Olague attacks led by billionaires and a consultant/commissioner with undisclosed income

Andrea Shorter appears on the sfwomenforaccountability.com, but she won't disclose who pays her for political consulting.

Understanding how political activists are being paid is important to understanding what their motivations are. For example, is Andrea Shorter – a mayor-appointed former president of the Commission on the Status of Women – leading the campaigns against Sup. Christina Olague and Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi out of concern for domestic violence, or is it because of their progressive political stands, such as supporting rent control and opposing corporate tax breaks?

As a city commissioner who is required under state law to report her income on annual financial disclosure forms to the city, the public should be able to know who is paying this self-identified “political consultant.” But we can't, because for each of the last five years, Shorter has claimed under penalty of perjury on Form 700 to have no reportable income, which means less than $500 from any source – an unlikely claim that was the source of complaints filed today with the Ethics Commission and Fair Political Practices Commission.

Shorter led efforts to have her commission support Mayor Ed Lee's failed effort to remove Mirkarimi from office for official misconduct, and now she's become one of the main public faces leading an independent expenditure campaign called San Francisco Women for Accountability and a Responsible Supervisor Opposing Christina Olague 2012, funded with more than $100,000 by Lee's right-wing financial supporters: venture capitalist Ron Conway and Thomas Coates (and his wife), who has also funded statewide efforts to make rent control illegal.

Neither Shorter nor Conway responded to our requests for comment, but tenant advocates and Olague supporters are pushing back with an 11:30am rally at City Hall tomorrow (Thurs/1). Organizers are calling on activists “to beat back the attacks on rent control and workers by billionaires Ron Conway and the Coates family. The 1 Percent Club, Coates and Conway want San Francisco to be a playground for the rich. Take a stand to say that these opportunists CANNOT buy elections!”

The Ethics Commission complaint against Shorter was filed this morning by sunshine activist Bob Planthold, who also filed a similar complaint a couple weeks ago against District 1 supervisorial candidate David Lee, who also appears to have grossly understated his income of the same financial disclosure form during his service on the Recreation and Parks Commission.

“There's been too little attention by mayor after mayor after mayor in that the people they appoint are allowed to be sloppy, negligent, unresponsive, and under-responsive to these financial disclosure requirements,” Planthold told us.

Although the Ethics Commission doesn't confirm or deny receiving complaints or launching investigations, Planthold said Ethics investigators have already notified him that they were investigating the Lee complaint, and he expects similar action against Shorter. “Ethics is pursuing my complaint against David Lee. It's not one of the many that they decided to ignore,” Planthold said.

The FPPC complaint against Shorter is being filed by former Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin, who told us, “The complaint speaks for itself.”

Although Shorter claims no income on public forms, the political consulting firm Atlas Leadership Strategies lists Shorter as the CEO of Political Leadership Coaching, which works with political candidates and causes. Atlas also represents PJ Johnston, who was press secretary for then-Mayor Willie Brown and now represents a host of powerful corporate clients.

“Her brand of discreet, highly confidential, political coaching works to equip leaders with tools to exercise more effective, impactful, innovative and – where possible – transformative leadership,” was one way Atlas describes Shorter.

Is she working in a discreet and confidential way to elect moderate London Breed to one of the city's most progressive districts? Is she being paid for that work by Conway or anyone else? Is she doing the bidding of Mayor Lee and his allies in hopes of greater rewards?

Or should voters just take at face value her claim to really be standing up for “accountability” from public officials? Is this really about the statement Shorter makes in the video prominently displayed on the sfwomenforaccountability.com website: “Christina Olague has lost the trust of victims' advocates. She has set our cause back. I'm profoundly disappointed in her and I can't support her anymore.”?

With less than a week until the election, voters can only speculate.


Why was she supporting Christina "Run Ed Run" Olague in the first place?

And what purse strings does Mirkarimi hold that these women are worried about?

Posted by Richard on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 4:56 pm

Every woman of color who dares to step off the progressive reservation for even a minute - Malia Cohen, Christina Olague, Jane Kim, Andrea Shorter - is mercilessly ripped apart on these pages. Accused of being a liar, a whore or in this case - a felon.

Posted by Troll II on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 5:05 pm

Why do you continuously pollute this site with intellectual garbage?

Posted by Non-Troll Human on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 5:22 pm

This is a very non-healing response to what the city has been going through over the past 11 months. It's like throwing gasoline on the fire.

Posted by Troll II on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 5:33 pm

Are white people not allowed to call out out women of color who enable straight white male developers to build us out of our neighborhoods and straight white male conservative billionaires to drive our local politics rightward?

