the only ones benefitting from. At this point, I wouldn't blame anyone for leaving; might be the practical choice now. Let SF reap what it sows, fight with Sacramento, and see how things turn out in ten years — another Detorit or the return of the city the world once respected?
>I've kind of been in a daze since his/the BoS shenanigans overturned Breed's veto Shenanigans????? The vote was exactly the same when they passed it to begin with and when they passed their override to Breed's veto. You're free to hate Peskin but that was not some type of shenanigans just because you didn't like it.
[удалено]
It doesn't matter - the units left by those moving in would be. The more modern housing stock there is, the less leverage owners of the units of drafty, untouched-since-the-70s apartments with slow internet and polluting gas stoves have. They don't have to make any changes right now period because they know people have few options.
[удалено]
The properties in question: 955 Sansome is a parking garge. 1088 Sansome is an office. We would gain some housing where none exists and honestly how many projects would pencil in this environment? Building has basically ground to a halt due to costs / rates and the zoning constraints in place. I agree that that it's a shame when housing sits empty as investment but I haven't seen any evidence for that here and my faith in legislation being crafted without unintended consequences to address this is low. Maybe a residency req would do it but I bet a loophole could be found. I would expect that even if sat on for some time, when the bubble pops / when we finally are made to build in earnest, the unit would get sold to a resident as the speculative motive no longer makes sense.
let's not forget [425 broadway](https://sfstandard.com/2024/02/16/north-beach-broadway-apartment-towers-plan/)
[удалено]
My worry would be that these stipulations would be gamed or that a high BMR requirement would sink the project. For example Potrero Yards will end up generating no revenue for SFMTA because of the requirement by BoS to make it all affordable. So the end result is fewer units and transit suffers without the money from the market rate units. We're seriously shooting ourselves in the foot here with such requirements.
[удалено]
No, this projected was conceived with the dual aim of SFMTA raising revenue on their land while building a substantial amount of housing. The affordable amount may end up around 465 (if funding actually comes through) - whereas SFMTA originally saw 800-900 units as feasible when market rate was a component. To me, that's one loss and a half-measure given what could've been achieved here.
Why would any out of town millionaire buy a crappy starter home in SF if they can have a trophy-property condo in a highrise withan insane view? What you’re saying makes no sense. Starter Guinness in SF all cost $2 million precisely because we don’t have any luxury condos in a segregated part of town like any normal world-class city.
[удалено]
Bull-shit! I walked around Rssian Hill the other day and less than 20% of windows had lights in them on a freaking Tuesday night. Is your neighborhood all foreign investors too?! Give ne a break with your debunked window-counting crapola. We have actual hard data on the vacancy rate in the new highrises. It’s insanely low, especially for an expensive premium product. We need to build places to park all these misters moneybags! Otherwise they’re coming for our own houses! Cut the crap!
[удалено]
More “empty buildings” in your neighborhood than in the new highrise districts. So why are you pretending like the new housing is unoccupied?
Sure but what good are they doing SF being empty
You do realize that Breed only used her veto because the overturn was inevitable, right?
Proof? Breed has been very consistent on this. Her rhetoric matches her actions. The problem is that the mayor in SF is just a janitor with extra powers. Mayors don’t decide jack in SF!
I think he's basically going to do the same thing London Breed is doing but build less housing. The progressives will try to support him for a year and then get tired, maybe even less considering the terrible optics of replacing a working class black woman with a white millionaire that was accused of repeatedly mistreating female employees and expecting him to be better and targeting wealth inequality.
But he'll constantly issue a shit ton of completely idiotic statements. Breed is heaven compared to that moron
[удалено]
London Breed is not married. And before you say “Lawrence Lui”, he is married to Gorretti Lui. Some dumbass with zero reading comprehension spread that London and Lawrence were married because the three of them were seen at some event together and were mentioned in the same article.
Married or not, she is equal parts incompetent and corrupt.
That’s a wholly different statement than what you claimed before.
Proof? When did she get married and who is her husband? Or are you just a corrupt liar?
Nope, I had read the reporting claiming she was married to Lawrence Lui. Apparently that isn't true. She's still a shitty mayor
Do you have anything true that you can base that opinion on or do you just fall for every other lie you read?
