Top Ten Reasons NOT to vote for Marjan Philhour for District 1 Supervisor
Written By Kristin Tieche
If you live in the Richmond District of San Francisco, your mailbox has probably been flooded with campaign paraphernalia for the last 2 years for Marjan Philhour. You’ve probably seen people wearing blue shirts and carrying blue signs with her name on it on every corner. Maybe you’ve even seen one of her mega-banners hanging from a house on your street. In fact, you’re likely as tired of hearing and seeing her name as much as you’re tired of hearing about Hillary’s damn emails.
There’$ a rea$on why Marjan’$ name ha$ been pla$tered all over Di$trict 1. Can you gue$$ why? (Hint hint: Follow the money.)
1) Marjan Philhour’s campaign has received more third party contributions than any other candidate in District 1, outspending some of her competitors by 100 to 1.
Join our weekly newsletter so we can send you awesome freebies, weird events, incredible articles, and gold doubloons (note: one of these is not true).
Philhour’s campaign has received tons of corporate tech donations through PACs like Progress SF (which funnels to the Robert F. Kennedy Democratic Club), as well as real estate money like Flynn Investments, Trinity Properties and Gruber & Gruber Properties.
Third-party expenditures have spent $665,395 to get Marjan Philhour elected and another $58,000 plus to defeat her opponent, the progressive candidate Sandra Lee Fewer. Some examples:
- Robert F Kennedy Democratic Club gave $504,000. Much of these contributions are from Progress San Francisco – corporate tech money from Salesforce, Airbnb, Facebook, Y Combinator, Google, Instagram and Yelp.
- San Franciscans for a City That Works gave $96,000. This is partially Police Officers Association money, and partially Local 261/other labor union money.
- San Francisco Parent Political Action Committee gave $31,711. Some of this money comes from Maximus Real Estate Partners (responsible for Monster in the Mission and Parkmerced).
Marjan pretends that there is nothing she can do about independent expenditures, but with her hands wide open, apparently. For more info on the dark money pouring into Philhour’s campaign, read the recent article in the Examiner and The Chronicle.
2) Marjan Philhour skirts the ethics rules on independent expenditures. One of Marjan’s former employees at her consulting firm (Philhour & Associates), who worked for her DCCC campaign, is now working on the independent expenditure committee, San Franciscans for a City That Works. Independent expenditures and candidates can not coordinate. It’s hella shady that Marjan’s former staff for her political fundraising company and campaign is now working on the independent expenditure to get her elected. Read more about this story, and the complaint filed against Philhour, in this 48 Hills article.
3) Marjan Philhour just received some questionable last minute contributions from big-time realtors and landlords. After raising essentially nothing for months, suddenly Marjan raised $20k in just a few days after the filing deadline, thinking it wouldn’t become public in time for the election. Some of these funds come from Flynn Investments (serial evictors) and from the head of Jackson Square Properties, Curtis Gardner, who is partners with Thomas Coates, who tried to eliminate rent control in 2008.
4) Marjan Philhour has taken down her political fundraising website Philhour and Associates to hide that she is a political consultant and paint herself as a “community advocate.” While at Philhour and Associates she fundraised for Carmen Chu, Katy Tang, Vicki Hennessy and London Breed.
5) Marjan Philhour publicly voted against Airbnb regulations in the spring of 2016. But with the unpopularity of Airbnb in the Richmond District, she’s changed her tune during her campaign for supervisor. San Franciscans can’t trust that Marjan won’t flip flop on this issue if she is elected.
6) Marjan Philhour is publicly in support of Proposition Q, which would take tents away from the homeless. While she enjoys the support of real estate developers, she would take away the only shelter that some residents of her district have to protect themselves from the elements. But more than that, Prop Q is a wedge issue for Mark Farrell and his bid to become mayor of San Francisco. Farrell has endorsed Philhour.
7) If elected supervisor, Marjan Philhour will put renters in the Richmond and across San Francisco at risk. When asked at the District 1 Supervisor forums, Marjan stated that she supports Propositions P and U. These propositions are sponsored by realtors and would gut the creation of affordable housing for lower income people and allow landlords to evict more renters or jack up their rent. The Richmond District is second to the Mission District in terms of evictions, and with 65% of residents being renters, San Franciscans need a supervisor who will protect tenant rights.
9) Marjan is endorsed by YIMBY, a pro-development group comprised of SF BARF and GrowSF. Remember that SF BARF was the pro-development group that tried unsuccessfully to take over the SF Bay Area Chapter of the Sierra Club. How can Marjan stand for affordable housing when she aligns herself with a special interest group whose intention is to build build build?
10) Marjan Philhour’s campaign has used PAC money to smear progressive candidates like Sandra Lee Fewer. Richmond District residents should elect a candidate who will truly have the community’s best interests in mind, and not private interest money in her pockets. San Francisco is NOT for sale.
Kristin Tieche is a filmmaker living in District 1 and producer of Let’s Get Political SF.