San Francisco’s Democratic County Central Committee held its first meeting on April 19 after a March primary election that handed a supermajority to business-backed centrists. However, the four-hour meeting in a conference room with no Wi-Fi or cell service in the basement of the Hiram Johnson State Office Building in the Civic Center wasn’t exactly smooth sailing. The remaining progressive opposition members expressed their disapproval of the new normal, and the public face of organized labor in the city dramatically demonstrated theirs by walking out of the meeting midstream. The on-stage kabuki reflected factional battle lines drawn for the November election.
A new normal
“You know, this has been an eventful week in which I started as [acting] mayor, then was demoted to supervisor again, and now I get to end the week as [acting] chair of the San Francisco Democratic Party,” Supervisor Matt Dorsey, the top vote-getter in March’s central committee election, told colleagues on the committee he temporarily presided over for votes on what should have been routine housekeeping measures — the adoption of new bylaws, and the formal election of officers.
Last March’s race for the committee, usually a down-ballot contest watched only by insiders and political junkies, was subject to an unprecedented level of publicity and campaign spending. A bevy of business-backed centrist groups leveraged earlier campaign victories, such as the recall of the district attorney and Board of Education commissioners in 2022, as well as following supervisors’ races, to organize a reform slate for the body, which faced off against a slate organized by progressive and labor groups. The centrists won handily, garnering 18 of 24 seats between the two assembly districts. The remaining six seats went to progressive-backed candidates and incumbents.
The Gang of Six
One of those incumbents, former vice chair, Peter Gallotta, almost immediately set the contentious tone for the meeting, which resembled a marathon session of parliamentary procedure as tactical thumb-wrestling.
Gallotta voiced concerns over the new bylaws, which he described as “fundamentally different” from the previous committee and requiring more extended notice before a vote. “I don’t necessarily have fundamental issues with what is being proposed in them, but I do think we need good process and transparency for the public and for all of the members,” he told colleagues. Nancy Tung, a centrist incumbent, noted that the committee was required to adopt new bylaws after every election and had given proper notice.
Tung’s position would rule the day as the new bylaws were adopted by the centrist supermajority, beginning a pattern of votes throughout the session of the six progressive members — Gallotta; lawyer and community organizer Michael Nguyen; former Supervisors John Avalos, Jane Kim, Gordon Mar, and current Supervisor Connie Chan — all either abstaining or opposing the votes. Of the ex officio members — seats on the committee occupied by elected public officials— only Assemblyman Phil Ting regularly sided with the six.
The labor drama confirms what many have been whispering about: that Labor Council leadership and progressive advocacy groups will try to degrade the political legitimacy of the DCCC.
One likely pain point for progressives presented by the new bylaws was the new limit on members’ use of proxy votes to no more than two meetings per calendar year without special authorization. A look at past elections for county committee revealed that progressives would tend to create a winning edge for their slate by including a more significant number of publicly elected officials and others with high-name recognition, who would inevitably make copious use of proxies once elected due to the demands of their day jobs.
A source inside the committee provided The Voice with a tally of proxies and absences last term, which revealed that apart from ex officio members, progressive elected members who were also public officials made the highest use of proxies, with Public Defender Manohar Raju and Supervisor Hillary Ronen topping the list. Ronen did not seek reelection to the committee this year, and Raju lost. Indeed, four such members elected to the committee in 2016 resigned within the first year of their terms.
Centrists also elected a full slate of officers, including Tung, who heads the Vulnerable Victims unit at the District Attorney’s Office, as chair. Nor Cal Carpenters’ Union senior representative Dan Calamuci, Noe Valley Democratic Club President Carrie Barnes, Community advocate Cedric Akbar, and legislative aide Emma Heiken were elected vice chairs, and education consultant Michael Lai, housing activist Mike Chen, and Kaiser executive Lanier Coles were elected as directors.
‘Destroy them’
Reaction from progressives and allies to the new committee’s policy resolutions may prove more consequential. They adopted statements on public safety, housing, and education that all reflect a more centrist direction, such as supporting a fully staffed police force, cutting red tape in housing production, and focusing on student outcomes. All of these passed with varying levels of opposition or abstention from progressives and ex officios. Concessions to progressives on the language of the housing resolution were adopted after some debate.
However, the most dramatic reaction at Friday’s meeting was from representatives of organized labor, led by San Francisco Labor Council Executive Director Kim Tavaglione, over the committee’s resolution restating an “unwavering commitment to stand in solidarity with San Francisco labor unions.” Restating concerns telegraphed earlier in the week by an article in progressive organ 48Hills that the resolution was “toothless” and failed to address specific issues, Tavaglione asked that the resolution be tabled or postponed and that any resolution on labor is made only in direct consultation with the Labor Council.
“Labor is about dignity and respect and that’s what we demand at every single bargaining table that we are at,” Taglione testified during the public comment portion of the meeting. “And we don’t appreciate being told what we want when we want it. If you want a bad reaction from labor, this is how you get it.”
The resolution, written by Calamuci, was supported by four unions, including the Carpenters.
“This is the first of what I imagine will be many, many issues that come up around labor,” he said, introducing the resolution. But I think it was important to put this out there as the very first measure. It’s critical that this gets passed by our mostly new Democratic Party leadership because I believe it’s important that we make a strong and unequivocal statement right out of the gate.”
Committee members explained during deliberations that the resolution did not preclude later statements on specific issues, with member Supervisor Catherine Stefani noting earlier that she was already in talks with the Building and Construction Trades Council about a follow-on statement. “I just want to reiterate that I look forward to this being the beginning of a more open dialogue with both the Labor Council and the building trades,” she told colleagues.
Later in the session, after a motion to postpone discussion on the resolution failed, Tavaglione stormed out of the room and was overheard saying “… destroy them” to colleagues. “I think this is the official break of San Francisco Labor and the Democratic Party in San Francisco. We will no longer support this body,” she said when asked for comment outside the room. “There are specific bills that we would want them to support … then the author wrote back and said, no, we don’t want to do that,” she added.
Who’s really out of touch?
The drama over the labor resolution confirms what many have been whispering about since the centrists’ big win in March: that Labor Council leadership and progressive advocacy groups will try their hardest to degrade the political legitimacy of the Democratic Central Committee and its perennially important endorsements by portraying its new leadership as inept and out of touch with historical Democratic values. The question is how much traction will that narrative really have.
“Labor is not monolithic,” Todd David, political director of Abundant SF, which backed the centrist committee slate during the March election, told The Voice in a text. “And the current DCCC has significant Labor support as evidenced by the SF Dems for Change slate being endorsed by the Nor Cal Carpenters Union, Laborers, and Operating Engineers.”
The Labor Council’s track record in recent elections doesn’t inspire confidence, either. The last two years’ worth of elections brought multiple setbacks for Labor Council-supported positions, ranging from 2022’s recall elections and the District 4 Supervisor race, where centrist Joel Engardio won despite the council spending over a quarter of a million dollars to shore up incumbent Mar, to the defeat of Measure B, the so-called “cop tax” put on the ballot to block direct funding to hire more police officers. Time will tell which side is really out of touch.
Correction 04/25/24: This story was updated to reflect Public Defender Manohar Raju’s run and loss in the DCCC race.