SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - Mayor Gavin Newsom, your attendance is requested.

The Board of Supervisors passed a board rule Tuesday that will set aside a portion of every third board meeting of the month for “question time” with the mayor.

Newsom, however, is not expected to ever show up.

The board rule, approved Tuesday in a 10-1 vote, implements the voter-approved Proposition I ballot measure, a nonbinding policy statement, which said the mayor should appear monthly before the Board of Supervisors to discuss policy. The question time proposal was based on the rollicking British House of Commons practice with the prime minister.

Newsom opposed question time, saying it would turn into “political theater,” and established an alternative — holding monthly “policy town hall meetings” that supervisors are invited to. The first of these meetings will take place this Saturday in the Richmond district.

Prop. I’s approval in November ignited a feud between the board and Newsom, as the two took opposing stances on how to implement the ballot measure, and publicly hurled criticism back and forth. When Newsom first appeared before the Board of Supervisors after two years for Monday’s swearing-in of elected board members, some supervisors took the opportunity to fault him on a number of fronts.

Board members maintain that voters wanted to see Newsom interact with the board at City Hall and are critical of his town hall meetings.

Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier, a close ally of Newsom, was the only board member to oppose the new rule. “I think that we are lowering ourselves by placing something on our agenda so that every month we are going to sit here, we are going to announce there’s time for the mayor to come, even though we know that he won’t,” Alioto-Pier said. The board rule is “playing a little bit of gotcha politics with our agenda,” she added.

Supervisor Sean Elsbernd, another Newsom ally, said he agreed that question time would be nothing short of “political theater,” but he supported the board rule since the voters wanted it.

“I do think question time is ridiculous. I voted against it. I advocated against it. I think it is political theater,” Elsbernd said. “However, the campaign is done, the vote is in. And the voters said put this on the agenda.”

Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin said last week that Newsom’s appearance before the board could result in “new, good ideas for San Francisco.”

Newsom spokesman Peter Ragone praised the town hall meetings as an “opportunity for community-involvement and neighborhood participation.”

“We’ll be having one on Saturday and we hope they’ll end their opposition to it,” Ragone said.

IN OTHER ACTION

FOOT PATROL VETO OVERRIDDEN: The Board of Supervisors overrode in an 8-3 vote Mayor Gavin Newsom’s veto of legislation requiring regular foot patrols around all 10 police district stations. Supervisors Sean Elsbernd, Michela Alioto-Pier and Ed Jew supported the veto. Newsom had vetoed similar legislation last year that required foot beats around eight police district stations, which was also overridden by the board. Newsom says the police chief, and not city supervisors, should dictate the deployment of officers.

jsabatini@examiner.com

Comments from Examiner Readers

1:36 PM MST on Fri., Apr. 4, 2008 re: "Smile, city government, you�re on webcast camera"

Examiner Reader said:
$131k per year to implement...how about if the Supervisors kick in portions of their own salaries to cover the cost?

Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

7:46 AM MST on Fri., Apr. 4, 2008 re: "Smile, city government, you�re on webcast camera"

Kimo Crossman said:
The ordinance only requires digital recording. SFGTV on it's own initiative is expanding that to audio webcasting in August 2008.

Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

3:57 PM MST on Tue., Mar. 11, 2008 re: "Outgoing supervisors vie for sway"

Examiner Reader said:
Mayor Newsom is hardly a stranger to political power plays.

2 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

3:46 PM MST on Sun., Mar. 9, 2008 re: "S.F. eateries may start counting calories"

turtle head said:
How in the world would it help make people healthy? If you don't know deep fried food makes you fat, you are likely fat because you are too stupid too be able to read.

1 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

3:04 AM MST on Tue., Feb. 19, 2008 re: "Modicum of moderation on the way?"

King of the Dynasty said:
Chris Daly endorses David Chiu in D#3. Voters need to remember that connection when they vote. Do we want more of the same political dysfunction?

41 agree | 30 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

6:39 PM MST on Mon., Feb. 18, 2008 re: "Modicum of moderation on the way?"

CRS said:
Sabatini states: "Moderates are looking to break the current progressive majority on the Board of Supervisors to give Mayor Gavin Newsom the four allies needed on the 11-member board to assure veto power on legislation." This is not particularly so. The mayor already has his veto power. Moderates are running with no reference to the mayor. They're running because they feel the need to bring some sanity and responsibility to the supes' side of the second floor, that's why. Andrew Ferguson

35 agree | 44 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

1:46 PM MST on Thu., Feb. 7, 2008 re: "S.F. eateries may start counting calories"

Native San Franciscan said:
I sometimes wonder if Tom Ammiano isn't going to be happy until every restaurant in San Francisco is closed and either turned into a homeless shelter or crack house. So now were going to turn every restaurant menu into a document the size of the Tokyo phone book putting yet another cost on San Francisco restaurants in order to inform people of something they should take the individual responsibility to learn themselves. Why anybody whould want to own a restaurant in San Francisco with the current pinhead on the Board of Supervisors is beyone me.

61 agree | 33 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate