Instructions:
1. There are 10 sections to this questionnaire. Each section
corresponds to the 10 Key Values of the Green Party.
2. Each section contains one or more written questions and ends with
several multiple-choice questions. Please don't skip the written
questions.
3. The multiple-choice questions are answered by checking the box in the
appropriate column to indicate which is closest to your position:
+ = Support / Agree / Yes
- = Oppose / Disagree / No
: = Undecided / Don't know / No opinion
4. The world is too complex to always break down neatly into
yes/no/maybe choices, so feel free to clarify any answers to multiple
choice questions with a few words.
Candidate Name: Keith Freedman
Phone Number: 415.738.2024
Web site: https://mayor.KeithFreedman.com
E-mail: mayor@KeithFreedman.com
Name of Campaign Manager: campaign@KeithFreedman.com
Are you receiving public financing: Yes
Signed voluntary spending limit: Yes
Major Endorsements:
Your 2nd, 3rd choices for Mayor:
Who did you endorse for Mayor in 2019 (all 3 choices, if applicable):
London Breed
1) Grassroots Democracy:
A) What are your thoughts on Instant Runoff Voting, and District
Elections? How have they worked to date? What would you change in
the future? What about Proportional Representation?
+ - ?
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Sub-government such as Neighborhood Assemblies, Networks or District Councils
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Voters' right to recall elected officials
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Residency requirements for elected officials should be strictly enforced
B) What strategies would you employ to reduce corruption in San
Francisco government?
+ - ?
[ ] [ x ] [ ] Ethics Commission should be disbanded
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Ethics Commission meetings should be televised
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Ethics Commission should prioritize investigating violations from well-funded campaigns
[ ] [ x ] [ ] My campaign is supported or promoted by a Super PAC
[ ] [ ] [ ] My campaign has attended events sponsored by "Neighbors for a Better SF", "TogetherSF", "GrowSF" and/or "YIMBY"
2) Ecological Wisdom: Please outline your view of the major
environmental and ecological issues facing San Francisco and your
proposed policies to address them.
+ - ?
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Phasing out all diesel and biodiesel transit (e.g., Muni, tour, shuttles)
[ ] [ ] [ ] Public Power with 100% local/regional clean energy mandate and elected utility board
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Install local/regional clean energy, efficiency, and battery storage and microgrids to supply 100% of our electricity by 2035
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Reducing or eliminating parking minimums in new housing and commercial developments
[ ] [ ] [ ] In the Bayview and on Treasure Island, halt all US Navy land transfers to the city or developers, and halt all development, until all sites are retested and cleaned to Residential Standards
[ ] [ ] [ x ] Non-native Tree Removals
[ ] [ x ] [ ] Use of herbicides in public parks
[ ] [ ] [ x ] Artificial turf on City-owned athletic fields
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Managed retreat, Coastal Zone protection, and restoring wetlands in response to Global Warming
I think we have too many elected boards. The thought is that it adds accountability but it only serves to confuse voters. We have enough elected officials, they can appoint or oversee the utility board and be held accountable by the voters. I do feel California's PUC is in the pocket of the utilities--our state legislature should be keeping them in check. I am discovering elections are expensive and this leads people to go after money which may not solve the utility problem in the way you hoped elections would. But, I do support local clean energy production and a move to 100% clean power. I would like to put every rooftop in San Francisco under the purview of SF PUC so that the power they generate can be sold at market rate. As it is the current exchange rate for solar is a disincentive to buying solar panels. I'd like people to overproduce and get paid the same rate pg&e will sell it for their local green energy production.
Some years ago, the MTA commissioned a study on traffic. It determined that 30% of traffic are people looking for parking. Our Mayor, who was on the board of supervisors at the time, along with her colleagues took this information and mandated fewer off street parking spaces. This logic escapes me and it violates the principles of mathematics. If a building can provide parking, they should provide as much as makes sense in the footprint of the building.
We should not be housing people on land that is unsafe. If the ground has to be tested and cleaned or replaced then we should do so. Additionally the federal government should pay for this if the pollutants were their responsibility. Our desperation to find land to build housing shouldn't mean we take on the cost and burden of making that land safe for habitation.
3) Social Justice:
A) What is your assessment of homelessness in San Francisco, and what
solutions do you propose?
+ - ?
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Project Homeless Connect
[ ] [ ] [ * ] Care Not Cash
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Healthy SF
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Housing As A Right
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Housing First for Homeless, Addiction, Mental Health
[ ] [ ] [ * ] Law against sitting or camping on SF sidewalks
[ x ] [ ] [ ] I support more homeless navigation centers in my neighborhood
There was an experiment done in Denver that showed some interesting results in just giving people money without strings attached. I believe that could work for some individuals but in general, we find that when we just give our homeless money they spend it on drugs or don't spend it efficiently. Some of this is due to circumstances. When you don't have a refrigerator or cooking facilities, you can't save money buying and preparing your own food. It's very expensive living out of bodegas and restaurants or buying prepared food.
I disagree with the Supreme Court Decision. Government has a responsibility to provide for it's citizens, but I do agree citizens should be expected to do their part. I'm not sure a Switzerland style "housing right" is the best fit for San Francisco, but I do feel we have an obligation to our current homeless population to house them. My "rising tide" initiative will do this. Details to be released the week of July 1st. I believe I can have 100% of our unhoused in reliable long term supportive housing which includes privacy, beds (not cots), bathrooms access to cafeteria or shared kitchens. Each will have a home with an address, supportive services, medical, psychological, and educational services.
As a board member of the South of Market Business Association, I advocated for SOMBA support of one of the first safe consumption sites - right near my business. Because it is small and has limited space, the benefits are muted, but noticeable.
Just like my plan to provide viable housing (not shelter beds) for unhoused people, where we can then expect them to stay in their new home instead of on the public streets, we need enough safe consumption sites that we can expect people to use them instead of consume on the public streets.
Until we can provide a viable alternative with sufficient supply, we can't expect people living on the streets to conduct their lives off the streets.
B) What are your views on housing affordability, what public sector
strategies have worked, which have failed, and what are your proposals?
+ - ?
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Building more market rate housing will lower housing costs for current SF residents
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Impacts of all new development should be paid for in advance by fees on developers
[ ] [ ] [ ] Community Land Trusts
[ ] [ ] [ x ] Rent Control is too strong
[ ] [ X ] [ ] Waive Environmental Review to build Moderate and Low Income Housing
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Social Housing (similar to https://www.sfcommunityhousingact.com/)
[ ] [ X ] [ ] Ban on Airbnb and other short term rentals
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Vacancy tax on residential property and "pied-a-terre" homes
[ ] [ ] [ * ] Flipping taxes on housing speculation
[ ] [ ] [ ] 10-year waiting period before corporate and nonresident owners can sell purchased housing properties
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Condo conversion is currently too difficult
I believe the government should do all it can to deter holding housing off the market for speculation or investment. We have to explore every legal avenue to address this problem, including potential use of eminent domain to resell those properties to people who will live in them or rent them to full time residents.
I'm not opposed to a pied-a-tere fee, but at least these properties are in use and generate economic activity from time to time. Speculative ownership is a drain on the economy and our housing supply.
4) Nonviolence: What are your solutions for SFPD accountability while
making the streets safer?
+ - ?
[ ] [ ] [ * ] Prioritize SFPD enforcement of moving violations
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Support expansion of foot patrols
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Demand stricter accountability in future MOUs with the SFPD
[ ] [ ] [ ] The Board of Supervisors should be able to set policies and priorities for the SFPD through legislation
[ ] [ ] [ * ] Support a public safety program modeled after NYC's "Stop and Frisk."
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Prosecution of SFPD officers involved in violet attacks on, and fatal shooting deaths of, SF residents and visitors
[ ] [ ] [ * ] End cash bail for nonviolent crimes
[ ] [ ] [ * ] Cut police funding and increase social program spending, and establish community control of neighborhood policing
I believe in community policing and I believe in innocent until proven guilty. As a multiple time victim of crime in SF, I want more enforcement, but every person has rights which need to be protected. I have right to get justice for crimes committed against me, and people have the right to not be falsely accused, and the justly accused have rights to be treated fairly and with humanity. I believe in second chances, but support stronger penalties for repeat offenders.
The ringleader of the burglary of my business in February, 2024, had previously had a bench warrant for her arrest, and was on probation as of September 2023. I don't know if she had a cash bail, but given she makes money off of stolen goods, I'm not sure having a cash bail would have much meaning for her. OOR seems reasonable, with increased penalties for failure to appear.
I have gone on many neighborhood walks with the police and have participated in the SFPD Small Business Security Advisory panel. My sense is that most of our officers WANT to do their jobs but they feel handcuffed by policy. Some, such as the detectives on my burglary case, feel overwhelmed and want more resources to do their jobs. In general, I feel the SFPD policies need revision, officers re-trained, and then lets see how effective we are in law enforcement. Once we can be more effective with the $750M/year we're spending on the SFPD we can then determine if more money or resources gets us across the finish line. My general sense is that once we start fighting crime, we may temporarily need to increase police presence until our city loses it's reputation as being a haven for criminals, once done, the levels of crime should go down enough that we can maintain order with less staff.
I don't feel that increasing socal program spending needs to come out of the police budiget. We should do that anyway.
5) Decentralization:
A) What are your thoughts on the Kaufman Charter of 1996? Does it
need revisiting? Would you support replacing the Strong Mayor system
with commissions where the majority of members are appointed by the
Board of Supervisors, or directly elected?
+ - ?
[ ] [ ] [ ] Elected Rent Board
[ ] [ ] [ ] Elected Public Utility Board
[ ] [ ] [ ] Bring the Housing Authority under the Board of Supervisors
B) The city currently uses non-profits to provide social services. Do
you think this is an appropriate model? Why or why not?
+ - ?
[ ] [ ] [ ] Expand Participatory Budgeting to at least 5% of the SF Budget
[ X ] [ ] [ ] Charter amendment allowing voters to choose the replacement of an elected official being recalled on the same ballot as the recall vote
[ X ] [ ] [ ] Immediately implement open-source voting system for SF elections
In my opinion, we have too many elected offices in SF.
As an example, even though voters choose a DA, and they may know there is a police commission, most think the Mayor is the start and end of law enforcement policy and implementation in SF. This is not the case. The Mayor can't unilaterally replace the police chief, for example. A separately elected individual decides what cases get prosecuted. If the voters wish to have this as a responsibility of the Mayor, they need to give the Mayor the ability to hire and fire a police chief without Board of Supervisor or even Police commission approval. Similarly, we need to evaluate whether or not an elected DA is right for San Francisco. About half the major cities in the United States have elected DA's, while the rest have DA's appointed by the Mayor (or chief executive of the city). Either the people need a better understanding of who is ultimately responsible for prosecution of crime, or they need to give this power to the person they believe is responsible for it nowâ€"the Mayor.
I believe this is also true of many of our city commissions. Most are ineffective and are filled to pay or accrue favor. Most don't require commissioners to be qualified in the field which the commission oversees. This is absurd, wasteful and unnecessary. If we want such additional oversight, the commissioners need to be well qualified. Given their effectiveness, however, I think we could do without most of them and be no worse off. We should expect our City agencies to be run by professionals in their field, and we have many other ways to hold them accountable. I believe the Board of Supervisors can adequately oversee these agencies in absence of commissions via their public hearing process. The Mayor and City Administrator can also similarly track and report on our departments/agencies.
I think we need fewer elected offices and need to hold those remaining elected officials more accountable for the outcome.
I would like to revisit our city charter and all of our city codes. Our city charter is a collection of strange “in the moment” emotional reactions from voters at the time and some of it makes no sense in this day and age.
Our other codes (planning, municipal, etc.) are a complex patchwork which are difficult for the average citizen to understand and are unnecessarily complicated. I'm open to creating a working group to investigate a complete rewrite of all of our City laws and codes. We need to modernize our codes, and we need to make sure all parts of the city and each of our citizens are treated equitably.
