Breaking barriers and building moratoriums. The
Mabel Teng story, San Francisco politics. In
this deep dive, we explore the fascinating career
of Mabel Teng, a pivotal figure in San Francisco's
political history. From her early days as an
immigration rights activist in Chinatown to becoming
the first Chinese American elected to the SF
Board of Supervisors without prior appointment,
Tang's journey is packed with local government
drama. We break down her high -profile battles
against sweatshops, her fights to preserve neighborhood
village character against corporate giants like
Starbucks, her historic role in officiating San
Francisco's first same -sex marriage in 2004,
and the controversies that ultimately led to
her resignation as assessor recorder. Whether
you're interested in Chinese -American political
milestones, urban policy, or the complex realities
of grassroots activism meeting city bureaucracy,
this deep dive delivers the key facts with engaging
analysis. Welcome back, everyone, to another
deep dive. We're really glad you're joining us
today. Yeah, thanks for being here. We have a
really layered one today. We do. Today we are
focusing on a— Highly complex story about local
government ambition. And I mean, just the messy
reality of trying to make actual structural change.
Right. We're looking at the fascinating barrier
breaking and. and ultimately pretty complicated
political career of former San Francisco elected
official Mabel Tang. It is just a phenomenal
trajectory to track. We are working today from
a really comprehensive biographical article on
Tang. Yeah, it covers everything from her REITs
in Hong Kong all the way to her influential roles
in San Francisco city governance. Exactly. And
the goal for you, our listener, is to really
extract the aha moments from her career. We want
to understand the broader implications here,
like what actually happens. when a grassroots
activist transitions into the rigid realities
of local political power. That's a huge shift.
It is. How does a community organizer navigate
or, you know, sometimes clash with the labyrinth
of city bureaucracy? That's the core puzzle we're
going to dissect today. Definitely. But before
we get into the timeline, we do need to establish
a quick but absolutely necessary disclaimer.
Yes, very important. Because the material we're
covering today involves some heavily politically
charged topics. Labor protests, immigration activism.
Right. And controversial local legislative battles,
intensely divided election campaigns. Because
of all that, I have to explicitly state to you
that this deep dive does not take sides. I don't.
We are not endorsing any left wing or right wing
viewpoints. Our mandate here is strictly and
impartially reporting the historical facts, the
events and the ideas exactly as they are presented
in the biographical source material. Right. We're
analyzing the history of San Francisco politics,
not debating the ideological merits of it. And
that neutrality is critical. It really is. Because
it allows us to look at the raw mechanics of
how political power is built, wielded and sometimes
lost without. our own immediate biases clouding
the analysis. Exactly. So let's start at the
beginning, which involves some rather extreme
geographic and cultural shifts. Yeah, you wouldn't
necessarily expect this path. Right, because
a lot of people might assume a San Francisco
political fixture spent their entire life in
the Bay Area. But Tang actually grew up in Hong
Kong. And then for high school, she relocates
to Ann Arbor, Michigan. Ann Arbor. I mean...
What does a transition like that do to someone's
formative understanding of community, moving
from an incredibly dense international metropolis
like Hong Kong to a snowy, collegiate, Midwestern
city? Well, it forces adaptability, first and
foremost. You are essentially placed in environments
with... vastly different social contracts, economic
structures, racial demographics, navigating that
kind of massive environmental and cultural shock
during your high school years, it often builds
a foundational, almost hyper -awareness of how
different groups interact. How outsiders integrate.
Exactly. How outsiders integrate and how communities
define themselves. And we see that awareness
translate directly into her early career because
she doesn't begin in a polished legislative office,
right? Right, at all. Her political genesis is
out on the streets as an activist with Jesse
Jackson's Rainbow Coalition. Which is a highly
specific and telling place to begin. How so?
Well, the entire philosophy of the Rainbow Coalition
was about building power by uniting diverse,
frequently marginalized demographics, bringing
together different racial, ethnic, and economic
groups to forge a single, undeniable political
force. Sort of recognizing that isolated groups
might not have power on their own. Exactly. Isolated
they struggle. but a meticulously organized coalition
that has power. And she takes that blueprint
for organizing and applies it heavily to her
own community. She co -founded the Chinese Progressive
Association in Boston. And then after making
her way to the West Coast, she becomes the co
-chair of the San Francisco branch of that same
organization. Right in the heart of Chinatown.
Yeah, she is embedding herself deeply into immigration
rights and community advocacy. And this is where
we see the architecture of her future political
base really being constructed. This heavy background
in community organizing isn't just about protesting.
What is it about? It's about building networks
of trust. It laid the essential groundwork for
her transition into formal governance. Which
happens in 1990. Right. In 1990, she takes that
crucial first step by joining the board of trustees
of the San Francisco Community College District.
