Peninsula Politics

Millbrae School Board Eschews Political Selection

2009-02-04T11:04:00.000-08:00

Following the death of veteran Millbrae School District Trustee John Lynch and the unexpected resignation of Trustee Robert Miller two new appointees to the board were seated at the board’s Feb 2nd meeting.

Two candidates, D. Don Revelo and Jay Price, both parents of school children in the district, were selected from a field of five applicants.

But the most interesting applicant was among those not selected. Former teacher and parent Jeff Steinberg was among the five applicants. Steinberg, a Millbrae native, is a former Capuchino High School Teacher who is known for creating the Sojourn to the Past program.

According to its web site, Sojourn to the Past brings the historical Civil Rights movement to life for 11th and 12th grade students, to develop communication and advocacy skills that better enable them to promote awareness of social justice in their community, and create a more civil society where diversity is embraced, injustice is spoken out against, and all people are treated with dignity.

The program has garnered national attention and has become a Steinberg’s fulltime occupation. Beyond Steinberg’s success with an innovative educational program, Steinberg is also the brother of the second most powerful political in the State government in that of Darrell Steinberg, the President pro Tempore of the California State Senate, the mantle held previously by Oakland’s Don Pirate and San Francisco’s John Burton.

Apparently the Millbrae School Board was not intimidated by the fact that one of the candidates they denied a board seat was the brother of one of a handful of political leaders who has the power to determine the fate of public education in California in the near future.

Slocum Calls for All-Mail Ballot
San Mateo County’s Chief Elections Officer Warren Slocum is publicly calling on the State Legislature to allow California counties to conduct elections by mail.

Slocum’s call for a mail-in ballot is due to the fact that a special May or June election is virtually assured and Slocum, like all elections officers in the state, is rightfully concerned about the cost of running yet another election.

Slocum writes in his blog:

To reduce the financial burden on the counties and/or the state, California could take a bold step forward and conduct the special election all by mail. Or lawmakers could allow counties that want to conduct the election by mail the legal authority to do so. This would not only save a huge sum of money in California but would possibly increase voter turnout. And around half the voters already vote by mail in regular elections.
This is not the first time that Slocum has advocated for mail-in elections, but in this context Slocum’s concerns are financial. The question remains if Slocum can convince local legislative representatives to carry such a bill.

Newsom to make Gubernatorial Campaign Foray into San Mateo County

2009-01-05T09:48:00.000-08:00

Campaign staff for San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom are reaching out to Democrats in San Mateo County promoting a scheduled Town Hall style meeting scheduled for Tuesday, January 13 at 7 p.m. at the Hiller Aviation Museum in San Carlos.

According to campaign e-mails, Newsom will make brief remarks and then take questions from the audience.

Newsom is beginning his tour of local counties “as he contemplates a run for governor, he wants to hear from California voters about the issues that matter to them.”

Newsom will run to succeed termed out Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2010. But first Newsom must win the June 2010 Democratic Primary Election which by all accounts will be a crowded affair.

California’s current Attorney General and former Governor Jerry Brown is already in campaign mode as is current California Lt. Governor John Garamendi.

Also rumored to be contemplating a run for Governor is Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

Newsom, who will also be termed out of office in 2011, has experienced numerous setbacks during his tenure as Mayor, most recently being used as the posterboy in advertisements supporting the same sex marriage ban, Proposition 8.

The blitz of Yes on 8 commercials seized on Newsom celebrating a May California Supreme Court ruling legalizing gay marriage by shouting out in a sing-song voice: "This door is wide open now! It's going to happen – whether you like it or not!"

In 2007 Newsom also admitted to being a problem drinker, which first came to light after witnesses reported that he appeared to have been drinking late Dec. 22 in 2006 before arriving at San Francisco General Hospital, where a police officer had been taken after being mortally wounded.

Newsom also indicated that his difficulty with alcohol may have played a role in his very ill-advised affair with Ruby Rippey-Tourk, then the wife of his deputy chief of staff.

Despite his many personal foibles, Newsom is contemplating a run in a crowded Democratic field.

If local political watchers are very lucky, they may also see Newsom's favorite televison journalist, Dan Noyes of ABC 7, attend the event and try to get an interview with the Mayor.

According to campaign staff, Newsom’s appearance in San Carlos is free and open to the public, but the staff is asking for rsvps from attendees by going to conversation@gavinnewsom.com.

San Mateo to be Represented by Second Appointee

2008-12-27T10:52:00.000-08:00

Following on the heels of the appointment of San Mateo City Councilwoman Carole Groom to the county board of supervisors, the San Mateo City Council will undertake its own appointment process to replace Groom.

Groom will vacate her council seat prior to the Board of Supervisors’ first meeting of the New Year on Jan. 6. The San Mateo city charter requires the council to appoint a new councilmember within 30 days after a council seat is vacated.

Applications for the vacant council seat are available on the City’s Web site. All applications are due Jan. 14 by 5 pm. The council will hold a public meeting to hear from candidates on Jan. 21 and will then make an appointment the following evening on Jan. 22.

Numerous potential candidates have already emerged, according to the Daily Journal including labor activist Rich Hedges, former council candidate Anne Arnold, Community Relations Commissioner David Lim, former planning commissioner and council candidate Karen Herrell, Parks and Recreation Commissioner Charlie Dreschler, former planning commissioner and council candidate Bertha Sanchez and planning commissioners Fred Hansson and Robert Gooyer.

The good odds are on Hedges getting the nod.

Hill’s Bills

Newly minted Assemblyman Jerry Hill has introduced his first solo piece of legislation, Assembly Bill 84, which would require that local elections officials establish a free access system by which a vote by mail voter may find out whether their ballot was counted and, if not, the reason why it was not counted.

The legislation is seemingly an extension of the emerging concern over voting security and citizen access to such information.

Hill, who has never been known publicly as an advocate for issues related to voting security, may run into some resistance.

The legislation requires local elections officials to spend what may be tens of thousands of dollars to set up such a ballot tracking system at a time when local governments are struggling financially. Such state-mandated programs are often fought by local governments as state reimbursement is often unreliable.

San Mateo County's own elections officer, Warren Slocum, the elected Assessor-Clerk-Recorder of San Mateo County, also questioned the likelyhood of State reimbursement for Hill's legislative endeavor in Slocum's own blog asking "And the big question is, 'since this is a state mandated program, will Sacramento pick up the tab?'"

It is peculiar that Hill, who was recently a county official, would so quickly author legislation that would create such an economic burden for county governments. In the past, Hill blasted the State Legislature for taking money from local governments. In 2002, when Hill assumed the post of president of the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors he blasted the State for taking local money.

“Sacramento, if you're listening, Sacramento, if you ever listen. Listen now,” said Hill in his inaugural speech. “Don't continue to insult us, just give us our money back!!!”

It appears that Hill is no longer so passionate about local government finances.

A Government of Three People, by Three People and for Special Interests

2008-12-19T15:00:00.000-08:00

With the appoint of former San Mateo City Councilmember and now Supervisor Carole Groom to the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, the voices of democracy – those calling for an election rather than a coronation – have been silenced.

The Supervisors crowned their new colleague on Tuesday, Dec. 17, 2008 over the objections of numerous organizations, many local elected officials, most of the county’s political editors in the press and even the lone voice of democracy on the board, Supervisor Rich Gordon.

During the board meeting Gordon asked his colleagues to embrace a democratic process.

“I am absolutely convinced that now is the time to clearly engage the citizens of this county in a discussion of the important issues we face,” Gordon said.

Gordon then made a motion to call for an election but the crickets could be heard all the way to San Francisco.

Gordon’s colleagues then appointed Groom in a vote so expected that it was predicted on this very blog over a year ago.

Groom’s appointment is the most conclusive evidence as of late that San Mateo County is indeed a political country club where membership is limited to those invited by special interests. Daily Journal editor Jon Mays blasted the board for failing to see that the bigger picture, that of a democratic process and the vetting of candidates through the electorate is a far better process and worth the price. “Indeed, looking at that big picture and not being influenced by the business and labor community is their job,” said Mays.

The response from the local editorial corps was swift. The Watchdog blog said that the Supervisors were “Thumbing their noses at democracy, elections, and all things we value as Americans.”

Examiner Columnist Bruce Balshone stated that “Now that the Supervisors have abandoned a democratic process and continued its tradition of machine politics, each supervisor may each individually pay a political price should they wish to continue their careers.”

It remains to be seen if the broad coalition that opposed this appointment will coalesce into a longer term response. Daily Journal columnist and former San Mateo City Councilwoman Sue Lempert theorized that a radical shift may occur in the near future catalyzed in part by the undemocratic actions of the Supervisors.

“The present system as it has evolved discourages those [candidates] who may not yet enjoy the support of the local labor and business establishment. But change is in the air. More people are voting. More people are interested in running for office, especially at the local level. New constituencies feel they are not adequately represented in top county posts. By the time there is the next round of supervisor elections in 2012, I would not be surprised if we were voting by district rather than countywide,” said Lempert.

Whatever the future holds for San Mateo County, one thing is clear: the present political system is broken and the smoked filled backrooms must soon see the light of day or San Mateo County will forever suffer the rule of an established oligarchy.

Local Editors Condemn Supervisor Appointment Process

2008-12-13T11:04:00.000-08:00

As part of a growing chorus of voices, the editorial pages of local newspapers are ablaze with sharp criticism for the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors’ push to make an appointment to fill a vacancy on the board rather than calling for a special election.

The sharpest criticism by far has come from Daily Journal Editor Jon Mays who skewered the Supervisors for hiding behind the false rationale that a special election would be too costly for the county in an op-ed that ran on Thursday, Dec. 12. Mays criticizes the supervisors for trying to do an end run around democracy stating that a special election is the “…only way the board can avoid the perception that offices are not earned, just simply transferred by the powers that be.”

May’s criticism follows that of the Daily Post, which published an editorial the day prior urging “...the supervisors to put democracy ahead of cost concerns and call a special election to allow the people to pick Hill’s replacement.”

Previously, the Insider Column of the San Mateo County Times also editorialized in favor of a democratic process, if fir nothing else than to avoid the perception of a closed political machine operating in the county, “Not that the San Mateo County government has a reputation for being clubby and nontransparent — cough, cough — but the Insider agrees with local Democrats that holding an election to fill the seat of Assemblyman Hill, irrespective of the cost, would be the democratic thing to do.”

Bill Paul, a columnist for the Daily News and an early critic of the appointment process, stated: “When the argument for making an appointment is that the person selected could well be the same person who’d be elected, or that supervisors will definitely pick the most qualified, experienced, and smartest person, then we need to ask, why have a representative, republic form of government anyway?”

One of the major proponents of calling a special election in lieu of an undemocratic appointment process is Dave Pine, a San Mateo Union High School District Trustee and local activist. Pine penned an op-ed stating that:”Holding an election to fill the vacant supervisor seat would encourage a rigorous and thoughtful debate on county issues, allow the voters to choose who will represent them, and energize our local democracy. To do otherwise would be a disservice to the residents of San Mateo County.”

Despite the near universal call for an election, the Board of Supervisors has remained steadfast in its pursuit of installing the fifth member of the board rather than allowing voters to choose their representative.

Appointment Process Attracts Numerous Candidates

With eleven applicants with varying degrees of credibility vying for an appointment to the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, the process to replace Jerry Hill has become far more complicated than expected.

Following former Supervisor Hill’s ascendance to the State Assembly, it looked as if his chosen successor, San Mateo City Councilwoman Carol Groome, was all but anointed.

But in a few short weeks, what was expected by most political watchers in San Mateo County to be hand-off from one member of the county’s political machine to another, has turned into an all out scrum.

Firstly, the process by which the four remaining supervisors undertook to fill the vacancy on the board has drawn fire from a range of interests and local leaders including numerous local elected officials and organizations such as the county’s Democratic and Republican parties, The Sierra Club, three chapters of the League of Women Voters and the League for Coastside Protection.

Dec. 11 was the deadline for candidates interested in applying for the vacant seat and, as reported in the San Mateo County Times, 11 candidates have filed papers. On Dec. 15, the board of supervisors will interview the candidates and hear from supporters on the merits of each. The following day, the supervisors will issue a decision – if they are able to agree- and appoint a new San Mateo county Supervisor. But if the fab four deadlock, which is rumored to be a possibility, the county may have a special election after all.

