And the media just loves to report on Newsom’s tweets and his Twitter milestones.

Yes, the Newsom for California campaign has added hundreds of thousands of Twitter followers in the past several months.

Gavin Newsom Twitter stats provided by twittercounter.

This astonishing growth isn’t due to the Gavinator’s good looks and popularity, or the organic evolution of a real Internet audience.

Twitter actually gives these followers to Newsom when new Twitter users sign up.

They do it through their controversial Suggested User List (SUL) feature.

This is Gavin Newsom on Twitter's suggested user list.

You may have recently read some news stories and blog posts about Twitter’s SUL.

Through this feature, Twitter is aggregating and building an online audience that the Newsom for California campaign would otherwise have to pay to create, in the same way Newsom’s campaign today buys eyeballs and clicks from Google, Facebook, etc. to ultimately drive traffic to his campaign website.

But since Twitter is giving this non-monetary service to a registered political campaign without its value being disclosed, Gavin Newsom is violating California’s campaign finance law, you know, as he tweets.

California law states that a contribution can be defined as:

§18215(b)(3) Any goods or services received by or behested by a candidate or committee at no charge or at a discount from the fair market value, unless the discount is given in the regular course of business to members of the public.

Does being on Twitter’s SUL constitute a non-monetary contribution? YES.

Twitter is providing this free service to Gavin Newsom, a declared candidate for governor. Newsom uses Twitter to send his Twitter followers links to his campaign website and to campaign news stories promoting his candidacy.

Is this Twitter service discounted and given to members of the public in the regular course of business? NO.

The SUL is not for sale or accessible to the general public. Twitter is a private company so there is no knowing if they’ve been selling the service. Twitter publicly says they don’t charge for the service.

Recent news stories put Twitter’s SUL cash value around $250,000. And when you analyze Twitter’s SUL, it’s not random, and it doesn’t look like any member of the public can ask to be put on the list, or even pay to be on the list.

Essentially, being featured on the Twitter suggested user list is a corporate black box decision and benefit provided to select customers that is not available to the general public though Twitter’s regular course of business.

In the opinion of a campaign treasurer consultant:

Twitter is giving Gavin Newsom privileged access and promotion on its proprietary online network through the company’s suggested user list feature, an Internet media service that is not accessible or for sale to members of the general public. Therefore, the Newsom for California campaign is receiving a non-monetary contribution from Twitter that must be valued, declared and disclosed to come into compliance with California’s government code and Title 2 regulations as enforced by the FPPC.

When a non-monetary contribution like Twitter’s is received, the fair market value of the goods or service must be reported as required by California’s Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC).

Has Newsom reported such a contribution from Twitter? NO.

Now all Newsom has to do is have Gary South send Twitter a missive, ask them how much their SUL contribution is worth, and then go file FPPC Form 460, which is required by all official candidates for public office to disclose monetary and non-monetary campaign contributions of value.

If not, this cozy business relationship will continue to violate campaign finance law.

So, what’s the big deal anyway — I mean besides all this stuff being illegal?

Newsom hasn’t raised enough money to stay competitive and he’s lagging in all polls.

But he claims a formidable “online following” as a testament to his campaign strength.

Newsom has been accumulating Twitter followers primarily due to his campaign accepting a non-monetary contribution from Twitter – a contribution with significant value that legally must be reported.

But if Twitter pulled Gavin Newsom off their SUL, he’d be in for a rude surprise.

That’s right.

No more weekly “earned” media stories about Gavin being tech-savvy.

The circus tent taxpayers bought Oracle.

San Francisco Chronicle – A scheduling snafu involving the big annual Oracle party and the TV show “Trauma” has wound up costing San Francisco taxpayers $270,000.

The mega mix-up revolves around the party that Oracle tosses for 22,000 select clients.

For years, Oracle has rented out a big chunk of the eastern side of the island for its party, including an old airplane hangar.

That was the plan for this year’s Oct. 14 bash as well.

However, the city rented out the hangar to NBC’s “Trauma,” which, while filming in the city, has provided a number of people with jobs – including the mayor’s actress wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom.

Oracle – one of the biggest conventions of the year – found itself out in the cold.

Now, to keep everyone happy, the city is putting up a football-field-size tent on Treasure Island for the Oracle party. Cost: about $270,000.

Newsom didn’t try to explain away the mix-up or defend the ensuing costs.

How’s that?

The city is in an ongoing budget crisis and no explanation from the man-child mayor?

Network World is on the ball with a thoughtful analysis of the Newsom administration’s ineptitude, facilities mismanagement and callous response to the scandal.

Now times are tough in the high-tech industry, but Oracle last year made a profit of $5.6 billion on revenue of $23.2 billion. Not bad. They’re willing to spend $7.4 billion to buy Sun. And, of course, Oracle head honcho Larry Ellison is among the most ostentatiously rich people on the planet; Forbes has him pegged at No. 4, worth a sweet $22.5 billion.

