Jane Kim BOS 6 questionnaire

Jane Kim BOS 6 questionnaire

Postby Jeff_W on Mon Aug 16, 2010 6:56 pm

Candidate name:

Jane Kim

Contact person:

Viva Mogi

Mail address:

1655 Mission Street #431, San Francisco, CA 94103

Telephone:

415.658.5263

Email address:

jane@janekim.org

Web address:

http://www.janekim.org

Anticipated Budget:

$143,000 Far more if cap is lifted.

Funds raised to date:

$143,000

Percentage of donations under $50

32%

Please write a brief response (less than 150 words) to each question. You will have additional opportunities to address these issues.



1. Why are you running? Why should we vote for you?

As a Community Organizer and School Board Commissioner, I understand how smart policy, crafted with community engagement, can effectively drive change that benefits everyone. It requires collaboration between city departments, community based organizations, labor partners, and neighborhood residents - something I have extensive experience with. Our campaign is about bringing people together who want to be a positive part of that collaboration.

In my campaign, I am proud to have assembled such an equally passionate group of people who live and work in the district and are committed to continuing collaborative work after the election. I am proud to hear feedback about how positive our campaign is, and that our team and volunteers are interested in more than just the November election - they are committed to improving the lives of people and making District 6 a better place for everyone.

2. What sets you apart from your opponents?

I have experience working in an elected legislative position in San Francisco. I have experience developing policies, collaborating with communities, garnering support, analyzing budgets and making tough choices that prioritize the most vulnerable. I have managed political pressure and maintained my personal and professional integrity throughout the process. Further, I have proven that I listen and can work with a lot of different parties and this year, was unanimously elected President by our Board of Education. Most importantly, I have demonstrated accountability to low-income communities, immigrant communities, youth and their families with the policies that I have both developed and supported.

In addition, I have run two city-wide campaigns-- both times, I reached 300 precincts with my field operations. In my second campaign, I placed first out of fifteen candidates citywide and earned 5,514 more votes than than my closest competitor. In District 6, I earned 1,000 more votes than my closest competitor.

3. San Francisco for Democracy is committed to grassroots involvement. Please explain how you are involving ordinary citizens in your campaign?

I believe our campaign is the largest grassroots campaign in District 6, involving most ordinary citizens. 100 different volunteers have been involved in our campaign in many different roles thus far. Our grassroots strength has been demonstrated by the number of signatures we gathered to qualify my name for the ballot. We turned in 1,732 signatures of which 1,281 were deemed valid by the Department of Elections, which was the highest number of valid signatures for any District supervisoral candidate city-wide. Our signature gathering campaign was 100% volunteer driven and our signature gatherers ranged from young adults to SRO tenants to young professionals to senior citizens.

We also ran one of the largest grassroots campaign for my two campaigns for Board of Education, bringing out close 200 volunteers, many of whom were participating in an electoral campaign for the first time.

An important aspect of our campaign is our commitment to registering new voters which we have been doing since June.

4. San Francisco for Democracy endorses fiscally responsible and socially progressive candidates. Please give examples of why you fit these criteria?

As a Member and President of the School Board, I have direct experience in balancing a public budget, and in determining cuts every year. I view the budget process as an opportunity to take a fresh look at services and evaluate what is effective and relevant today. I know what it means to take a fine-toothed comb to make cuts where it made sense to do so, cooperating with communities in the process to understand their interests and needs.

I am a proponent of values which embody the socially progressive (and fiscally responsible): grassroots democracy, ecological wisdom, social justice, nonviolence, decentralization, community-based economics, feminism, respect for diversity, global responsibility, and sustainability. I have worked to promote these values, not only on the School Board, but also as a Community Organizer and a Civil Rights Attorney.

5. What public safety strategies currently being implemented by the San Francisco Police department do you agree, or disagree with? What will be your agenda regarding public safety, if elected supervisor?

We cannot build the kind of community we want when our neighbors do not feel safe to walk our streets. There is a lack of a comprehensive violence prevention strategy that works for our neighborhood.

Community policing is the right direction for our City. In order for the police to be as effective as they need to be, the community must have a greater sense of trust. This can be encouraged by having additional beat cops patrol by foot. For example, due to the density of the neighborhood, the Tenderloin can easily be patrolled by beat patrol without compromising SFPD’s commitment to response time for 911 calls. I think the past captain, Jiminez was building strong relationships with the neighborhood and instituting community policing and we need to build upon his legacy.

We need to take a holistic approach to effectively address public safety in San Francisco. Anti-poverty initiatives will address violence in our communities and increase public safety. Much of violence is directly correlated to lack of jobs, quality of education opportunities and affordable housing. My priorities are to increase affordable housing, create jobs for our communities and support safety net services. In a recession, studies have shown that states that raise taxes and more robustly support services bounce back from recessions faster than states that cut taxes.

6. What do you believe is the correct percentage of units to be set aside for affordable housing, when property is redeveloped? Please explain why you believe that percentage is correct?

As someone who was a community organizer for one of the pioneering San Francisco affordable housing developers for six years, I have seen how the lack of affordable housing stock for families has overcrowded and created substandard housing conditions for our working class families. I am excited about supporting a Youth and Family Special Use District plan in South of Market, one that prioritizes development of affordable family housing, open space, recreation, and other services that make certain uses such as fast food restaurants and liquor stores more limited.

In general, we must advocate for more units with two and three bedrooms that appropriately accommodate different sized families, and focus on deep affordability by targeting families at AMI much lower than 80%. We must advocate for the highest percentage possible when a property is redeveloped. This fluctuates depending on the number of units and the type of developer (small, large).

7. Public transportation is dysfunctional in the City and County of San Francisco. Do you agree with that statement? If not, why? If so, what is your analysis of why it is dysfunctional? What will you do to make public transportation functional if elected?

I agree with this statement. We can increase service without increasing costs by speeding up MUNI from its current 8.1 MPH average with pre-boarding payment, the Van Ness and Geary BRT, and prioritized lanes for MUNI. I would also pursue a variety of other strategies to improve and increase MUNI service from current levels, looking for advancements in management, public information, transparency, operations, and safety.

For management, we need to be careful about the metrics that we use to hold MUNI accountable. For example, if on-time performance is the only metric, that can unintentionally skew toward results that are not entirely in the public interest (e.g. stops being skipped). I would also examine the system of rewards and incentives for upper and middle management, to see if they are aligned with producing better performance.

For public information, I would explore continued expansion of Nextmuni. I would also look at way in which public information on service outages could be improved, and how multilingual information could be enhanced.

For transparency, I would push for more responsiveness to customer complaints, particularly when they are illustrating patterns of problems, and I would explore if more regular town halls with MUNI management would be productive.

For operations, I would advocate for the prioritization of an approved upgraded control center, to address the current antiquated system. I would also explore ways in which “bunching” could be mitigated, possibly with better technology or with more street inspectors assigned to monitor.

And finally, for safety, I would look at allocating resources, such as the funding of community response teams or MTAP to ride our buses and monitor certain bus stops with a high number of incidents to prevent bullying, petty thefts, fights and provide conflict mediation during high incident hours, such as 3-5pm on weekdays.

8. What do you view as the top three issues in District 6? What are your solutions for these issues? Do you believe these issues are consistent throughout the city? If they are not consistent, what do you view as the issues outside your district that should be addressed in the coming years? Do you have solutions for those issues?

I believe that the top three issues are to 1) keep people safe; 2) develop policies that protect tenants’ rights, improve living conditions for residents, and provide development incentives for small business to thrive; and 3) develop creative budget proposals that protect and improve public services, such as mass transit, health care, education and parks. I believe that these issues are consistent throughout the city.

Our campaign is about strengthening neighborhoods, making them more vibrant and livable. San Francisco is a desirable city because of entrepreneurship, diversity, the arts, and progressive ideals. District 6 embodies all of these. Together, we can be a model for smart urban planning and thriving neighborhoods.

I am in the process of developing my implementation plan for these priorities with members of the community. My style on the Board of Education is to develop priorities and then work with stakeholders, community leaders and residents on how to best implement policies.

9. What is your position regarding privatization in the public sector?

In general, I am opposed to privatization and/or contracting out of existing local government services. This is particularly true where union jobs are eliminated in the process. In the past, I have voted out against the contracting out of security guard jobs twice at the school district. Privatization not only destroys decades of employment protection gains but is falsely seen as cost-effective.

10. Do you favor the use of Project Labor Agreements in the public sector? Please explain your position.

Yes. I supported the PLA as a Board of Education candidate and member. Projects Labor Agreements retain jobs with fair wages and benefits and give greater level of accountability for city projects.

11. What is your position regarding Sit/Lie?

Oppose. I certainly understand the concerns over aggressive panhandling, soliciting and behavior of individuals on our City’s sidewalks. I do not support a sit-lie ordinance because we already have laws on the book -- CA Penal Code 647(c): aggressive solicitation, obstructing passage of pedestrians on the city’s sidewalks, and loitering -- which address many constituents concerns. These laws can be enforced without requiring citizens to complain of violation prior to enforcement. I believe that effective solutions could be found in proper enforcement of these existing laws.

12. Do you believe San Francisco should be a Sanctuary city?

I support the original sanctuary city ordinance. I interned at the San Francisco Public Defender’s Office at Juvenile Justice when the ordinance was amended to report suspected undocumented youth at detention, and I saw how families were unnecessarily torn apart prior to any due process or conviction of families. I was raised in an immigrant community, I continue to work in our immigrant communities, and as a former Community Organizer, I believe that all residents should have access to services regardless of status. As a Board of Education member, I supported policy which prohibits school staff from directly cooperating with ICE on campus and keep our schools safe from ICE raids. Undocumented residents make up the economic foundation of many cities and they help ensure that our city runs as we know it. The immigration system is broken, and Congress has failed to come up with a comprehensive solution. I personally support general amnesty of all undocumented residents in the US.
Jeff_W
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 7:00 pm

Return to November 2010 General Election

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron