By Tab Buckner, HANC Board
HANC’s September 14th General Membership Meeting was a zoom-only occasion that featured District 3 Supervisor Aaron Peskin addressing the history and state of district elections of the city’s supervisors.
The supervisor, who currently serves as the board’s president, was introduced by HANC Board member Calvin Welch who provided some background history of San Francisco’s supervisor elections.
Supervisor Peskin, who served two terms from 2001 to 2009, was elected again in a 2015 special election and has been re-elected twice since then. He has served as a San Francisco district supervisor longer than any other person in the 20th and 21st Centuries. He said Supervisor Tom Ammiano encouraged him to run for District 3 Supervisor in 2000 and, after some hesitation, decided to go ahead with it.
Peskin had been active for years with the Telegraph Hill Dwellers, challenging Chinatown Ellis Act evictions and fighting against chain store proliferation. He mentioned that he didn’t expect to win but wanted to run a protest campaign. He won the election in a run-off after initially defeating Mayor Willie Brown’s appointed supervisor and several other candidates. Stating that neighborhoods felt alienated by Mayor Brown’s power, Peskin said the voters responded by electing a large majority of progressives.
Regarding the sometimes-stated claim that district supervisors are out of touch with citywide matters, Peskin said that San Franciscans do not feel the same sense of accountability from supervisors for a particular issue when everyone is elected citywide. He said that while he does hear from people across the city, he will respond to his own district’s residents’ inquiries first. He added that the most important issues, including ones more associated which certain vicinities, still affect the city overall.
The supervisor reflected on his district’s residents successfully reaching out to city voters to tear down the Embarcadero Freeway and to stop the “Wall on the Waterfront”. While most voters did not live in the immediate area, Peskin noted that the issues on hand were important to the entire city. He also commented on the greater influence of big money in citywide races making it much more difficult for local activists to get elected. Peskin said that he was originally elected as a district supervisor by “shoe leather and a group of friends” who kept reappearing to knock on doors.
There was mention of Billionaire Michael Moritz funding a study to help bolster the argument that San Francisco’s current district election system is not working. The study was based on three small towns and cities that did not resemble San Francisco. Mayor London Breed has also stated her opposition to the current practice of district elections.
Supervisor Peskin provided his own analysis of patterns of behavior that blame “Fill in the Blank” regarding the city’s problems. Peskin stated that the mayor is failing and not leading and is prone to casting blame elsewhere. He mentioned recent accusations against the Board of Supervisors, against recalled District Attorney Chesa Boudin and against judges that uphold unhoused people’s right to not be displaced without adequate shelter alternatives. Commenting that the current board is more moderate than when he served earlier terms, “What they are complaining about is highly unclear to me.”
The supervisor emphasized the need to “Organize!” for the 2024 election. He remarked that the divisiveness that people locally decry has been aided and abetted by entities that include Michael Moritz and TogetherSF that have brought a level of toxicity to a higher level than in past times. He noted that the mayor and Board of Supervisors have had exceptionally low-level approval ratings and believes this has been influenced by negative social media, the pandemic and other factors.
Supervisor Peskin remarked that the current city charter, approved by voters in 1996, does not put the Board of Supervisors on an equal footing with the mayor’s office. He said the charter creates a “super strong” mayor role. The change, he said, diminished the role of the City Administrator which has contributed to people’s perception that the city “isn’t working.” Having a City Administrator empowered with the ability to remain in place beyond mayoral terms, he continued, would be beneficial. Peskin also defended the integrity of local non-profit organizations and asserted that a few favored ones should not be given special treatment by the city’s leadership. Non-profits, he said, have as much a right to litigate as the city, which does so on a regular basis.
There is a State Senate bill, Peskin said, that would amend the creation of electoral districts by disallowing politicians from selecting members of redistricting bodies. The supervisor said that, if the bill fails, he will commit to supporting and passing a charter amendment to enact a similar measure for San Francisco. He added that he would need grassroots support to push five of his colleagues to join him in placing it on the ballot. Peskin said that despite pessimism felt by some of his allies, he’s optimistic about the future. He considers San Francisco as still being a place that attracts new generations of activists willing to fight for socio-economic justice. He mentioned that local artists have been able to find new workspace in unlikely places such as the Embarcadero Center as wealthy property owners have felt the need to find people to utilize their vast number of empty spaces.
The supervisor concluded saying that San Franciscans, including HANC members, are the hope for the future and he urges more people to become active in civic life.