more very soon.

if he wins…we’ll see who’s correct in time.

history tells us it will be me.

if it’s you, everyone will be happy (and some of us will be surprised).

I appreciate your comments but you have categorically failed to offer a substantive basis for your assertions that he will do nothing about crime (David Campos is largely responsible for the increased foot patrols in the Mission in response to the recent crime wave) when he has the best understanding of the SF police department’s operations and of issues surrounding crime as a Police Commissioner. Most of your allegations are based on your “understanding…from political insiders that know him.” Who are these unnamed political insiders? I’m sorry, but that sounds very suspicious — not mention unfounded. If you had an actual conversation with the guy, you’d see that David Campos is one of the most down-to-earth, caring, and atypical candidates for this office you could find. Also, it seems immaterial to me that he hired a consultant to help with his campaign. That does not take away any legitimacy from his candidacy in my view. Moreover, the consultant is not t “running” his campaign, as you’ve alleged — his campaign manager’s name is Linette and her employer, before she took a leave to become his campaign manager, was the SF Public Defender’s office.

i personally think it’s a good thing, but it’s not a qualification in any way.

honestly, everything you’ve cited cements my view that Campos espouses pretty much the same empty “progressive” agenda as the other guys, and the current BoS.

he’s the MOST insider candidate in that machine, and there’s no question he’ll toe the party line. (As will Sanchez, btw….perhaps in a more aggressive political manner).

also, while i’m not denying he’s had some accomplishments, all those claims are blown way out of proportion vis a vis actual results in my understanding. it’s also my understanding (from city insiders that know him) that he’s caught quite the political bug…and isn’t the same guy he was when he was doing all that stuff in the past. much more…well…political. “we don’t know the guy anymore” was the direct quote.

no big surprise. typical political campaign stuff. (Campos hired a political consultant to run his campaign, btw).

most importantly, in my view, Campos – and any of the “progressive” candidates – WILL NOT REPRESENT THE WHOLE DISTRICT. he’ll represent one group of folks (who admittedly need the most help), leaving most of the D9 community in the cold, with no voice at all.

he’ll espouse a rhetorical “progressive” platform and do nothing about safety, do nothing to support the middle class, do nothing about “quality of life” issues….all under the guise of fighting for “the cause”.

meanwhile, crime will continue to mount, his “people” will continue to be displaced, he’ll alienate the cops, guys will continue to crap in my driveway, and THE GENTRIFIERS WILL CONTINUE TO WIN…but he’ll be keepin it real, and he’ll be down with “the cause”.

the reason he will do this, my view, is because this will give him the most “cred” in the “progressive” political arena, and best set him up FOR HIS NEXT POLITICAL POST.

to me, that makes him a big fat liar.

why can’t we see the difference between a deranged sidewalk crapper and a “poor person”?

why can’t we see the difference between an “imperialistic developer driven displacement of working families via upmarket condos” and a middle class family that wants to buy a TIC?

why can’t we agree that much of what goes on at 16th & Mission is unacceptable to everyone?

because of dogma.

and in my experience, so many “progressives” – particularly in SF government – are more concerned with dogma and “making an example” than they are with finding real, actionable solutions for anything.

my view, it’s the root of many problems we have in the city. historically, it’s the root of many positives. but when it becomes a political machine, it’s just fucking politics, and it has nothing to do with you & me, or anyone else for that matter. it’s about self-interest on the part of politicos.

that said, your ideas are good ones, and i would love some…uh…comrades to help me fight the fight in whatever way makes the most sense for the most people. because with these issues…i think we can all get PAST dogma, and agree on most things..

in November i am having the first publicized meeting of Capp Street Association.

i hope you’ll come, as this exact topic – not to mention the discourse – it the goal.

Moreover, I know him personally and he is the least power hungry candidate you could ever meet. Instead, he’s forthright, compassionate, and genuinely committed to social justice and to this City.

You asked how Campos is not “just a self-interested politico?” He’s spent his life in public service. Believe me, a graduate of Harvard Law School could be making millions a year by now. Instead, he’s devoted his career to the practice of public law. Examples of how he has fought for the cause? Just to name a few:

* As General Counsel to the School District: He worked to desegregate San Francisco schools, successfully investigate corruption, and bring open government to the School District.

* Newsflash: THE SFPOA does not always endorse police commissioners are tough and push for tougher disciplinary measures for police misconduct. As a progressive Police Commissioner, David fought for public disciplinary hearings for police officers, more foot patrols, and protection for medical marijuana and immigrant rights.

