$20,000 Nets Clear Channel Outdoor Inc. a SWEETHEART Multi-Million Dollar San Francisco City Contract!

President of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors Aaron Peskin Trades Fundraising for Contracts!


San Francisco Board Supervisor Jake McGoldrick questioned under SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES back in August of this year...

$20,000 Nets Clear Channel Outdoor Inc. a SWEETHEART Multi-Million Dollar San Francisco City Contract!
Comment by Marc Chamot

San Francisco BAD HABITS in fundraising and CRONY Politics NEVER DIE, Progressive supervisors Aaron Peskin and Jake McGoldrick are taking a beating over these questionable unethical lucrative trade off in campaign moneys for their perspective propositions, one to save his recall efforts against him and the other to finance a campaign for their dysfunctional mass transit system.

What brought about the rise of these San Francisco progressives were the corrupt years of former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown. Willie Brown was the master in concocting these kind of shameful deals… These two supervisors have promised seven years ago to clean up these types of pervasive anti-tax friendly, cozy sweetheart deals that has perverted San Francisco for years…

In Jake McGoldricks case he was under a recall movement and he needed funds to quickly finance his anti-recall foes and makes a CONDO deal through a well-connected city hall group called the Barbary Coast Consultants. (Story Below) Not long after they allied with him on the McGoldrick anti recall team he votes in a major lucrative real estate deal for Barbary Coast’s client.

Not to be outdone San Francisco Board President Aaron Peskin quickly works his deal with Clear Channel Outdoor Inc. to find money for his MUNI, San Francisco’s failed bus systems a proposition being placed in front of the voters in an attempt to fix the system, and in turn rewards Clear Channel Outdoor Inc. with a million dollar contract!

No folks, this is just another reason as to why most of the nation finds that city so dysfunctional and this is the typical aloof and brazen way of doing business in that city… Forget MUNI, I just wonder when their corrupt political structure of hypocrisy is going to be fixed? Former Mayor Willie Brown must be laughing hysterically over these bumbling lack lards that call themselves San Francisco government officials..

Ad firm gives to Muni measure, gets S.F. contract
Robert Selna, Chronicle Staff Writer

Wednesday, October 31, 2007

A committee controlled by Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin and set up to promote a Muni overhaul measure on the November ballot received a $20,000 campaign contribution from Clear Channel Outdoor Inc. just two days before Peskin and other supervisors voted to award the company a Muni advertising contract worth hundreds of millions of dollars over the next 20 years.

The contribution from Clear Channel to the San Franciscans for Clean Air & Better MUNI committee on Oct. 15 - two days before the supervisors' 9-1 initial approval of the advertising deal between the company and the city Metropolitan Transportation Agency - appears to violate a city law meant to stamp out influence-buying by contractors seeking business deals with San Francisco government.

The law prohibits businesses negotiating or bidding on city contracts from making political donations to officials who will decide the contracts - or to committees controlled by those officials - and was enacted to ensure that business deals are awarded on their merits.

"Two days before the vote, it certainly appears that (Clear Channel) was trying to get Peskin's attention," said Bob Stern, a campaign finance expert who heads the nonpartisan Center for Governmental Studies in Los Angeles. "People give money for rational purposes, and the rational purpose here is that a vote on their contract was coming up."

Peskin, who acknowledged that he controls the Muni campaign committee, said he had no knowledge of Clear Channel's contribution to the Muni reform measure, Proposition A, campaign when he voted on the contract.

"Look, if any contribution violated any law, we will refund the money," Peskin said. "But a contribution to Yes on A would not influence a piece of legislation voted on by the entire board ... nothing could be further from the truth."

Representatives for Clear Channel did not return calls for comment.

Donors who violate the contribution law can be fined up to three times the amount of the illegal contribution, according to John St. Croix, the city Ethics Commission executive director.

Campaign disclosure reports show Clear Channel's donation was the third largest and by no means the only one flowing into the Prop. A campaign from businesses and developers with an interest in securing approvals from the Board of Supervisors in the future.

Moreover, committees set up to pass or fight other ballot measures, such as the No on E campaign opposing a City Charter amendment that would require the mayor to make monthly appearances before the Board of Supervisors, have garnered contributions from firms interested in influencing City Hall.

But the Clear Channel contribution to Prop. A appears to be the one most directly addressed by the anti-influence buying law.

