API Vote Key to Mayor’s Success
by Samson Wong

LINING UP FOR BROWN
The entry of Board President Tom Ammiano makes ethnic support, including the Asian American vote, key to Mayor Willie Brown’s re-election.

Brown’s 57 percent support among likely “nonwhite voters” in the Oct. 19–23 San Francisco Chronicle poll was indicative of his recent editorial board comment: “I run extremely well in communities of color.”

Polls have shown that Brown is ahead among Asian American voters, although methodologies are debatable given my Oct. 8 column, recent stories and commentary.

The Examiner ‘s Sept. 21–23rd poll showed that Brown was ahead among all Asian voters with 41 percent to businessman Clint Reilly’s 14 percent and former Mayor Frank Jordan’s 11 percent. A Chinese American Voters Education Committee survey from Sept. 10–15 of 732 Chinese language newspaper respondents preferred Brown with 66 percent, Jordan with 4 percent, and Reilly with 3 percent.

For four years, Brown has nurtured the Asian American electorate. Now, it’s a chance for Asian American voters to reflect on Brown’s top Asian appointments such as Police Chief Fred Lau, Supervisor Mike Yaki, and Housing Commissioner Julie Lee, or Airport Commissioner Caryl Ito. It’s also a chance to evaluate major projects such as revamping Japantown’s Peace Plaza or revving up a Sunset Community Center or the Chinatown Night Market.

In return, (see the S.F. edition’s cover) Brown has received the support of nearly all Asian American elected officials (neutral Leland Yee said on Oct. 14 that he may endorse for the December runoff) and most Asian American political groups such as the Japanese, Filipino, Pacific Islander, and Asian Pacific Democratic Clubs.

RUNOFF LIKELY
Ammiano’s entry splits gay/lesbian and white progressive voters and more likely guarantees a Dec. 14th runoff as indicated by the Chronicle poll. Both Brown and Ammiano split gay/lesbian votes at 29 percent apiece. In that scenario, Willie Brown will depend more on Asian American voters as he faces the second place runner-up who either will be Reilly, Jordan, or Ammiano.

Brown acknowledged for Asian Week that it is mathematically impossible for him to win outright next Tuesday. The Chronicle poll of likely voters had him with 33 percent, while Jordan at 14 percent, Reilly’s 11 percent, and Ammiano’s 11 percent were fighting for second place.

“I’ve always anticipated a runoff,” said Brown. “Mathematically, it is very difficult when you have fourteen people running without Ammiano. “

Brown estimated that his two major opponents and 11 minor candidates probably will leave him to scrap from 42 percent of the voters to enter the December runoff.

In Brown’s political calculus, Jordan’s name recognition might earn him up to 20 percent of the vote and that Reilly’s $3.5 million spending spree might translate to 16 percent of the vote. The 11 remaining candidates like Martin Eng or Lucretia Bermudez might splinter the electorate at two percent apiece.

However, Brown needed to go back to the political drawing board as to how he’ll do in the Nov. 2 primary with the Ammiano factor.

“I don’t know mathematically (how I will do with) Ammiano. Hopefully, all Ammiano does is help divide up what I was not going to receive anyway, rather than invade any votes I might get,” said Brown, who was looking to the help of an AsianWeek endorsement, which he received.

TOM AND ROBERTA
Ammiano’s entry energizes voters who were likely to stand on the sidelines and who have rejected the notion of voting for Brown, Jordan or Reilly. It’s some of the same ideologically left voters who read the Bay Guardian or are sympathetic with Harvey Milk GLBT Democratic Club’s viewpoint (both have endorsed Ammiano as a write-in) and who supported Brown’s opponent, Roberta Achtenberg, in the 1995 primary.

In that November 1995 race, former Supervisor and HUD Deputy Secretary Roberta Achtenberg ran against Brown and incumbent Mayor Jordan. Achtenberg, who finished third with 27 percent citywide, was strong in gay/lesbian and the city’s most progressive neighborhoods, where she placed first ahead of Brown and Jordan.