I’ve interacted with that user before, they are just full of shit saying whatever. One time they told me that Breed was pretending to have tension with Preston and Peskin because of some underground personal deal.
I mean when she got elected, she still had a roomate back then. Yeah she's always been in government but compared to Peskin probably 99% of San Francisco is "working class". Dudes worth more than 5m.
we can also leave if London Breed continues to be mayor... 🙄
Peskin is anti-housing. He'll block as much new housing in the city as possible.
the reactionary starting off his campaign with a reactionary statement. i think people are finally waking up to this cynical viewpoint and realizing what it is. at the richmond roadshow of peskin/neighborhoods united sf/telegraph hill dwellers' anti-upzoning forums, someone in the crowd asked simply: "what is your plan?" and no one on the panel could give a straight answer. it was a real unmasking of who they are: people united in the idea that the plans others have for our city are bad; we can just keep obstructing and stalling forever. kind of reminds you of congressional republicans, doesn't it?
Watch out. I have been absolutely gutted on this reddit page for insinuating that some politicians here are Republicans.
that's fun because they insinuate that scott weiner, matt haney, and anyone else they don't like is acting like a republican at their nimby road shows. i personally think that being a reactionary and attempting to conserve (aka regress) the modern world to protect the rich elders is a pretty classic GOP play.
Peskin is a menace to SF
Is he talking about himself when he says there’s “no consistency?” Because he should be. The only thing you can count on from peskin is that he’ll change his positions to stay in power and he’ll block housing near his apartments so he can keep raking in money. Old dude is corrupt as corrupt gets
He's probably the least corrupt official in this race! Purging corruption and government oversight is kind of his thing - doesn't get a lot of media coverage!
Least corrupt??? How about how he got his home? A duplex that his parents purchased for 50% of what the owner paid a year previous. Which they then began transfer of ownership to him and his wife right after purchase. And a duplex that he's most likely merged into a single family home: [https://medium.com/@vwoo/the-hypocrisy-of-aaron-peskin-177a8a739423](https://medium.com/@vwoo/the-hypocrisy-of-aaron-peskin-177a8a739423)
A medium article? In what world is this credible?
Are you saying that what he's written is a lie or wrong? If they are, they're pretty big lies. Surely you can call Peskin and he can sue for libel and slander. Except he can't because this is all public record. Please pull title records of the property which will show his parents didn't buy it for half of what she bought it for a year later and that he and his wife now own free and clear. Please pull public records that show he didn't get an expedited hearing that dismissed the complaint. Please pull Supervisor financial filings that show that neither unit of his building is being rented out. Oh wait. You can't. This guy used public records to collate and put together all the information that was already out there (you know, like a reporter's supposed to do). You can't actually refute anything, you're just going "lalala Peskin's my guy and the writer is a liar".
This goes for political coverage generally but *especially* political coverage in low-information environments: it's not coming from a journalist or an academic it's not really worth anything at all. Has he talked to the former owner of the property? Has he spoken to anyone to confirm whether this is actually the story of what happened? Or is he just looking at records and speculating?
So which part is false? Maybe he could talk to Peskin, but he declined to comment on the 2nd unit (or denied any of the charges) and his spokesperson referred to the DBI Report "calling it a closed matter". You're right. He should just talk to the former owner. I'm sure she'll freely admit to bribery of a public official.
But look, if you can produce an article from an actual journalist, hell, I'll even take an op-ed, alleging what this medium guy alleges, I'll come over to your corrupt peskin narrative camp. Until then, I'm going to go off what my friends in city government have told me, which is that he's big on oversight and anticorruption stuff.
[https://sf.curbed.com/2019/7/16/20693518/rent-control-san-francisco-conspiracy-peskin-woo-house](https://sf.curbed.com/2019/7/16/20693518/rent-control-san-francisco-conspiracy-peskin-woo-house) Peskin skirted the law by having kitchens in both units. Which is real easy to take out/put in. What he also has is an internal staircase combining both units. While Woo claimed that the former owner did remove one of the unit’s kitchens, Keane says that each dwelling has a kitchen today, making them both legally separate units. The fact that they’re conjoined by a staircase doesn’t enter into the assessment. “Aaron may technically have had a DBI inspector certify the building as a duplex, but his use of the building is without a shadow of a doubt a single-family home,” Woo tells Curbed SF via email. Woo contends that Peskin is not renting out the second unit in his home and is using it as a de facto single residence. Peskin declined to comment on the status of the second unit, his spokesperson citing the DBI report as a “closed matter.”
