The brief saga of Isabella “Beya” Alcaraz in San Francisco reveals something about the mayoral administration of Daniel Lurie. For those of you who have been paying attention to other things in recent weeks, following the recall of Joel Engardio, the supervisor for District Four, which includes most of the Sunset and a few other neighborhoods in the southwestern part of the city, Mayor Lurie had the opportunity to appoint a replacement.

Lurie chose Alcaraz. At first, this seemed like a bold move. Alcaraz, was a complete political neophyte, but one who had strong roots in the community. It also seemed like an appointment by Lurie meant to ensure that he would have a reliable vote and perhaps some political control over the new supervisor. 

The idea of appointing somebody with little experience in public office to the Board of Supervisors is not always a bad idea. For many who serve or who have served on that body it is their first foray into electoral politics. However, there is a difference between a supervisor who has real experience in government or community activism and one who, like Alcarez, had never shown much interest in those kinds of things.

Within a few days after the initial surprise of Lurie’s decision began to fade, the situation began to evolve in a troubling manner. Reports of Alcaraz, a pet store owner, writing things off on her taxes inappropriately and keeping her business, according to the woman to whom she sold it, in a state of filth, began to leak out.

One of the reports was that Alcaraz’s pet store smelled of dead mice and feces. The odor of dead mice and animal feces might be a good metaphor for much of our politics these days, but Alcaraz’s financial malfeasance, including paying employees under the table and all but boasting in texts about how she wrote off personal expenses on her taxes, made the story even worse. 

It is apparent, if bewildering, that Mayor Lurie’s staff did an extremely poor job of vetting a woman who was about to leap into what, in the San Francisco context, is a very high-profile job, with no political experience. Even in the best of circumstances she would have needed a lot of support, but this was far from the best of circumstances. It is also possible that Alcaraz was not vetted at all and this was an impulsive decision by a mayor who is usually very deliberate. In some sense it no longer matters as events moved very quickly for Alcaraz.

On Friday November 14th, Alcaraz resigned, bringing an end to what amounted to an eight-day term on the board. Lurie will take a political hit here but will be able to appoint her successor as well. Presumably, he will be a little more thorough with his vetting this time. This will be a stain on Lurie’s record, but it is unlikely to be the kind of thing that will bring a mayor down.

For Alcaraz, the story is very different. This will define her in the eyes of San Francisco for some time. She will become the punchline to a joke — the shortest tenured member the board of supervisors in a very long time and perhaps in the history of the city. While Alcaraz has not demonstrated herself to be a woman of great integrity nor a particularly ethical businessperson, this seems a bit unfair. Alcaraz, a woman trying to make ends meet out in the Sunset District will face challenges related to this for some time. It is even possible she will face civil or criminal charges related to the tax fraud she may have committed.

Meanwhile, the wealthy mayor will go on with his life and his time in office with Alcaraz, from his perspective, being  little more than collateral political damage. The San Francisco Women’s Political Caucus summed this up nicely. “(T)he responsibility for this outcome rests with the Mayor’s office. They advanced a young woman into public office without proper vetting or ensuring she had the preparation and backing required to succeed.”

A theme, one that is not free of racial subtext, of Lurie’s campaign, and indeed his mayoralty was that he was going to bring competence back to City Hall. The shift from Lurie’s predecessor London Breed to the current mayor was never one of ideology, but it was one of style, and part of that style, at least from Lurie’s perspective, was always supposed to be competence. 

Almost a full year into his term it is clear that one area of Lurie’s competence is media where a friendly media environment and a good social media presence has buoyed the still relatively new mayor. However, the way he has handled this appointment demonstrates something very different. This was a triumph of, in the best case, Lurie’s own arrogance and hopefulness, over the real work of politics and governance.

While the appointment and brief tenure of Beya Alcaraz will be a blemish, perhaps a minor one, on Lurie’s record. This fiasco pales in significance to some of Lurie’s other decisions about appointments. For me, Lurie’s decision to appoint Sam Altman as one of the co-chairs of his transition team almost exactly a year ago tells me much more about who the mayor is-and is much more concerning.