“Neighbors for a Better San Francisco and TogetherSF are gonna go for Farrell. GrowSF and Abundant SF will go for Breed,” Joe Rivano Barros told the audience at Manny’s in a discussion of the city’s biggest political donors.
That was the prediction for November’s looming election offered by Mission Local’s senior editor at a Tuesday-night debrief on big money in San Francisco politics.
Mission Local has been covering the groups that have collectively launched a more conservative-leaning movement to oust progressives from elected office in San Francisco — and their spending. “We’re gonna see a big divide, a big rift in November,” said Rivano Barros. Also on the stage were Will Jarrett, Mission Local’s former data reporter, and managing editor Joe Eskenazi. All three have been contributors to Mission Local’s BigMoneySF series.
The tech- and real-estate-backed groups who have put millions into city elections do not only diverge on mayoral candidates, but also differ more generally: Neighbors for a Better San Francisco has geared towards public safety, while GrowSF and Abundant SF are more urbanist and YIMBY, focused on market-rate housing, bike lanes, keeping the great highway and JFK Driver car-free, according to Rivano Barros.
Neighbors for a Better San Francisco, the wealthiest among all groups, in particular, has gradually changed its focus from various supervisorial fights and anti-tax measures in 2020, when it launched, to public safety, including being the largest funder to recall former District Attorney Chesa Boudin. “It was a lot of kind of getting on to voter anger and then, fueling and being fueled by that voter anger,” said Rivano Barros.
Divergence, however, is not always the case. For a long time, the groups have been looking out for each other on social media and helping each other with fundraising. The two election cycles make 2024 monumental for them. Their goals? To make structural changes in the city’s governmental body, according to Rivano Barros.
First, winning 18 out of the 24 seats in San Francisco’s Democratic County Central Committee was a “huge coup,” said Rivano Barros. “That will mean that they control the endorsements,” which will be very interesting going to the high-turnout November race where voters will be looking for the local Democratic Party’s seal of approval on candidates and measures, he said.
Second, to oust more of the progressive Board of Supervisors; Dean Preston and Connie Chan are seeking re-election in November, among others.
Third, two November ballot measures from TogetherSF will seek to bolster mayoral power by “enabling the mayor to fire and hire more easily, have deputy mayors, and then capping the number of commissions in the city,” he said.
Behind the BigMoneySF map
Jarrett was the data reporter behind an interactive map that laid out the flow of money behind these groups and related campaigns. That came from months of laborious work of rummaging through campaign finance filings, tax returns, news reports and more, he said. “I had a full head of hair at the beginning of this project,” quipped Jarrett.
It took time to aggregate the documents which were in various formats, and figure out what has or hasn’t been disclosed, said Jarrett.
The complex campaign finance filing system sometimes also provides gaps for people to conceal their involvement, according to Jarrett. “Because if they’re not disclosed, [it’s] very hard to write about them,” he said.
How new is this?
It’s nothing new for big donors to get involved in San Francisco politics.
In the past, however, they tended to focus on one-off issues that only lasted one or two elections, such as a soda tax, or restrictions on e-cigarettes. The recent big donors are more steadfast, with some saying they want their groups to go on for decades, said Rivano Barros.
Also, past big donors were more downtown-centric, focusing on small businesses or taxes. Today’s big-money groups, Rivano Barros said, are more ideologically-driven, aggrieved wealthy donors.
In general, the massive investment of money has worked for these groups.
Two major slates competed in the March DCCC race. The more right-leaning slate outspent its opponents at least three-to-one. “They had a much better election than they first thought they were going to do,” Jarrett said, according to what he had learned from sources. They ended up grabbing 18 of the 24 available seats, while they would’ve been pleased with 10, according to Eskenazi.
Their donations also paid off during the 2022 school board recall, when they outspent opponents 25-to-1, and the Boudin recall, when they outspent opponents 2-1.
Money did fail sometimes. Housing streamlining measure Prop. D of 2022 was well-funded. But it was undercut by a competing measure and failed to pass.“They kind of cannibalized each other’s votes,” said Jarrett.
But more money seldom hurts. And some of the relatively smaller investments may pay the greatest dividends: Neighbors donated $450,000 to ConnectedSF, which led a redistricting effort to benefit moderate-leaning candidates.
It is unclear exactly what effect this had. But the map subsequently adopted after a debacle of a redistricting process in 2022 resembles one that could’ve been created by a moderate activist.
In the subsequent election, Joel Engardio was elected as District 4 Supervisor, ousting progressive incumbent Gordon Mar. Prior to that, he had failed in three attempts to win in District 7. “The precincts that were moved during redistricting were the ones that made the difference,” said Jarrett. “If you were an investor who is looking to try and get more progressives off the board, that $400 grand was a very good investment, I would say.”
Takeaways from the March election
Money was big in March and it will be bigger in November. And it will matter more: First, March was a relatively low turnout election with fewer than half of eligible San Francisco voters participating. The voters who showed up tend to be stalwarts, who already knew how they were casting their ballots. But November’s election will involve nearly double the voters. Many will be low-information voters, thus more ads and promotional material can make a bigger difference.
Money didn’t matter as much in March’s judicial elections. Both incumbent judges kept their seats, despite $1.1 million donated to their tough-on-crime opponents. That’s probably because voters at least have a semblance of an idea of what judges do, according to Eskenazi. In comparison, money mattered a lot in the DCCC race, because the roles of the members of this largely unknown entity are more obscure and door knockers and phone bankers could make a difference.
As for the progressive-leaning candidates, one reflection Rivano Barros has heard: “They’ve got to stop just talking about billionaires controlling this.” At some point, you have to offer voters a reason to vote for you, not just reasons to vote against your competitors: “There was a question mark there [in the March election] about what progressives were proffering.”
“If you allow your opponent to define who you are and they have ten times the money you do,” added Eskenazi, “you will lose.”
I am grateful to these groups. Before this, we had big money from George Soros that put Chesa Boudin in office, and that was a disaster. Soros and Boudin cared only about national issues and did not care about San Francisco at all.
I live here. I care what happens here. So do these groups. I’m glad they’re spending money to try to improve the city. I hope it helps.
Carolyn,
These new billionaire groups are coming from a space of Hate and it doesn’t work.
The basic conflict here is between Revenge and Reform.
Mountains of Research says Reform works and Revenge doesn’t.
“I don’t care what the studies say, I’m going to keep arresting addicts.”
Chief Scott said that in reply to Max Carter-Oberstone at a Police Commission meeting a month or so back.
At stake was whether 8 officers assigned solely to arrest addicts as well as dealers should continue doing this despite the Fact that Stanford studies thumb-nailed to the Chief over and over predicted the strategy would result in more overdose deaths from fentanyl and that is exactly what has happened.
We set a record with over 800 deaths using the SFPD trail and we’re on path to break it this year.
I worked with ‘gangster’ kids for decades and they can be reformed/redirected.
What virtually every single student in my classes had in common is that they were being raised by poor parents or guardians who did not love them.
Best hardball move ?
Offer every person arrested 10 thousand dollars and a thousand a month for a year to get sterilized.
Trust me, it pencils out.
h.
“a moderate activist.”
ML has been making progress in reducing its use of the anodyne, disinegenuous desciptor, “moderate,” to describe politicians who mouth socially-liberal platititudes while pushing policies favorable to wealthy constituents and big business. Please, no backsliding! 😂
Omg, I just found myself rooting for two of these groups over the other two, yuck. But if we’re stuck with the choice between these billionaire-backed candidates, I hope the voters choose the “urbanist/yimby” candidates who at least feign concern for sustainability and public infrastructure over the “public safety” candidates who just stoke our fears without providing any data. But that’s probably wishful thinking in San Francisco.
I watched the You Tube video of the confab and was disappointed that the camera never scanned the graphic that was being shown to the audience at Manny’s! It took a great deal away from the presentation. Next Time show the graphic done by Will Jarrett tracing the $$$…And, did I understand that WJ is no longer with Mission Local and has transitioned to The Guardian? Keep up the good work. But to be clear I voted with ”The Money” this time except for in the judicial races. And, since I’m a registered Independent I did not vote for DCCC members. How many registered independents voted in the election?
I don’t know where you got Jarrett was hired by the Guardian, but could be – the Guardian is sitting on a mountain of cash.
Rosh et al. —
Will has not been hired by the Guardian — yet. Sadly, visas don’t last forever and he has returned to Britain. But perhaps this is in his future. He was an absolutely first-rate colleague, one of the best I’ve ever had, and we wish him well.
JE
Jarrett is recognized for his data compilations, but he’s a top-notch reporter as well. I’d point to his coverage of the parcel 36 morass, which I found to be exemplary objective journalism.