NVV July/August 2017: We Read It So You Don't Have To

The Noe Valley Voice is published ten times a year and has been a neighborhood fixture since 1977. Here are notable highlights from the latest issue. Links are to stories we've covered here on NVSF or other resources. Follow the NVV link at the bottom for full articles and all the ads.

July/August 2017

Front Page: There's a Petit Cine, a tiny sidewalk cinema on the 3800 block of Cesar Chavez; profiles of some of the Farmer's Market families; the company that owns Real Foods, Neutraceuticals, is for sale, sparking hope for a sale of the vacant building at 3935-39 24th St.

Letters: A shout-out for the great work of Friends of the Urban Forest for making Noe Valley so full of trees and sidewalk gardens; a love letter to the group that coordinated the concert in the Noe Valley Town Square in May; Several neighbors write in to decry the rash of senior evictions in the neighborhood; a recap of this year's Garden Tour and RIP "Big Mike" Lefiti, the Upper Noe UPS driver who was killed in the workplace shooting at the Portrero UPS in June.

Features: The District 8 Supervisor race is already ramping up and Sheehy and Mandelman are the main rivals so far; SF City Guides have several free history walks in our little neighborhood. Eva Skoufis, owner of the coin-op laundry at 1732 Church has retired after 29 years and the new owners, Leanne Yu and Ann Truong have taken over.

Cost of Living in Noe: The average cost of a Noe Valley home in May jumped to $3.1 million thanks to the recent sale of the renovated No. 44 firehouse on 22nd St. for $5.3 million and the home at 526 Duncan for a record $12.5 million. The latter is now the most expensive home in Noe Valley; it first sold for $5.3 million in 2005 (not a bad appreciation).

Short Takes: Lots going on in the Town Square all summer - schedule here. Local comedians will descend on Valley Tavern the first Thursday of every month - there's no cover for the show. Folio Books also has an active summer events calendar for kids and adults. Juri Commons park at the edge of Noe Valley just got a grant for some playground updates.

Store Trek: Shop Monroe, 3920A 24th Street at Sanchez

Rumors and Tidbits: Rubber ducks were again spotted in Noe Valley on June 23; Radio Shack has left the building and the space is for rent for $9,000 per month. Savor has changed management and is now the Savor Open Kitchen with a few new menu items. Le Cupboard is now open. The For Rent sign is down in the old Good News space, but no rconfirmation of a new tenant or if it's been rented. The old Bom Dia is still for rent. And a For Rent sign has appeared on a former dry cleaner spot on 29th and Noe. Just for Fun is selling fidget spinners. The most popular movie rentals at Video Wave are Get Out, Logan and Hidden Figures.

[The Noe Valley Voice]

NVV February 2016: We Read It So You Don't Have To

The Noe Valley Voice is published ten times a year and has been a neighborhood fixture since 1977. Here are notable highlights from the latest issue. Links are to stories we've covered here on NVSF or other resources. Follow the NVV link at the bottom for full articles and all the ads.

February 2016

Front Page: Design shop Wowhaus has won the commission to create the public art for the Town Square -- comments wanted; St. Luke's is under construction; the Affordable Housing Bonus Program is controversial with Noe Valley residents; a foster dog named Peanut needs a home and gets a ginormous feature story; SFMTA traffic engineers are still trying to slow down traffic and protect pedestrians and cyclists at the I-280 merge.

Letters: A neighbor reminds you to check the dates on construction sawhorses (contractor parking) - they might be expired; a 23rd St resident believes that traffic and speeding on his street are on the rise; a house garage on the 4700 block of 25th street was burgled; RIP to the dapper Wilkes Bashford, a longtime Noe Valley resident. Sidebar: the most common crimes in our little burg? Burglary, disturbing the peace, fraud, stolen cars, theft and vehicle break-ins.

Features: A full rundown of what transpired at the January 14 District 8 security meeting.

Cost of Living in Noe: Housing prices are up 20 percent year over year thanks to tight supply. Rents are flattening out (but still high).

Store Trek: Charlie's Corner, 4102 24th St. at Castro

Rumors and Tidbits: Lots of For Rent signs still on 24th Street including Common Scents and In-House - as are many storefronts over the hill in Eureka Valley/Castro; Hahn's Hibachi is closing for good after many rumors and 20 years; Pomelo is no longer serving dinner - for now; construction will begin soon on the former Bliss Bar which is becoming a thai noodle bar [Ed.--construction is underway]; La Boulangerie is open; Hamlet is open; the former toy store The Ark is papered over and will become a retail store for kitchen goods; Portuguese restaurant Uma Casa will come to life in the old Incanto restaurant space this summer.

[The Noe Valley Voice]

This Week In Noe Valley: Halloween Excess, Pasta Pomodoro Exits, And GO GIANTS!!

News from, about and for Noe Valley from around the interwebs:

• Noe Valley gets wild after Giants World Series win [eefeefeef]
• S**t going down in Whole Foods during the World Series final [@zamosta]
• A Giant plan to improve Muni (and speed up the 48) [Burrito Justice]
• Halloween, Noe Valley style [gfillonramos]
• Where they stand: Candidates for Supervisor in District 8 [SF Gate]
• A writer's guide to SF cafes names Bernie's best in Noe Valley [7x7]
• Plumpjack, which has been looking for a restaurant spot in the area, is opening a bar in the Luna Park space on Valencia [SFist]
• Folio Books turns one [@FolioSF]
• Pasta Pomodoro is closed on 24th St – but hey, you can still visit one of their 18 other Bay Area locations [NVSF and @PastaPomodoro]
• Massimiliano Conti talks La Nebbia and La Ciccia [Inside Scoop SF]
• A review in pictures of Martin Maddox [Spotted SF]
• Short films about SF's ecological anomalies at the Roxie – Tues Nov 11 [Kyle Garrett]

[Photo: Orange sky for the Giants parade via js42]

This Week In Noe Valley: Orange October, Harvest Fest, And Other Signs of Fall

News from, about and for Noe Valley from around the interwebs:

• It was Harvest this weekend and Scott Wiener was there [@Scott_Wiener]
• So were Carol Kingsley and David Campos [Carol Kingsley and @DavidCamposSF]
• Orange October indeed: Beautiful Noe Valley sunsets [ktmow and andrewgodwin]
• And the hayride not operated by Uber [brianalvey]
• A short video of Trolley Dancers that rode the J-Church line this weekend [swim97]
• And an in-depth piece about said Trolley Dancers [KALW]
• Bom Dia corner market gets closer – and they're hiring [Good Food Jobs]
• Sorry #NoeDads – Hooters is not replacing Bliss Bar [San Francisco]
• A discerning review of Rare Device [SF Girl by Bay]
• After a recent facelift, Noe Valley Bakery launches a Kickstarter to raise $19,000 for...a facelift (because France) [Kickstarter]
• Man rear-ended, then pistol-whipped at 24th and Dolores [SF Examiner]
• KRON goes to the scene of the crime and interviews neighbors who feel less safe now [KRON4]
• Beware of this potentially dangerous Comcast scam [@paulettebleam]
• An in-depth review of Porcellino's pork ragu that survives from Incanto [SFGate]
• Meanwhile, Cosentino hopes to branch out at his new restaurant Cockscomb [SFGate]
• San Francisco and Noe Valley are tops for trick or treating once again [Zillow]
• Are there any grown-ups in SF? Yes, and they're all at Urban Putt [SFGate]

[Photo: NVSF]

This Week In Noe Valley: Shop Local, The Fleeing Middle Class, And The 2014 District 8 Supervisor Race Has Begun

News from, about and for Noe Valley from around the interwebs:

• Oh to be young again - exploring the tunnels under San Francisco [The Bold Italic]
• Cardio-Tone is moving to outer Church - will take over Kohler Jones, née Mikeytom Market [@F6x]
• Employees of the The Little Chihuahua in Noe Valley outkicked the Divisadero team [thelittlechihuahua]
• The New York Times tries to explain why the middle class may be leaving San Francisco; commenters retort that it's because SF sucks [New York Times]
• ...And SFGate piles on the middle-class-is-leaving meme [SFGate]
• Post-Thanksgiving shopping doesn't have to be dangerous - shopping in Noe Valley is quite civilized [SFGate]
• Man arrested for trying to take photos of Scott Wiener in the bathroom files to run for D8 Supervisor [Castro Biscuit]
• Ex-Googler starts a food delivery biz that caters to NV and nearby areas [SF Biz Times]
• Noe's Nest bed and breakfast and owner Sheila Ash are... "eclectic" [Mission Local]

[Photo: "The holidays in Noe Valley" by @mchou]

Scott Wiener: Why I Voted Yes On AT&T U-Verse

A typical AT&T U-verse box

The AT&T U-verse vote squeaked through the Board of Supes this week, and the long-delayed high-speed phone/Internet/TV project will soon be rolled out citywide. The first installations are reportedly headed for the Sunset and Richmond districts, but eventually 32 AT&T communications boxes are tentatively headed for Noe sidewalks as well.

Our own District 8 Supervisor Scott Wiener voted in support of the U-verse roll out, and sent this note explaining why:

From: <Scott.Wiener@sfgov.org;
Date: Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 4:41 PM
Subject: My vote on the AT&T issue
To: Scott.Wiener@sfgov.org

I'm sending this email to a number of neighborhood association leaders and other involved folks in District 8, in order to explain my vote yesterday on the AT&T environmental appeal.  I would appreciate it if you would forward this email to your boards, memberships, and neighbors who have an interest in this issue.  The voters are entitled to an explanation of all of my votes (and I cast many each week), including votes as controversial as this one.  People can agree or disagree, but they deserve an explanation.

I will start by saying that I struggled mightily with this issue.  Like many of you, I do not like these boxes, or any of the utility boxes that are already on our streets.  Part of me very much wanted to vote against AT&T and for an EIR simply because I dislike the boxes.  But one of the commitments that I made to myself, and to the voters, was that I'm not just going to be a reactive elected official.  I committed that I was going to be the kind of elected official who tried to find solutions to hard issues.  I also committed to myself early on that I would not abuse CEQA by ordering EIRs where the law doesn't support it simply because I have policy issues with the underlying project. As described below, ordering an EIR here probably would have been illegal and certainly would have fed into our City and State's addiction to environmental review, with the effect that good projects (including public projects) are delayed, killed, or made much more expensive than they need to be.

The issue here was very hard -- pretty much everyone agrees that Comcast is in desperate need of competition while also agreeing that these boxes stink.  There were also incredibly strong views on both sides of this issue.  I received many emails from opponents, passionately and articulately describing the issues with the boxes, and from proponents, passionately and articulately describing why we need the service and competition.  This was a no-win vote for me in terms of popularity contests.  Either way I voted was going to make one group or the other upset with me.  But, for better or for worse, casting controversial votes is what we do at the Board.  If I wanted to be loved by everyone all the time, I wouldn't have run for office.

And, this issue pointed to a major problem we have in San Francisco.  We do a bad job managing our sidewalks.  Our departments don't coordinate well. We don't have a strong master plan.  We haven't fully implemented the Better Streets Plan.  That plan is how we should be managing our sidewalks and deciding what to put on them and where.  Not through CEQA, which is a blunt instrument that doesn't get you much other than delay and expense, but through actually having a plan for our sidewalks.  As described below, through a strong and well-planned permitting system, we can do that.

So, why did I, in the end, tip in favor of voting to reject the appeal?

1.  Not an appropriate CEQA issue:  This was not a vote on the merits of the project or on whether to issue permits and where.  This was an appeal under CEQA, of the Planning Department's determination that the project was exempt from a full-blown environmental impact report.  While the exemption was not 100% clear cut as a matter of law, it's pretty clear that the exemption was properly granted, since there is an exemption in CEQA for utility boxes.  Past Boards of Supervisors have used CEQA as a tool to achieve certain ends even when it doesn't really apply (i.e., killing projects they don't like).  I don't like to do that, and to its credit, the current Board has abandoned this practice to date.  CEQA abuse has been a problem in San Francisco and in California generally.  Instead of addressing projects on the merits, we try to save or kill them through CEQA.  That's not appropriate.

In my view, it's important not to apply CEQA inappropriately to accomplish another end.  I believe that's what would've occurred here had we sustained the appeal.  I never heard a truly credible legal argument that this project was required to undergo an EIR.  Indeed, ordering an EIR here -- something that has never happened before in San Francisco for placement of utility boxes on sidewalks -- would have set a terrible precedent.  After all, we have to apply CEQA fairly and equally.  Do we really want to require DPW to undergo an expensive and lengthy EIR (costing hundreds of thousands or millions of scarce DPW dollars) next time it decides to place 500 much-needed trash cans on our sidewalks?  Do we really want to require MTA to undergo an EIR when it decides to place new traffic control signals, and the resulting boxes, on our sidewalks?  That's the precedent we would have set.

2.  EIR wouldn't have stopped the project, just delayed it:  Even had we ordered an EIR, that wouldn't have stopped the project.  AT&T simply could have undergone an EIR and then proceeded with the project or sued us for improperly ordering an EIR.  Had that all occurred, then the community benefits and processes described below would have been off the table.  I determined that given the likelihood that AT&T would have been able to proceed with the project at some point anyway, it was best to negotiate a good process now.
3.  AT&T reduced its target number of boxes by 1/3, from 726 to 495.


4.  Undergrounding not a viable option:  If undergrounding had been a viable option, I would've led the charge to force AT&T to do that, no matter the cost.  But, after months of being immersed in this issue, I have yet to see any credible evidence that it's viable.  Undergrounding the boxes would require construction of a large underground room, large enough for a technician to safely go down and to have climate control.  That, of course, would have led to hundreds of major excavation sites around the city.  In many locations, undergrounding would've been impossible because of interference with underground wires and sewers.  Moreover, because of the need for climate control, undergrounding would still have required a box above the underground vault -- i.e., a box on the sidewalk.  I never saw a credible counter to this, and neither I nor my colleagues, to my knowledge, actually believed that undergrounding was a viable alternative.

5.  Permit and neighborhood processes -- neighbors will have a say and won't get a box if they don't want one:  AT&T cannot place boxes on the sidewalk without obtaining a permit from DPW.  DPW has discretion to grant or deny that permit, and a grant of a permit can be appealed to a hearing officer and then to the Board of Appeals. AT&T has agreed that before it applies for a permit, it will notify all neighbors within 300 feet of the box by mail (that's almost one block in all directions), the neighborhood association if there is one, and my office.  AT&T will work with the neighbors to find an appropriate site for the box.  If there's significant opposition, on a block or in a neighborhood, AT&T will not place the box there.  Moreover, AT&T is giving me, effectively, veto power over all placement decisions.  If I tell AT&T not to place a box in a particular neighborhood or street, the box will not go in.  I will, of course, be basing my decisions in this regard on feedback from the neighborhoods and neighborhood associations.  In other words, you will have significant control over this process, and if a neighborhood or street doesn't want a box, it won't get a box.  Period.
We will all be particularly sensitive to the width of sidewalks in neighborhoods. Some streets have narrow sidewalks that are already difficult to navigate.  It's hard to imagine it ever being appropriate to place a box on a narrow sidewalk, and I will be very conscious of that (as will you, I'm sure).

6.  Attempt to place boxes off of sidewalk:  AT&T has committed to looking for locations off of the sidewalk.  Some neighborhoods have small alleys that may be appropriate, for example.  But all of these placement decisions will be made in conjunction with the impacted neighborhoods.

7.  AT&;T has to pay for using the public right-of-way:  Under state law, AT&T will have to pay the City 5% of the gross revenue generated by each box each year.  Permanently.  Comcast currently pays the City $89 million annually. Comcast's payment will likely go down as AT&T takes customers away, but there's projected to be a net increase in revenue since AT&T anticipates that a lot of its new customers will not be former Comcast customers.

