Add a Comment
More In the Newsroom
The Battle to Preserve Old Buildings: Is Some History Best Forgotten?
Want to Get People Talking? Write about Rent Control in SF
Why Your Newsletter Went Missing
A Note to Our Readers
Trust and Politics: The Case of Mayor Ed Lee
Mayor Ed Lee at The Bay Citizen Feb. 15, 2011
Judging by the very unscientific survey of San Francisco voters that we conducted last week, most people are not offended by interim Mayor Ed Lee’s decision to run for a full term after promising he would not. Lee’s political opponents are trying to make hay with the issue, but the general sentiment seems to be that a) people are entitled to change their minds and b) politicians are slippery as a rule, so Lee’s actions are nothing out of the ordinary.
But based on the things that Lee said here in our newsroom shortly after he was appointed mayor, I don’t think the issue is so easily dismissed.
We had invited the mayor over to meet with the editorial staff and answer questions on a wide range of topics. At one point, my colleague Steve Fainaru asked him whether there was any scenario in which he would run for a full term in the fall.
After joking around a bit, he gave a very long and rambling answer, but the thrust of it was this: the problem with politics and government is a lack of trust. Politicians don’t trust each other, and voters don’t trust politicians. Running for a full term after promising he would not would contribute to this lack of trust, and therefore he wouldn’t do it.
You can watch the video here, and I’ve pulled out a few key quotes below:
Lee: “I indicated at the outset to the Board of Supervisors that had that historic vote that I was not going to be a candidate for mayor.
“Part of my goal is to restore the trust that used to occur … the divisions within the city make the city unworkable, and if there was anything that I represented in my term as city administrator, as the director of public works … anything I said I would do, I would make sure I got it done. And that, to me, that is the foundation of trust-building with the public. … The way I look at running an office like this, I just want to make sure all the supervisors know they can work with the mayor. I can make assurances on a one-on-one basis, or on a group basis. I'll deliver on something. … I've spoken to so many groups … and they all remind me of promises that were made to them that never were fulfilled.”
Me: “If understood that right, trust is more important, the most important thing, you said you weren’t going to run for mayor, so you’re definitely not running for mayor, is that what I heard?”
Lee: “That’s true, yes.”
Fainaru: “So that’s unequivocal, you’re not going to be running for mayor in the fall?”
Lee: “That’s right.”
Lee now says that he has simply changed his mind since that exchange took place. But if you parse his statement, that can only mean he has changed his mind about trust being the most important thing in government. What he is effectively saying now is, “Trust is the most important thing, but only until it interferes with political ambition.”
Lee also says that he was motivated to run by the fine job he’s been doing, and specifically his success in bringing people together at City Hall and getting things done. But his achievements in that regard appear to be mainly a function of his having promised not to run. As he says above, if the supervisors trust you and don’t regard you as a political opponent, they’ll work with you. But once you betray that trust, you’re just another politician, and many other politicians will then revert to noncooperation.
Lee’s reversal is often referred to as a “flip-flop,” but that isn't quite right. A flip-flop is when a politician changes his stance on a policy issue. Lee’s actions, rather, are about his failure to uphold his end of a deal. I wasn’t there for the conversations with the supervisors who elected him, but Lee clearly promised that he wouldn’t run in the fall, and in exchange, several supervisors, notably board President David Chiu, agreed to support him. Lee, in this case, was not a man of his word.
Everyone has their own criteria as to what’s important in an elected official. But perhaps the mayor needs to find some new talking points; citing the "new tone" of cooperation and trust he has engendered at City Hall rings a little hollow now.
I'm the West Coast Bureau Chief for Reuters News. My past gigs include editor in chief of The Bay Citizen, founder and CEO of New West Publishing, co-founder and editor in chief of the Industry ...
View Profile
About Us
Reporting Staff
Stay In Touch
- About Us
- Events
- Support Us
- Careers
- Corrections
- Letters to the Editor
- Privacy Policy By accessing this site, you accept our Terms of Use. Please read them.
© The Bay Citizen, 2012
- Katharine MieszkowskiEnvironment and Health
- Reyhan HarmanciArts, culture, nonprofits
- Zusha ElinsonTransportation
- Shoshana WalterCrime and punishment
- Jennifer GollanRegional government
- Aaron GlantzHousing, real estate, development
- Trey BundyEducation
- Matt SmithSF politics and government
- Andy WrightNews and engagement specialist
- Marie McIntoshPublic engagement manager
- Adithya SambamurthyVideo and Photography
Seej Cane
Thank you for stating what seems to be lost amongst all the theatre:
Lee's runnning on "civility" and "getting things done" is a farce given he enjoyed such civility under the guise that he was not running. He would find no such civility having to work as an elected Mayor with those he blatantly double-crossed.
You omitted to mention that Lee told the BC in the same interview the City was on a trajectory to "bankruptcy in 5 to 10 years" and that $300 million in annual savings was necessary from his pension reform efforts. Well know we know the Controller scored his "City Family" pension reform plan at $40 million in general fund savigns or close to 10% of what he stated was necessary -- and we have to hear Lee drone on about his wonderful consensus plan. And people wonder why this City is a mess...
MWSSP
I'm less worried about Ed Lee changing his mind. Others relied on him, and thats an issue that he will have to deal with when he looks himself in the mirror. But for us, the residents of this City, the most important question is whether Ed lee will make a good mayor for San Francisco over the long run. I agree that changing his mind changes the definition of trust, and as the article points out makes him a politician instead of a caretaker mayor. And thats the point that counts. Ed Lee is a great caretaker mayor. He takes care of business. If you want someone to mind the store, keep the lights on, keep business going and cooperative then Ed Lee should be our Mayor.
But this is San Francisco. We are, or we want to be considered, a World Class City. To compete in this 21st Century, we need a mayor with a vision for San Francisco and not just somone who does a good job keeping the lights on at the Store. I know who I am voting for at this point and I strongly suggest San Franciscans think about which candidate brings a vision for San Francisco that make our City a better place to live. I don't think we need a good caretaker. Rather we need a leader who can execute on a vision for San Francisco.
Andrew Ferguson
MWSSP - Not sure if you are aware of this, but the term "world-class city" is a code word for developer-friendly construction:
taller, bulkier, less off-street parking, density bonuses, etc.
h. brown
Jon,
We need a mayor who is independent, intelligent and has integrity. We haven't had that since Agnos. Lee's anything but independent if you listened to what he told David Chiu (http://www.fogcityjournal.com/wordpress/3010/civility-lee-turns-uncivil-during-mayoral-debate/) ... Willie Brown was literally standing behind a curtain next to the stage with a few others when this went down and had the sense to turn and leave as as Chiu was explaining how he was unable to refuse to do the bidding of Willie and Pak. I know because I was there and heard it and watched it.
This so upset Willie that he didn't allow Ed to even show up at the next debate before the black groups in the Fillmore. He called the 200-300 black people in the audience, "insiders" in a tweet from a bar in the Haight where he was tossing em down with my buddy C.W. Nevius.
I'll admit it, I'm baffled and I had always thought myself to be essentially unbafflable. What was the message Lee and Willie and Nevius were trying to send? Maybe, "When things get tough I head for the nearest bar."?
Hmmmm, I kinda like that.
Naw, gimme Adachi with his no nonsense nose to the grindstone and making tough decisions on tens of thousands of cases, not just a compliant bureaucrat rubber-stamping crooked contracts while the FBI watches over his shoulder.
Go Giants!
h.
h. brown
Then again,
Willie was fun to cover. I kinda doubt that Ed or anyone else can match him. Within one year Willie fathered a child out of wedlock, kept a mistress in Admiral Nimitz's house on Yerba Buena Island and had a lingerie model for an appointments secretary. And? No one batted an eye.
Have we no shame?
Don't answer that.
h.
The Commish
This article hits the nail on the head. Lee's platform that he brought "civility and cooperation to City Hall" makes no sense. The only reason he did that was because no one was threatened by him and he was a caretaker. Since he's announced, he's getting jabs thrown at him by Herrera, Chiu, even Alioto-Pier.
Lee's own actions belie and undercut his platform.
eight arms
I kind of agree with the rest of the city that it doesn't matter that much, mainly because they are all a pack of liars to begin with. My cat lies better than Ed Lee.
What certainly concerns voters more is the legislative incompetence and naivety of basing a crucial appointment to the mayors office on a verbal promise instead of getting it in writing and making it legally enforceable. Is this a big clue to how they conduct the rest of the city's business? Judging from the Twitter fiasco I'd say yes.
eight arms
People knew from day one that Ed Lee was scheming to leverage his incumbency and the idea that that simpleton is engineering all this himself has most of us laughing out of our chairs.
eight arms
Anyone who thought Newsom was a maybe 'lil dumb probably can't believe their eyes right now. Where does Willie Brown find these people?????
h. brown
eight arms,
You can buy them at Office Depot in the Robot Lackey aisle.
Can you believe the Giants are only 1 1/2 games out?
And, rain in San Francisco in August!?!
h.
GalPal
Ed Lee: Lying to the people before he's even elected to the job.