A fundamental misunderstanding of District 4 fueled the recall campaign against Supervisor Joel Engardio, said political insiders on Tuesday night at an event organized by Mission Local at Manny’s.
Longtime political consultant Jim Ross called Prop. K, supported by Engardio and successful in transforming the Great Highway into a park, one of “those weird issues.”
“A lot of these people in the Sunset are driving to the Peninsula … that’s why to me it’s stupid on his part, just a fundamental misunderstanding of your district and your constituents,” Ross said at a panel moderated by managing editor Joe Eskenazi.
John Crabtree, a longtime political operative who is a high-level volunteer with the campaign to unseat Engardio, was also on the dais.
Despite the city having a transit-first policy, Ross said many native San Franciscans want to be able to drive and park easily. This juxtaposition is especially clear in the western neighborhoods, where District 1 supervisor Connie Chan, for example, opposed Prop. K.
Engardio’s championing of Proposition K led outraged voters to circulate recall petitions. On May 21, they turned in nearly 11,000 signatures, and now ballots to recall Engardio will be mailed to his constituents’ homes later this month for the Sept. 16 election.
The trio on the panel spoke for an hour about recalls, especially Engardio’s, their repercussions across the city’s political landscape and the reasons why San Franciscans are now seeing them more and more.
Despite having raised more than four times what his opponents have, both panelists agreed that Engardio is in trouble. As of July 4, the pro-recall campaign has amassed about $161,000, compared to the $667,000 raised by the campaign opposing it.
Prior to 2022, San Franciscans had only voted once to recall an elected official — in 1983, when then-Mayor Dianne Feinstein beat an attempt to remove her from office sponsored by the pro-gun group the White Panthers.
But in recent years, the city recalled Boudin — Ross led the fight against that recall — and, prior to that, three members of the school board. Recalls are happening elsewhere, too: Alameda county voters recalled their district attorney, Pamela Price and Oakland mayor Sheng Thao last year.
Another recall attempt is underway in Contra Costa County, where district attorney Diana Becton faces criticism over her handling of cases. Ross is currently working against Becton’s recall.
Engardio supported Boudin’s recall and was a leader in the school board recall.
“The truth of the matter is he didn’t just support recalls in the past … he built himself up as a recaller,” said Crabtree. “This should be ammunition for other people [too]. Be careful what you ask for, what you do.”
As for what’s changed in the last few years that makes recalls so frequent now, Ross said it’s the money fueling San Francisco politics today.
“There’s never been more money concentrated in one city at any point. And a lot of people are willing to use that money for politics,” said Ross, reflecting on the preferences of the city’s tech millionaires, many of whom, he said, prefer to give money to advance their political beliefs.
“Really, what’s changed comes down to money,” he said.
Despite agreeing that big money remains an issue in city politics, simple anger can also fuel a successful recall. Crabtree said Sunset residents felt lied to by their own supervisor.
Some, he added, recalled stories of Engardio telling them personally at their homes he would support a compromise that kept the Great Highway open during weekdays.
“They felt betrayed and, rightfully so, they organized themselves,” said Crabtree, adding that the recall became more than just about Engardio’s support for Prop. K. Voters felt their supervisor had misled them in order to gain their support.
He said the recall movement has been one operated mostly by volunteers from the district who have knocked on many doors and walked many miles to speak with fellow constituents.
Recalls in California date back to 1911, when Gov. Hiram Johnson introduced them and other reforms to give voters direct access to prevent corruption.
Despite that intended use, San Francisco has never recalled an elected official for actual corruption, despite having multiple opportunities throughout the years to do so, Ross added.
Instead, voters used this power to recall the three members of the school board over school closures during COVID-19 and their views on other reforms. As for Boudin, as both Ross and Crabtree agreed, he was recalled for doing what he said he was going to do.
On Tuesday night, however, Crabtree compared Engardio’s actions to corruption.
“Irrespective of whether you think the highway should be closed … when you sit in someone’s home and you tell them what you think they want you to hear so that you can garner their vote, that’s corrupt,” said Crabtree.