8.  AT&T has agreed to submit to the City's surface mounted utility order, which it previously had disputed as illegal.  That order provides DPW with the power to order AT&T to make streetscaping and design changes to compensate for the placement of the box.  This can include bulbouts, screening, benches, street art, etc.  Neighborhoods are encouraged to come up with ideas in this regard.

9.  AT&T has agreed to fund staffing in the Planning Department to ensure that the placement of the boxes complies with the Better Streets Plan (http://www.sf-planning.org/ftp/BetterStreets/index.htm).  In other words, there will be a staffer in the Planning Department whose job will be to ensure that these boxes are not just dumped on the sidewalk.  This staffer will work with AT&T, with me, and with the neighborhoods to maximize the fitting in of the boxes with the streetscapes.  I'm already in the process of convening a meeting with DPW and Planning to ensure that they are coordinating and have a solid plan in place.  I've requested that they not issue any new permits to AT&T before they have this plan, and proper staffing, in place.
10.  AT&T has agreed to fund staffing in DPW to compensate the city for DPW's time in working with this issue, to coordinate DPW with Planning and with neighborhoods, and to ensure that AT&T is complying with its obligations, including graffiti removal.

11.  AT&T has agreed that it will remove any graffiti on boxes within 3 days, and within 48 hours if possible.  If it fails to do so, it has agreed that DPW can remove the graffiti and bill AT&T.

12.  AT&T has agreed that of the hundreds of jobs created by this build, at least 1/3 will be locally hired.

I hope that this email has been useful in explaining my position.  Feel free to email or call me to discuss.  I'm also, as always, happy to meet with any neighborhood group to talk about this issue or the hundreds of other issues I'm dealing with here at City Hall and in the district.
Thank you.
--Scott
Scott Wiener
Member, San Francisco Board of Supervisors
District 8
(415) 554-6968

[Photo: SFGate]

Supes Race: Mandelman Concedes, Wiener Victorious

The final tally won't be official until the end of November, but the race for District 8 Supervisor is over. From SFGate:

...The other conceded race goes to Scott Wiener in District Eight. The second-place finisher in that showdown, Rafael Mandelman, issued his statement to ''Dear Friends'' on Wednesday.

''I cannot express just how incredibly grateful I am to all of you who have been part of my campaign for supervisor,'' Mandelman wrote. ''Unfortunately, after two years of dialing for dollars, knocking on doors, chasing after endorsements and harassing the bejeezus out of every registered voter we could track down in the district, we are firmly in second place. ... Scott Wiener will be the next supervisor for District Eight (and a very capable and excellent supervisor he will surely be), but I am so glad and grateful for the opportunity to represent you and your values in this campaign.''

Like Kim, Wiener also made use of the exclamation mark in a mass e-mail, stating: ''Victory!''

In the latest results, Wiener had 42.75 percent of the first-choice votes Thursday to Mandelman's 35.27 percent. But again, when voters' second- and third-choice votes were run in a preliminary count, Wiener surpassed the crucial 50 percent mark.

[SFGate: Kim, Wiener declare victory]

Preliminary Ranked Choice Results: Supes Race District 8

The short version: Scott Weiner leads with 12,985 total votes or 55.65% of the vote in Round 2 (Mandelman has 44.35%).

In case you were confused by the ranked choice voting, here's how it works:

The Ranked-Choice Voting Report for Round 1 combines the accumulated totals of first-choice rankings as well as the second- or third-choice selections transferred to the first-choice ranking selections when the first-choice ranking was skipped as required under San Francisco Charter Sec. 13.102: "If a voter casts a ranked-choice ballot but skips a rank, the voter's vote shall be transferred to that voter's next ranked choice."

The numbers are not final, and Mandelman has not conceded. The department will release final results on November 30, 2010.

[SF Department of Elections: Preliminary Ranked-Choice Results Report, Board of Supervisors, District 8]

NVV Oct. 2010: We Read It So You Don't Have To

The Noe Valley Voice is published ten times a year and has been a neighborhood fixture since 1977. Here are highlights from the latest issue. Links are to items we've covered here on NVSF or outside sources as the Voice doesn't post stories online until mid-month.

October 2010

This month's Voice is mostly a lightweight collection of what you'd expect: A half-page photo of trick-or-treaters from last year's Halloween on 24th St, a thinly-veiled press release from Alain Pinel Realtors (no mention of the Sue Bowie sellout), and notes on the second Town Square meeting.

But the real (only?) reason to pick up this month's issue is on pages 11-12. The District 8 supes candidates answer some questions about where they stand on key issues this election. Worth a look before you vote.

[The Noe Valley Voice]

Supes Race: District 8 Candidate Forum

Last chance to hear from all four candidates to replace Bevan Dufty as District 8 Supervisor here in Noe Valley is tomorrow night at the monthly Upper Noe Neighbor's meeting at the Upper Noe Rec Center. Bill Hemenger, Rafael Mandelman, Rebecca Prozan and Scott Wiener will answer questions submitted to UNN President Vicki Rosen.

When: Thursday, Sept. 16, 7:30 pm
Where: Upper Noe Recreation Center (Day & Sanchez)

Can't make it? There will be another meeting on October 6th over the hill at the Randall Museum.

Update: The Bay Area Reporter has a good summary of candidate positions as well as upcoming forums and debates.

Supes Race: Bill Hemenger Opening Campaign Office In Noe Valley

From the press release:

Bill Hemenger, Democratic candidate for District 8 Supervisor, will open a second campaign office in the heart of Noe Valley, at 4128 24th Street, between Castro and Diamond. This location will serve as an outreach center and information hub for the residents of Noe Valley, Diamond Heights, and Glen Park. Bill is the only candidate in the District 8 race with two campaign offices.

Bill’s new Noe Valley office will complement the campaign’s official headquarters at 2324 Market Street, between Noe and Castro, serving Duboce Triangle, Upper Market, and the Castro. Bill saw the need to reach out to the residents of Noe Valley and beyond, who often feel overlooked in supervisor elections. The opening of the second office is in response to the flood of requests for information from voters in the more residential neighborhoods of District 8.

[Official Site: Bill Hemenger for District 8]

Supes Race: DCCC Shenanigans Unchanged With Progressives In Power

BeyondChron was at last night's meeting of the San Francisco Democratic County Central Committee (DCCC) and notes that politics are unchanged since Progressives took power:

The Committee then moved to the District 8 race to succeed Bevan Dufty. As the only progressive candidate running, Rafael Mandelman had the edge. On the first round of voting, he grabbed 18 votes – one more than necessary. David Chiu, who I had heard from a few sources was a “wild card,” voted for Mandelman. But the real surprise was State Senator Leland Yee – who has endorsed Rebecca Prozan, but was the 18th vote.

Immediately after this vote, DCCC member Scott Wiener congratulated Mandelman for getting the Party’s endorsement – and said he would not be seeking the “second place” vote for the District 8 nod. “I’m running for first-place,” he said, “and I intend to win.” With Wiener out of the picture, Prozan easily secured the “second choice” endorsement.

It became clear that a deal had been struck, with one moderate politico telling me that Rebecca Prozan had “back-stabbed Scott.” Another way of putting it is Mandelman had to secure the endorsement, and Prozan delivered Leland Yee. And while it’s true that Mandelman only needed 17 votes to prevail, perhaps David Chiu didn’t want to be the 17th vote. Regardless, now progressives are going to feel beholden to Leland Yee.

As SFGate puts it: "Mandelman...walked away from the vote a happy man, noting that candidates who have the backing of the Democratic Party more often than not win their races."

[BeyondChron: Cronyism Makes a Comeback at SF Democratic Party ]
[SFGate: Who got the endorsement of SF Demo Party?]

Supes Race: Rebecca Prozan Sets Up Shop In Noe Valley

From the Bay Area Reporter:

So far the sole District 8 supervisor candidate opting to open a campaign headquarters outside the Castro is Rebecca Prozan . She recently secured the storefront at 1195 Church Street, home to a former bead store, at the busy intersection of Church and 24th Street...

[BAR: D8 candidates open campaign headquarters]

Supes Race: Ammiano Endorses Mandelman

Wasting no time, Assemblyman Tom Ammiano endorsed Rafael Mandelman today for this November's District 8 Supervisor race. The former SF Supe adds his name to a growing list including Supervisors John Avalos, Eric Mar, Ross Mirkarimi and...um....Chris Daly. And don't forget - Mandelman also has the support of the Harvey Milk LGBT Club.

[FCJ: Ammiano Endorses Mandelman]
[NVSF: Harvey Milk LGBT Club Endorses Mandelman for District 8]

Supes Race: Harvey Milk LGBT Club Endorses Mandelman for District 8

An update to the District 8 2010 Supervisor race that could be significant: The Harvey Milk Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Democratic Club has endorsed Rafael Mandelman for district 8 (via SF Citizen).

Oh, and if it matters, Mandelman was also named one of the Hot 20 Under 40 by 7x7 magazine.

[SF Citizen: Harvey Milk Club Endorses Debra Walker, Rafael Mandelman and Michael Goldstein for 2010]
[7x7: Hot 20 Under 40]
[Photo: John Lee for 7x7]

UNN Meeting: Meet the 2010 District 8 Supervisor Candidates

What: Upper Noe Neighbors monthly meeting. "We'll be featuring many of the candidates for District 8 supervisor. Great opportunity for Noe Valley residents to get a head start on evaluating the candidates."
When: Tonight, Thursday the 22nd, 7:30pm
Where: Upper Noe Recreation Center, Day/Sanchez

Can't make it? With only a year left in this campaign there will likely be many more opportunities to meet Rafael Mandelman, Scott Wiener, Rebecca Prozan, Laura Spanjian and whomever else dreams of taking Bevan Dufty's seat on the Board.

Update: SF FYI net attended.

2010 Supes Race: Scott Wiener Makes It Official

In a move guaranteed to get picked up by at least 7 blogs, this week Scott Wiener announced his candidacy for District 8 Supervisor on YouTube (via Sweet Melissa).

Mr Wiener and Rafael Mandelman are official candidates, while Laura Spanjian and Rebecca Prozan are still sitting on the fence.

[NVSF: It's Official: Mandelman Enters Supes Race]

Bevan Dufty Endorses His Replacement(s) On Way To Mayoral Race

Examiner: "Though the election for District 8 supervisor is more than 18 months away – and nobody has officially filed -- two potential candidates got a ringing endorsement today from Supervisor Bevan Dufty, who currently holds the seat. Dufty called out Laura Spanjian, an assistant general manager at the PUC, and Scott Wiener, a deputy city attorney..."

[SFE: Dufty picks favorites early for District 8]
[NVSF: Election 2010: And So It Begins]

Election 2010: And So It Begins

As the dust settles on Election 2008, candidates are already gearing up for the 2010 District 8 Supervisor race. From the Bay Area Reporter:

Both Deputy City Attorney Scott Wiener and Rafael Mandelman, current Milk Club president, have declared their candidacies in District 8 to replace openly gay Supervisor Bevan Dufty, who is termed out and plans to run for mayor in 2011.
...Also looking at jumping into the race is Deputy District Attorney Rebecca Prozan, who owns a home with her partner near the heart of the Castro.
...Laura Spanjian, who works for the city's Public Utilities Commission, is also contemplating a run. Another past co-chair of Alice, she said last week she has yet to decide.
...Several other gay people mentioned as potential candidates in D8 include Alex Randolph, Mayor Gavin Newsom's liaison to the district and the LGBT community; BART board member Tom Radulovich, who lost his bid for the seat to Dufty in 2002; and Sierra Club executive committee member Rick Galbreath.

Candidates can't start raising money until May 2009, so for now it's all talk. And of course there have to be some non-LGBT candidates in the mix. Stay tuned...

[BAR: Candidates plan 2010 supes races]
[NVSF: Update: Noe Valley Voted]
[NVSF: Fun With Maps: Where is Noe Valley?]