This isn't a high priorityâ€"If I accomplish my other goals I'll be satisfied with a job well done. This is nice to have but also may be a time consuming project that may require support of a successor to bring it across the finish line.
As for voting, yes, more transparency and accountability is best. I'd like to see a system where people can vote online using a login and pin code. They can change their votes right up to poll closing time. I'd also like to see some value in those tear off ballot stubs. I have this number but I can't enter it anywhere to see that my ballot was properly counted the way I intended. It's not acceptable in the heart of silicon valley in 2024.
6) Community Based Economics: What economic policies, including
taxation and land use, would you propose that would drive capital into
our communities and keep that capital here for residents?
+ - ?
[ X ] [ ] [ ] Legislation limiting formula retail outlets/chain stores
[ X ] [ ] [ ] Conditional Use permit required for big box stores
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Municipal broadband as a public utility
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Neighborhood cooperatives prioritized as a local supply chain for legalized marijuana
[ x ] [ ] [ ] I support recreational marijuana stores opening in my neighborhood
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Local hiring requirements should be enforced and expanded to include private projects
[ * ] [ ] [ ] Conversion of some golf courses into soccer fields
[ * ] [ ] [ ] Conversion of some golf courses into wild open space
[ X ] [ ] [ ] Prop 13 limits on tax increases should apply only to residential properties
[ ] [ ] [ * ] Commercial Rent Control
[ ] [ ] [ X ] Transition all residential and small business rental
properties into not-for-profit trusts and co-ops
[ ] [ ] [ * ] Vacancy and flipping taxes on local small business property
[ ] [ ] [ * ] Transaction/Flipping taxes on all asset speculation to increase city budget
[ X ] [ ] [ ] San Francisco Public Bank by 2027
I'm not a golfer, but I don't wish to begrudge peoples choices, but it always struck me as odd that a city as small as San Francisco has 10 golf courses. This effectively allocates these large spaces to a very small percentage of our population.
While you're asking, I'd like to see more of our swimming pools open 365 days a year.
We have a problem in SF in that our commercial property owners are willing to act against what seems to be their own best interest. Given there is no commercial rent control, why are they holding out for such high leases for years leaving money on the table. It makes no logical sense. However, commercial tenants can lock in pricing with longer leases and renewable lease terms which can protect them. I'd rather explore things like eminent domain against vacant commercial space rather than rent controls which may further reinforce the owners desire to hold places vacant for higher paying tenants.
See comments above about speculative rental property. same applies here.
Why isn't the SF Public Bank open!! this has been in the works for decades!!
7) Feminism: Do you believe women are underrepresented in city
government? If so, why do you believe this is the case? Is this a
bad thing, and if so, what would you do to remedy the situation?
+ - ?
[ X ] [ ] [ ] The City should help SFUSD provide child care for children of working parents
[ X ] [ ] [ ] The DPH should provide reproductive health services
[ ] [ X ] [ ] Require parental consent for minors seeking an abortion
[ ] [ X ] [ ] Require parental notification for minors seeking an abortion
I believe parents should be responsible for their children but I don't believe parents should be given the ability to force a child to have a child they either don't want, can't care for or will otherwise adversely affect their young lives in irreparable ways. I would hope that a child is comfortable discussing their pregnancy with their parents, but if they aren't then forcing them to do so could be disaster.
We should do more to educate our children about sex, the benefits of sex and the consequences of sex. This will allow young people to make more informed decisions. Teaching parents how to be more combinative and how to be a resource for children and not just rule makers will likely do more to prevent teen pregnancy which makes the abortion question more moot. but I look at things from the perspective of the parents and children who have less open and functional relationships and what the long term consequences will be for that person and for the potential newborn and what their future life might be like.
Anything we can do to facilitate education we must. This includes making schools more accessible, after school programs and anything we can do to ease the burden of Teaching. The more nurturing an environment for teachers, the better quality education we can provide our citizens.
8) Respect for Diversity: Tell us what you believe are the best and the
worst aspects of San Francisco's diversity. How would you try to
protect the best while trying to change the worst?
+ - ?
