Talk:Ed Lee

Birthdate

Can no one find his date of birth (not just the year) anywhere? I'm amazed that despite all kinds of searching, this information just isn't out there! Moncrief (talk) 21:00, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Just after I posted that I found a cite, finally! Put into article with ref link: May 5, 1952. Moncrief (talk) 21:18, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Perjury accusations and bomb threat

This article devotes about 4,000 words to a perjury accusation and bomb threat that occurred during the Ross Mirkarimi trial. The perjury accusation came to nothing and was floated by Mirkarimi's lawyers to help their client. The bomb threat was handled according to procedure. I would like to remove these sections. They have undue weight and were written during the heat of the Mirkarimi drama. Any objections? Chisme (talk) 15:35, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Though I'm not familiar with the subject, I would suggest that you should leave at least some mention of the accusation (though I would agree 4000 words is excessive). Brambleclawx 15:37, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm removing this. These topics were put here in the heat of the Ross Mirkarimi hearings. Nothing ever became of them. Chisme (talk) 23:07, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

I remember the process at the time. I support the removal. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:12, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

A bomb threat made to City Hall while Ed Lee was on the stand during a commission hearing is indeed relevant to the history of his term as the Mayor of San Francisco. Do not remove this important event. GreenIn2010 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 02:18, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

These are very serious charges -- perjury, manufacturing a bomb threat. If they were real, Lee would be in jail now. They have no merit. Chisme (talk) 05:22, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Clearly you want to hide the fact that these events happened. The bomb threat was real and covered in the news as were the concerns that Lee had committed perjury. If you think they are not real, check the links. Your bias to whitewash the reputation Ed Lee is showing. GreenIn2010 (talk) 15:10, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Clearly you have a vendetta. The criminal here, if there is one, is the person who called in the bomb threat. The "perjury" charge against Lee came to nothing. I live in SF. Nobody talks about this. If he did commit perjury, the DA here would bring him to trial. C'mon? Stick to things you know about. Chisme (talk) 20:25, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Vendetta? I'm simply trying to keep factual news worthy information about Ed Lee on the page that his defenders want to pretend never happened. Wikipedia is not based on what your circle of friends in SF is talking about, it's based on what is news worthy and the bomb threat and Lee's presence at the scene made the news. It's not about what I know about, it's about facts. Clearly you cannot tolerate those. GreenIn2010 (talk) 22:27, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

You're only interested in the first Asian mayor of San Francisco insofar as he opposed the founder of the California Green Party in his wife-beating case. Chisme (talk) 03:37, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't let Obama off the hook for keeping the Bush policies alive, just like I wouldn't let Hillary if she continues them, just because of race or gender or being the first of one of those in that office. Each person is responsible as an individual. I had first hand experience in the events I'm editing, which is mainly why I'm writing about them, because I was there and I saw what happened and feel they are historical. It's up to others to post the other events that they may feel need to be shown. If a figure has enough events, then one or two that are negative are not the focus. GreenIn2010 (talk) 14:45, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

This stuff is just manufactured mud from Lee's opponents. None of it ended up sticking to Lee. If he is convicted of something, or admits to something, we can put it in. Otherwise it is just unsuccessful and thus unimportant political jockeying. Binksternet (talk) 15:26, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Blanket removal of everything you don't like on the page is not "editing", it is defending a politician you support by removing factual documented information which falls outside your image of that politician. Claiming that the documented concerns of numerous city officials covered in the news widely is all just "mud slinging" and that Lee's involvement with the Mirkarimi debacle should be disappeared from history is the opposite of documenting the career of the mayor, it is white-washing it. GreenIn2010 (talk) 17:46, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

You think I support Ed Lee? What a laugh. I live in Oakland I couldn't care less about Lee. Your "documented" allegations are not strong enough for this article, since they did not result in a conviction or impeachment or resignation. I can keep removing your preferred text indefinitely per WP:Biographies of living persons, while your restorations of the text will be racking you closer to a violation of the three-revert rule. You have few options here; one is to start a WP:Request for comment about the text, another is to greatly trim the text to be far less of a political attack. Binksternet (talk) 18:35, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't see a documented bomb threat while a sitting mayor is giving testimony at an ethics hearing as an "allegation". All you have are threats, not edits. GreenIn2010 (talk) 22:46, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

It looks like all of the allegations are now summarized into one section. I would recommend cuts rather than blanket removal. Each one has news articles which are relevant. If one feels nothing has come of them they can add a statements about that. GreenIn2010 (talk) 15:23, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

The perjury accusation must stay out of the article until a court confirms that perjury was committed. Binksternet (talk) 22:19, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

California public domain

I'd like to point out that works of the California state government, which includes municipalities, are in the public domain. Therefore any official portrait of Ed Lee as mayor would be in the public domain, and no explicit release is necessary. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 22:56, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Mayoralty section

It does need more balance. It slants too positive, without considering the criticism he's received for gentrification and being too cozy to tech, while not doing enough to help low-income residents. This article is a good one to incorporate. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:14, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The "Mayorality" section is emphatically pro-Lee in terms of its tone. I don't know anything about SanFran politics but I'm guessing its also pro-Lee in terms of what it has chosen to include. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 17:34, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

@LukeSurl: It is biased in content and tone. I live in SF and can say that the criticism of him is from being too close to business (too many tax breaks for Twitter and other such companies), too much gentrification, and not doing enough on affordable housing. I added the section on the Mid-Market revitalization to help balance it out, but I have limited time and could use your help. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:47, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm unlikely to be able to do any major editing for the next few days. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 18:06, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Shucks. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:16, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

FBI corruption probe

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/aug/06/shrimp-boy-accuses-san-francisco-mayor-ed-lee-corruption

https://48hills.org/2015/08/ed-lee-and-the-fbi-corruption-charges/

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Mayor Ed Lee Headshot Closeup.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:22, 8 December 2025 (UTC)