She beat Brown in progressive/gay strongholds like the Haight, Mission, Noe Valley, and Upper Market. Achtenberg turned around for the December 1995 runoff and supported Brown, who overwhelmed Jordan with over two-thirds of the vote in the same areas. Achtenberg and most of the elected gay/lesbian leadership are support Brown for re-election this year.

Where Achtenberg finished strong over Brown was where Ammiano beat Mabel Teng decisively by two to margins to win last year’s Board President race. Despite Brown’s support for Teng as Board President in November 1998, Ammiano became Board President instead with 52 percent of voters citywide over Gavin Newsom’s 47 percent and Teng’s 41 percent.

In next week’s primary, Ammiano is not mounting a serious campaign close to achieving what Achtenberg did in 1995 or what he did to become Board President. However, his strong support in those areas may draw off gay/lesbian or progressive voters who may switch sides or might not have voted not all.

WILLIE SHOULDN’T IMITATE ART
The same gay/lesbian and progressive voters also factored in the Jordan upset of 1991. Incumbent Mayor Art Agnos lost because of an increased turnout and overwhelming margins by Jordan in conservative, moderate precincts. At the same time, alienated progressives sat out while Asian Americans emerged to key Jordan’s 52 percent to 48 percent upset -- a lesson that is not lost on Agnos’ old Assembly colleague -- Willie Brown, who seems to have wrested Asians from Jordan and Reilly.

Learning Agnos’ lesson is literally written in last week’s “lessons learned” mailer where Brown reflected “to keep your door open.. and keep your mouth shut.” Brown will either have learned the lesson, or voters will teach him a lesson on Dec. 14.

PARTNERS IN CRIME
Brown’s appointee, Police Chief Fred Lau has stayed clear of the contentious District Attorney’s race. However, Lau repudiated D.A. candidate Bill Fazio’s use of an unsubstantiated quote where he criticized D.A. Terence Hallinan for “knowing nothing about prosecuting criminals” in a Fazio fundraising invitation, according to an Oct. 12 San Francisco Independent story.

Contrary to the quote, Lau has maintained a good working relationship with D.A. Hallinan.

“As Chief of Police, I cannot officially endorse any candidate for District Attorney,” said Lau on Oct. 19. “However, the cooperation between the San Francisco Police Department and Terence Hallinan’s D.A. office is at an all time high. Together, we are helping reduce violent crime in San Francisco.”

At his AsianWeek Oct. 18 editorial board meeting, Fazio said the quote did not come from his office or a fundraiser but from an Examiner story on Nov. 20, 1998.

“It certainly wasn’t an endorsement (by Lau). It wasn’t meant to be... It did not come from (our) campaign,” said Fazio, whose campaign agreed to withdraw use of the quote.

Apparently, Hallinan and Lau’s work to reduce crime may be buoyed by a report released Monday sponsored by the Justice Policy Institute, a project of the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice. CJCJ was critical of the Chronicle’s “misleading” methodology counting only convictions and incarcerations as the only successful measures of lowering crime without including diversions and “other progressive crime control measures.”

CJCJ went on to refute recent Chronicle stories on Sept. 2 and Oct. 8 that concluded that D.A. Hallinan’s office was the worst in the state.

“The crime rate has dropped dramatically in San Francisco since Hallinan has been in office -- faster than in counties where D.A.’s have higher rates of convictions and incarceration,” said the CJCJ release.

“Violent crime has dropped faster in San Francisco than it has in California counties with higher rates of prosecution.” The report went as far as saying that “San Francisco has been more effective at fighting violent crime than New York.”

According to CJCJ’s analysis, violent crime dropped faster in San Francisco by 33 percent using Hallinan’s “liberal policies” compared to NYC Mayor Rudolph Giuliani’s conservative “broken windows” approach, where New York City has dropped by 26 percent since 1995. In his campaign speeches, Clint Reilly has been critical of both crime-fighting under Brown and Hallinan, while praising Giuliani’s approach to arrests and incarceration for “low level offenses” like jay-walking and vagrancy.

REILLY WORRY ABOUT JORDAN
Reilly is worried about not just overtaking Brown, but looking over his shoulder at Jordan, if an Oct. 21 mailer is any indicator. The latest attack piece is Reilly’s “Who Wrecked Muni?” which blames San Francisco’s public transit ills at the foot of both Jordan’s and Brown’s mayoral administrations. It’s the first time that Reilly has attacked Jordan in a mail piece.

If the polls are any indicator, he may be fighting for moderate and conservative Jordan voters. However, he may withhold attacking Ammiano, whose progressive support maybe needed in the runoff against Brown. It’s a similar tactic Brown employed when he declined to attack Achtenberg, whose support he assiduously courted.

As the latest media poll indicated, Reilly’s double jeopardy is to keep first-place Brown under 50 percent, but fending off former mayor Jordan and Tom Ammiano to qualify for a Dec. 14 runoff against Willie Brown on Nov. 2. The latest Chronicle poll on Oct. 25 showed Brown ahead with 33 percent, with a contest for second place with Jordan at 14 percent, and Reilly and Ammiano at 11 percent apiece.

SNEAKY PREVIEW
Folks have criticized AT&T Cable Services and Brown for issuing subscribers four free cable pay-per-view movies worth $16 because of the inconvenience to implement new services over four years. Isn’t it strange that when a Republican does it, it’s called a tax cut (some cable subscribers pay a $3.20 monthly fee to the city). But when a Democrat does it, it’s a re-election scam. Give the mayor credit; the coupons only will pay for mainstream pics, not the more pricey porno flicks.

FREE-WAY OR PAY-WAY
Finance Chair Leland Yee, who is against Proposition I (the Octavia Boulevard) and for Proposition J (retrofit of the Central Freeway), is questioning the true value of the surplus parcels if the state legislature releases land under the Central Freeway for development. The sale of the surplus land parcels are supposed to underwrite traffic improvements under the Octavia Boulevard, which would replace the Central Freeway if Prop. I defeats Prop. J.

Yee has questioned whether the city will actually gain over $30 million if the surplus Central Freeway land is sold. Quoted in this column two weeks ago, Yee compared that surplus land to the parcel valued at over $2.5 million at the demolished Broadway ramp for the Embarcadero Freeway, which sold for only $500,000 for development of affordable housing.

Well, Yee’s office has obtained figures from the Mayor’s Office of Housing that the 30,940 square foot Broadway parcel was worth more -- $4.5 million, which meant that the parcel sold at just over 10 percent of its fair market value.

If the city ends up with a smaller amount because the land is sold for affordable housing, then the city may assume more responsibility for maintaining a boulevard instead of a Caltrans maintained Central Freeway.

UNINFORMED VOTER
If you follow the latest “Informed Voter” mailer, then you’re truly an “uninformed voter.” As I disclosed last week about the pay-to-play Chinese American Democratic Club’s card, a slate mailer like “Informed Voter” has to disclose in small print who issued and paid for the mailer.

In this case, it’s a for-profit mailer out of consultant Robert Barnes’ office and paid for by the campaigns marked by an asterisk (*). So far, the No on F (ATM Fees) campaign has paid $5,000 to appear. Other campaigns that have paid are the Laguna Honda Hospital Bond (Yes on A) campaign, Steve Castleman’s district attorney campaign and the anti-Central Freeway campaign (Yes on I, No on J). Interestingly, Barnes is also the campaign consultant for the No on F, Yes on A, and early-on for the Castleman campaign.

Barnes’ ATM campaign (Coalition for ATM Choice) is flush with almost a blank check from the California Bankers Association, which loaned his campaign $125,000, and Bank of America and Wells Fargo Bank which chipped in $200,000 total in donations. As of Oct. 16, Barnes’ campaign had received $379,000 to defeat an attempt to regulate ATM fees in San Francisco.

WE FRY ALL SIDES
Comments welcomed at potsticker@prodigy.net or samson@sfindependent.com. Calls will be taken at 415-826-1100, Ext. 23.