So, politics is a bit like cruising the singles ads. Governing: That’s a relationship. San Francisco excels at politics. San Francisco struggles at governing. Politics is exciting. Governing’s harder.
San Francisco, it would seem, has broken up with Mayor London Breed after a tumultuous six-and-a-half years. And we’ve found someone new. And, get this: He’s a really nice guy. But he’s never been in a relationship.
So, we have no idea how things are going to go. And, truth be told, neither does he. Mayor-elect Daniel Lurie has never held conventional employment, and he’s certainly never had a job like this.
The degree-of-difficulty for the next mayor of San Francisco has officially been ratcheted to “triple lindy.” The city is facing a crushing deficit at the same time that our traditional downtown office revenue model has been relegated to rayon blazers with shoulder-pads nostalgia. That tall, black-cloaked figure with the scythe who just boarded your BART or Muni vehicle? Could be a weirdo. Or it could be a harbinger of transit doom (and there is no downtown recovery without functioning transit).
San Francisco’s drug and homelessness situations remain suboptimal. The city will have to deal with a state-mandated rezoning — and interest rates, like Sherlock Holmes’ preferred cocaine solution, are hitting 7 percent. The forthcoming San Francisco Unified School District budget ought to come with a fifth of Jack Daniel’s. The Giants continue to attempt to draw people to the ballpark to watch a series of interchangeable, bearded .250 hitters.
These are the times that try men’s souls.
And all of that would be the case even without a vindictive authoritarian narcissist being elected president and full well having the ability to crater San Francisco’s budget if he feels like it that day. But that happened, too.
In short: San Francisco has issues. And this will be Daniel Lurie’s first relationship.
More than $16 million was raised by and for Lurie’s winning mayoral effort. That’s enough to purchase around four M1 Abrams tanks.
Lurie’s competitors certainly felt like they’d been run over by a tank. Breed on election night griped that the city is “not for sale.” But that’s debatable: Chester Hartman’s 1984 masterwork on San Francisco is, in fact, titled “City for Sale.” More to the point, it wasn’t money alone that won the day for Lurie and doomed Breed.
Having essentially unlimited money never hurts, but TogetherSF/Mark Farrell/Prop. D had heaps of money, too, and that wasn’t enough.
Prop. D raised over $9.5 million, while Prop. E raised $69,159
money raised for Prop. D
money raised for Prop. E
money raised for Prop. E
money raised for Prop. D
Chart by Kelly Waldron. Data from the San Francisco Ethics Commission.
Lurie’s ability to stay relentlessly on-message — with the message being that he is an outsider who had no part in our government’s mismanagement — also won him this race. As did the fact he’s a fundamentally nice and decent man, which nobody is denying. In the end, it wasn’t a close election.
But if winning was easy, governing’s harder.
To start with, in governing you ought to eventually say what you’re going to do — and, to an extent, do it. Which brings us to Lurie’s much-repeated pledge to declare a fentanyl state of emergency on “Day One.”
There’s just one problem: You can’t do it.
Let us start with the premise that drugs are bad. Let us continue by noting that fentanyl is a game-changer in the worst way, and a scourge on this and most every city. Clearly the status quo is not acceptable.
All true. But you can’t declare a fentanyl state of emergency.
You may recall the “Tenderloin State of Emergency” Mayor London Breed declared, which was approved via an 8-2 Board of Supervisors vote in late December 2021.
Did Breed and her office first look into declaring a fentanyl state of emergency? Of course they did. But we have learned that they were informed by the city attorney’s office that they couldn’t do this, which led to a bit of legislative legerdemain to make it a “Tenderloin” state of emergency instead.
That’s because, legally, there is a definition of what constitutes an “emergency.” You can turn to page 11 of this memo from the San Francisco City Attorney in 2005 regarding emergency declarations, where it helpfully asks and answers “What is an emergency?”
“An emergency, for purposes of the Charter” is an “unforeseen occurrence or combination of occurrences which calls for an immediate action or remedy …” notes the memo. “The first test is whether the emergency situation is sudden or unexpected. The situation must be something that the City could not have specifically anticipated and prevented, such as an earthquake or a terrorist attack.”
As bad as drugs are, and as awful as fentanyl is, it is neither sudden nor unexpected (neither, for that matter, is “homelessness,” so you couldn’t declare a “homelessness state of emergency” either). Fentanyl has been here a while and its appearance in this town was the very opposite of unanticipated: It moved from right to left across the nation ravaging cities in its wake, the way children of the 1980s were led to believe that killer bees would.
The state of emergency declared in 2021 was narrowly circumscribed to the Tenderloin and based upon the argument that — suddenly and unexpectedly — a spike in overdoses, crime, the pandemic, etc. had led to a particularly untenable situation in one particular quadrant of the city. Truth be told, it’s not an A+ argument — the Tenderloin, for the last several decades, has not been a garden of earthly delights — but it did pass legal muster.
