Most San Franciscans won't run afoul of Wiener's anti-nudity ordinance. Yet the supervisor's passed or pending legislation touches on the city's most elemental subjects: housing, development, transportation. Wiener has emerged as the most capable legislator on the board. Even his ideological opponents funnel him material, because they know he'll work aggressively to ram it through — hastily, and with minimal compromising.
Scott Wiener, a man who has been chewed up and spit out by this city's political process, has less reverence for it than most. Those who embrace rituals meant to extract concessions while slowing (or outright halting) change have little use for Wiener's efforts at "streamlining" or, worse yet, "reform."
J. P. Dobrin
Those close to Scott Wiener say he's not "too uptight or too serious. ... He is very comfortable in his skin and very comfortable with other people."
Joe Eskenazi
Upon being sworn in as a supervisor in 2011, Scott Wiener realizes he is too big
for his desk.
Details
Related Content
More About
In Wiener's San Francisco, the lyrics to McKenzie's song may not be so ill-fitting after all: "There's a whole generation with a new explanation — people in motion, people in motion."
In recent decades, San Francisco politics has been driven as much or more by what you're against as what you're for. Opposition to the runaway development and rampant cronyism of the Willie Brown era galvanized the "progressive revolution" of 2000. Brown's handpicked successor, Newsom, continued to serve as bogeyman for the city's left, while the bombastic Peskin and profane Chris Daly returned the favor for moderates. Politics became vitriolic and personal, and these embittered men had oversize personalities and vitriol to spare. Their battles were as nasty as any on the floor of the Taiwanese parliament, minus the chair-swinging (though it did get close).
As much as Wiener has become a lightning rod for controversy, he does not neatly fit this mold. It's hard to take umbrage at his personality when his personality is opaque. He is not a charismatic or dynamic figure like Brown, Newsom, Daly, or Peskin; Wiener's extended, wonky discourses are delivered in the monotone of a man dictating his name on an outgoing voicemail message. And while Wiener is, plainly, a political striver, colleagues see him as less conventionally political than most.
"Scott's real skill is, I have never seen him cave on his principles," says former moderate Supervisor Sean Elsbernd. Adds Olague, "What makes him effective is also why so many people don't like him. He's not political; people go to him with legislation, and if he likes it, he'll get it through. If you put that legislation on another supervisor's desk, they'd probably bend to political pressure. It'd still be sitting on their desk."
Wiener has managed to pick and choose issues that confound cardboard notions of what it is to be progressive or moderate — leading to deeply bizarre political battles. He targeted the insidiously connected Academy of Art University's longstanding practice of cannibalizing rent-controlled housing and converting it into lucrative, four-to-a-room dorms, yet also pushed to enable the creation of towering rabbit warrens of 220-square-foot "micro-units" to house the ascendant, moneyed, single techies permeating San Francisco. Wiener managed to pull off the mind-blowing feat of simultaneously angering the tenant-crushing Academy and every last tenants-rights group in the city (which have doubled down against him due to a pending condo conversion ordinance they portray as a means to erode rent control and evict tenants).
Depending on how one spins it, this was an act of inspired political independence, recklessness — or both. It was certainly not the behavior of someone receiving a late-night phone call telling him how to vote. "Scott is his own man," concedes Peskin. "He is not a wholly owned subsidiary of anyone."
Last year, Wiener tangled with the Academy and bucked the mayor and PG&E by siding with CleanPowerSF, providing the board with a veto-proof majority. And in a move his opponents spun as a swipe at the city's service providers, Wiener unsuccessfully attempted to force nonprofits to pay transit mitigation fees to Muni.
"What was really at issue is whether big, powerful nonprofits like the hospitals would be paying a transit impact fee," explains Rafael Mandelman, Wiener's progressive opponent in the bitterly contested 2010 race for District 8 supervisor. No city progressive would argue the California Pacific Medical Centers of the world shouldn't pay for transit impacts brought about by their massive development projects, "but they don't," Mandelman continues. "Scott was trying to change that. So who's on the left and who's on the right now? Academy of Art, PG&E, the Hospital Council — that's about as powerful as it gets."
Two years ago, Wiener was the Chamber of Commerce's preferred legislator. Last year, however, it ranked him in the middle of the pack, behind Jane Kim. But they're still thrilled to have him over for power breakfasts to talk shop. Scott Wiener is independent, but he's still Scott Wiener.
Reviewing Wiener's attempts to "streamline" or "reform" city rules, patterns emerge. His gambit to rejigger the city's ballot initiative process would have given the Board and mayor the power to undo voter-approved measures. His attempt to revamp the campaign consultant ordinance would have allowed the dysfunctional Ethics Commission and supervisors to alter rules governing their own political consultants; currently only voters can enact those changes. Wiener's ongoing attempts to modify the city's approach to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) would require development critics to cede more unchecked responsibility to a Planning Department those critics feel is beholden to developers (and which let the Academy of Art brazenly flout city rules for decades). "What we have," says Larry Bush, a veteran politico who has clashed with Wiener on Ethics Commission matters, "is a repeated practice of reducing what the public can see."