The Los Angeles Times makes an eloquent point here:
Newsom’s family business is run by a close relative — his sister, who seems unlikely to maintain radio silence with her brother for his four-year gubernatorial term. And if Newsom continues to accrue profits from the business’ assets, there’s the potential that lobbying firms or interest groups wishing to curry favor with or grab the ear of the governor might arrange to spend a ski vacation at the PlumpJack Squaw Valley Inn or a rejuvenating long weekend at the Ingleside Inn in Palm Springs, book a party at one of the company’s event spaces or order cases of wine from one of the wineries.
Congratulations Governor elect Gavin Newsom!
San Francisco journalist and researcher Carol Harvey expertly details Newsom’s involvement with toxic pollution at Hunters Point and on Treasure Island, as well as his pandering to the anti-homeless crowd:
And so it happened that on Aug. 18, 2010, a brilliantly sunny day, Gavin Newsom convened a “Mayor’s Press Conference” on Treasure Island attended by U.S. Navy Secretary Ray Mabus and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Willie Brown observed from the audience.
Newsom’s TIDA Redevelopment Director Jack Sylvan asked board members to stand. Among them was past TIDA board member Jared Blumenfeld, who, after directing San Francisco’s Department of the Environment, was elevated to regional administrator for Environmental Protection Agency District 9 in San Francisco, a federal post he held from January 2010 to May 6, 2016.
This EPA official was well aware of the Navy’s decontamination of Treasure Island, yet nowhere in Michael Krasny’s KQED 2016 exit interview of Blumenfeld did the former EPA director mention Treasure Island or Hunters Point. Blumenfeld spoke of environmental injustice against Native Americans but not the people of color being poisoned at both former bases.
After all three politicians delivered unctuous self-congratulatory speeches, they signed the terms for the conveyance of former Naval Station Treasure Island from the Navy to the City.
The reason is simple: according to The Sacramento Bee, Newsom declined to stay within campaign limits!:
Newsom, unlike his Republican opponent John Cox, declined to accept the $14.5 million general election campaign campaign spending limit for gubernatorial candidates.
State law requires candidates for state office to keep below expenditure limits — which vary depending on the office being sought — if they want to purchase a 250-word candidate statement in the information guide that the state sends to approximately 19 million registered voters.
According to state election records, the Newsom campaign has spent $21.9 million this year as of Sept. 22. The Cox campaign, by comparison, has spent $8.9 million.