[ ] [ ] [ X ] Multilingual government and public education
[ X ] [ ] [ ] Undocumented immigrants should have equal access to education and health care
[ X ] [ ] [ ] Non-citizen residents should be able to vote in all local elections
[ X ] [ ] [ ] Full rights for transgender persons
[ ] [ ] [ X ] Boards and commissions now reflect the ethnic diversity of San Francisco
[ ] [ ] [ X ] Boards and commissions now reflect the political diversity of San Francisco
[ ] [ ] [ * ] My campaign reflects the diversity of San Francisco
[ ] [ ] [ * ] End Drag Queen Story Hour and K-12 School Education on Gender Spectrum Differences
I am unfamiliar with the drag queen story hour, but in general, I feel educating people is the right things to do. Geneder spectrum differences may not be something kids learn anywhere else so we should teach them. As one of only 2 LGBTQ+ candidates on the ballot, I can attest that my puberty and subsequent years might have been less stressful had I not been educated in such a heteronormative system. I don't believe in prayer in schools but I believe in science in schools. The science of sexuality is evolving but it's based on non-faith facts. We should teach facts in school.
My campaign team is small currently, but my business has shown grat diversity. I hire based on qualifications and drive and not ones gender, race, color, sexuality or any other physical characteristic. The city should do the same.
9) Global and Personal Responsibility:
A) What are your thoughts on the Board of Supervisors taking positions
on state, national and international issues?
+ - ?
[ ] [ ] [ ] City government cooperating with the PATRIOT Act
[ ] [ ] [ ] City government cooperating with ICE/Secure Communities
[ ] [ ] [ ] City government should boycott Israel until it complies with UN resolutions
[ ] [ ] [ ] SF supervisors should take a position on offshore oil drilling outside CA
[ ] [ ] [ ] SF should refuse to purchase PG&E's nuclear power
As a Jewish person, I find the anti-semitism troubling. The city certainly should not weigh in on International politics for which the city can do nothing and gains nothing. I'm supportive of Israel, and Ukraine. I'm not sure what the city can do about either or what impact a city resolution on either would do other than take up valuable time the BoS should spend on other business.
We are a sanctuary city. I don't see any reason to change that. If illegal non-citizens commit a crime, i don't see that we should not use ICE or federal agencies to relieve the city of such burdens but those contributing to our society should be welcome and treated as valued members of our society.
B) Please describe how you make your political decisions. What is the
main basis for your decision making (e.g., consultation with your
constituents, political consultants, colleagues, unions, businesses,
donors, or your gut feelings)?
+ - ?
[ ] [ ] [ ] Fleet Week and the Blue Angels flyover
[ ] [ ] [ ] JROTC in the public schools
[ ] [ ] [ ] In a severe recession, environmental regulations should be suspended to create jobs
[ X ] [ ] [ ] Business taxes are too high
The environment should never be set aside for expedience. The cost of undoing the damage is always worse than the value gained by allowing it!
business taxes are forcing businesses to close and keeping new ones from opening. if we cut business taxes by half and double the number of businesses, we end up with more money, jobs, economic activity. It seems counterintuitive to some, but we have to look at the total impact, raising business taxes isn't working, I believe lowering them will.
I like fleet week. I understand the environmental objection to the Blue Angels flyovers. I'm not sure it's a hill I'm willing to die on. If there were support for discontinuing it, I wouldn't object, but it's not a cause I would personally champion at this moment in time.
10) Sustainability: What does the Transit First City Charter provision
mean to you? How has Transit First fared in recent years, and how would
you enforce that Charter Provision if elected?
+ - ?