A “state of emergency” isn’t just a bit of semantics implying that things are bad; it’s a legally actionable term. It allows for no-bid contracts and a notable reduction in governmental checks and balances. To receive state or federal funds, the state or federal government must also declare an emergency, and they, too, are operating off of a definition of an “emergency” that doesn’t include a nebulous and/or longstanding situation.
Finally, while San Francisco’s level of drug-related misery and death is hardly ideal, it’s actually far, far better than in recent years, thereby undercutting any argument that the situation has spiraled out of control and an emergency declaration is required. Even if that was something that could be done.
All of which is to say: Pledging a fentanyl state of emergency “on Day One” sounds like good politics. But it’s not good government, because you can’t deliver.
Governing’s harder.
Lurie’s announcement last week, about his transition team, drew particular attention. And that’s not just because of the names on it — most notably, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman (and, Altman’s complete opposite, longtime former controller and “adult in the room” Ben Rosenfield). It’s also because Lurie has no government record, so nobody can know how he’ll handle his new role. Every bit of information is grabbed with both hands and overanalyzed: This means something!
We have no idea who Lurie will listen to. We have no idea who will stay and who will go. We have no idea if it means more that the buses have never run better, or that city merchants and residents in tonier enclaves are infuriated by street-use plans, all of which is under the aegis of MTA director Jeffrey Tumlin.
So, we have no idea how things are going to go. And, truth be told, neither does Lurie. But that needn’t be a knock: How could he know? He’s never done anything like this before. Perhaps it’s for the best to not have so many preconceived notions.
If Lurie is looking for silver linings as he begins his hard job, here are two: It’s difficult to think of a mayor that more San Franciscans are pulling for; there’s simply too much at stake for cheap partisanship. And, in the end, nobody is claiming he isn’t a nice and decent man.
And that’s important. Relationships flourish. Relationships sour. Things may go well. Things may go badly. Perhaps it’ll be something in-between. But, in the words of Max Robinson, “try to keep your integrity. Because you’re going to find out in life at the end, that’s all you got.”
Let’s just hope this new change brings a lot of good for the city.
We need it!
While I did not vote for Mr. Lurie, I hope that he can fix the city’s problems. I expect him to stumble a little as he learns the ropes but hopefully, he will quickly recover. We need to give him a little slack.
My fears are how the wealthy (Lurie, TogetherSF, and others) want to run San Francisco “like a business.” While operational efficiencies are badly needed, a city is not a business. The following quotes reinforce my case:
“We should no more want the government to be run like a business than a business to be run like the government. The key issue is this: not everything that is profitable is of social value and not everything of social value is profitable. The proper role of government is the latter.” –John T. Harvey, Why Government Should Not Be Run Like A Business
“Government is, to some extent, deliberately inefficient. The need for approvals and oversight is a purposeful drag to ensure compliance with law and regulations, with ethics, with the budget. The need to serve everyone is itself inherently inefficient as those clients may be people that businesses often avoid: special education students or services that are time consuming and not cost effective.” –Mark Holzer, Public administration at a crossroad: Five enduring challenges
“to some extent”. Sure, I doubt through Mt. Holzer envisioned San Francisco levels of inefficient. Plus, all the corruption, theft, rent-seeking, nepotism and graft. Last checkpoint I’ve seen, the City&County had 34,000 employees. Pull any place the size of San Francisco out of the hat, and that corresponding number will be (fill in the adjective) lower. Yet, what we hear is a chorus of departments singing along how short staffed they were – bus drivers, sheriff’s deputies, nurses, police officers.
Now that much of the funny money’s left town, the old MOA doesn’t hold up by the glue any longer, it’s time to return to the drawing board.
The fact is that an unimaginable amount of fraud, waste, and graft flows from San Francisco taxpayers through its government to ineffective nonprofits. Framing the oversight and reversal of this phenomenon as Republican-style “running San Francisco like a business” is quite the political messaging trick.
Lurie ended the reign of the deeply corrupt, and deeply incompetent Willie Brown Machine. Whatever can be said about Lurie, I imagine it can’t be worse than 28 years of patronage politics, handouts to corrupt nonprofits and donors, bloated contracts which cost the city taxpayers, and machine politics akin to Tammany Hall 2.0. Dreamkeeper, Recology, Mohammed Nuru, DBI, pay to play…. Flush it down the $1.7M toilet!
Yes, I am on Team Let’s Give The Guy A Chance!
