FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

In Bay Area Refinery Town: Berniecrats & Clintonites Clash Over Rent Control

by

Photo by Phil Roeder | CC BY 2.0

Photo by Phil Roeder | CC BY 2.0

In June, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders wound up his presidential primary campaign by urging his supporters to run for office themselves.

About 20,000 volunteered to do so–in this election cycle or future ones. And, since then, the Sanders-inspired organization known as Our Revolution (OR) has endorsed about 100 like-minded candidates across the country. They include Sanders fans running for seats in Congress and state legislatures, on city councils and local school boards, and mayoral positions.

In Richmond, the scene of an epic electoral battle between local progressives and Chevron-backed candidates in 2014, two would-be city councilors are getting OR fund-raising and publicity help (including a photo op with Sanders during his visit to San Francisco last weekend). Melvin Willis and Ben Choi are leaders of the Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA), a force for change in their majority minority city of 110,000 for the last 13 years. During that time, RPA candidates have won eight mayoral or council races while losing only six local contests. Two of those initially unsuccessful candidates now serve on the city council after getting elected on their second or third attempt.

Unlike most first-time candidates, Willis and Choi have the benefit of existing political infrastructure of the sort OR hopes to foster in more cities and states. The RPA has a bustling downtown office and dues paying membership of several hundred; its most active volunteers publish a newspaper mailed several times a year to 30,000 Richmond residents and support a year-round program of multi-issue organizing. The group’s election campaign coordinators have a database of past progressive voters.

Like political insurgents elsewhere who identify more with Sanders personally than the Democratic Party, Willis and Choi are clashing with local Clintonites. In Richmond, leading Democrats, including Mayor Tom Butt and his longtime council rival, Nate Bates, are against rent control. As an organizer for the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE), 25-year old Willis helped spearhead the effort to get a city council majority to approve rent regulation in 2015, before a California Apartment Association (CAA) petition drive triggered suspension of that local ordinance.
Rent control and the requirement of just cause for eviction are now on the Richmond ballot Nov. 8, in revised form. The CAA is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to defeat this measure, along with pro-rent control referenda in nearby Alameda, Burlingame, San Mateo, and Mountain View.

Corporate Money Rejected

The field of nine Richmond candidates seeking three open seats on its city council is split 5 to 4 between foes and friends of rent control. Five contenders are past or present city councilors, with higher name recognition than the RPA hopefuls; one fellow African-American in the race, senior city councilor Nate Bates, is 60 years older than Willis! “Team Richmond 2016,” as the RPA calls its slate, is taking on three lawyers, a local businessman, and a neighborhood council leader who, despite being a rent control critic, is backed by six Democratic Party organizations and liberal state Assemblyman Tony Thurmond.

No one else in the officially “non-partisan” race, except Willis and Choi, refuses contributions from corporations or industry associations like the CAA—a stance that both RPA activists stress at every candidate forum. Their campaigns are using house parties to attract enough small donors, of the Sanders variety, so both candidates can fully utilize local public matching funds. In Richmond, that system provides a maximum of $25,000 to office seekers who can raise $30,000 in private contributions.

A graduate of Amherst College, Choi comes from a Korean immigrant family in Los Angeles; he works for Marin Clean Energy, a non-profit renewable energy provider responsible for reducing fossil fuel dependence among local utility users. The son of a single mother in Richmond, Willis has personally experienced both homelessness and low-wage work. He graduated from a local high school but opted to become a full-time community organizing, rather than pursue further education. Three years ago, in recognition of his tireless neighborhood canvassing for refinery safety, soda taxation, tenant and home-owner protection, plus a higher minimum wage, Willis received the prestigious Mario Savio Young Activist Award at UC-Berkeley.

Willis and Choi have both served on the city planning commission, a background they tout in candidate night debates about balanced development and housing affordability. They were appointed by Gayle McLaughin during her eight years as the city’s Green mayor. McLaughlin was termed out two years ago but now serves as a Richmond councilor and leading proponent of rent control. Prior to California’s Democratic primary in June, she broke with Green Party orthodoxy and urged her supporters to join her in voting for Sanders.

Killing The Golden Goose?

McLaughlin’s election night dream this Fall is a first-time ever RPA majority of four or more on the city’s 7-member council. That is not an outcome favored by her 72-year old successor in city hall, a native of Arkansas who appeared with Bill Clinton at a local pre-primary event for Hillary. A decade ago, Tom Butt welcomed the “Greens, Latinos, progressive Democrats, African-Americans, and free spirits” in the RPA as valuable political allies. In October, 2014, he joined McLaughlin on the stage with Sanders at a Richmond rally protesting Big Oil’s $3.1 million campaign to elect Chevron-friendly candidates rather than Butt and that year’s three-member RPA slate, which included McLaughlin.

Since then, Richmond’s left-liberal united front has fractured over rent control, reform of the city’s police commission, and various water-front development controversies. After ACCE organizers like Willis, concerned ministers, local unions, and the RPA pressed the University of California for concessions related to a proposed campus expansion in Richmond, Butt blamed them for “killing the golden goose” when that project was suspended due to stalled private sector fundraising and UC-B Chancellor Nicholas Dirks’ sudden resignation this summer. When Richmond tenants got rowdy at a Sept. 13 city council meeting–where a 45-day moratorium on evictions failed to win a necessary super-majority vote–Butt accused the RPA of “riot and bullying.”

In email blasts to several thousand readers of his E-Forum, Butt now condemns the RPA for its “ideological purity” and raises the specter of “bloc voting” by progressive councilors who, in his view, have “almost no interest in economic development and job creation.” As he told me recently, “if they get a fourth member on the council, it would be an absolute disaster for Richmond and would make my life miserable.” In some past interviews, Butt has even hinted he might resign if his own council vote was rendered irrelevant.

On the campaign trail, Melvin Willis reminds voters that, “before the RPA, Richmond was a terrible and dangerous place.” The city council was dominated by “a voting bloc called the Chevron Five,” politicians bought and paid for by the city’s largest employer (an arrangement that some present-day RPA critics, although not Butt, had no problem with then).

Addressing a crowd at Richmond’s Washington elementary school on Sept. 28, Choi disputed the “perception of RPA as unyielding and uncompromising,” saying that neither he nor Willis “fit that stereotype.” In the closing days of their campaign, Choi and Willis are both counting on the RPA’s much-tested GOTV capacity—plus additional voter-turn out help from Our Revolution. They’re also getting strong support from pro-Sanders unions like the California Nurses Association, National Union of Healthcare Workers, and Amalgamated Transit Union, plus the Richmond branch of SEIU Local 1021, which represents city workers and whose international union favored Clinton.

The outcome of Richmond’s referendum on rent regulation will directly affect about 25,000 people in 9,000 residential units. If enough voters in those often lower-income households participate in the election, they may also favor the candidates most strongly identified with tenant protection. The coat-tail effect of a big pro-rent control vote could give the RPA its largest city council delegation ever—in an election year when its main adversary in the past, Chevron, has been laying low and avoiding the “independent expenditure” over-kill that back-fired against conservative Democrats running two years ago.

Steve Early is a resident of the San Francisco Bay Area currently working on a book about progressive municipal policy making there and elsewhere. He is the author, most recently, of Save Our Unions (Monthly Review Press, 2013). He can be reached at Lsupport@aol.com

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

Weekend Edition
January 20, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Divide and Rule: Class, Hate, and the 2016 Election
Andrew Levine
When Was America Great?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: This Ain’t a Dream No More, It’s the Real Thing
Yoav Litvin
Making Israel Greater Again: Justice for Palestinians in the Age of Trump
Linda Pentz Gunter
Nuclear Fiddling While the Planet Burns
Ruth Fowler
Standing With Standing Rock: Of Pipelines and Protests
David Green
Why Trump Won: the 50 Percenters Have Spoken
Dave Lindorff
Imagining a Sanders Presidency Beginning on Jan. 20
Peter Lee
The Deep State and the Sex Tape: Martin Luther King, J. Edgar Hoover, and Thurgood Marshall
Pete Dolack
Eight People Own as Much as Half the World
Roger Harris
Too Many People in the World: Names Named
John Berger
The Nature of Mass Demonstrations
Stephen Zielinski
It’s the End of the World as We Know It
David Swanson
Six Things We Should Do Better As Everything Gets Worse
Alci Rengifo
Trump Rex: Ancient Rome’s Shadow Over the Oval Office
Brian Cloughley
What Money Can Buy: the Quiet British-Israeli Scandal
Kent Paterson
Mexico’s Great Winter of Discontent
Norman Solomon
Trump, the Democrats and the Logan Act
David Macaray
Attention, Feminists
Yves Engler
Demanding More From Our Media
James A Haught
Religious madness in Ulster
Patrick Bond
Tripping Up Trumpism Through Global Boycott Divestment Sanctions
Robert Fantina
Trump: What Changes and What Remains the Same
David Rosen
Globalization vs. Empire: Can Trump Contain the Growing Split?
Elliot Sperber
Dystopia
Dan Bacher
New CA Carbon Trading Legislation Answers Big Oil’s Call to Continue Business As Usual
Wayne Clark
A Reset Button for Political America
Chris Welzenbach
“The Death Ship:” An Allegory for Today’s World
Uri Avnery
Being There
Patrick Hiller
Guns Against Grizzlies at Schools or Peace Education as Resistance?
Randy Shields
The Devil’s Real Estate Dictionary
Ron Jacobs
Singing the Body Electric Across Time
Ann Garrison
Fifty-five Years After Lumumba’s Assassination, Congolese See No Relief
Christopher Brauchli
Swing Low Alabama
Jon Hochschartner
The Five Least Animal-Friendly Senate Democrats
Pauline Murphy
Fighting Fascism: the Irish at the Battle of Cordoba
Louis Proyect
Is Our Future That of “Sense8” or “Mr. Robot”?
Charles R. Larson
Review: Robert Coover’s “Huck out West”
January 19, 2017
Melvin Goodman
America’s Russian Problem
Dave Lindorff
Right a Terrible Wrong: Why Obama Should Reverse Himself and Pardon Leonard Peltier
Laura Carlsen
Bringing Mexico to Its Knees Will Not “Make America Great Again”
John W. Whitehead
Nothing is Real: When Reality TV Programming Masquerades as Politics
Yoav Litvin
Time to Diss Obey: the Failure of Identity Politics and Protest
Mike Whitney
The Trump Speech That No One Heard 
Conn Hallinan
Is Europe Heading for a “Lexit”?
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail