Julian Davis announces for supervisor in the key battleground district for progressives (5)

05.22.12 - 4:46 pm |

(29)

Julian Davis and his mother Margo Davis and his stepfather on City Hall steps before declaring for supervisor.

PHOTO BY JEAN DIBBLE

Julian Davis, a widely known progressive activist and organizer in San Francisco since 2002, declared Tuesday his intention to run for supervisor in District 5, the city's most liberal district and a battleground district for progressives seeking to regain control of the Board of Supervisors.

He joins eight other challengers to Sup. Christina Olague, appointed by Mayor Ed Lee to replace former Sup. Ross Mirkarimi. He was considered by many to be the board's most reliable progressive. He succeeded Matt Gonzales, a strong progressive. The battle will center on which candidate will be the most reliable progressive vote--Olague, whose votes are being carefully watched by progressives, or by one of her challengers.

Davis, a Bay Area native, is a graduate of Brown University and UC Hastings College of the Law, where he graduated magna cum laude. He has worked in government and non-profit and legal sectors on community development, civil rights, social justice, public power, and environmental causes. He has worked on several candidate and ballot measure campaigns including John Avalos for mayor (20ll), Jane Kim for supervisor (2010), Prop H (2008), Clean Energy Act.) He also led a succeesful campaign in 2007 to free journalist Josh Wolf from federal prison for refusing to reveal sources in a demonstration he was covering.

"I was drawn to San Francisco by the creative energy and culture of the city--by what makes this place so special," Davis said. "Over the past l0 years, I've devoted myself to developing healthy communities. I'm running for supervisor to keep the city a vibrant home for the every day people that make San Francisco real." b3

Comments

Thank you Julian for that

Thank you Julian for that vision. I know you mean it. Healthy communities is what it's all about. A focus on people...Profit can take a back seat, in my world. Not that we don't appreciate business, because we do. But people are the life-blood. Let's keep a nice diversity.

And your stepdad knew MLK? Can't go wrong. Just continue to be you and we'll back you up.

Posted by Daniele E. on May. 22, 2012 @ 5:37 pm

You "appreciate" business, Daniele? Really? Big of you.

Where else do you think all the money comes from to pay for all your grand "people" based schemes and largesse?

Stepdad knew MLK? What the hell does that have to do with anything?

Davis is a nobody which is why he's done nothing in years. Breed or Olague are the only possibilities that don't look criticially flawed right now. And we should try and avoid the farce we had a few years back with a couple of dozen candidates, most of whom were unelectable.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2012 @ 7:08 am

If you want to make snarky

If you want to make snarky comments, I can't stop you. My business comment was meant as a plea for balance. I didn't say anything against, did I? Martin Luther King knew the importance of valuing people. I for one, was glad to know that Julian's stepdad had a connection with the man.
You want to call Davis a nobody? Well maybe that speaks volumes about your take on "people". Davis has stated what he values and what he has worked on and that, in my book, does not make him a "nobody".
And where/how do you think people who are successful in business get that way? It is in large part due to the overall society which is made up of all kinds of "people" doing all kinds of "things". Businesses need to give back, into the pot from whence they came. My opinion. Feel free to disparage.

Posted by Daniele E. on May. 23, 2012 @ 7:57 am

You're trying too hard, Daniele.

Which tells me you are too personally involved with this candidate to be credible.

But somebody's stepdad knowing MLK is neither here nor there. If his best shot at winning is playing a second-hand race card, he's already in trouble.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2012 @ 8:11 am

Dude/Dudette, Not "trying too

Dude/Dudette,
Not "trying too hard". Just commenting here like I see fit. How well do I know Julian Davis? Not all that well, actually. But I remember him from the last time he put his name in the ring, and I go by my own intuition on these candidates. I like what I see. His values speak to me. He's also a nice guy, and I trust him. As time goes on, I will of course look at all the candidates and adjust as I see fit.
I did attend a pre-city hall filing papers launch for Julian where the "Guest speaker" was one of MLK's closest confidents. And you know what? I liked that, as someone who has taken the trouble to study MLK's writings. So it is a little more than the stepdad connection.