Which is interesting. Why? Start there. Why is
a community college board the launchpad rather
than running straight for city council or the
state legislature? Because it is the perfect
bridge. We actually see this pipeline frequently
in local politics. Oh, really? Yeah, because
a community college district is deeply intertwined
with the daily lives of the working class, immigrants,
and young voters. Which are the exact demographics
she was already organizing. Exactly. But unlike
pure street activism, sitting on the board of
trustees forces you to deal with the realities
of governance. The red tape, managing massive
budgets, negotiating contracts, dealing with
administrative bureaucracy. It proves to the
political establishment that an outsider activist
can actually govern. And she clearly proved it
because just four years later, the political
landscape shifts dramatically. It's 1994 and
Tang is elected as a member of the San Francisco
Board of Supervisors. This is a massive milestone.
It's huge for you to know. She becomes the very
first Chinese -American elected to the board
without having been appointed to the position
first. And that distinction between being appointed
versus being elected outright is paramount to
understanding her power at that moment. Because
historically, it didn't happen that way. Right.
Historically, if a Chinese American was on the
board, it was frequently because a mayor had
appointed them to fill a sudden vacancy. It was
the political machine bestowing power. Handing
it down. Yes. By winning the election directly,
without that mayoral head start, she demonstrated
that she had independently assembled a powerful,
undeniable coalition of voters who could bypass
the traditional gatekeepers. She ended up serving
two terms on the board. And her legislative style
during those years is fascinating. It's highly
recognizable to anyone who follows modern urban
development. She becomes heavily involved in
what you could call moratorium legislation. Yeah,
she uses temporary legislative freezes as a zoning
weapon. Let's look at September 1996. Tang calls
for an 18 -month moratorium on any new alcohol
licenses within the Inner Sunset neighborhood.
She wasn't acting without precedent here, though.
She actually modeled this specific legislation
after a 1994 move by Supervisor Susan Leal. Oh,
in the Mission District, right. Exactly. Leal
had prohibited new alcohol licenses for non -restaurants
over in the Mission. But Tang's justification
for the inner sunset was rooted in stark statistics.
The crime rate in the inner sunset at that time
was 18 percent higher than the city's average.
18 percent. But it is an interesting leap to
use zoning and business licensing as a primary
tool for crime reduction. You are essentially
restricting commerce to engineer public safety.
It reveals a philosophy that views neighborhood
infrastructure and commercial density as direct
contributors to social behavior. Right. But her
use of the moratorium didn't stop at crime prevention.
She utilized the exact same bureaucratic lever
for neighborhood preservation. This brings us
to February 1997, and this one is deeply reflective
of the cultural anxieties of the late 90s. Oh,
absolutely. Tang seeks another 18 -month moratorium,
this time targeting the West Portal Commercial
District, specifically the stretch of West Portal
Avenue between Ulloa Street and 15th Avenue.
And she isn't just going after alcohol this time.
No, she casts a massive net. She's seeking to
hit pause on any new bars, full -service restaurants,
specialty grocers, and... Retail coffee stores.
Banning new coffee stores in a major West Coast
city in the late 1990s is quite the statement.
It is entirely ironic in hindsight, given the
coffee boom, but the catalyst was very specific.
Neighbors and local merchants were actively protesting
the impending opening of a new Starbucks. They
argued they needed to protect the neighborhood's
village character. Village character. This is
a classic urban tension point. It really is.
How does a city manage the friction between economic
development, which is... often driven by well
-funded corporate chains, and the preservation
of local independent neighborhood identity. And
Tang made a definitive choice. She leveraged
her power on the Board of Supervisors to actively
shield a specific geographic area from corporate
homogenization. It is the grassroots activist
fighting the massive corporation, but doing it
through municipal zoning codes. But she didn't
limit her battles against major corporations
to the zoning board. There is a vivid scene from
December 13th, 1996, that perfectly illustrates
how she synthesized her activist roots with her
elected office. I love this example. Mabel Tang,
a sitting member of the Board of Supervisors,
is outside the massive Macy's West store in Union
Square, right alongside Supervisor Tom Amiano,
actively picketing. And they are out there with
garment workers and members of the San Francisco
Labor Council and the AFL -CIO. It is a formidable...