*As an attorney in the SF City Attorney’s office, he worked on landmark litigation against the gun industry as well as a big lawsuit against PG&E for the city’s right to public power,

So how do we get 16th and Mission cleaned up? Go to Chris Daly and demand answers? Protest? What can we do to make it happen since the powers that be aren’t fixing things?

so Campos has “a history of fighting for the cause”….fighting for what “cause”? is it one everyone in D9 can get behind?

if he “spent YEARS advising the board of supervisors re: government ethics and public policy”…why is the BoS still an inept crowd of infighting knuckleheads that can’t get anything done, and have turned SF into a failed “progressive” experiment?

and why is David Campos – taking credit for being a Police Commish – not being endorsed by the POA? How’s he going to work with the cops when they hate his guts?

i would LOVE to be educated on how Campos is anything other than a swindling self-interested politico who built his career delivering empty promises to the people who need him most, who will do nothing more than make our city a stage for “progressive” grand-standing as he cruises into whatever next office he can attain…

i mean, it was good enough for his mentor & endorser, Tom “the comedian” Ammiano, right?

that said, you might be right cyn…Campos might be the most “effective progressive candidate”.

my view, that ain’t saying much.

For instance — all the candidates want more foot controls and want police reform. Who actually knows how the police department works inside and out and how to best effect change from a structural and systematic perspective? DAVID CAMPOS. He knows that police practices are directed by General Orders. He knows how the City operates and knows how to write laws to improve it.

His life story is the epitome of the American dream. He came across the border as an illegal immigrant and grew up in South Central LA. David Campos then made his way through Stanford and Harvard Law School (does that mean he’s elitist?? noo– to me, it means he’s very smart and very capable) and has dedicated his life to public interest law. VOTE DAVID CAMPOS!

my view there’s 3 things that will really solve problems:

1. proper, effective services for severely mentally ill and addicted people….i’m talking about folks who are obviously unable to take care of themselves. these don’t exist in SF. my view, entrance into such non-existent services should be mandatory, not optional. further my view, if someone enters into a mandatory program, and doesn’t finish, there should be consequences. i am no legislator, so i don’t know what’s appropriate, but there should be some real system for getting help, and taking responsibility once you become a danger to yourself and the community.

2. a realistic look at what’s going on in the SRO’s on that block. these are not “hotels”. they’re holding stations for drug & prostitution businesses. there’s no reason we have to tolerate that. now, i’m saying “realistic”. i’m not saying “turn it into a prison” or “disregard that many of the folks that stay at an SRO might pop a vein or turn a trick” or “impinge on people’s civil rights”.

these particular SROs are a blight, and ground-zero for issues on that corner….mis-managed and unsafe by any standard. there’s plenty of others in the hood that aren’t (there’s 2 directly on my block, the one over Bruno’s and the one at 20th & San Carlos…not a peep out of them, no sidewalk sales, no hookers calling out from doorways), so we don’t need to believe that status quo is all we can do for those properties.

3. full time 24/7 police presence on that block, with a goal of eliminating street deals and prostitution. very simple. no street deals of any kind tolerated in that corridor for a year. currently, the cops do what they can, given the environment (i mean political environment) they’re in. which is more or less nothing. they arrest sometimes, but there’s no intent on the part of the city to indict, so it’s a loser deal for them to step into too many potentially dangerous “quality of life” issues like prostitution, low level dealing, public drink, etc.

my bet is if we do any 2 of the above, the corner gets less rough.

other thing, i am NOT talking about “telling people they can’t sit on public benches because of how they look”. I’ve never said anything like that. a guy crapping in the middle of the sidewalk and smoking crack, or a guy passed out with a needle still in his vein right inside a kid’s playground, or an army of crack dealers & hos out on the street at 9am right in front of a BART station IS NOT THE SAME AS A GUY SITTING ON A BENCH.

i have no idea why “progressives” can’t look realistically at the world. everything is dogma. i just don’t understand it.

Your rant really didn’t explain what you want to do to ‘clean up’ the 16th St. BART. Drug user or not, they have just as much right to be in the public space as you.

The cops could (and do) enforce the law around public drug use, public intoxication, and public defecation– I’ve seen it. I agree it’s a rough corner, too. Could the cops be more vigilant and have more of a visual presence? Maybe. I’ve seen the corner thin out whenever a cop walks by, for sure.

But a city that tells people they can’t sit on public benches because of how they look is not a place any of us would want to live. We already see the strong double-standards of public drinking/intoxication at work in the Mission– white in Dolores? OK. Black or brown outside your SRO? Not OK. White, hailing a cab in the middle of the street at 2 AM? Fine by me. Sitting on a public bench at 16th St. & Mission- under arrest. Is that really what you want?