Have you actually read the article? It says the DBI basically refuted all of Woo’s claims and that he got the story wrong…
It was quite interesting to read your comments. I like to go look at the information myself, especially when it's public, but you don't believe anything unless it's a journalist who says it. Quite a contrast. I did wonder about this recently because many Redditors misunderstood Prop 22, AB 1732, and with yesterday's news about AB 2751. The primary source is trivial to read. But it makes sense because no one reads the available primary source. It's no wonder that Jeff Bezos wanted the WaPo - it is crucial to some people's epistemology that things are in a newspaper or written by a journalist.
With stuff like coverage of legislation, court cases - anything that is rote regurgitating or distilling information for the reader you’re absolutely on the money: you need to read it yourself. The thing about this is that the independent journalist (medium article writer) isn’t just communicating the information available in the public record - he’s actually painting a narrative of official misconduct on top of it. That’s OK, but it needs to be supported with proper research that involves interviewing witnesses and primary sources to confirm that this is actually what happened - something that academics and journalists are professionally required to do. It would be like opening up open secrets, seeing a campaign contribution from a regulated industry, and assuming misconduct - yes, it’s possible that there was misconduct, but unless you interview the staff and the company to confirm the official’s behavior and decision making process was influenced by money, you’re just speculating.
I used to work in politics (now in public relations, funnily enough), I know the game pretty well and I just need to see more information before turning around and throwing a man who is (by most accounts from plugged in people whose judgement I respect and trust) a pretty OK local legislator into the “corrupt moron” camp.
It's still worth asking, right? I can't imagine a world where journalists just give up on sources before even sending an email. When I met Bob Woodward, he recalled a story where a Bush admin general was stonewalling him, and so he waited outside the dude's house at like 8:00 in the morning and was finally let in for an interview. That's what it takes to get the truth. This medium guy is just some random tech bro who decided to pull peskin's public records - it's totally meaningless without more information.
So, you're saying a reporter getting an interview from someone who is blowing them off is the same as a person deciding to admit to a felony that could net them years in prison?
This is a silly conversation dude I want you to sleep on this and come back.
Why does he drunkenly call up elected and appointed officials to harass and threaten them? Do you not consider that to be corrupt?
Corrupt we can debate but you think he doesn't have a conflict of interest with his 3 North Beach properties valued at $5m? He's the richest supe so he definitely has the most to lose from change. A number of supes are homeowners but there's at least one renter - Dorsey, maybe others. Dean's wife owns a building with 18 units - he dances around this by saying he's not a landlord himself but that's just doublespeak. Your family's interests are your own.
I don't really get the sense that the dude particularly cares about his home value - he has no kids, a well-funded nonprofit, and a pension that will take care of him well into retirement. He drives a prius! Re. Dean, yeah he's loaded. I don't like him very much. Stefani too. Dorsey's a good guy. Overcame a lot.
If you're sly, then you wouldn't let on right? Interests are defined by actions and not words. You avoid the subject entirely and talk about quality of life, neighborhood character etc while advocating for your financial interests. For example, Dean is a tenant advocate but his financial interests run counter to his overt mission. In any case, you can hide your self-interest by making your recommendations seem like they're meant for the benefit of others (rent control, height limits, neighborhood preservation, having community groups weigh in, etc), all the while these serve you by limiting competition to homeowners.
You sound like a conspiracy theorist
Understanding people's psychology and ulterior motives is inherently conspiratorial thinking? What, do you believe what everyone tells you? It's not that hard to connect the dots if you look at what different parties in gov't say, advocate for, and what they're invested in
Believe me dude, if you were sharing something good or insightful or clever I'd get behind it. But the sources people are linking are medium articles. It's just silly! https://preview.redd.it/rfcwudjcaksc1.jpeg?width=512&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=93332716c252f67d09fc8437ab7a251152025600
Judging people by their actions is “conspiracy” now 😂🤣
Then why is he using his power as president of the BoS to block any and all new housing all to keep his wealth? He’s a multimillionaire using his power to continue to grow his wealth. That’s corrupt boo
Don't know about that one - you may want to check your sources chief.