labor presence. But what is striking is the scoop
of the protest. They aren't protesting a local
San Francisco municipal issue. They are part
of a massive national campaign organized by the
Union of Needle Trades, Industrial and Textile
Employees, targeting federated department stores
and maid department stores. They're actively
protesting sweatshop labor conditions in Nicaragua
and unpaid wages for garment workers down in
Los Angeles. Which begs the question, why does
a local city supervisor risk political capital
by antagonizing one of the city's major retail
taxpayers over international and out of state
labor issues? Because for an organizer born out
of the Rainbow Coalition. Solidarity doesn't
have municipal borders. That makes sense. It
signals to her progressive and labor voting blocs
that holding office hasn't moderated her fundamental
principles. She's using the inherent visibility
of her office, the fact that cameras will show
up if a supervisor is on a picket line, to amplify
a global labor struggle. She was also utilizing
her legislative power to amplify marginalized
communities culturally. In July 1998, she formally
proposed renaming a portion of Myrtle Street
after the lesbian writer Alice B. Toklas. Which
was successful. Yes, it resulted in an alleyway
near City Hall being designated as Alice B. Toklas
Place. If you step back and look at the coalition
she is trying to maintain throughout the late
90s, it is incredibly broad. It's massive. She's
advocating for neighborhood homeowner associations
in West Portal, progressive labor unions targeting
multinational supply chains, and LGBTQ cultural
visibility. Maintaining a coalition with that
many distinct, sometimes competing interests
is an incredibly delicate balancing act. And
in the year 2000, that delicate balance finally
fractured. It did. Tang runs for another term
on the Board of Supervisors, and she is defeated
in the runoff election by Tony Hall. But the
margin is what makes this a staggering moment
in local political history. She loses by fewer
than 50 votes. Fewer than 50 votes in a citywide
runoff is essentially a rounding error. It's
nothing. It is a razor thin margin that exposes
the deep structural fault lines within the city's
electorate. Let's look at the map of that vote
because it tells a very specific story about
San Francisco at the turn of the millennium.
The demographic split is incredibly stark. Teng
maintained her stronghold, winning the neighborhoods
that possessed an Asian majority. However, Tony
Hall effectively captured the city's Irish Catholic
enclaves. When a progressive coalition cracks
along such distinct geographic and cultural lines,
a 50 vote loss demonstrates just how deeply entrenched
those neighborhood voting blocs really were.
Losing by fewer than 50 votes is the kind of
defeat that typically forces politicians into
early retirement. Usually, yes. But Teng pivots.
From 2002 to 2005, she moves away from the legislative
branch and becomes the city's assessor recorder.
This is a profound shift in how she interacts
with city power. The board of supervisors is
highly public, highly legislative, and built
on debate. The assessor recorder is the engine
room of the bureaucracy. It's all paperwork and
numbers. Exactly. You are managing property records,
calculating tax assessments, issuing licenses.
It is highly administrative. And yet, even from
the administrative engine room, she ends up executing
one of the most visible acts of civil rights
defiance in modern history. Oh, it's a pivotal
moment. On February 12, 2004, Mabel Tang officiated
the very first same -sex marriage in San Francisco.
You have to recall the intense national climate
of early 2004 for you to really grasp this. Same
-sex marriage was legally unrecognized and fiercely
opposed on a federal level and in almost every
state. Right, it was a massive risk. San Francisco's
decision to issue those licenses was a coordinated,
monumental act of civil disobedience executed
by the municipal government itself. And as the
Assessor Recorder... Tang was the physical mechanism
of that defiance. She actually did the paperwork.
Yes. She utilized the bureaucratic function of
issuing a marriage license to force a massive
national conversation on civil rights. It perfectly
synthesizes her entire career up to that point.
The activist and the bureaucrat merged. Exactly.
But beyond those historic civil rights moments,
the assessor recorder position is fundamentally
about municipal finance, which brings us to her
highly impactful stance during the early 2000s
economic recession. Right. During this recession,
major commercial property owners in San Francisco
aggressively sought to have the assessed values
of their properties lowered. Which would inherently
lower their tax liabilities. Exactly. And Tang
vehemently opposed this mass reassessment. The
argument she made was based on the mechanics
of the city's tax burden. If she capitulated
and cut the commercial property valuations, the
city would face a massive shortfall in tax revenue
from downtown corporations. And cities have to
balance their budgets. They do. To balance the
budget, that lost revenue would have to be recouped
elsewhere, which meant the tax burden would inevitably
shift onto everyday residential homeowners. She
was positioning herself as the firewall protecting
the residential tax base from absorbing the financial
shock of the corporate sector. And she highlighted
a devastatingly effective real -world example
to illustrate how commercial properties exploit
short -term economic dips. She pointed to the
Fairmont San Francisco Hotel. This example is
wild. It really is. In 1995, the Fairmont successfully
lobbied to have its valuation reduced from $82
million all the way down to $58 million. That
is a $24 million drop in taxable value. resulting
in an enormous tax break. But then just two years
later in 1997, that exact same property was sold
for $100 million. It completely dismantled the
argument that these commercial properties were
suffering long term devaluation. The Fairmont
example proved that corporations were securing
massive municipal tax relief only to turn around
and execute a highly profitable quick flip sale.
And she weaponized that data point to defend
her refusal to grant widespread commercial reassessments.
