The SF Bay Guardian released their endorsements for local races and state propositions. These tend to be some of the most influential endorsements in the City, and to a lesser extent, in the region. As always, they do a laudable job presenting a thorough analysis of each race and the relative merits of each position. Hats off to Tim Redmond and the crew at the SFBG.  Here’s a summary of their positions, and I’ll discuss some of them over the flip.

Prop 98: No, No, No

Prop 99: Yes, Yes, Yes

SD-03: Mark Leno

SD-09: Loni Hancock

AD-13: Tom Ammiano

AD-14: Kriss Worthington

CA-08 (Pelosi): No Endorsement

Let’s start with Props 98 and 99. (I work for No on 98) They state the position that progressives across the state have come to, whether Jon Coupal thought the opposite might be true, Prop 98 is a disaster for California. And they even give us a nice little way to remember which is the good one: “We hate 98, but 99 is fine.” Cute.

On to the Senate Races, surely the most watched position in this endorsement slate was the issue of SD-03 (aka Rumble in the Bubble, that’s mine, I want royalties for that, even though I do work for Mark Leno.)  The BG has endorsed both Leno and Migden in the past, but they haven’t been so into Joe Nation. (I don’t know if they ever endorsed him in a primary…he ran unopposed for at least one term in the Assembly.) So, this came down to a decision between the two San Francisco gay candidates.

The BG sees strengths and weaknesses in both candidates. Migden has passed some good pieces of legislation like community choice and toxics legislation, and Leno has a record of protecting vulnerable populations from evictions and passing the marriage bill. But they also disliked Leno’s close ties to Mayor Newsom and Migden’s connections to Gap Founder Don Fischer who is a huge “school choice advocate.”

The BG, like me, is a fan of primary challenges in this one-party town., and they laud the attention the mostly absentee Migden has now paid to the district. But toss Migden’s “imperious and arrogant” ways to her campaign finance troubles, and the BG tilted towards Leno. “In the end, we’ve decided – with much enthusiasm and some reservations – to endorse Assemblymember Mark Leno.”

SD-09: Loni Hancock. I’m a fan of both Hancock and Chan. Whomever wins will be a great Senator to replace the, shall we say “imperious,” Don Perata. The BG went with Hancock based upon her work on the budget.

AD-13: Ammiano. He’s running unopposed, but that is, in and of itself, is a testament to Ammiano. People in SF love the guy, for good reason. He’s great personally as well as politically.

AD-14: Kriss Worthington. There are some great candidates here, but Kriss Worthington, the openly gay Berkeley Councilman that has been the heart of Berkeley’s progressive movement, for years will be a great legislator. He’s willing to stand alone for progressive values, if need be.  And, in Sacramento, need exists. Often.

CA-08: The Guardian chose not to endorse Speaker Pelosi, stating that she no longer represents San Francisco’s progressive values.

I’ll leave the other races to the Guardian’s excellent endorsement editorial, save one where I think they got it wrong. That is the SF DCCC endorsement of the so-called HOPE Slate. Besides the obvious play off of Obama’s campaign, my issue is with a few members of the slate.  Specifically, the inclusion of two San Francisco supervisors on the slate. Now, I understand that the Supervisors want to ensure that their political positions get into the Party’s apparatus, but frankly, the point of the DCCC should be less about policy positions and grandstanding and more about organizing Democrats in San Francisco to ensure turnout.

I understand that the endorsements of the party have a very strong impact upon the vote for local issues here in San Francisco. But it is hard to argue that the SF Democratic Party has been anything other than progressive in the last two years. And furthermore, while hope is terrific and all, after all I am an Obama supporter, the results of elections depends on the hard work of registering voters and turning them out. Under the leadership of Scott Wiener, the SF DCCC has done just that. SF is one of the few counties to increase Democratic percentages during 2007. Fighting the battle against increased apathy and DTS registrations, we’ve been winning.

Scott has been an enormous part of that success and deserves re-election to the DCCC and to the chair.

(Such lovely people – promoted by jsw)

I wrote this for today’s Beyond Chron.

To learn about Proposition 98’s agenda, look no further than Dan Faller, President and Founder of the American Owner’s Association (AOA) – the largest landlord group in California.  In a nine-page essay published in the association’s magazine, Faller complains heatedly about rent control, calls pro-tenant elected officials “terrorists” and “suicide bombers,” compares the effort to pass Prop 98 with World War II, says that renters “choose not to provide for themselves,” and – with rhetoric that channels George Bush – tells landlords: “you are either for us or against us in this fight for your freedom and property rights.”  We cannot dismiss Faller as just another right-wing kook, for his organization has already contributed $325,000 to the “Yes on 98” cause – and the AOA has plans to raise even more money in the coming weeks.  And with voter turnout in June expected to be very low, Faller’s fringe beliefs might actually become public policy in California – if we don’t act now.