Meanwhile, San Francisco’s municipal finances have been anything but rosy given the destitute state of that state.

Under the circumstances, couldn’t the company — or Ellison himself — have picked up the tab for that tent instead of sticking it to the already traumatized taxpayers of San Francisco?

If not, the least the mayor’s office could have done is apologize for the costly screw-up.

Don’t hold your breath.

"So, veto the law and help your rich landlord friends."

Well, it’s Friday afternoon.

And that can only mean one thing at City Hall in San Francisco.

Friday is Gavin’s favorite time to press release bad news and announce vetos that make him look bad.

You know, so he can avoid reporters and their pesky questions.

Newsom handed his veto letter to the clerk of the board at precisely 4:51 p.m. Friday, prompting tenant advocates to say they’ll push for a veto override at the board and might even take the issue to the ballot.

Newsom vetoed potential legislation that would have given renters some needed relief in this massive recession.  I’m no expert on these matters, but millionaire landlords like Gavin Newsom have a long track record in San Francisco for screwing over their tenants, and converting their apartments into condos, etc.

According to BeyondChron, Newsom was a landlord before he was mayor when he served on the Board of Supervisors, and the City’s conflict-of-interest rules prevented him from taking a stand on many pro-tenant ballot measures.  How convenient.

T.G.I.F.

"This red ribbon is no match for me."

Gavin Newsom is stealing credit, again.

This time it’s for funky fresh bus shelters that were actually paid for by Clear Channel Outdoor, and negotiated in a shady back-door deal by former Board of Supervisors President, Aaron Peskin.

It’s true, voters don’t read much.  So they won’t remember that the man-child mayor had nothing to do with it.

It’s also true that if there is a red-ribbon in San Francisco that needs to be cut, Newsom is at the front of the line screaming me me me me me.  Look. At. Me.

Today, Gavin poses for cameras as if everything is beautiful in transit land — it’s not.  These bus shelters are like lipstick on a pig.

Riders just got the (drive) shaft and MUNI still can’t protect and collect its revenue.

Ask Gavin why San Francisco still has a third-rate public transit system for a supposedly world-class city.  And then ask him how he intends to make public transit better by raising fares AND cutting service routes.

I need to walk now, because my bus isn’t coming.  Ever.

The San Francisco Board of Education is an independently elected body that has jurisdiction over public education, not the Mayor.

But Gavin lives on a fantasy island where any school improvement is a result of his leadership.  He has nothing to do with our schools.  In fact, he’s using them as a public toilet.

San Francisco’s school district has sued the city, claiming Mayor Gavin Newsom’s appointees have tried to turn the district into a dumping ground for laid off city workers.

According to allegations spelled out in a lawsuit filed in San Francisco Superior Court last Monday and reported in SF Weekly, Newsom’s staff has repeatedly ordered the school district to replace current school workers with laid off city employees.  The school district says it’s Newsom’s staff who are violating the law.

Under the state’s constitution, school districts are separate agencies, managed by independent school boards, and not subject to control by mayors, county supervisors, or other municipal officials.

If the school district’s legal complaint is accurate, however, the mayor’s only direct involvement in schools’ management has been an attempt to illegally pressure administrators into replacing their own staff with unwanted city workers.

In other words, Gavin Newsom is no civil service reformer.

Gavin Newsom is really Richie Rich.

The Chronicle — Gavin Newsom portrays himself as a self-made businessman and a political outsider, but he’s not.

Gavin Newsom has reaped huge financial benefits from his ties to old money and power in San Francisco particularly with his lifelong association with Gordon P. Getty, one of the nation’s richest men.

Getty, 69, billionaire heir to an oil fortune and friend of Newsom’s family for 50 years, helped Newsom become a millionaire by investing in every important venture of the supervisor’s business career.

Getty, or trusts and firms he controls, is lead investor on 10 of Newsom’s 11 businesses, including his PlumpJack group of wine, restaurant, resort and real estate ventures. “Plump Jack” is the name of an opera Getty wrote.

And while Newsom contends that Gordon Getty is only one financial backer of many, records show Getty is Gavin Newsom’s top outside investor, either individually or through his firms and family trusts.

It must be very nice to have such wealthy friends.

"Gus, I suggest you build up 20 feet."

The Chronicle — Gavin Newsom used a “clerical error” to ensure that one of his major political donors would get a chance to build a taller condominium project than is otherwise allowed.  WTF?!

The clerical error which boosted the allowed building height of a parcel on San Francisco’s Mission Street to 85 feet among many blocks that are limited to a uniform 65 feet, stands to benefit restaurateur Gus Murad.

Over the past several years, Murad has contributed thousands of dollars to Newsom campaigns and ballot measures.

“And here we are with four votes, a clerical error, and a mayor who has gained politically from the property owner,” Supervisor Chris Daly said. “And that’s how it’s going to go down. This is disgusting.”

Just another lovely day in pay-to-play land — a.k.a. Gavin Newsom’s City Hall.