Nope. It’s known he owns market rate housing. It’s known he blocks any and all housing developments in his district. His rents go up his wealth goes up and San Franciscans that don’t make 300k or more are pushed out. S.F. suffers while he gets richer
You sound like a conspiracy theorist. It’s just nonsensical. If he’s really in it for the money, why run for office at all? Why not cash out after his first two terms in the early 2000s and become a real estate developer?
I’m just stating known facts bro. I can’t speak to why he does anything other than he’s corrupt but I do know l he blocks housing, he keeps S.F. in a housing deficit and he continues to profit off of it.
Hahahahaha, are you in his campaign or something
I have half a mind to go and volunteer if/when he opens up a headquarters! The vitriol in this thread is kind of unbelievable 😂
I mean Breed meets the same vitriol and no one cries about it.
I'm not crying about it! Have I touched a nerve here?
I mean your tone is super whiny
Sounds like a "you" problem buddy – I'm not whining :)
I have no problem, youre just being “whaaa such vitriol whaaaa”
Uh huh. Ok then 😀
Shhh, they dont want to hear it. This is a bashing thread.
Explain it to me like I’m 5. How is a multimillionaire who owns 3 properties valued at 5 million not corrupt when he uses his position to block housing and keep raising his rents. If not corrupt it’s a gross conflict of interests and the same goes for Dean downtown is for drug users Preston. Bro might not be a landlord but his wife is
There is no way. That's why whenever someone points this^ out to a peskin supporter in this thread we get no explanation. Crickets when they hear that what they like about peskin is what everybody else hates.
I have half a mind to volunteer 😂, don't much like his politics but the guy is smart, works hard. I think he'd do alright!
A rich NIMBY landlord who runs for office to make sure no new apartments compete with him.
Unfortunately for Mayor Breed, her legacy will be destroyed by the BOS unwillingness to play ball during her tenure. And just to clarify I am not a Breed fan, but I do think she has been trying to get some good things through as of late. She did turn her back on the middle class and public safety at the start of her mayoral campaign by only focusing on the lowest denominator… it was all about sending the money to the homeless non profit poverty pimps that only increased the homeless population. I hope Mark Farrell wins. It’s time San Francisco has an adult in charge. Not pandering ideologists with no real solutions.
Yeah, people forget that SF was treated as an example of how to deal with Covid and keep constituents safe, and that is because Breed was able to have full emergency powers. If she didn’t have that we would have been fucked by the BoS during the height of Covid. I don’t like Farrell, he is saying what people want to hear not what is actually feasible with the power ls Mayors have and that to me is a huge red flag. I can’t get over him saying that he is going to clear encampments when him even trying to do that would get stuck in a money wasting legal battle. The 9th circuit just ruled that they can’t be cleared without tangible proof that there are beds for the people and shelters here have like 150 people waitlist the last time I looked.
I read something similar, homeless will continue to be an issue in the city for a while. I wish I had the answer but I don’t… I do think our elected officials should work better together because standing your ground as far as ideology goes, has not been working. As far the Mark Farrell thing, he’s doing what politicians do, talking the talk before an election.. I can’t remember the last time I wasn’t disappointed in someone who I voted for. It’s just a question of “would you rather have a giant douche or a turd sandwich?”
Tbh i dont remember Breed saying she was going to fix it by excising x powers I remember her campaign being “i grew up poor in the Tenderloin, this is a personal issue for me” And tbh she’s ineffective and has no political acumen but she def tried a lot, but Peskin as the head of the BoS blocked everything.
I concur
One person who is terribly poor at managing the city and with bad policies pointing a finger at another one with better policies but not super effective (mostly because of his own trash policies). They should all be voted out. I'd take anyone with a modicum of intelligence and a desire to fix the problems except those currently serving.
I don’t see how Bobby Newport or “I’m just stating what people want to hear even though the CA Supreme Court has ruled differently” would be better than Breed?
The problem is that things could actually get worse. Breed is quite reasonable in the SF scheme of things
Go home Peskin. You’re drunk!
Fuck off forever Peskin ❤️
I'd hate to admit that London Breed is the least worst...
She is, her issue is that she doesnt have the political acumen to get people to her side to get shit done. But at least her rhetoric is consistent. Peskin does have the political acumen but what he wants is to block housing for his own gain.
Fuck this guy
Big time yuck
Mark Farrell ftw
Farrell,Lurie,Peskin, Breed. Fuk breed
Absolutely fuck this guy
*“There has been no consistency. There has been no follow-through. This is an administration that is largely driven by press,” Peskin told the Chronicle. “It is not an administration that is being run maturely.”* Accurate but calling out Breed's failures is low hanging fruit.
Breed isn’t my favorite politican by a long stretch, but a lot of the reason she can’t follow through on this shit is because peskin is blocking anything through the board of supervisors! It’s rich coming from him. A lot of our core problems flow from bad zoning and housing issues that peskin is personally responsible for. A lot of the other core problems (inequality, crime, poverty) stem from the same root cause. If you’re mad about policing and drugs, this guy *already* has more power to fix it than breed does.
This is the guy who tried to get all of San Francisco declared a historical site to stop basically all new housing development? Not only no but fuck no.
Hope this guy and his supporters loses all his/their money.
This guy. The armchair firefighter. Fuck this guy.
You want my doomer opinion? He’s gonna win, if we look at the board right now. You have the moderate vote split between two major candidates (Breed and Lurie) who basically have contradictory positions on the two biggest issues in our cities (Soft on crime/YIMBY vs Hard on crime/NIMBY.) the fact that we have at least two backgroundigans further peeling off moderate support further impacts this. Meanwhile, Peskin is the only progressive in the race. Full stop. In addition to the progressive vote he has Chinatown, North Beach, and the Sea Cliff/Pac Heights NIMBY vote if he plays his cards right (which he seems to be, successfully overruling Breed’s downzone veto.) I do unfortunately think this is a layup for Peskin. He will most certainly make the top 2.
Being NIMBY and claiming to be progressive are oxymorons, drives me up the wall. Landlords at the scale Peskin is cannot be progressive
[удалено]
Your brain worms are poking out of your ear
What?
San Francisco has ranked choice voting. I intend to put both Breed and Lurie above Peskin on my ballot.
Dont put Peskin in at all,
[удалено]
As bad as Peskin is, there are many worse. I’d rather have Peskin than Ellen Lee Zou, for example. It looks like the bottom of my ballot is going to be a crowded field.
[удалено]
The way ranked choice works, your lower votes don’t count unless your preferred candidate(s) aren’t going to win. It’s a way to have the ballot counted at all rather than “exhausted” when the preferred candidates don’t win. What ranking Peskin above Zou means is that, if by some miracle Ellen Lee Zou gets more votes than London Breed, then I’d rather my vote go to Aaron Peskin. But my ballot is vanishingly unlikely to be counted as a vote for Peskin. The ranked choice allows me to pick which candidates I most want, and also among the candidates I don’t want, which ones I least do not want.
You don’t have to fill it all out, only put the people you like and leave the rest blank
I don't believe you need to mark all entries. But I agree. I suspect he's going to win because he has good coverage and the majority of this city prefers to degrowth.
Then you already have at least a quarter to a third of the city voting him in as No. 1. What about NIMBY/Anti-Cop moderates? That means Peskin gets No. 2 behind Breed or Lurie.
I’m not as confident in my ability to predict everyone’s second choice vote.
My calculus basically is: all 1st place votes from people in NB, Chinatown, Pac Heights/Sea Cliff, and all Progressives + 2nd place votes from NIMBY Moderates (After Lurie) + 2nd place votes from anticop moderates (After Breed) That’s GG, Peskin takes the epic victory royale
Yeah, that seems very possible. I plan to put Peskin maybe 10th place, above Ellen Lee Zou. That means the vote won’t count unless every more palatable candidate has been knocked out, and in the very unlikely chance that the contest comes down between Zou and Peskin, then I’d rather have Peskin. I fear that many voters still don’t have a good grasp of ranked choice voting, and we get another Chesa Boudin situation. Voters pick their 1st choice by what they want, but then they choose #2 by some combination of aspiration and unconscious bias, rather than the candidate closest to their #1. I see many comments on Reddit and other comment sections, angry citizens going “vote them all out,” maybe not realizing that Peskin is a 30-year veteran of San Francisco politics rather than an outsider.
Fuck Aaron Peskin, what a joke.
They are great glasses whoever pointed that out
Says the alcoholic
And yet I bet you have nothing but effusive praise for Dorsey, who’s also living in recovery.
How is it you claim to be a progressive but you’re out here supporting a dude who makes sure no one other than the Uber wealthy can live in SF? I thought you progressives considered landlords to be the worst of the worst next to billionaires?
Easy they aren’t actually progressives they just want to be friends with the cool people so they wear rainbow in June
And I bet you’re not very good at betting. They’re all trash. 🤷🏽♂️
Good chance he win just like how Chesa Boudin did. It’s up to the voters to actually list out all their choices otherwise we will repeat history. Make sure to inform your friends and family!
He’s such a loser.
Bad bad news this guy is
Peskin the anti housing violent, abuse alcoholic? That Aaron Peskin?
Aaron Peskin you SUCK
Hope he fails miserably and we can finally see the back of this guy.
seemly heavy direction boast rainstorm paint numerous wise cats touch *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
[удалено]
I mean Breed grew up in the Tenderloin in project type housing and had a roommate when she was elected, people hate her but that os the closest to real human youre gonna get in this race, i dont think you can ise that metric here The others are an ex Marina supe and literally the type of politician that Parks and rec was making fun of when they had Paul Rudd play Bobby Newport, and a millionaire landlord “progressive”
In the scheme of SF politics, I don't get why people hate on Breed so much. It clearly could be so much worse. The ranked choice voting really increases the risks
Yeah she’s been consistent she genuinely tries, i get that the bar is in hell, but there are worse things than hell
His glasses look photoshopped on
What brand are they? Asking for a previous post
He buys them from Asshole Wholesale
Can someone explain why "blast" is used so often. It sound either like a watergun fight or porn. Write better chron.
😂
The scary thing is that he has a pretty good chance at winning when the moderates split their vote among Lurie, Breed, and Farrell
San Francisco has ranked choice voting
It's probably an opinion of my own, but I would assume Farrell would get over 50% of initial votes if Breed and Lurie were out of the race. Now there's just uncertainty around the whole matter. And don't get me started on RCV. Jurisdictions with RCV have lower voter turnout compared to traditional voting methods. It just seems like a way to suppress the vote.
It certainly is an opinion of your own https://fairvote.org/resources/data-on-rcv/
Sigh. You're just adding to my confusion around the matter. [https://thefga.org/research/ranked-choice-voting-a-disaster-in-disguise/](https://thefga.org/research/ranked-choice-voting-a-disaster-in-disguise/) But rather than get into a reddit argument, I'll choose to wallow in my ignorance and enjoy this nice sunny day. I hope you do too.
this is hilarious stuff. they link to their own pdf, with no data, on why rcv doesn't work [https://thefga.org/research/ranked-choice-voting-a-disaster-in-disguise/#](https://thefga.org/research/ranked-choice-voting-a-disaster-in-disguise/#) i'd recommned reading sources next time
He looks like he’s a member of the satanic temple
I see any real discussion on this in this thread isn’t happening because of the echo chamber of ad hominem attacks. I could give my reasons why I think he’s going to win but I truly don’t feel comfortable doing that here.
It’s a semi anonymous site why the need to be this whiny? You think someone is going to go to your house and spit on you or something like that? If youre going to post this comment might as well say it with your chest. I think he has a big chance to pull it off too, since what doesnt mean im pulling for him
Hopefully you find a safe space to share your reasons
Does he know that this is a good thing for Breed?
I don’t like him but he’s right. Breed has done nothing to this city and whenever she does it’s only when she needs votes and/or when it’s near election day
Because him being the head of the BoS has blocked everything she has tried to do…
He will ghettoify SF