Dear Editors,

In his recent article about the as-yet hypothetical governor’s race (“Newsom Early Favorite in 2010 Governor’s Race,” 4/29/2008), Randy Shaw declares Newsom the “early favorite.”

According to whom? Shaw cites no poll to back up his claim.

I also found it amusingly ironic that just about every criticism that Shaw claims disqualifies L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa from running also applies—almost uncannily--to Newsom as well. An illicit extramarital affair: check. Unresolved city problems: (MUNI, increase in violent crime, affordable housing crisis, homelessness): check.

“Los Angeles has too many problems for him to abandon the city for a statewide run in 2010,” says Shaw of Villaraigosa. But it’s okay for Newsom to abandon San Francisco in 2010?

So what exactly is Shaw is building his argument on? One can only conclude that it’s wishful thinking.

I found this part of his analysis particularly bizarre: "Gavin Newsom is a very unusual politician. Although he lacks passionate supporters and close, fervent allies in San Francisco, he has combined an effective public presentation and a savvy prioritization of issues to create an extremely sellable statewide image."

If Newsom has "no passionate supporters nor close allies" in his own city, how is he going to parlay this lack of support into a statewide win?

And what does Shaw mean by "an effective public presentation"? Newsom’s public image created through photos opps and spin? Newsom's has been widely criticized for his fiat via press release and image-pandering. Remember the Getty mansion fashion spread with wife # 1?

And his gay marriage stunt was gleefully outed for what it was even by Newsom cheerleaders Matier & Ross last fall. The mayor, they said, “played the gay card.” They admitted that it was legally meaningless. “The licenses didn't hold up, but the move paid off in political spades. In one stroke, Newsom - who had just squeaked into office two months earlier - jumped in the voter approval polls from just over 50 to over 70 percent, largely on the strength of the gay and progressive vote.”

Most important is Shaw’s claim that Newsom demonstrates "a savvy prioritization of issues." What does that mean? That he's cleverly organizing issues, not according to what is best for the city, but what makes Newsom look good?

How about these ‘priorities’?

Earlier this year Newsom buys $78,000 worth of flat-screen TVs and office furniture and hands out generous raises to some of his staffers, including a ‘climate czar’ (“Director of Climate Protection Initiatives”), to the tune of $500,000 more in city salaries. How is he funding this extravaganza during a time of fiscal crisis? By siphoning monies from the ailing MUNI (MTA) and Public Utility commission funds.

How do you like them priorities?

Or how about Newsom firing efficient SF Public Utilities Commission head Susan Leal for no cause, costing the already financially strapped city upwards of $400,000 in severance fees?

Or how about petulantly demanding across-the-board resignation letters from hundreds of city employees, only to accept a handful--many from environmentalist progressives like SF Bike Coalition’s Leah Shahum (so much for 'Green Gavin')--and not from the arguably most deserving, like widely criticized Police Chief Fong?

On Nov. 7, 2008, the San Francisco Bay was besieged with a disastrous oil spill when the Cosco Busan ship struck the Bay Bridge . Rather than stick around and oversee the disaster, Newsom took off on vacation to Hawaii (to recover from the rigors of an uncontested reelection, no doubt) while the disaster worsened.

Priorities?

And in Jan. 2007, Newsom skipped the National U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting, foregoing the opportunity to focus on solutions to his city's problems, to go to Davos, Switzerland (for the third year in a row), with his girlfriend for the World Economic Forum.

Lastly, Shaw refers to Newsom as creating “an extremely sellable statewide image." This doesn’t sound like the description of an accomplished, respected leader who could make his case on a solid record of accomplishment to the most populous state in the nation. This sounds like a long product-placement campaign for shampoo.

In all, it's pretty telling that the minute he is reelected (by a mere 25 percent of the city’s registered voters), Newsom turns his back on San Francisco and aims his limo at the governor's mansion. If anything, Newsom’s “savvy prioritization of issues” adds up to a strong case for Newsom’s recall.

Sincerely,

S.M. Peters
Seattle



To the Editor:

I read Tommi Avicolli-Mecca's article "Germs 'R Us" today and, given the heightened attention to medical errors, hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) and prevention methods, I thought you would like to cover one of the most common, but deadly hospital-acquired infections: catheter-related bloodstream infections or CRBSIs.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has reported that in the U.S. hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) account for an estimated 1.7 million total infections and approximately 100,000 associated deaths each year. Of the 1.7 million total infections about 250,000 are CRBSIs, which are the second leading cause of death associated with HAIs, second only to pneumonia. CRBSIs develop when bacteria enter the bloodstream through improper central venous catheter maintenance and
insertion.

Dr. Michael Gropper, Director of Critical Care Medicine and Professor/Vice Chair of Department of Anesthesia and Perioperative Care at the University of California in San Francisco, is extremely passionate about the prevention of CRBSIs in his hospital. He would love to speak with you about what UCSF, as well as Stanford and some other Bay Area hospitals, are doing to prevent the occurrence of these infections. He can speak on the cost of these infections, and how, with preventative measures in place, UCSF has been able to bring down the incidence rate and save significant money on patient care costs.

Kind regards,

Kaileen Connelly
Racepoint Group
Waltham, MA



You can submit letters to the editor by clicking on this link: feedback@beyondchron.org or by writing to:

Beyond Chron
126 Hyde Street
San Francisco, CA 94102
415-771-9850 (phone)