[ X ] [ ] [ ] Muni should be funded sufficiently to replace most car use, and be free to the rider
[ ] [ x ] [ ] Downtown Transit Assessment Tax to support Muni
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Citywide Transit Assessment Tax to support Muni
[ ] [ x ] [ ] More weekend closures of streets in/near my neighborhood to cars (e.g., Car-Free GGP)
[ ] [ * ] [ ] State law change that lets bicycles treat stop signs as yield signs and red lights as stop signs
[ X ] [ ] [ ] I ride Muni, bicycle and/or walk instead of driving on a regular basis
[ X ] [ ] [ ] Bus Rapid Transit expanded to all major transit corridors in SF
[ ] [ * ] [ ] Car hailing services like Uber and Lyft should be regulated as taxis, or banned
[ ] [ ] [ ] Allow residents to park on the sidewalk without getting a ticket, unless their neighbors complain
[ ] [ ] [ ] Congestion pricing for parking
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Power more City vehicles using biofuels (e.g., corn-based ethanol)
[ ] [ ] [ * ] Residents should be allowed to park in the street in front of their own driveway for free
[ ] [ ] [ x ] Support expanding parking meter hours to include later evening hours and weekends
[ ] [ ] [ * ] Remove parking spots and car lanes to create dedicated bike and bus lanes or wider sidewalks
I understand the benefit to allowing bikes to roll through stop signs. My concern is that the consequences are too high--it puts a burden on driver to pay attention to what someone is doing when they should have a right of way--I don't want to see a person die from being hit or a driver have to suffer the anxiety of hitting a cyclist because the law allows something that doesn't really make sense. Protected bike lanes and bike routes that have less interaction with traffic make more sense to me.
I don't own a car. I use uber/lyft/waymo sometimes I walk often, and recently I got a scooter which I use when I'm in a hurry to get to work or the weather makes walking less interesting.
I would like to be the mayor to make san francisco a driverless city. But this isn't really a plan I am campaigning on but I'd like to create a working group to explore this once in office.
I do think we need to do better to contain lyft/uber, etc.. designated pickup and drop off points make sense. There's a lot we can do her to make these less impactful on our city but still be useful to citizens who rely on them.
In general, I'd like to see a carrot vs stick approach to car ownership. I gave up my car, my lifestyle allowed for it, but not everyones does. SF has adopted policies to just make it harder to own a car. this isn't effective.
Making MUNI better is good, making changes to traffic just to slow down and inconvenience drivers is bad.
If we want people to give up their cars, we need to give them better options, not just punish them.
Your positions on selected current and past Propositions:
+ - ?
[ ] [ ] [ ] March 2024 Prop E (More Police Chases)
[ ] [ ] [ ] March 2024 Prop F (Drug Test Poor People)
[ ] [ ] [ ] June 2022 Prop C (Recall Reform)
[ X ] [ ] [ ] June 2022 Prop H (Boudin Recall)
[ X ] [ ] [ ] Nov 2020 Prop G (16-17 y.o. voting, local elections)
[ ] [ ] [ ] Nov 2020 Prop I (Real Estate Transfer Tax)
[ X ] [ ] [ ] June 2018 Prop F (Eviction Defense)
[ ] [ ] [ ] June 2018 Prop H (Tasers for SFPD)
[ ] [ ] [ ] Nov 2016 Prop D (Vacancy appointments)
[ X ] [ ] [ ] Nov 2016 Prop N (Non-citizen voting, school board)
[ ] [ ] [ ] Nov 2016 Prop Q (Prohibiting tents on public sidewalks)
[ X ] [ ] [ ] Nov 2016 Prop 62 (Ending Death Penalty)
Due Date: Friday, June 21, 11:59 pm
Please submit by email to cc@sfgreens.org. For more information, call
Barry Hermanson at 415-255-9494. Please return your answers in plain
text (not HTML, PDF, or Word format), so that we can post all
candidates' answers in the same format.
The SF Green Party will invite selected candidates who return
completed questionnaires on time to speak and answer questions at our
candidate forum and endorsement meeting. To be given time on our
agenda, each candidate needs at least three active Green Party members
to request their invitation. This will be a hybrid meeting, so
invited candidates may also speak with us via Zoom.
Our endorsement meeting is scheduled for Wed, June 26 from 6:30-9:30
pm at our office, 2973 16th St, #300, SF - note that this is across
the street from our old office in the Redstone Building. The first
two hours will be for interviews of selected candidates, and the last
hour will be for decision making.
Completed questionnaires will be posted on our website,
https://sfgreenparty.org.