August 2, 2007
Less Than Jake (McGoldrick)
Well, at least he lives in the Richmond, right? (Some) affordable housing advocates and ethicists are shaking their heads over District 1 Supervisor Jake McGoldrick's poor party timing this week.
Remember that lot on Cesar Chavez and Mission that everyone's fighting about condoizing? Well, the Board of Supes had a contentious debate about it on Tuesday, and narrowly voted for development on a 6-5 vote. (hey, Michela Alioto-Pier must've shown up that day!) The swing vote? Jake McG, which surprised some people because usually Jake votes with the progressives (who were the losing 5).
Well, well, well: turns out that on Monday night, the day before the vote, McGoldrick went to a fundraising party thrown by Barbary Coast Consulting. Barbary Coast not only sponsors SF local politics go-to website Usual Suspects, but also runs one of the city's most successful lobbying/PR businesses. And who's just recently hired Barbary Coast? The developers of the condo project. That doesn't look so good.
Barbary Coast says that their party for McGoldrick had nothing to do with their lobbying work and that they were simply showing their support for the supe in his anti-recall efforts, and McGoldrick himself says that "my buttocks has never been for sale" (huh?) -- but the Mission Anti-Displacement Coalition is pretty steamed. Who'd want to buy McGoldrick's buttocks anyways?
For what it's worth, the developers have donated $2000 to McGoldrick, and McGoldrick raised about $8000 at Monday night's shindig (it's not clear if the $2000 was donated at the party, but we don't think it was.).
Picture of Jake McG at the Prog Con by Steve Rhodes.
|
How is replacing a paint store and parking lot with condominiums displacing anyone?
Seriously, regardless of the issue of an apparent quid pro quo (which may or may not be the case here), this project is not displacing anyone, and is providing more housing in SF, and 9 units at below market rate. Perhaps that's why Jake voted in favor; taking unused space and turning it into housing.
This has little to do with need for housing.
What the issue really is here is that someone other than MAC/BHNC will BUILD that housing. They want the profit from it.
MAC/BHNC wants to control the residents of their rental units as they do in their other buildings.
This whole issue is greed and politics: if they are able to populate the buildings with low-income renters, they control votes. They cannot control someone else's building populated by homeowners.
Oh good grief. Let's get our facts straight here: The Board was supposed to vote on the 3400 project on July 17, and only didn't because, after endless hours of public comment, an exhausted Aaron Peskin moved to continue the vote to July 31. The McG fundraiser was planned during the first week in July to take place on July 30, so it was initially supposed to take place AFTER the vote - and would have, regardless of how McGoldrick voted.
I don't know whether the 3400 project should have been halted or not, but I do know this: the folks at BCC are well-known for having impeccable ethical standards. Anyone running around town trying to make any claims to the contrary is completely wasting their time.
McGoldrick freaks me out.
I saw him on that city government board w/ Alito-Pier and Ed Jew! (now thats a festive bunch!)
and all he does is interrupt people and tell them to speak louder, speak softer, stand away from the microphone, move the microphone up please.
I think that's his job on that committee.
melissa, i think you're awesome BUT -
the issue isn't barbary coast's ethical standards, but jake's.
if he is going to go against his own well-established voting history and advocacy of affordable housing due to the pressure of a recall ... ... isn't that the same as if the recall had already succeeded?
When do we get the story about the financial incentives for the supes that voted with Daly and the professional housing activists? Clearly the housing activists and Daly have been able to extort funds from the City to fund their activities. How much money is still floating around Daly's slush fund to? Are there quid pro quos taking place for the supes that vote with the professional activists? I was frankly shocked the vote was this close and that such a nonsensical group is able to convince 5 supes to vote in their favor. Either the threats worked or some supes see the benefit of getting on Daly's gravy train of professional housing activists.
According to SFGate: "Jake McGoldrick is a profoundly moral individual and has consistently cast his votes from a principled position and not been influenced in any way by the politics of money," Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin said, adding he himself has received fundraising help from the same lobbyists yet voted against the project.
So next expose is that Aaron took dough from the same parties too and didn't stay bought? Or, maybe, they were working together. Yeah. That's it. They shaved the vote to a narrow passage knowing that Jake could survive scrutiny better than Aaron. Kee-ripes. All this bluster about McGoldrick, who btw is not a fave supervisor of mine, is all about trying to blow cold ashes into a flaming fire.
--
Sal
Isn't it amazing - McGoldrick ONCE votes like a person with a bit of brains in his head, to allow building something absolutely crucial and necessary for the benefit of everybody in this city, and his former "progressive" friends turn apoplectic and hysterical on him. Watch the testimony of July 17 on sfgtv on this issue - what a zoo of complete idiots spoke against this project, it's mind boggling.
Guest [5] - thank you for the compliment! I certainly agree with you that all of this implicates Jake's ethics. But I think it implicates BCC, too - the accusation that they held a fundraiser to get his vote. I only wrote about BCC because I am more familiar with their reputation. I hear that Jake can't be bought, but I figure that others with more info than me can vouch for him.
SFHawkguy: you were shocked? Haven't you noticed by now that Daly's puppets like Mirkarimi and others practically never break ranks with him, no matter what the issue is?
"Rising star in SF politics" and "next mayor" my a...
"SFHawkguy: you were shocked? Haven't you noticed by now that Daly's puppets like Mirkarimi and others practically never break ranks with him, no matter what the issue is?"
Color me naive. I'm relatively new to this area of city politics. My understanding was that McGoldrick was the least NIMBY-minded supe there is. I've never liked Ross so it doesn't surprise me he's Daly's lap dog.
But this humble citizen and neighborhood resident will certainly remember this vote. I'll also be on the lookout for this group that is supposedly representing the interests of Bernal Heights. What a dishonest piece of "advocacy" the leader of that group has published.
SFHawkguy - do yourself a favor, watch public comments here:
http://sanfrancisco.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=10
7/17/2007
click on part 49
then ff just a bit to the beginning of public comments
it's very entertaining
and it goes on for HOURS and HOURS
you won't just be "on the lookout", you'll want to really do everything possible to fight these lunatics - because anyone who is white, with a job, AND in need of housing is, in their minds, the biggest public enemy.
So 3400 C.C. is going as planned? SHOCK! SURPRISE! Um.
A special shout-out to Missionman, who posted:
Aaron Peskin also seemed to think the entitlement monsters might be right about their appeal of 3400 Cesar Chavez. Let's see how hard you cry into your double decaf frapuchino when the community wins.
HA HA. Told you so. Here's your horchata, start sobbing. :-)
one thing i noticed about the jake article - and this doesn't have to do with how he voted or why - was the fact that the article was written in a way that seemed to slightly favor the "progressive" point of view. when i woke up this morning and read today's political headlines in the chronicle, i thought i had woken up in an alternate universe... wow, it's fascinating how the tone seems to have changed all of a sudden as august 10 approaches... other articles today, too, seem different than the usual - the one on lennar and the bayview development, the one about earthlink delaying responses to the BOS about wifi, the one about the homeless crisis in GGPark - they are all written with noticably more sympathy for the progressive sides of the stories. it's exactly what randy shaw was talking about the other day in beyond chron - about the paper maybe realizing it needs a mayor's race for sales so it all of a sudden has subtly (or not?) altered its tone, but i wasn't sure i bought such a theory until today. anyway, maybe just conspiracy theory. but, maybe it's also too little too late for a candidate to want to go up against the mayor who has had such a strong media ally...
SFist readers:
Alex Clemens of Barbary Coast here. We've written an open letter, and we invite you to read it here: http://www.barcoast.com/Barbary%20Coast%20Open%20Letter%20-%20August%202,%202007.pdf
Thank you.
- Alex
As a former employee of said consulting firm I may have a slightly biased opinion.
For 110 days I witnessed the drive and purpose of said consulting firm. It was a great experience. That aside, the way the picture looks in the frame of the vote the next day is crooked but none the less perfectly normal.
Equally the reflection on MAC is just as crooked. How can be housing units replacing a barren lot and an out of business paint store be a bad thing.
Seriously, there are bigger fish to fry..oh wait, did I say that!?!
Guest 12,
Thanks for the link to the hearing.
At first I thought the professional housing activists enticed a group of out-of-work malcontents to the hearing with the promise of a good dinner. But then I realized these people aren't out of work. In fact they all seem to hold rather senior sounding positions for activist organizations (e.g. Senior Outreach Analyst for Diversity and Economic Development of the Mission Anti-Blah, Blah, Blah). I would normally be impressed that this activists are at least enterprising enough to come up with a self-important sounding title (I really like the guy that sat on the Board of Directors of the Elderly Citizens United For the Preservation of Slums in the Mission, or something). But then I realized that these leeches are living off of City money and other monies extorted from normal San Franciscan's that simply want a sane housing policy.
Shame on any supes that appease these nutjobs for short-term gain. If we allow city funds to keep going to these professional activists San Francisco housing policy is screwed for years to come.
May I amend my last post?
Anyway, I think it is totally appropriate that when an open letter is posted its displayed crooked.
Thanks for straightening that out but aren't we all trying to tilt at the windmills? Or are the windmills tilted?
So its all straightened out and the letter is posted is crooked but the person writing it is straight as an arrow but isn't Jake a like a little round so it all rolls around...oh crap I am going to stop here because we all know what goes down the hill.
Excuse my rudeness, but if Jake shaved off his remaining hair and put on a black mu-mu, he'd be a dead ringer for Uncle Fester of the Addams Family.