By David M. Greenwald
Executive Editor
San Francisco, CA – This week the recall effort of Chesa Boudin officially qualified for the ballot, with confirmation from the Department of Elections Tuesday. That election will be combined with the statewide primary on June 7.
If the election is successful, Mayor London Breed would choose the replacement. Breed in 2019 supported Suzy Loftus over Boudin in the regular election and appointed Loftus as interim DA when George Gascón resigned in October to move to Los Angeles.
“We are ecstatic; the signature gathering effort has succeeded,” said Richie Greenberg in a statement. “Let me be clear—this recall is not seeking to undo an election, as some nay-sayers claim. Rather, Mr. Boudin has earned his recall himself, as his policies of attempting to reimagine criminal justice for nearly two years have been a colossal failure.”
A huge amount of money has already poured in, with the pro-recall side raising about $1.6 million to $650,000 for the anti-recall 
side.
Much of the money raised by the pro-recall side was spent on gathering signatures to qualify for the ballot.
At a rally in October, Chesa Boudin said he knew this was coming.
“We knew that we were going to face challenges,” he said. “The recall website domain was registered the week I was sworn into office.”
He said, “This has nothing to do with the facts or the real challenges our communities are facing. This has everything to do with disrespecting the will of the people—but your vote matters.
“Is it any surprise in light of those promises made and those promises kept that we are seeing a historic situation. We are seeing more money spent by these dark money groups to oust a sitting district attorney than has ever been seen anywhere in this country,” he said.
“They have spent more than $1.4 million, just gathering signatures. Flying poor working people from around this country to San Francisco, because they don’t have the volunteers, that’s for sure, they are paying them, their airfare, their hotel, and then a per signature.”
He added, “They have used every dirty trick in the book. They’re promising that before they’re done, they’re going to spend $5 million.”
The Prosecutor’s Alliance pushed back on Wednesday.
“In a community where data and science matter, a recall fueled by misinformation and unprecedented fearmongering has qualified for the ballot,” said Cristine Deberry, Founder and Executive Director of the Prosecutors Alliance of California.
“As they did throughout the pandemic, San Franciscans will once again turn to the facts and data–rather than politics and disinformation—to determine the veracity of this recall,” Deberry said. When they do, they will see that crime is down, but to qualify this recall organizers misled the public and twisted themselves into a pretzel claiming that crime is up. Voters have seen these tactics in our recent past and forcefully condemned them in voting against the recall of our Governor.”
The Prosecutor’s Alliance pushed back as well, noting that the “police department is the least productive police agency in the entire state of California.”
That department, they say, has solved just 7 percent of all crimes in San Francisco this year—down even from the 9 percent a year ago.
Deberry pointed out, “It is impossible for a prosecutor to act when there are no suspects arrested. Since the certainty of being caught is a vastly more powerful deterrent than the punishment, the SFPOA blaming DA Boudin for their failures should be examined closely. If we want to address crime, we have to be honest about the role played by every agency in the system.”
The group added, “Over the course of the next several months the Prosecutors Alliance of California looks forward to engaging on the issues and serving as a resource as the public looks critically at the merits of this recall. There is justification for the public’s frustration, but it is misplaced in a recall attempt fueled by suspect financial interests and objectively false information.”
San Franciscans know if they feel safe in their city and will vote accordingly whether to oust Boudin or not. They see what’s happening every time they step out or walk the city streets so they will make their judgement based on their own perceptions and experiences. I don’t feel that Bouds well for Boudin.
That’s the tricky point – most people feel personally safe. The data presents a view that people are considerably safer than they were a decade ago.
The power of highlighted cases is at work here. That will make for an interesting phenomenon.
Also interesting is the nearly 8 month lag time – how will dynamics shift over the next 8 months?