Boudin, incidentally, lives in Engardio’s District 4. He said in December he would not support the Engardio recall, out of principle.
When asked if the system should be reformed so that it’s not so easy to recall elected officials every time voters disagree with one of the decisions, Crabtree said what needs to be reformed is the money that goes into these campaigns, not the people’s right to recall.
“Should they not have that right to do things very much the way we did them, to go out and knock on doors and do it one person at a time and be very district-centered?” replied Crabtree.
Ross told attendees that, while he worked opposing Boudin’s recall, he found that San Franciscans actually like recalls. It’s a tool, he said, that they’re not ready to part ways with. And voters rarely agree to limit their own power.
“Now they’re just a thing in the mix. We do recalls,” he said. “That’s just a thing that we live with.”
Joel didn’t perform his job to represent his constituents on a monumental issue.
Bye Joel.
None of you folks seem to remember that the entire City voted on closing the Great Highway. You lost.
@Stephen. You miss the point.
The rest of the City wasn’t negatively impacted, and it was sold via a pack of lies at the very last possible minute with Billionaire dark money and secret, redacted meetings with Google lawyers. Engardio is lying scum, not a representative of the Sunset, and the recall is the product of that. When the lawsuits prove CEQA was illegally skirted by the dark money groups, the Great highway will revert to the necessary thoroughfare and evacuation route it has always been – and cyclists are welcome to use it like they always have before Prop K liars blew into town.
Joel is toast.
The school board members we recalled were just nuts. You gloss over this in the story, but they spent their days declaring Abraham Lincoln a racist rather than discussing a school reopening plan.
Boudin wasn’t nuts: he was just a lover of criminals like his parents. He seduced a lot of San Franciscans with the idea that we could not lock up career criminals and they would instantly stop robbing us. He should never have been elected in the first place.
Had we not recalled these people, the city’s doom loop would have continued to spiral downwards. I have spoken to people who left the city because of the school board. And we all know that Boudin helped make SF internationally famous for lawlessness.
When you lie to the people, don’t be surprised when they no longer like you.
It’s actually pretty simple. He threw his district under the developer bus.
Wieneresque moves from YIMBY tools that only serve to gentrify and divide.
We deserve better. I’d like to see a candidate who inspires local voters to make small dollar donations in SUPPORT of them, instead of only to recall them when they lie and take Billionaire developer cash and pretend to have invented Algebra and Night Markets, unbelievably, while making our traffic slower and our streets demonstrably less safe for a few connected yuppie interests. They lied, they gaslight, and now the chickens have come home to roost and they complain that the people “just don’t understand”??? No, WE UNDERSTAND, LIAR JOEL and CO. We understand all too well what you’re up to, gentrification squad Wieners.
The entire recall process was designed to remove corrupt officials. Instead, people use it as a political weapon or as a way to use a minority opinion to “wag the dog”. There really should be consequences for misuse, like there are for SLAPP lawsuits.
Filing a recall against an elected official should require “They did XYZ, which is illegal”. Instead it’s, “They said they were going to do A, but didn’t. Now I’m mad and going to cause the rest of the city to pay for my hissy-fit”.
And Boudin, agree or disagree or whatever with his politics, that recall was the most blatant example of corruption I’ve ever seen in 50 yrs. Police actively ignoring calls to stop shoplifting because the DA was going to prosecute a cop who, on his 3rd day on the job, rolled down his car window and shot a suspect in the back as he ran away, and then another officer arrested him. They even had paid commercials with a local chinatown store owner who “had to close his shop because of boudin!” – a shop that had been closed for 4 years. They had a prosecutor who denied, and then admitted, that she accepted 100k for coming out against him. She was then handed the job, stating “there is no quid pro quo” with the arrested cop – who she then dropped charges the following month, saying the arresting officer had asked her to (he didn’t), and then WE paid for a settlement when he sued for defamation.
/rant
SF Politics has always been a bit tedious, but now it’s just “how can the angriest and wealthiest get power when they don’t have a majority”
No, Engardio is legit corrupt and a liar. That’s enough, it’s beyond politik.
