Prepare for a truly special election

SAN FRANCISCO — Those of you who read this page last week saw my article about ballot measures for the special election we have to look forward to in 2009. Well, like a chubby kid who runs like the wind when the ice cream truck bell rings, it’s amazing how fast government works when there is money at stake. On Tuesday, as a final gesture during his last meeting, Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin introduced a measure that would allow for a special election June 2.

Why June? I’m betting it’s because The City’s fiscal year runs from July 1 to June 30 and the anticipated revenue from any successful tax measure can be factored into the 2009-10 budget.

We should anticipate a ballot full of many new and inventive revenue increases. With a $560 million shortfall looming for next year, you can bet that local unions and other organizations will be pushing hard for new taxes to avoid the layoffs and service cuts that would otherwise be necessary.

Now, the City Charter and Elections Code contain all sorts of rules that require ballot measures to be made public anywhere from 90 to 105 days before an election. The exact number of days depends on the type of law and how it is put on the ballot. For example, charter amendments — which must always be passed by the Board of Supervisors — are supposed to be submitted 102 days in advance; ordinances backed by signatures have to be made public 105 days in advance.

If you do the math, following these requirements would mean submitting proposals around the end of February.

However, several of these timing rules can be waived by a majority vote of the Board of Supervisors and, once a special election is declared, some members will be wielding that power like a hatchet, trying to clear the overgrowth of voter education to make room for more time to negotiate and draft ballot measures before the election.

Welcome to 2009. The games have already begun.

Proposition 8 litigation creates a union

Look out Mistermayor, because fellow gubernatorial hopeful state Attorney General Jerry Brown could get a serious boost in popularity from City Attorney Dennis Herrera, the legal engine leading the fight against Proposition 8.

Right before Christmas, Brown filed a brief with the California Supreme Court arguing that Prop. 8, which would eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry, is unconstitutional. In doing so, he agreed with the position taken by Herrera in principle, but Brown set forth a whole new reason to strike down Prop. 8 — namely that it violates the right to liberty in the California Constitution.

In documents filed with the court June 5, Herrera expressly agreed with Brown’s new argument. This marks the first time that both men have been on the same side of the same-sex marriage issue (remember that Brown defended the state in the underlying case where same-sex marriage was first recognized — In re Marriage Cases) but now they are also essentially making the same argument.

While Mistermayor has been on the political forefront of same-sex marriage, the tangible victories for same-sex couples have come from Herrera’s office. Thus, if Brown and Herrera were to solidify their alignment on defending same-sex marriage with some sort of public alliance, Brown may be able to steal some of Mayor Gavin Newsom’s pro-gay-rights thunder. The accompanying publicity probably wouldn’t hurt Herrera’s impending run for mayor, either.

Familiar faces exit, stage left

No one will miss supervisors Jake McGoldrick and Aaron Peskin more than me. Tuesday was each man’s last Board of Supervisors meeting (Tom Ammiano and Gerardo Sandoval had already departed to new positions in the state Assembly and Superior Court, respectively). McGoldrick’s non sequitur monologues, peppered with Irish poetry, and Peskin’s droll commentary make watching board meetings bearable.

As is tradition with the board, at a supervisor’s final appearance (with the exception of Ed Jew) the other members stand up and say something nice — sometimes through clenched teeth, an experience to which any Southern woman can relate.

First up was the love-in for McGoldrick, where everyone basically agreed that he is at least well-intentioned, if exasperating.

McGoldrick also spoke, and, in a final demonstration that the only language he doesn’t know is brevity, addressed the board first in French, then Spanish and finally English.

When it was his turn, Peskin tried to get out of the send-off altogether by saying a bunch of speechifying would make him lose a side bet he made on what time the meeting would end (that’s our board president, y’all!). The supes went on anyway, and Chris Daly told a hilarious story about a raft race at Daly’s bachelor party during which Daly’s brother tried to jump onto Peskin’s raft but was immediately ejected. When finally fished out of the water, Daly’s brother exclaimed, “That little bastard bit me!” The moral of the story was supposed to be that Peskin is tenacious, but it ended up being: Think twice before you invite him to a party.

I was really looking forward to Michela Alioto-Pier’s comments to Peskin, seeing as how he publicly called her a “whiny brat” after she accused him of an ethical violation.

When the big moment came, she was altogether civil, as was he. Like the time my friend told me he owns a yellow Porsche, I was both impressed and disappointed.

At the end of the goodbyes there wasn’t a wet eye in the house, but the standing ovation lasted so long that I’m sure Peskin lost his bet.