"If his best shot at winning is playing a second-hand race card, he's already in trouble."

No one is playing a second-hand race card. It is the values represented that interest me. Nothing more, nothing less.

Posted by Daniele E. on May. 23, 2012 @ 8:36 am

OK, Daniele, you're honest enough to admit your bias here.

I'll play. I'll ask the same question of Davis that I asked of Avalos and which he could not answer.

What are Davis's top three ideas for stimulating private-sector jobs in the city?

Clue: A local hire ordinance isn't an acceptable answer.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2012 @ 9:37 am

jobs

I can't speak for Julian Davis, but I have plenty of ideas for stimulating private-sector job growth -- and I speak as someone who runs a private-sector company and I have hired people and laid off people and I know a little about what causes small businesses to hire.

Here's some ideas:

1. First improve access to credit. A Bank of San Francisco that loaned money to small businesses, a mandate that any bank that holds the city's short-term deposits make a certain percentage of loans to local small businesses .... that's one major factor holding back job growth among non-tech small biz.

2. Make it possible for good employees to live in San Francisco. very few small businesses can afford to pay anyone the amount of money it takes to rent or buy a median market-rate house or apartment. Workforce housing is a huge business issue.

3. Control (private) health-care costs. Health care is killing us all. Organize every mayor in the state to push for single-payer health care in California. That alone would create tens of thousands of jobs. If our (private) health insurance wasn't going up 10 percent or more every year, we'd use that money to hire more people.

Taxes are not a factor in any hiring decision I've ever made. The city's business tax per employee is so miniscule it's not an issue. It costs far more to recruit, train and buy a computer for a new employee than it does to pay the payroll tax.

Posted by tim on May. 27, 2012 @ 1:45 pm

Tim, let me summarize the biggest problem with each of your

three "big" ideas. And it's basically the same point in each case:

1) You want to impose a "mandate" on banks. IOW, governmental control of how banks deploy capital.

2) You want to impose a mandate on housing. IOW, governmental control of how housing is deployed.

3) You want to impose a mandate on healthcare. IOW, governmental control of how healthcare is deployed.

So, in each case, your idea of how to improve free enterprise is making it less free. When what business actually needs to be more profitable and therefore be able and confident to create more jobs i.e. the exact opposite - LESS interference by bureaucrats.

Avalos stood for mayor on similar policies to what you suggest, and lost by a mile. Anything to learn from that, Tim?

Posted by Guest on May. 27, 2012 @ 3:10 pm

I really bemoan this idea

I really bemoan this idea some people have that they need to be "free" and that taxing them makes them not "free" so that they would rather flee than pay those taxes. Same with "regulations": impinging on "freedom".

As an American, I know that "freedom" is a big deal. I know that "individualism" is a big deal. This is the "stuff" of the "American Dream" so to speak.

But sometimes one has to re-look at things. Really, one does.
Here is how I see it. No one is taking away basic freedoms. A business owner is still free to run his/her business. And partake of society's capital, services in all their myriad forms. That is freedom.
I think some people take the notion of individualism too far. They fail to "see" that they are part of a "whole". And nobody can deny that they are. But they don't want to see life that way. Hence, a tax is seen as a burden (same for any joe schmo--oh no tax day? yuch. who wants to give up my hard-earned $$?) But if we see ourselves as interconnected/interdependent, then it is not a "burden" and what once was seen as a burden becomes an opportunity to "give back".

The Declaration of Independence says we are created equal, but everyone knows that in our society, it gets a little dicey. Just think back to the legacy of slavery and its systemic implementation and you have the seeds of trauma that one can't know of unless you've been there. Systemic oppression has consequences, which need addressing/remedying. As well as other forms of societal violence which all have consequences.

So watch your words. When you say:
"So, in each case, your idea of how to improve free enterprise is making it less free. When what business actually needs to be more profitable and therefore be able and confident to create more jobs i.e. the exact opposite - LESS interference by bureaucrats.
Avalos stood for mayor on similar policies to what you suggest, and lost by a mile. Anything to learn from that, Tim?"