While proponents want voters to think it’s about eminent domain reform, Prop 98 is the most dangerous right-wing initiative to hit the California ballot in years.  It would abolish rent control, gut the most basic tenant protections, repeal sensible environmental laws and endanger public water projects.  Another measure, Proposition 99, would reform eminent domain – which Faller opposes because it would “only protect owner-occupied homes.”  In other words, the Prop 98 forces don’t really care about the middle-class homeowner who fears eminent domain.  They just want to repeal all regulations of private property.

In the post-9/11 world, calling someone a “terrorist” is a serious accusation – but Faller refers to pro-tenant elected officials who oppose Prop 98 as “terrorists” or “suicide bombers” at least seven times.  “The bombs and explosives they are throwing at us,” he writes, “are rent control, eminent domain, inspection laws, building codes, requiring 60-day notices so tenants can steal more time from you, eviction laws that allow tenants to live rent-free for several months, relocation fees, inclusionary zoning that drives up the price of housing so they have another excuse to justify even more laws.  These elected officials are dangerous.”

Urging his fellow landlords to fight this “war” on the “terrorists,” Faller says the solution is to hit them with the “big bomb”: Proposition 98, which would invalidate all these existing laws and then some.  “Help to permanently take away their weapons that allow unfair eminent domain and rent control,” he writes before asking for campaign contributions.  “This is certainly one war that we all believe in and can hold our heads high as we fight to win!  You are either for us or against us in this fight for your freedom and property rights.”

According to a Field Poll conducted in December, George Bush has a 28% approval rating in California – with 64% who disapprove.  Yet, one of the top supporters of Prop 98 is using exactly the same rhetoric as our Commander in Chief to deride his opponents.  If voters in June are educated about who’s behind this initiative, they will defeat it.

But it’s not just the “terrorist” politicians that Faller has a bone to pick with.  He demeans people who can’t afford to buy California real estate as lazy and ineffectual.  As he urges landlords to “join this war” to pass Prop 98, Faller says “you’ve worked hard providing housing for others who chose not to provide for themselves … You gave up a lot of weekends to make it possible – something others were not willing to do.”  Apparently, it’s okay to berate the state’s 14 million tenants because they “obviously” did not work hard enough to buy property themselves.  Hyperbole is one thing; personal insults are quite another.

Does the fight over Prop 98 match the battle against Nazis and fascists in World War II?  Dan Faller seems to think that it does.  Recalling his childhood memories in Los Angeles when he feared that “the enemy was going to land their troops in Long Beach and along our coast,” the AOA President puts the fight to pass Prop 98 on a similar plane.  “There were big signs and advertisements that read ‘Uncle Sam Needs You!’ during WWII,” he writes.  “There’s a big AOA sign today that says ‘Freedom Loving Americans Need You!’  We need your support to win this War to protect your property rights!”

It would be easy to laugh at these outlandish statements if Dan Faller was just your crazy uncle who makes offensive jokes that amuse only himself.  But he’s the President and Founder of the American Owners Association – a national trade association of landlords that boasts more members in California than any other group.  Faller is on the Board of Biopharma, the owner of a commercial brokerage firm, and used to be a Wall Street broker.  The AOA’s monthly newsletter – which printed his “Yes on 98” screed – is the most widely read landlord publication in the country.

Under Faller’s watch, the AOA has provided crucial seed money for Prop 98 to get on the ballot – and they’re now aggressively fundraising to get it passed.  The group has already put $325,000 towards the effort – and Faller has urged members to give even more.  “Donate at least $1,000 with an additional minimum of $50 for every unit if you own over twenty apartments,” he wrote.  “If you own less than 20 units, please donate the $1,000 minimum.  If you own more, step up and invest according to all the benefits you’ll enjoy as a result of winning this campaign.”

With such a fundraising appeal, the “Yes on 98” campaign should have plenty of funds to hoodwink voters into thinking that their extreme ballot measure is about eminent domain.  Opponents of Prop 98 must be vigilant, fundraise and get out the message to expose it as the Hidden Agendas Scheme that it really is.  Only by doing so can we truly save such essential programs in California that 14 million renters rely on to live here.  And with the June ballot garnering such low attention, there’s a serious chance that we could lose.

Was Faller joking when he called pro-tenant elected officials “suicide bombers,” accused tenants of being lazy, and compared the fight to pass Prop 98 with fighting the Axis powers in World War II?  Apparently not.  “Please take every word of this article more seriously,” he wrote in the preface, “than any other article you have ever read in this publication.”  That should give us all pause about how dangerous Prop 98 really is …

(Have you seen any other candidates come out against Prop 98? Let us know! – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

I wrote this for today’s BeyondChron.

With no presidential primary on the statewide ballot, voter turnout in June is expected to be abysmal.  Which means that Proposition 98 – the extreme right-wing measure to abolish rent control, basic tenant protections, environmental regulations and water laws – could actually pass.  But with term limits forcing many state legislators out of office, there will also be a number of competitive June primaries – creating the potential to drive up voter turnout in the state’s more progressive pockets.  If Democratic candidates for Assembly and State Senate make the defeat of Prop 98 a central part of their campaign, they could help it go down in flames.  Candidates who mobilize to defeat it would also benefit – as it will help them connect more strongly with the Democratic voters in their district.

“Prop 98 is a terrible initiative, and I will campaign against it loudly,” said Barbara Sprenger, who is running in the 27th State Assembly District (Santa Cruz and Monterey.)  By re-defining “private use” to include when a public agency takes over natural resources, Prop 98 threatens to undermine any public water project in the state.  “I’ve helped organize my community in opposing higher water rates from private water companies,” said Sprenger.  “Prop 98’s effect would be devastating.”

“I expect to have ‘No on 98’ on all my campaign literature,” said Kriss Worthington, who is running in the 14th State Assembly District.  “It seriously questions our environmental policies, and is a very blatant attack on affordable housing and rent control.”  As a current member of the Berkeley City Council, Worthington sponsored a resolution to have the City oppose it – and organized a press rally in November to draw some media attention.  He also will encourage voters to support Prop 99 – a competing measure that deals with eminent domain – as a “far more reasonable alternative.”

Sprenger and Worthington are both running in competitive races – in heavily Democratic districts where constituents are likely to oppose Prop 98.  But unless voters in these areas turn out, Prop 98 could pass statewide – so the burden is on local candidates to make its defeat a rallying cry.  “Prop 98 is horrible,” said Nancy Skinner – who’s running against Worthington in the 14th A.D. – “and it’s a worse poison pill than the last initiative [i.e., Prop 90] that we defeated.  I will have it in my campaign materials, and I will speak out against it at every opportunity.”  If competing candidates make a point of it when they boost their own campaign, they can ensure a healthy progressive turnout.

In San Francisco – where Mark Leno and Carole Migden are locked in a bitter race for the State Senate – the two candidates jointly appeared at a rally last November to defeat Prop 98.  I had previously written that having Leno and Migden run against each other could help progressive measures pass in San Francisco.  To defeat Prop 98, we’ll need similar efforts elsewhere.

Gina Papan and Richard Holober are running against each other in the 19th Assembly District (San Mateo County.)  Both oppose Prop 98, because it hamstrings the ability of local government to advance solutions.  “I believe that it goes way too far,” said Papan, who currently serves as Mayor of Millbrae.  “I will be working to help defeat it in my campaign.”  Holober’s campaign manager said that the candidate “doesn’t think that the state should dictate and tell localities what to do – and he opposes Prop 98.”

I spent much of last week calling many Democratic candidates throughout the state to see who would go on the record opposing Prop 98 – and whether they plan to make it a big part of their campaign.  Many were vague about how they expect to do so (most are just kicking off their campaign right now), but a few were happy to talk about how their background made it important to defeat Prop 98.

“I’m a renter myself,” said Anna Song, who’s running in a competitive race for the 22nd Assembly District in Santa Clara.  “It’s really important for renters to have a certain level of stability, and Prop 98 would take that away.”  Before running for public office, Song worked for Project Sentinel – a non-profit in the South Bay that assists tenants and low-income homeowners – so has encountered this issue first-hand.

A spokesman for Mariko Yamada – who’s running in the 8th Assembly District in West Sacramento – talked about the candidate’s firm commitment to rent control.  “She’s a social worker by training,” he said, “and is very sensitive to the needs of mobile home park residents in the district.  Gentrification has been pushing a lot of people out, and we’ve been working closely with grassroots organizers on these issues.”

Many of these candidates didn’t even know they were running until February 5th – when the defeat of Prop 93 termed out a lot of state legislators, opening up the chance for Democrats to run in the June primary.  As a result, a lot of them have been late in writing their campaign strategy – and some were even unsure about Prop 98 when I first brought it up.  “I need to get more educated first,” was a common response I got from a lot of them.

But now is the time to put them on record – while they’re still introducing themselves to their district – and ask them to campaign against Prop 98.  Because only with competitive races that generate a high Democratic turnout – and an emphasis on the devastating impacts of Prop 98 – will we ensure that affordable housing, environmental protection, rent control and water rights are protected in California.

And who knows?  Maybe we’ll get a more pro-tenant state legislature when it’s all over.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Before joining BeyondChron, Paul Hogarth lived in Berkeley for many years and worked for City Councilman Kriss Worthington.  He has endorsed Worthington’s run for the State Assembly, and donated $400 to his campaign.  He also supports Mark Leno’s run for the State Senate.