It shows a fierce, almost combative protection
of the city's finances. However, that reputation
as a principal defender of the public trust stands
in sharp, unfortunate contrast to the controversy
that abruptly ended her political career. Yeah,
the turning point. We have to examine the circumstances
of her fall from office, which occurred right
in the middle of her term as assessor recorder.
The transition from an outsider demanding change
to an insider wielding bureaucratic power almost
always comes with severe ethical and operational
tests. And this is where the mechanics of the
political machine caught up with her. She became
the subject of an intense investigation regarding
her hiring and promotion practices within the
Assessor Recorder's office. Specifically, she
was investigated for hiring or promoting 16 of
her own campaign contributors after she assumed
the office. We need to analyze what this actually
represents. This is the textbook definition of
political patronage. In local politics, campaigns
are incredibly expensive and require massive
networks of donors and volunteers. When a candidate
wins, there is often immense pressure from that
network to receive the spoils of victory. The
expectation of a reward. Exactly. By placing
16 individuals who financially supported her
campaign into taxpayer -funded city jobs, it
shattered the image of the grassroots outsider.
It framed her actions not as public service,
but as the transactional behavior of an entrenched
political insider rewarding loyalists. The public
and political pressure mounted rapidly. In May
2005, Mabel Tang formally resigned from her position
as assessor recorder. The reasons she provided
for her resignation offer a very sobering look
at the reality of holding high -level local office.
She cited deeply personal reasons for stepping
down, specifically pointing to the suffocating
bureaucracy of the office and the intense, compounding
stress it was placing on her family life. It's
crucial context that at this time she was a divorced
mother raising two daughters living in West Portal.
Ironically, the exact neighborhood where she
had previously fought the zoning battles to preserve
the village character. Wow. Yeah. Managing a
sprawling city department, navigating a high
profile patronage investigation and raising a
family simultaneously clearly became an unsustainable
burden. It is a stark reminder of the very real
personal toll that local politics demands. It
profoundly humanizes the arc of her downfall.
It separates the abstract concept of an investigation
from the reality of a person who simply hit their
breaking point under the weight of the political
machine they had spent decades trying to master.
Following her resignation, she largely retreated
from the electoral spotlight. But she did not
abandon her community entirely. Looking at the
final chapter of this timeline, we see a return
to her foundational roots. Back to the beginning.
Yeah. In 2009, four years after leaving City
Hall, she became the executive director of the
Chinese Culture Center, located right back in
Chinatown. It is an incredibly poignant, full
circle conclusion to her public life. She begins
her journey. deeply embedded in Chinatown advocacy
with the Chinese Progressive Association. She
leverages that base to rise to the very pinnacle
of San Francisco city government, experiences
a highly publicized fall from grace due to the
pressures of that system, and ultimately returns
to Chinatown. But this time she is operating
entirely outside the electoral battlefield, focusing
purely on cultural advocacy and preservation.
It is a sweeping, complex narrative. Let's summarize
the key phases of what we've unpacked today for
everyone listening. We started with the geographic
shock of an immigrant moving from Hong Kong to
Michigan, who then channels that adaptability
into becoming a passionate grassroots organizer
with the Rainbow Coalition. We analyzed her barrier
-breaking 1994 election, where she built an independent
coalition to become the first unappointed Chinese
-American on the Board of Supervisors. We examined
her controversial use of legislative moratoriums
to engineer neighborhood safety and preserve
local character in the Sunset and West. We discuss
her bridging of local power with international
labor protests outside Macy's. We broke down
the demographic fault lines that led to her agonizing
sub -50 vote defeat in 2000. We tracked her administrative
pivot to the Assessor Recorder's office, where
she simultaneously executed historic civil disobedience
by officiating the city's first same -sex marriage.
While fiercely defending residential homeowners
against corporate tax maneuvers. And finally,
we examined the unfortunate reality of her political
exit. falling victim to a patronage scandal that
highlighted the transactional nature of local
government before she ultimately returned to
cultural advocacy in Chinatown. It's just an
incredible arc. It really is. And as we conclude
this analysis, I want to leave you, our listener,
with a broader philosophical question to ponder
based on Mabel Tang's trajectory. Oh, I like
this. We have traced her path. From a street
-level protest organizer to a high -ranking official
controlling property taxes and city jobs. Think
about the friction of that transition. Yeah.
When a deeply passionate outsider grassroots
activist finally successfully integrates into
the rigid bureaucratic machinery of local government,
a machinery built on patronage, budgets, and
compromise, does the activist eventually succeed
in changing the nature of the system? Or does
the weight of that bureaucratic system inevitably
change the nature of the activists? That is exactly
the kind of structural question her legacy forces
us to ask, and it perfectly encapsulates the
deep complexities of municipal power. Thank you
for joining us as we explore the intricate history
of San Francisco politics through the career
of Mabel Tang. We appreciate you taking the time
to analyze these historical mechanics with us,
and we look forward to unpacking another deep
dive with you next time.