I say you're making business more accountable and responsive to its true position--not "less free". I'm not buying this notion that jobs won't be forthcoming if regulations are imposed. BS--it is your irrational "distaste" of being "impinged upon" that makes you say/believe such things.

And as for Avalos vs da mayor, I have only one thing to say: Power of Incumbency, brought about by dismissing the tacit agreement of serving as interim mayor. I watched the proceedings. I know what went down. I saw Mr Lee's body language when interviewed on the subject. Other than that, it's possible Avalos' team could have been stronger in certain ways, but I can't speak to that. And we also have a sleeping public, with very low voter turnout. Many might be struggling too much in these hard economic times to be bothered.

Posted by Daniele E. on Jun. 04, 2012 @ 4:01 pm

Make all the excuses you like, Daniele, but your guy lost by

a landslide.

And Tim's three ideas for creating private sector jobs actually create public sector jobs, which is of course the only kind of jobs he approves of.

Tim wants more control, and control means an erosion of fredom

Posted by Guest on Jun. 04, 2012 @ 5:33 pm

Well, as I wrote earlier, I

Well, as I wrote earlier, I don't see "more control" as an erosion of freedom. I see it as what you do when you take responsibility for the best efficacy of your community. Same with the financial markets. Look what happened there w/ lack of regulation...yeah, they certainly had their "freedom", didn't they?

I get that freedom is sacrosanct for you...but I think that you will actually be more free if the whole community is able to do its best along with you: less crime is one consequence of what can happen when people are put to work, or have the services they need to overcome difficulties. And less crime would make *you* more safe, and by extention, more free.

Posted by Daniele E. on Jun. 05, 2012 @ 10:04 am

PS~it iz Gonzalez, not

PS~it iz Gonzalez, not Gonzales....... ; )

Posted by Daniele E. on May. 22, 2012 @ 6:02 pm

More splintering of the progressive base

He last served in office a decade ago. To you Bruce I know that is a very short amount of time. To most San Franciscans, especially those who've not lived here long, he's a dinosaur.

Mayor Lee lures back the Warriors to town with a stadium plan which involves no public financing. The progressives offer a tired, old politician who last served in office before the war in Iraq.

Which vision is more compelling?

Posted by Troll II on May. 22, 2012 @ 6:35 pm

More trolling....comes with

More trolling....comes with the territory. Troll deux, I don't think Julian Davis held office...correct me if I'm wrong, somebody. "Tired, old politician"?...just who are you talking about? Not this fresh-faced 33 year-old who goes by the name of Julian Davis....But by all means, troll away...

Posted by Daniele E. on May. 22, 2012 @ 6:52 pm

Gonzalez

That's whom.

Posted by Troll II on May. 22, 2012 @ 7:07 pm

Good to see you in this,

Good to see you in this, Julian. Considering her vote for Condos for Billionaires at 8 Washington Street, Christina Olague has some serious 'splaining to do.

Posted by Rick H on May. 22, 2012 @ 7:11 pm

Olague has already explained her vote on the condo's.

They will bring in 11 million for affordable housing.

What has Davis done for us recently?

The simple fact is that District 5 is becoming more moderate. The average home price in my area of D5 is over a million now. My neighbours may be liberal on social issues, but they are no socialists and don't want a far-left candidate whose main interest is "civil rights".

We already won that war,

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2012 @ 7:11 am

We did? Housing, health care,

We did? Housing, health care, and economic opportunity in general are available equally? Well hal-le-lu-jah.

I have a newsflash for you, Guest; some of us District 5 residents are indeed socialists, and see that society still has a long way to go. Whether that translates into a vote for Julian Davis remains to be seen.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2012 @ 4:54 pm

So you want free housing for all? I want a pony too.

But people only want so much equality. And given that the vast majority of voters, in both D5 and elsewhere, can afford both, neither are likely to be critical drivers when voting.