Lurie’s election would appear to be the end of Willie Brown machine politics, which brought us London Breed and was itself a continuation of the Burton machine. Willie handed out political patronage like candy to get the votes of key demographics with lots of “assistant” jobs, nonprofit handouts, and questionable contracts. But that was matched with cracking heads to break through the bureaucracy to make sure the moneyed class got what it wanted, e.g. Mission Bay, Giants ballpark, lots of office buildings. Breed did the handouts but was ineffective at the part of actually getting things done. It’s not entirely her fault as the dynamics have shifted and this city is now so stocked with wealthy people that there simply are not enough poor people to turn an election so you don’t need to buy that group’s votes to win. Still TBD is whether Lurie can get things done, but he is freed of having to spend hundreds of millions a year to keep non-profits and lower-income voters in his camp as he doesn’t need their votes. Big question in my mind is whether he will stand up to very powerful, long-standing inertia, or if we will just see the same old thing.
“Still TBD is whether Lurie can get things done, but he is freed of having to spend hundreds of millions a year to keep non-profits and lower-income voters in his camp as he doesn’t need their votes”
Then why would he lift a finger for them if he doesn’t need their votes? This is some Alice in Wonderland logic. Let’s just keep adding to the rolls of our billionaire benefactors and pretty soon there won’t be any rabble left to worry about!
C’mon.
Two different things. He still needs to engage in good governance – clean, safe streets, well-maintained parks, effective land use and planning, infrastructure maintenance, public transit etc. This benefits everyone, including the poor (most of all). But he no longer needs to divert hundreds of millions of dollars a year from these functions to literally buy votes, as has been the norm for many decades.
Lurie will have a better chance to balance the budget and streamline to the Byzantine permit process. Maybe get permit approvals done in under a year or 5.
Finally! Isn’t ANYONE thinking about the developers?
I just want to replace some windows.
Apparently people like marcos enjoy watching our aging housing stock decay and become more dingy by the day.
Gentrifier! 🙂
Bilal Mahmood is a lot like Lurie. Not sure how much money he has, but it’s certainly enough to mean he hasn’t really worked and also puts him way out of touch with the people of the neighborhood he moved to a year and a half ago so he could position himself as something he is not. He has no political experience – he’s barely voted. His “policy analyst in the Obama administration” is almost certainly closer to his training and career as a neuroscientist than to a position is more than just a fluff internship for Stanford grads.
Mahmood is committed to making city government “efficient.” Politics, governing and leadership are not about efficiencies. The simplemindedness of these inexperienced “outsiders” isn’t a solution for San Francisco’s affordable housing crisis (in contrast to the city’s unaffordable housing glut); homelessness; grotesque wealth inequality; and the near-dead downtown luxury shopping and financial districts.
Mahmood says he’s going to solve the “open air drug market” problem in the Tenderloin by hiring more cops. SFPD has had coordinated policing support from the CHP and feds for two years (the latter can arrest and deport with impunity), so how will a “fully staffed” TL station make a difference? It won’t. Mahmood blamed Preston for the lack of new housing construction in D5, though he couldn’t be bothered to 1.) admit there’s been relatively more new construction in D5 than in, let’s say, D2, D1, D4 and D7. Mahmood – the highly educated “analyst” – couldn’t grasp that interest rates, lack of demand for bespoke luxury lifestyle shoebox semi studios and junior one bedrooms, and the crushing weight of construction costs have obliterated developers’ pencils.
He’s got a whole slew of things to take care of, so good luck to him.
I was going to say pandering to and capturing the middle-wealthy classes starting with techies and the general “asian” train, but then he went and did exactly that, so the lede goes nowhere it isn’t already. He’s governing from the optical center.
For accountability in nonprofits, he would immerse himself in this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_resource_accounting#%3A%7E%3Atext%3DSince_human_resources_are_incapable%2Cassets_in_the_strict_sense.?wprov=sfla1. Too, too too!
Campers,
It’s all gonna depend upon who he trusts doesn’t it ?
And, the people he allows himself to be surrounded by.
In the campaign his advisers were no different than Farrell’s or Breed’s and pushed him to be even worse than them.
At one point he said that he’d like to see a situation where a homeless person was approached by a cop and a social worker.
If the homeless person refused whatever ‘shelter’ the social worker offered (actually available or not ?) than the cop would arrest them.
That’s the ideal of the campaign Lurie.
Nice guy ?
Sure.
Humane actor.
Not even.
Hey, words are cheap or I wouldn’t have a million of em.
Actions cost.
Let’s see how he acts.
Beginning with the people he pays big money to advise him.
After that ?
“You shall know them by their deeds.”
Breed’s deeds surround us.
Soon we’ll see Daniel’s work every day when we walk out our doors.
I got my fingers crossed.
Ironic that the situation in the White House and in Room 200 are reversed.
In D.C. we’re hoping that Trump’s staff can civilize him.
In SF we’re hoping Lurie’s staff doesn’t corrupt him.
Go Niners !!
h.
He said metrics and stats. I played that game with my bosses for 25 years, hire me at $300k and I’ll tell you how to do it.
These AI fiends being welcomed with open arms by political leaders is of concern. Altman is looking to embed his product, Lurie is interested. Aside from not being promised an official position, it bears resemblance to the Trump/Musk bromance.
It would seem, among other strategies, AI oligarchs are looking to slash and burn people powered bureaucracy and backfill with their data mining AI products. Data is the new oil, as they say. And government agencies are replete fields to be tapped.
If there was any doubt, it was removed in watching the 2024 national election unfold.
Dannyboy is a child of the ruling class, which means the billionaire (or billionaire-adjacent) class.
It’s a safe bet that whatever their surface justification for the rabble may be, his policies will boil down to:
1. boosting downtown commercial real estate values;
2. building (or converting, see#1) moar luxury condos (because everyone knows that gentrification makes housing for the poors more affordable, right?);
3. suppressing service industry wages.
Follow. the. money.
can’t speak bad of the silver spoon billionaires with zero experience, because they’re so rich they can’t be bought, right? (literally word for word from one of my relatives who loves him – and Trump) Lurie supporters are exactly the same mentality. You can’t criticize him without immediately being attacked like you’re somehow supporting corruption and evil doing.
For the Mission, the posture Lurie adopts with the city funded politically connected nonprofits, the ones who had nurtured Jon Jacobo to be on deck for D9, will determine the contours of politics for us.
Lurie has no demonstrated interest in sustaining the Newsom/Lee/Breed posture of using city funded poverty nonprofits as a choke collar on progressives.
Lurie has indicated that he will impose performance standards determined by outcomes on city funded nonprofits. That’s gotta be making some of these nonprofiteers break out in cold sweats.
Will Lurie continue the broad power relationships that define San Francisco–The Containment Zone–where the east side generates the biz and sales tax revenues which get shunted to the periphery to keep the “nice” neighborhoods “nice,” while containing any social problems deemed undesirable by polite company in the fecal crescent that runs from the TL through Western SOMA, North Mission and Showplace Square?
The deck is probably being shuffled with a new Mayor not historically dependent upon the mechanisms of political control devised by the Brown machine in the late 2000s.
Mostly disagree but I give you credit for coining the term “fecal crescent”.
I might have instead gone with “syringe arc” but the point is well taken.
I think a wealthy guy with no political or job experience to speak of, who buys his way into the mayorship with his own (and his mother’s) money, is by definition not a ‘decent’ person.
although I’d like to agree with the feeling of rich people bad, I wouldn’t want to follow in MAGA’s footsteps by blaming someone for something they had no control of which is the wealthy family they were born into. He seems to come across as a decent person but for now I would like to reserve judgement until I have evidence either way since sociopaths can also come across as very nice to their neighbors until the bodies are discovered.
If I ever get cancer, and have to choose from a bunch of different doctors, I’ll make sure to hire Lurie as an oncologist, because he’s never had a patient die.
Later on, I need to have my taxes done, but this guy I met on the street says he’s never had the IRS audit people he’s done taxes for…. not that he’s ever done taxes for anyone, but he always pays tax when he buys his liquor at the store.
I can’t say the election choices were anything but crap, but I can say that this joker is nothing but a spoiled rich kid who never had a job besides throwing big parties for rich friends of his mommy and giving away the leavings to charities so they can deduct the entire thing.
So, perhaps take a step back, say a prayer or something, and hope for the best. I hope he does well and I hope he’s smart enough to let someone be his Dick Cheney, because being mayor of a major city is no job for a nubie and we’re ALL depending on him.
Maybe the next election we can have even more billionaire inheritors to choose from.
Rocka Reeka n Arnie Swarzie come to mind, but i doubt he can do any fancy dancing.
Hey Joe,
I know you keep saying that Mr Lurie is a nice guy, but I have an acquaintance that worked in non-profits and she said he had a reputation for being a real asshole. Might be worth looking into before you keep on saying how nice he is…
Also, I used to work for a very wealthy family with a household name that most people know in the 80’s and 90’s. The looser progeny of the family was typically banished from the real business of the family and made to run non-profits where they could mis-manage and lose all the money they want while still pulling down an ok allowance as a board of directors member. Not saying this is the case with Mr. Lurie, but it may be related.
Cheers, and please keep up the good work.
hope you left more clues than just “some lady who worked in non-profits” since that might be too many people to narrow down with the low pay and high turnover in most non-profits. like they say, “Pics or it didn’t happen” – rumors are hard to go on when there’s no one to even quote.
Rumors abound that people who worked with him at Tipping Point thought he was an poor leader and insufferable person to work with. Few news outlets dug into his reputation as a nonprofit leader during the campaign, but I suspect more stories will come out if he struggles during his first few months as Mayor.