The recall process requires the will of the people to be respected.
DOL,
I didn’t know about it either and I’m a big supporter of Joe’s and live 2 blocks away.
When did y’all advertise this, Joe ?
go Niners !!
h.
Part of the problem is voter participation, especially in off-year elections. You note that Chesa Boudin did exactly what he said he was going to do and was then recalled for doing so, which sounds kind of nuts. But digging into the numbers, the fact is voter turnout in SF municipal elections in 2019 was 41%, of which Boudin received 36% of 1st choice votes (in ranked choice voting) and then won in a squeaker 51-49 – hardly a ringing mandate. So a fraction of the City turns out to vote, a fraction of that votes for Boudin, he gets busy with his agenda, and everyone suddenly pays attention and gets mad. Voila – recall. The people need to get out there and vote the first time around; then maybe those put in office will truly reflect the will of constituents.
“Despite the city having a transit-first policy, Ross said many native San Franciscans want to be able to drive and park easily.”
It’s a tired old war horse that paints stereotype progressive San Franciscans as hypocrites. In fact, you can have a robust transit-first policy and keep the city practical for those who need an automobile.
One 40-foot bus stop doesn’t create parking issues. Eliminating entire blocks of parking spaces, or causing traffic jams by building bicycle lanes is the problem.
Indeed, take a look at SFMTA’s “Biking and Rolling Plan”. You will see that in many cases, pedestrians, who today can step directly from the sidewalk onto a bus, will have to wait for a signal and walk across traffic to get to the bus. Not exactly transit-first.
We can’t recall Trump. We can’t recall Pelosi. Recalls don’t exist federally. So what do we do? Wait for the next election, and vote. The normal progress of democracy.
It’s an incredible waste of resources to have micro-elections based on fits of pique over single issues. Just wait your turn. I would happily vote for a ballot measure eliminating recalls in SF and California, generally.
The incredible waste of resources is candidates spending big to win elections and then doing the opposite of what they ran on or what is demonstrably unpopular in their district.
The money has been spent. The signatures have been gathered and verified as valid. THIS is democracy also and pretending otherwise is ridiculous. Note where the recall funding came from – locals, individuals almost exclusively and small dollar donations at that. Contrast with the Billionaires and Multi-millionaires donating hundreds of thousands to their corrupt, bespoke and dishonest manchurian candidate, all of that from corporate coffers. THAT is the problem with our democracy, not the will of the people demanding respect at the ballot box, but the corrupt dark money Billionaire-funded machine that hires Sam Singer to lie to our faces and tell us we like it like this, and there’s no choice. No, there’s a choice.
Vote yes on the recall and make the money that’s already been spent count.
This is democracy – lie to your constituents, gaslight, and be prepared to be held to account – and Engardio himself came into office on a wave of recalls that he himself hyped and supported. Hypocrites to the last man in that camp. Obviously the Sunset deserves better and in fact demands it.
Afraid of the will of constituents? Well he ought to be. That’s Democracy.
Recalls are included in our process for very good reason, and WE THE PEOPLE supported this one from our own pocketbooks for good reason against lying Billionaires and their domesticated pets in City Hall. Voting to give voters less power vs. the Billionaire dark money is exactly the wrong move.
Just curious Stephen: did you vote yes to recall DA Chesa Boudin? Did you vote?Yes to recall the SFUSD Board members?
Hi Greeny. Let me satisfy your curiosity! I did not. I will never support wasting City money on a second-bite-at-the-apple election. I vote no on every recall. Boudin. Gray Davis. Whatever. We have elections at regular intervals. Vote then. Don’t ask the people to shoulder additional administrative costs because you’re *so mad*.
Prop C in June 2022 went down (58/42%) which would have put some time restrictions on when, in a term, voters could recall a city official. 2022 was high noon for recall fever, so maybe it’s worth a re-visit. I’d love to add some restrictions on the basis, but I can’t think how? It would be nice to find a way to limit the basis to capacity (e.g., debilitating disease, moving out of the district, etc.), and not an avenue for folks unhappy with policy decisions.