Olague has shown an independent spirit and an ability to see all sides of a problem. Like Lee, she's a pragmatist who gets things done, and not an ideolog who rants on about "rights" forever and never lifts a finger.

We need Supes who have done something in their lives more than just drone on endlessly about rights. We need jobs and prosperity. Good luck getting that from yet another opportunistic "holier than thou" do-gooder.

Davis looks like mediocer dross.

Posted by Guest on May. 24, 2012 @ 3:35 pm

His campaign in 2004 was a

His campaign in 2004 was a pretty big failure, and he can't raise money so I don't see him doing much in 2012. Plus he's been away for a few years...focused on himself not the "community." Oh well, he can help Christina get re-elected so we can have eight years of WilliePak's appointee.

Posted by Guest on May. 22, 2012 @ 8:16 pm

Davis is a non-starter

Julian Davis is interested only in Julian Davis. This is a nonstarter. He has zero support in the progressive and most think he is a joke. He, Rizzo and Mecke are risking a London Breed win. What is it with progressives that they can't see reality and refuse to support strong women candidates? 8 Washington is a complicated project. Why aren't progressives going after Mar for his vote on 8 Washington? I have a bigger concern about an 11-0 vote on Treasure Island. Why arent progressives challenging Campos Avalos and Mar for that?. Olague is smart, knows land use beyond ideology. She is a progressive. Davis is not only a waste of energy and time. He and the other ineffective self- declared male candidates continue to split the left. Progressives need to stop throwing women candidates under the bus.

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2012 @ 6:47 am

Women like London Breed, you

Women like London Breed, you mean?

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2012 @ 4:55 pm

Davis is a non-starter

Posted by Guest on May. 23, 2012 @ 6:47 am

John Henry, you are so

John Henry, you are so transparent.

Posted by Guest on May. 24, 2012 @ 3:14 pm

Looks like opposition

Looks like opposition candidates have fired up their social media strategy. Davis and Mecke and Rizzo are the only candidates in the race with strong progressive values. If you think Olague hasn't sold out you're smoking crack. Just look at the photo she's mailing out from the day she announced her candidacy. She is literally standing under an umbrella being held by Ed Lee.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 08, 2012 @ 10:24 am

I don't know to much about

I don't know to much about him and his view, but I will not vote vor him and the reason is he has such a rude staff to be specific Hanan OMG she is rude and not professional at all I don't know who she think she is definitively. In my personal opinion she needs some people skills in order to do her job. I have also hear a few comments about Julian and all are negative about his personal skills.

Posted by Guest on Jul. 14, 2012 @ 1:45 pm

Davis is a very strange guy.

Davis is a very strange guy. I was on Hastings Law Journal with him, and he was kicked off for basically not doing his work, alienating the editor in chief, and having a strange altercation with the security guard of the building where the Hastings Law Journal is located. From what I've seen, the guy is of middling intelligence, has little to no social skills, and zero qualifications to be making policy for a large (or small, or tiny) city. It is shocking that people will take him seriously.

Posted by HLJ Alum on Jul. 20, 2012 @ 5:01 pm

Any thing else?

Any thing else?

Posted by Guest on Oct. 04, 2012 @ 12:07 pm

candidate

oh thank you for the open forum which strange enough I somehow came across after all this time!!!!!! oh how perfect.
Julian Davis-well this is great!
I knew Julian back in SF and treated him with total kindness and respect as I do normally towards people. I thought he was nice, a good person, and hung out with him from time to time......yet Julian who tried so hard always to show himself as an activist, and a groovy person as does EVERYONE who moves to SF apparently thinks just because they have moved to SF they are automatically "radical", "groovy", "sexually freaky" and totally above all others who live elsewhere. Well I know otherwise.....

Julian Davis participated on some levels and was VERY AWARE of the very sick game against me while I lived in SF and he participated like all the others in SF in the sick game against me. What are the avenues of the sick game not only against me but other girls/ women? That game is a sick game against girls and women where WE are filmed having sex in guys apartments. How you ask.? Well you ladies think you are going home with some guy you met in a bar or club yet you go there and his ENTIRE apartment is RIGGED with hidden cameras. (ladies living in SF-this is a HUGE network and the majority of guys KNOW and ARE participating), trust me you are being filmed!-you just DONT want to believe it), If you have sex with the guy it is not only broadcast live on the internet where the 'subscribers" have 'earned' their way into the 'viewing' room but it is also recorded, and the footage (if of course the weiner holders on COKE/ICE feel its worthy), then sell it to the internet porn reality. Julian was a participant (only to the best of my knowledge as a viewer NOT, and I repeat NOT someone who rigged his apartment,) not only in the KNOWledge of what was being done to me as well as other girls, but also had COMPLETE knowledge of these networks doing this to girls in SF and only thought it was utterly 'hilarious" just like the other guys (and even girls) who knew about this being done to me and others. By the way this network that did this to me also stalked me after filming me sexually, harrassed me, tried to constantly degrade me, humiliate me 24/7, and created such disturbing slander lies about me and character assasination of me that 13 years later I STILL have to endure the original lies from all the "groovy" SF people to this DAY! (its called GANG STALKING folks-read about it-it is very serious)
While I still lived in SF (I HAD to move from all the gang stalking) Julian was involved in all the 'free Josh" campaign as he AT THE SAME TIME was aware of this total sick, sick, nauseating game against me. Did he care? NOPE-he kept watchin.
HOW DOES ONE FERVENTLY TRY AND FREE ONE PERSON WHO YOU CLAIM IS SUCH A FREEDOM FIGHTER AS YOU PARTICIPATE IN TAKING AWAY ANOTHERS FREEDOM AND FROM SOMEONE WHO ACTUALLY IS A REAL FREEDOM FIGHTER?...........How do you fight to free Josh as you actively participate in such sickness as you did? LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR
I have NO vendetta against Julian I do believe him to be 'good' yet I also could, and he knows it, lay way more out on this table about him but I wont. (actually the other gang stalkers claimed he is just so 'good")
my statement is simple.........
YOU ALL THOUGHT YOU GOT AWAY WITH WHAT YOU DID TO ME BUT YOU HAVE NOT........
YOU ALL THOUGHT IT WAS SO FUNNY WATCHING THE MOVIE YOU ALL MADE OF ME AND OTHER .............. girls........US GIRLS WILL HAVE THE LAST LAUGH
AND YES JULIAN WITH OTHERS THOUGHT IT SOOOOOOO FUNNY AND EVEN EMPOWERING TO PLAY SUCH A GAME AGAINST ME........
yet I close with this.......

You see as you think your living some great life and 'movin on up" and as I continue to suffer from all of yours and Julian Davis' sick game against me, I assure you, you are only at the beginning of your false "rebound". You are only about to begin the repercussions of your actions of the past.
go to hell Julian Davis for being such a shitty person and so phony
go to hell Jeff snipes for being yet another stranger who got involved in a heinous game against me for no reason except people told you too. weak phony loser.....
go to hell Mike Powers from the Power Exchange for being not only an organizer of networks that films girls against their will, but also kidnaps them and sadistically tortures them just like Damon who lives on Baker st......and Luis who rides around on rollerblades.....the list goes on and on.....
and go to hell all SF pathethic and phony people who participated in the sick game against me..........you ALL have yet to receive your full payback.
and to hell all satanists and black magicians-you are all about to go BYE-BYe
to hell all you politicians for the fraudulent pathethic piles of poo you really are.

amazing that Julian Davis thinks nothing of destroying my freedom, my privacy, my right to live at peace and be safe in SF, as he tries to win an office acting as if he is the epitome of SF progressiveness, freedom, and privacy for us all. I guess by SF standards privacy is only for those who have a weiner.......(and the best COKE of course)..........

yours truly,
Mrs. V for Vendetta

Posted by Julian Davis on Jul. 25, 2012 @ 8:04 am