Which Two 'Progressive'
SF Supes Attended Junket in DC?
The president of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, David Chiu, is no progressive, not when he frequently votes with the conservative faction of the board as he did on Tuesday to ban nudity.
Chiu's swing vote in favor of Scott Wiener's latest failure to hash out a neighborhood compromise to a social controversy, and to seek a second legislative nudity solution, illustrates Chiu's lack of progressive bona fides.
Imagine my surprise reading Chiu's gifts of travel disclosure posted on Tuesday at the Ethics Commission web site. He was in Washington, DC, from November 16 thru the 18th. The purpose of attending a junket in the capitol? Chiu claims he was:
Representing San Francisco at Founding Meeting of the National Progressive Municipal Network.
If Chiu's a progressive, then I'm Greta Garbo. His pro-Wiener, anti-nudity vote lays to rest any question that he's a genuine San Francisco progressive.
Amount listed for cost of attending the junket? Not much, just $707.
Section 4 of Chiu's disclosure requests the name of any other city employee required to file a statement of economic interests and Supervisor John Avalos' name is listed. Avalos is certifiably and genuinely progressive, but either he hasn't file a gifts of travel disclosure form for the trip or he has and the Ethics Commission has not posted it.
But Avalos' progressive reputation is sullied by the written promise he made in September 2011 during his mayoral campaign, that he would address the rainbow flag control issues at Harvey Milk Plaza. After his loss, he abandoned that promise.
There's also the matter of Avalos demanding more robust, direct and regular question time with Mayor Ed Lee, and not holding his own forums where question time directed at him is on the agenda.
Avalos could show the mayor how easy it is to engage with taxpayers via question time events, and put on his own. That is, if he's not too busy spending time on a junket in DC.