"No person who contracts with the city ... whenever such transaction would require approval of a city elective officer, or the board on which that city elective officer serves, shall make any contribution to such an officer, or candidate for such an office, or committee controlled by such officer or candidate at any time from the commencement of negotiations for such contract until (1) termination of negotiations for such contract; or (2) three months have elapsed from the date the contract is approved by the city elective officer," the law states.

The Board of Supervisors gave its second and final approval to the city's contract with Phoenix-based Clear Channel on a 7-2 vote on Oct. 23. Peskin voted in favor on both occasions. Voting against were Supervisors Ross Mirkarimi and Chris Daly.

Under the ad deal, the company has the sole advertising rights at transit shelters and freestanding sidewalk kiosks in exchange for at least $306 million over 20 years.

The company and city officials have refused to say how much Clear Channel stands to earn from the deal, saying the information is confidential because the company considers it proprietary.

Clear Channel was one of three bidders for the deal. It becomes responsible for replacing all 1,110 transit shelters around the city and could receive approval to install 400 more.

The company also is required to replace 39 advertising kiosks and could get permission to add 111. The company must maintain the shelters and streetcar boarding platforms.

Under the agreement, Muni would get $5 million up front and would be guaranteed minimum payments of almost $7 million in the first year and more than $35 million in each of the following years.

The existing shelter advertising contract, held by CBS Outdoor, expires in December. Under the current agreement, Muni receives about $300,000 a year from the contractor. Clear Channel beat out CBS Outdoor and another company, Cemusa, in the competition to negotiate the new transit shelter deal.

Mirkarimi, one of two supervisors to vote against the contract, said he was troubled by the timing of Clear Channel's donation but did not believe it influenced Peskin's vote or that of any of board members.

St. Croix, the Ethics Commission director, said city codes restricting contributions to political committees by companies contracting with the city are imprecise.

He said it is unclear whether the rules bar contributions only to committees intended to raise money to elect a particular official or whether they also cover ballot measure committees controlled by an official.

However, Stern, the campaign finance and ethics expert, said that although no court has ruled on that question, he believes the law applies in a case like the Clear Channel contribution.

Either way, St. Croix said, it is the responsibility of the donor to follow the rules, not the elected official.

In addition to Clear Channel, the Prop. A campaign received financial support from development and real estate companies such as Seven Hills Properties, Emerald Fund, Inc. and Trinity Management.

Developers and their lawyers have encountered difficulty in getting some projects approved by Peskin and his fellow progressives on the Board of Supervisors. The board's authority over private development projects has grown in recent years. It is now frequently the last stop on zoning and other development permit matters and appoints three members of the seven-member city Planning Commission.

In August, Supervisor Jake McGoldrick raised eyebrows when he broke with his progressive colleagues and provided the swing vote for a controversial condominium project in the Mission District.

The night before the vote, McGoldrick attended a fundraiser sponsored by the lobbying firm that Seven Hills had hired to push the project through the Board of Supervisors.

Peskin said he worked to persuade developers to support Prop. A, arguing that it is in their best interests because new downtown development will require a strengthened public transportation system.

Peskin also noted that Clear Channel is part of the Committee on Jobs, a politically influential, pro-business group that donated $25,000 to No on E. Proposition E is strongly opposed by Mayor Gavin Newsom, and the campaign to defeat it is a high priority for Newsom's backers in the business community.

Unlike Peskin's relationship to the Prop. A campaign, Newsom doesn't control the committee set up to defeat Prop. E.

Stern said it's clear that companies try to curry favor with elected officials by donating to ballot measures that the officials support.

"They only reason (the companies) do it is because the politician controls something they're interested in," he said. "If you give money to something the official supports, you're really giving money to them."

E-mail Robert Selna at rselna@sfchronicle.com.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/10/31/MN5RT3DPD.DTL&tsp=1

McGoldrick's link to Mission condo developer
Robert Selna, Chronicle Staff Writer
Thursday, August 2, 2007


The night before San Francisco Supervisor Jake McGoldrick broke with his progressive colleagues and provided the swing vote for a controversial condominium project in the Mission District, he attended a fundraiser sponsored by the lobbying firm the developer had hired to push the project through the Board of Supervisors, The Chronicle has learned.

McGoldrick's decision to attend the event on Monday at Barbary Coast Consulting - to raise funds to combat a recall effort against him - just before the vote by the Board of Supervisors brought withering criticism from affordable-housing advocates who have considered McGoldrick an ally.

"It's shocking that this fundraiser was held for him by the PR firm that was representing the project," said Nick Pagoulatos, a coordinator for the Mission Anti-Displacement Coalition, adding that his attendance leaves the impression the supervisor's vote was for sale. "The timing is frankly stupid."

McGoldrick called it character assassination to suggest that his decision was influenced by the fundraising help he received from the developer's lobbyist.

"It should be pretty obvious by this point that I vote with my conscience and that my vote can't be bought," said McGoldrick in an interview at his City Hall office on Wednesday.

Barbary Coast Consulting, formed by former City Hall legislative aide Alex Clemens, is among the top-earning lobbying and political consulting firms hired by developers and businesses trying to influence decision-makers at San Francisco City Hall.

Clemens said the fundraiser had nothing to do with the vote on the project proposed by his client, developer Seven Hills Properties, and that his firm makes a regular practice of raising money for elective office holders and candidates.

"We didn't put the two things together, and we don't put the two things together," Clemens said. "Jake McGoldrick is a tough, independent guy on the board ... . We are involved in the body politic and sometimes raise money for politicians and issues we care about."

The recall campaign targeting McGoldrick is being led by Richmond District residents and merchants who object to positions he has taken that they consider detrimental to small businesses - among them his backing of closing roads in Golden Gate Park to motor traffic on Saturdays.

At issue before the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday was an appeal of the city Planning Commission's approval of Seven Hills Properties' plan to transform a closed Kelly-Moore paint store at 3400 Cesar Chavez St. into a four-story building with a Walgreens drug store below 60 condominiums.

The residences are expected to be priced between $500,000 and $700,000, and nine of the units are to be sold at below-market rates to comply with a city law meant to encourage construction of affordable housing.

The Mission Anti-Displacement Coalition and other groups pushing for more lower-income rental housing in the city wanted the supervisors to place the project in limbo while studies of development trends in the area can be completed and to give City Hall time to establish new land-use rules to protect moderate- and lower-income residents.

But the appeal was rejected by the supervisors 6-5. McGoldrick joined Supervisors Michela Alioto-Pier, Bevan Dufty, Sean Elsbernd, Ed Jew and Gerardo Sandoval in the vote that let the project go forward.

Last year, McGoldrick was on the side of affordable-housing advocates when a residential development at 2660 Harrison Street was challenged on similar grounds. Supervisors blocked it pending the development-trend studies under way in the city's eastern neighborhoods south of Market Street.

The fundraiser Monday wasn't the first time interest groups connected to the Cesar Chavez project have contributed money to fight the McGoldrick recall, which backers first hoped to put before voters in November but now are aiming for the February ballot.

Seven Hills Properties and the firm's lawyer, Steven Vettel, contributed $2,000 of the $19,985 that a pro-McGoldrick campaign committee had netted as of July 11, according to the most recent campaign finance statements on file at the city's Ethics Commission.

Fundraising for McGoldrick after July 11 - including contributions made at the event Monday at Barbary Coast Consulting - doesn't have to be disclosed until Sept. 27.

Clemens said he believes the Barbary Coast fundraiser took in about $8,000 for McGoldrick.

Pagoulatos said that McGoldrick, a former San Francisco public school teacher, has long been perceived as an advocate for families and working class San Franciscans and has stood out as a fighter for affordable housing.

For example, he introduced legislation to limit Ellis Act evictions, under which landlords rid their rent-controlled apartments of tenants by committing to get out of the rental business altogether.

In 2002 and 2006, he helped lead a successful drive on the board to increase the number of below-market-rate units private developers are required to sell as part of their new housing projects.

Pagoulatos speculated that the supervisor might be feeling pressured to soften his positions in the face of a recall drive by business interests in his district.

But McGoldrick denied it, saying his accusers are "dwelling in the gutter."

He said he would have voted in favor of the Cesar Chavez project even if his own mother had told him to reject it.

In defending the vote, he noted it had the endorsement of city planners and the Planning Commission in part because it included the nine affordable housing units.

"The Planning Department made it clear how this project was consistent with the city's policies on affordable housing," McGoldrick said. "I look at these things case by case."

Other supervisors came to McGoldrick's defense on Wednesday.

"Jake McGoldrick is a profoundly moral individual and has consistently cast his votes from a principled position and not been influenced in any way by the politics of money," Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin said, adding he himself has received fundraising help from the same lobbyists yet voted against the project.

E-mail Robert Selna at rselna@sfchronicle.com.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/08/02/MNTQRBGEK2.DTL&hw=mcgoldrick+barbary+coast&sn=001&sc=1000