Paul Kozakiewicz:District elections are a failure

When district elections were sold to the electorate about a decade ago, many of us were willing to give them a try, despite the fact that an earlier experiment with the voting system brought us Supervisor Dan White and other candidates from the lunatic fringe. The promises, if realized, would improve local representation and diminish the influence of Big Business.

But now, the promises are hollow and the results disastrous. Only the far left wing Democrats, so-called progressives, have emerged winners, at the expense of all other hardworking people, including minorities.

Like snake oil salesmen, they sold us a bad system, with promises that could not be kept. A companion change in our electoral system, ranked choice voting, discards the right of many San Franciscans to vote for a candidate of their choice.

Here are the three biggest myths surrounding our current system of district elections.

Myth #1: Quality candidates emerge from every neighborhood to lead

In many instances, district elections have produced inferior, unqualified candidates to serve on the board of supervisors. For example, there was Ed Jew, who was elected in District 4 and then convicted of taking large sums of cash for his help securing a permit for a small business owner in the Sunset;

Jake McGoldrick, who ignored his constituents and pushed to close JFK Drive in Golden Gate Park on Saturdays, despite the fact that Richmond District voters, and voters citywide, overwhelmingly voted twice to not close the road on Saturdays. He faced a grass-roots recall campaign for his actions;

Supervisor Chris Daly, who bought two homes in Fairfield and has already moved his family there, has done untold amounts of damage to the City by driving up the price of housing and every other basic commodity in the City. His uncivil demeanor on the board is divisive and has helped push the public's opinion of the city's political leadership to all-time lows.

There are many other examples of how the small-minded, and inexperienced, politicians are ruining the City for those who live and work here.

When I had the opportunity to moderate a forum of candidates from District 7 for the SF League of Women Voters several years ago, I was awestruck by the number of talented and well-informed candidates there were. Unfortunately, only one could take a seat on the board in that district, depriving the City of the talents and expertise of numerous candidates who would have made great supervisors.

District elections not only produce inferior candidates in some instances, but they shut out many good, qualified candidates.

Myth #2: Power of Big Business negated

When McGoldrick was running for re-election, major downtown groups, like the Golden Gate Restaurant Association, spent upwards of $200,000 to knock him off. If that money was applied citywide to all 11 districts, it would have represented a whopping $2.2 million.

Candidates running for district election seats still raise and spend more than $100,000 for the privilege to serve. That money comes from the same sources as citywide candidates, big business, labor unions and San Francisco residents. It may cost a little less than a citywide campaign, but it is still a large sum of money that has to be raised; often more than a sincere, but largely unknown candidate can raise. Many good candidates are still shut out of district elections because of financial concerns and those who do run are still beholden to their benefactors.

Myth #3: District elections lead to greater diversity

District elections eviscerated the political power of the Chinese community by "Balkanizing" Chinese voters, who are disbursed throughout the City. Because Chinese voters tend to be homeowners, entrepreneurs and family folk, they tend to vote on the more moderate side on various issues.

While comprising about 30 percent of the population of San Francisco, only one Chinese supervisor, out of 11, was initially elected to serve. That was Ed Jew, who barely won in District 4, which is the only district in the City with a majority of Chinese residents.

If Ron Dudum had won that election, there would have been no Chinese members on the Board.

We went from three Asians on the board to one, and if Mayor Gavin Newsom's choice to replace Jew with Carmen Chu wasn't done, there would have been none. Board member David Chiu was recently elected in the Chinatown District, but even now there are only two Chinese members of the board.

Ranked Choice Voting is Un-American

Combine district elections with ranked choice voting, a most un-American twist in electoral politics because everyone's vote does not count, and you see how the progressive wing of the Democratic Party has gamed the system to its advantage. Rather than sharpening the focus on two top candidates in a runoff, ranked choice voting discards the votes of thousands of San Franciscans who did not vote for the top vote getter. Rather than giving these San Franciscans an opportunity to vote for their favorite candidate in a focused runoff, they are forced into silence with the bizarre form of voting; all in the name of saving a few bucks.

Currently, former District 4 candidate Ron Dudum and several other former candidates are suing the City over ranked choice voting.

I hope the plaintiffs win the lawsuit, because every person's vote should count in America. Where are we, in some Third World Country?

I understand the reluctance of some San Franciscans to jettison district elections as they are now, but it must be done for the greater good of the City and democracy at large.

A hybrid system seems to be the best way to solve the problem. Have six supervisors elected by district and five elected citywide. That way, the power of the Chinese and other minority communities to elect qualified candidates is re-established and those who need to communicate neighborhood concerns will have someone in their district to talk to. That is, unless the supervisor shuts them out, as has happened so many times in the past. The cost for running for a seat in a designated area would still be lower and more affordable than running for a citywide seat and the negative influences of Big Business and labor unions would be minimized.

As well, we would once again open up the talent pool of available candidates so we get the best people possible to serve our city's diverse interests.

I hope someone starts a petition drive soon to put a hybrid district election system on the ballot. I will walk precincts, contribute money and do anything in my power to make sure it passes. I think other like-minded San Franciscans, who love our City, would do the same.

Paul Kozakiewicz is the editor of the Richmond Review and Sunset Beacon newspapers.