“We can’t recall Trump.”
There is an impeachment process. That did for Nixon, and was also tried with Clinton and Trump.
As for money being a factor in recalls, I feel sure that is true to some extent. But the over-riding factor is that some bad choices have been elected in recent years:
We had a DA who sympathized with criminals, three individuals on the school board who preferred ideological posturing to improving education, and (now) a supervisor who ignored his constituents on a key local issue.
Could that just be a streak of bad luck?
End the recall option. We have impeachment if there is a real need to get someone out of office because they are unfit, but simply put, the recall is undemocratic.
He lied. He continues to lie. He’s a liar. The recall respects the will of voters.
Engardio clearly does not. This is literally the reason recalls exist.
Fascinating conference last night. One question I should have asked, but have thought ever since – why wasn’t there a recall of Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi? He almost got impeached (the Mayor pushed his removal, but he barely survived a removal vote at the Board of Supervisors) so if there had been a recall attempt it would likely have prevailed. But instead, his opponents waited until the next election (three years later) to defeat him. In my opinion, that’s what you should do – the voters already have the power to remove elected officials: it’s called ELECTIONS!
Hello Paul!
The short answer is, after the failed recall of Mayor Feinstein in 1983, everyone thought it was impossible to win a recall in SF.
Not just impossible — slow and expensive, too. The process takes a year. You need valid signatures from 10% of the voting population, or roughly 50,000 people. You can’t do that with volunteers alone, and paid signature gatherers are expensive ($12-15/signature last I checked)… so you have to find someone willing to bankroll that cost… and that would’ve been a hard sell when everyone knew recalls were impossible to win.
This was still the conventional wisdom in 2021 when we started the school board recall. We were told that there had never been a successful recall in SF.
This wasn’t quite true — there were actually two successful recalls in 1913 and 1914 — but no one had been recalled in over a century, and the rules had changed since then. (Oddly enough, whenever a politician gets recalled, the other politicians pass legislation to make recalls harder.)
Back then, you had to gather fewer signatures, and the election was held right away with very little time to campaign.
For example, look at the 1913 recall of Judge Weller. The recall was spearheaded by the Oceanside Women’s Club after Weller reduced bail for a prominent businessman accused of sexually assaulting a 16 year old girl. They announced the recall on Jan 16, had 10,000 signatures on Jan 24, and had the recall election on April 23… three months after they started. Judge Weller was recalled. (And the businessman? He paid the bail and disappeared.)
Personally, I’m glad we have the recall process and I have a lot of faith in the wise voters of SF. But we can disagree on this. 😉
Hey Autumn !
You won because you spent ten times as much in a Special Election financed by billionaires Lou Cypher Oberdorf and David Sacks (who now is a top Trump Employee).
This was just one of a series of nationwide Recalls financed by the same gang of what some have called a ‘Poker game club’.
The entire point of the game has continued to be to swing the entire nation hard right to fill our already stuffed prisons.
Big part of game is to hire best local conservative mouthpiece (Jim Sutton in this case) and to bring in out of town talent (you and your spouse amongst them) to overmatch targeted office holders.
I watched you at Manny’s drive the School Board’s first ever Pacific Islander’s voice to tears cause he couldn’t match your high salary debating skills.
The Billionaire’s Boys Club wanted to try to recall the entire Board in this low turnout election ruse but only 3 could be put on the ballot and you lumped him with 2 who were misdirected so to speak.
Which means (I agree with previous comments) they should have been removed in the same type of regular election in which they first won.
Recalls were a great idea in Woodrow Wilson’s California.
To modern Billionaires they are a chink in the Progressive armor.
go Niners !!
h.
Was this event advertised on ML? Would’ve liked to have checked it out.
And boy, this is a ridiculous statement:
“…when you sit in someone’s home and you tell them what you think they want you to hear so that you can garner their vote, that’s corrupt,” said Crabtree.
Sir or madam —
There were ads here! Next time we’ll run them longer.
JE