Hall Monitor

Connolly gets the nod from local women's club: Superior Court Judge, Seat 10, candidate Scott Connolly may have captured the endorsement of the San Francisco Women's Political Committee, but not without many political observers wondering how. After all, his challenger, Gail Dekreon, had managed to get the nod of the group's endorsement committee several weeks earlier. The difference between the committee's recommendation and the final results has led Dekreon's camp to conclude that Connolly must have had some high-powered help from sitting public defender Kimiko Burton, who is a member of the club. (Burton's father, state senator John Burton, directed $2,500 from his Burton for State Senate 2000 committee to Connolly's campaign Feb. 24.) SFWPC president Laurie Beijen, who serves on the club's endorsement committee, told us she was not aware of any arm-twisting by daughter Burton. "I did not get a call," she said. She did say that it was unusual for the club's general membership to vote differently than the endorsement committee. "In the [Democratic County Central Committee] races [held last March], the vote was different on only 2 of the 24 candidates," she said. Beijen noted that Connolly mounted an aggressive effort to communicate with club members and sent each a postcard about his campaign. "Some candidates do a better job of making sure their supporters are there [for the vote]," she said. "I think that's what may have happened." Regardless, Dekreon's campaign manager, Jo Cuney, finds the outcome distressing. "Connolly is just not strong on issues important to women," she told us. "I'm amazed that a club committed to empowering women through the elections process would choose a less qualified male candidate. Something fishy has to be going on." For her part, Kim Burton told us she does support Connolly, with whom she worked at the Public Defender's Office and who is a longtime friend, but did not make any calls on his behalf or attempt to influence any member's decision. "All I did was cast my own vote," she said. "I didn't work for anybody['s candidacy] or anything like that." (Savannah Blackwell)

The chamber's contradictions: The San Francisco Chamber of Commerce backed up its decision to oppose public power measure Proposition D in its official paid ballot argument (which will run in the voters' handbook this November) by saying that "unlike other measures, Prop. D would authorize bonds that would be beyond the reach of voter referendum." A chamber-funded poll last winter showed voters strongly opposed giving up the right to weigh in on revenue bond issuances. But the business group is not consistently heeding the wisdom of the voters it polled. In fact, Prop. D is a lot like Prop. E, the Public Utilities Commission reform measure aimed at helping with water system fixes. Like Prop. D, Prop. E would also allow city officials to issue revenue bonds without sending each issuance back to the voters for approval. The chamber's position, as stated on its Web site: Vote yes on E. Chamber spokesperson Carol Piasante could not be reached for comment. (Rachel Brahinsky)

Budget battles: Though voters approved a measure in 2000 guaranteeing San Francisco's Children's Fund would be spared from the budget axe, it was not until several days before the 2002-03 budget was to be approved that activists realized Mayor Willie Brown had cut more than $7 million from the fund. Brown must have assumed no one would notice, Margaret Brodkin, director of Coleman Advocates for Children and Youth's director, told us. After the group threatened suit, $3.5 million was restored to the fund. Now Coleman has come up with a number of ways to protect the fund in the future. Among the group's ideas included in its September 2002 report, "San Francisco's Budget Process Reforms": The board should make options for raising additional revenue part of the regular budget consideration process. The mayor should get the final budget to the supervisors one month earlier, by May 1. Any change of $50,000 or more by a department head should be explained and justified. The city should work on budgets covering more than one fiscal year to allow for more effective planning. And the city's Youth Commission should be given a formal role in the process. "The supes made a great deal of effort doing the best they could," Brodkin said. "But in the end, they still had far too little input, and there was far too little scrutiny and public input. We have a long way to go." To read the report, go to www.colemanadvocates.org (Blackwell)

Ramm on board: Tenant activists were dismayed to learn that Thomas Ramm, the president and cofounder of a property-owners group called the Small Property Owners of San Francisco, has just been appointed to the city's Assessment Appeals Board. The board considers requests from property owners, often the owners of large commercial enterprises, to have their property-tax rate lowered. The SPOSF is considered by tenants to be the landlord organization most hostile to tenants' concerns. Indeed, according to a candidate running for supervisor representing District 6 who attended the group's recent debate, the mere mention of support for the city's rent-stabilization law was enough to elicit a round of jeers and boos from the crowd. "I'm pretty sure I heard 'Get out the rope!' coming from the back row,'' the candidate, who asked not to be named, told us.

"I'm really disappointed in the Board of Supervisors [for approving Mayor Willie Brown's appointment of Ramm]," Robert Haaland, organizing director at the Housing Rights Committee, told us. "There was little or no debate on this – one of the most egregious appointments I've seen in years."

Ramm told us the tenants have no grounds to complain and that he will be fair. "I own three units, but I do not work in the real estate industry," he said. (Blackwell)