With Mayor Newsom’s re-election a done deal, San Francisco progressives turned their energy to winning on the issues – and in the race for Propositions this November, it paid off. A diverse coalition led by Supervisor Aaron Peskin dealt Republican C.E.O. Don Fisher a tremendous blow – by passing comprehensive Muni Reform (Proposition A) and crushing the Downtown Parking Initiative (Proposition H.) While Newsom had supported Prop A and opposed Prop H, he barely lifted a finger – instead working to defeat Proposition E, a Charter Amendment requiring him to meet monthly with the Board of Supervisors. With the early absentees reporting, Prop E is losing by just 3 points – and could still pass when all votes are counted. Again, Newsom proved to have few coattails – as environmentalists, labor unions and supportive moderates were the big winners in last night’s election. As progressives look ahead to 2008, this cycle provided two important lessons: (1) focus on issues, not personalities; and (2) build coalitions that round up more than just the usual suspects.

Because Secretary of State Debra Bowen ordered the S.F. Elections Department to hand-count all Election Day ballots this year, the only results available last night were from “early absentee” voters who had mailed in their ballots in the preceding weeks. But long-time observers know that early absentees are notoriously conservative, and last night’s results – albeit incomplete – gave San Francisco progressives much cause to celebrate.

Proposition A – the Muni reform package supported by the Sierra Club, the Democratic Party, the Bay Guardian and organized labor – was slightly ahead with 50.7% of the vote. Because “Yes on A” had the sole major field operation on Election Day, most expect that its lead will widen as votes pour in. Prop A’s only opposition came from Republican Don Fisher’s attack pieces sent in the final weeks – which apparently did not convince voters.

While Prop A’s outcome awaits confirmation, the same coalition decisively killed Proposition H – Fisher’s parking initiative – as early absentees showed it losing 58-42. Criticized as a major step back for our “transit-first policy,” Prop H would have tripled the number of cars coming into the Financial District during rush hour – and threatened the fight against global warming. As one progressive gloated last night, “it’s great to be in a City that gets it.”

And there was no better place to be than at El Rio in the Mission District – where the “Yes on A” / “No on H” campaign threw a victory party to celebrate a hard-fought win where everyone feared a low voter turnout could spell doom. The campaign that passed Prop A brought many groups who rarely work together – the Bicycle Coalition, Pride at Work, the Sierra Club, SEIU and others – and their presence was all felt in that room. It was a valuable lesson for progressives, who will need such alliances in the future.

Local politicians from the left (Tom Ammiano and Ross Mirkarimi) and the center (Sean Elsbernd and Bevan Dufty) were also there to celebrate Prop A’s passage and Prop H’s defeat – proving that the fight for a “transit-first” City will unite San Franciscans across the political spectrum. But the real star of the show was Board President Aaron Peskin – who had brought these groups together to wage a winning campaign. “This victory,” he said, “bodes well for us in 2008” – as six seats will be up on the Board of Supervisors.

Absent from the festivities, however, was Gavin Newsom. The Mayor had officially endorsed Prop A and opposed Prop H, but refused to campaign on these measures – citing other priorities. It wasn’t a question of his own re-election – his opponents weren’t much competition – but another Proposition that he was eager to defeat: Proposition E, which mandated Question Time.

And how badly did Newsom want to kill Prop E, so that he wouldn’t have to face a monthly meeting of the Board of Supervisors? Consider the following:

On the Eve of Election Day, Newsom and Aaron Peskin campaigned side-by-side at a Muni Station. The Board President – who had been neutral in the Mayor’s race – offered to distribute Newsom’s re-election literature, if the Mayor would pass out “Yes on A” / “No on H” leaflets. “Absolutely not,” said Newsom. “I need to defeat Proposition E.” Newsom was more interested in stopping a measure that may cause him personal embarrassment – than a proposition that would bring 20,000 new cars on our streets.

Of course, it’s not lost on many that Don Fisher – who was busy trying to kill Prop A and promote Prop H – was also helping Newsom defeat Prop E. As the Bay Guardian reported, a “No on A” and “No on E” mailing had the same return address, and their campaigns had the same consultant. Did Fisher offer Newsom money to fight Question Time – if the Mayor did not actively campaign against him on the transit measures?

But all the money raised to defeat Prop E was not enough to decisively kill a measure that had no organized support. While the early absentee results currently have Prop E losing by 1100 votes, enough votes on Election Day could tip the balance and ensure passages. If Prop E does pass, it will be because the “Yes on A” campaign brought enough progressives to the polls.

Unlike the “Question Time” advisory measure that passed in November 2006, Prop E is a Charter Amendment – which means that the Mayor would be legally compelled to answer questions from the Board of Supervisors. If Prop E passes, it will be a huge embarrassment for Newsom and his Downtown allies – who would be batting scoreless on the three major battles of this year’s ballot.

But the Committee on Jobs and other business interests can take solace in at least one measure that passed last night. Proposition C, which requires the Supervisors to submit all future propositions 45 days in advance for scrutiny, passed easily by a three-to-one margin. While appealing to voters as a “good-government” measure, Prop C could have some bad implications when fully implemented.

Voters also passed Proposition B – which will require the Mayor to replace hold-over Commission appointments. Sponsored by Supervisor Jake McGoldrick, this house-cleaning measure took on added significance after Newsom asked all of his Commissioners to resign.

A library funding measure (Proposition D) appears headed for a similar lopsided victory. The Mayor’s two initiatives – a small business center (Proposition I) and an advisory measure about supporting Free Wi-Fi (Proposition J) – are also headed for an easy win.

Two of McGoldrick’s other initiatives – the “horse stables” measure (Proposition G), and a policy statement about outdoor advertising (Proposition K) – also appear to have passed.

By far the least sexy measure on the ballot – Proposition F, which makes an obscure change in the police retirement system – is locked in a tight race and will have to wait for later votes to determine the outcome.

But few people will notice or care. In the next few days, attention will be focused as to whether Prop A maintains its slim lead (which is likely), and Prop E makes up a small deficit (which is possible.) If these two things happen, it will have been a very good night for San Francisco progressives.

In the meantime, progressives should look at what they accomplished this year and draw a few conclusions. Newsom was personally popular and probably unbeatable, but by focusing on the issues they were able to deliver the Mayor’s Downtown allies a major defeat. And such a campaign was not possible without a broad coalition of labor, environmentalists, queers and a few sympathetic moderates.

Such lessons will be valuable for progressives to apply in 2008 and beyond.

Send feedback to paul@beyondchron.org