Posted by marcos on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 5:33 pm

Marcos. The incidences of entitled white progressives, like yourself, running down women of color are legion in this town and evidently from the sounds of this article - clearly not over.

Posted by Troll II on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 5:51 pm

Right, that's why I've supported Christina for election since she was appointed along with supporting Julian and John.

It would be racist and sexist to hold women and people of color to a lower standard when they are failing at their stated political mission by the numbers.

That you all are more concerned with the hurt feelings of professional progressive women of color than the deteriorating circumstances of families of color with women in them in the east side really says it all.

Race is over in San Francisco after they've blown the lynch code whistle at Julian.

Posted by marcos on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 6:34 pm

Marcos, now would it?

Quid pro quo.

Posted by Troll II on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 10:35 pm

I've known and worked with Christina for long enough to dispel that assertion, and my political self worth is not predicated upon being ignored by MTA executive staff on the MTA CAC.

Posted by marcos on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 9:06 am

What is Marcos appointed to besides the committee for the forced public sodomy of all males ?

Posted by Guest_Ann_Garrison on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 12:00 pm

MTA- Citizen Advisory Committee. Lots of big things happening there.

Posted by D. Native on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 12:26 pm
Posted by Guest on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 12:45 pm

Het buggery is widely prevalent nowadays.

Posted by Hortencia on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 10:06 pm

Why do we have to make this about race? Its really about the unfathomable amount money being dumped into a small district election with hopes of compromising rent control and workers. What make's it all the more shameful, is the blatant exploitation of domestic violence in order to achieve a political power grab.

I am a women of color, domestic violence survivor, and I see this for what it really is. I hope others do to.

Posted by Troll111 on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 8:44 am

I'm sick of people claiming extra weight to their opinions because they are this or that or the other.

"Woman of color" = "non-white chick". Problem?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 8:57 am

interesting response.

Posted by Troll111 on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 9:27 am

Compromising rent control and workers is the scare line that the SEIU and SFTU trot out every time they feel their endorsed candidate is losing and they want to scare voters to the polls.

But in this case, the institutions and the advocates have diverged on their choices and thus the wires are crossed and the messaging muddled.

Posted by marcos on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 9:38 am

On Mirk, on Hetch-Hetchy, on D5 and on any topic you care to mention.

Are you with the Judean Popular Front or the Popular Front of Judea?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 10:03 am

This is what we get when the people's movement is reduced to losers losing on behalf of losers, nobody wants to associate with that.

Posted by marcos on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 10:07 am

This all seems really manufactured. With the possible exception of London Breed, all the D5 candidates support rent control. But now we're all supposed to take up arms for Christina Olague to beat back this newly-materialized "attack" that is going nowhere? If you're worried about rent control, David Lee is probably your man.

Christina Olague is still endorsed by Ed Lee. Still "friends" with Rose Pak. Still in the good graces of Willie Brown. So, Who is the threat? Who is "doing the bidding of Mayor Lee and his allies in hopes of greater rewards."?

Seems pretty clear the way this is going. Ed Lee will run against Ross Mirkarimi for the foreseeable future. Conway and Coates will fan the flames throughout the City. And in the meantime, voila: Christina Olague can run against Conway and Coates! And the new "threats" to labor and rent control! Instead of, you know, running against her actual opponents in D5. Seems pretty desperate, actually. If you're losing the argument, change the argument.

Posted by Gust on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 5:17 pm

Somebody on this thread is awake.

Posted by Judy on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 8:38 pm

And one will be a woman?

How many more cases of progressives abusing women would you need to be convinced?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 4:17 am

David Lee? Isn't he running in another district? Also backed by the realators and produced a homophobic campaign video? Yay, great fucking choice, so progressive and for the people, NOT!

Posted by Troll111 on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 8:49 am

Looks like some posters have a terminal case of situational ethics. It's only a crime (misdemeanor) if we don't like someone. And if we can play the race card, all the better.

The fact is that our laws are supposed to apply to everyone. And flaunting them year after year is more than just a dumb thing to do. It is a sign of contempt for the public and the law.

Posted by CitiReport on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 6:08 pm

If so for the commenters, then the Guardians stance is par for the situationalist course.

The subject here is a typical Bay Guardian "progressive"...

On a pointless commission

Getting over on the city by screwing around with the required paperwork.

Taking a zero tollerance stand on spouse abuse, oh but wait it's Mirkirimi involved...

A wilderness of mirrors.

Posted by matlock on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 6:33 pm




I just thought it might help to say it.

Posted by lillipublicans on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 7:46 pm

I was at City Hall October 9. Andrea Shorter was there. I recognized her from the Commission on the Status of Women. I told her I am a violent crime survivor who was denied justice by the SFPD. She didn't care. I told her it took me several phone calls to even get a meeting with the COSW.

Yeah, I would love to hear on whose payroll Ms. Shorter is on. She clearly cares nothing about women.

I did meet with Emily Murase of the COSW. I asked her to send her a letter on my behalf. Murase responded by throwing me out of her office.

So much for sisterhood.

Posted by Erika McDonald on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 6:55 pm
Posted by matlock on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 7:10 pm

I am sure that police commissioner Julius Turman will Get Right On It the way that he got right on Phil Horne.

Posted by marcos on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 7:26 pm

"Me," "I." Her comments never involve anything substantive beyond how the issue of the day impacts HER. After seeing her testimony at the Mirkarimi hearings I understand more and more why her generation is so fucked up - the chronic inability to see beyond oneself and to imagine everything involves YOU. Narcissism to the extreme.

Posted by Troll II on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 9:53 pm

but its just because they are trolls.

Trolls take anything decent and twist it inside-outside.

In fact, unlike so much troll #2 scattered about on these pages -- personal attacks, innuendo, and falsifications -- Erika's use of "I" is quite refreshing. *She* speaks from personal experience. That personal experience puts the lie to what these disgusting trolls are constantly claiming.

The true narcissism resides in she who makes the accusation of it; manifested in a demented faith that her position is so far above question and beyond critique that any rhetorical trick in support of it is justified no matter how disreputable or illogical or hurtful.

Troll #2, you disgust me.

Posted by lillipublicans on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 6:08 am

Her life sucks, someone mugs her probably because she was staggering home drunk one night, and now she's a certified victim and we all have to feel sorry for "poor little Erika".

Sorry - not playing.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 7:34 am

... a dented pot with a rusted-out bottom.

I only know Erika by having seen her speak, but she looks fairly adequate to me. :0)

Posted by lillipublicans on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 7:53 am

talk about something about other than her self-styled "victimhood", then maybe somebody somewhere would give a flying crap about whatever else she says.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 8:14 am

Only the crowd fertilizes its corrupt operation on the ashes of the Tourke and Hayes-White families could describe Erika's life, two wonderful kids, a brilliant husband and a nice home, as inadequate.

Posted by marcos on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 8:06 am

Her home life is irrelevant here, as much as I struggle to believe that anyone that self-absorbed can achieve adequacy, let alone prosperity.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 8:44 am

Then why do you fucking raise it, freak? Only worthy, politically useful victims need apply for the spotlight, average folks who pay taxes to finance the corrupt cavalcade of City Government need to quit whining and fend for ourselves.

Posted by marcos on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 8:57 am

Erica needs a new party trick - that's all.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 12:39 am

So Erika posts under her own name while you do not. She offers an account that is compelling, while you offer name calling and a smear.

This is why no one pays attention to you.

Posted by CitiReport on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 10:51 am

And about an endless whining single-issue, self-serving advocacy?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 11:31 am
Posted by Guest on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 9:13 pm

with no decent impulses and nothing positive to contribute; just like you -- which makes sense since you are attacking a female victim to defend them while this whole story is based on the supposed need to defend female victims.

Really, if you analyze the reactionary dirty tricks for the pattern that they describe, it all makes sense. Just like the Prop F campaign, the point behind the attacks on Mirkarimi and Davis was to divide those who are natural allies.

Posted by lillipublicans on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 9:32 pm

Going to stick with my original theory

Posted by Guest on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 5:25 am

There's a vast conspiracy.

Posted by Troll II on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 9:25 pm
Posted by Guest on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 4:15 am

might be the Guest making veiled threats here.

Might Shorter actually have good reason to be highly upset at the developments with regard to disclosure? Might this whole political machine be on its way to collapse under the weight of its own duplicity and corruption?

When Edward Hallet Carr proposed that authoritarians habitually overestimate themselves and underestimate their opponents, leading to their ultimate downfall -- as occured in Europe c.1945 -- he was simply paraphrasing a bit of classic literature: pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.

Posted by lillipublicans on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 6:20 am

Looked more like an analogy to me.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 01, 2012 @ 7:31 am

I thought Christina was voted off The Progressive Island for approving that condo development by The Embarcadero.

For that, good riddance.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 7:22 pm

"they've blown the lynch code whistle at Julian."

Good phrasing, Marcos. Julian has been subject to a lynch mob.

There is no proof that he did anything to harm that woman.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 7:27 pm


Posted by Troll II on Oct. 31, 2012 @ 9:26 pm