These applicants include:

Daniel Duane Kaul, Belmont

David Dexter Frydenlund, Belmont

Richard Louis Silver, San Mateo

Linda A. Koelling, Foster City

Michael Stogner, Belmont

Carole Groom, San Mateo

David Bauer, Belmont

Rod Hsiao, Foster City

Karen Leong Clancy, Belmont

Marland Wesley Townsend, Foster City

Maureen Freschet, San Mateo

League of Women Voters Call for Special Election for Supervisor Seat

2008-12-09T13:22:00.000-08:00

The League of Women Voters of San Mateo County, the very paragons of good governance, issued a statement on Tuesday, December 9 to the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors requesting that the board call a special election to fill a vacancy caused by the resignation of former Supervisor and now Assemblyman Jerry Hill.

The Statement, delivered by Marie Baldisseri, the president of the League of Women Voters of North and Central San Mateo County, was a polite but stinging rebuke of the board’s effort to undertake an undemocratic appointment process in lieu of an election.

“The Leagues…have a position of support for procedures to ensure an open and responsive process of selecting supervisors in San Mateo County,” said Baldiserri. “We believe that an election is the best way to ensure that process. If appointed, the [next] supervisor would face the next election as an incumbent which is always a substantial advantage and which may discourage others from running.”

The board held a public hearing in order to gather input from members of the public regarding criteria for selecting a new member of the board. Instead, the board got an earful from opponents of an undemocratic selection process.

The Leagues’ (North, Central and South chapters) action on this matter was an unusual challenge to the county’s political machine but one that may end up tipping the scales away from an appointment process.

The Leagues join the Loma Prieta Chapter of the Sierra Club, the League for Coastside Protection and environmental activist Lennie Roberts who have all called for a special election. Prior to this most recent hearing, the San Mateo County Democratic Party, Republican Party leaders and several current and former local elected officials have protested the board’s actions and have called for a special election.

The remaining supervisors will hold another hearing on December 15 to hear from potential supervisor candidates seeking the board appointment and their supporters. The following day on December 16, the board will pick the next supervisor.

If the board is somehow unable to come to an agreement, the board can still call an election or perhaps appoint a caretaker candidate who will not seek election in June of 2010.

Public Invited to Shape Criteria for Supervisor Pick

2008-12-08T18:17:00.000-08:00

Members of the public are invited to provide input to the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors on possible criteria for the board to select a new member to replace former supervisor and now Assembymember Jerry Hill who resigned his board seat on November 30 with two years left in his term.

The remaining supervisors have adopted a plan to select Hill’s replacement at a hearing on December 16. As part of the selection process, the Supervisors are inviting members of the public to attend a hearing on Dec. 11 to help the supervisors shape the criteria for their selection process, according to an article in the Daily Journal.

The criteria will include but isn’t limited to “the qualities and experience that are appropriate for the position,” County Counsel Mike Murphy stated in a staff memo.

The Board released a basic application for interested candidates to apply for the coveted post but as of last Friday, according to the San Mateo County Times, only one candidate had applied, that being Daniel Kaul, 55 year old cabinet maker from Belmont who wants to run a platform of fiscal conservatism.

Under the selection plan approved by the board, any and all candidates must submit an application for the board members to consider by Dec. 11. At a hearing on Dec. 15, candidates will be invited to make a 15-minute public presentation to be followed by 10 minutes of public testimony on each applicant’s behalf. The following day, Dec. 16, the Board of Supervisors would either appoint one of the candidates or set a date for a special election.

Three or four names have surfaced as possible contenders. Leading the pack is San Mateo Councilmember Carole Groom. Other names that have surfaced include San Mateo County Board of Education Trustee Rod Hsiao, former clerk to the Board of Supervisors Ric Silver and recently Belmont-Redwood Shores Elementary School District Trustee Karen Leong Clancy has also been mentioned.

Although the supervisors continue to press forward with an undemocratic selection process, support for a special election is mounting. The remaining public hearings may offer a degree of uncommon political drama in San Mateo County.

County Republican Leader Calls for Special Election for Vacant Supervisor Seat

2008-12-04T18:25:00.000-08:00

Joining party activists on the other side of the political spectrum, former Foster City Mayor and vice chair of the San Mateo County Republican Party Deborah Wilder has called on the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors to call a special election to fill a board seat vacated by former Supervisor and now Assemblyman Jerry Hill.

Hill resigned on November 30, 2008 and the four remaining supervisors have moved ahead with a process to select rather than elect Hill’s replacement. The board has rationalized that the approximate cost of $1.6 million to conduct a special election next spring is too much given the financial challenges the county faces.

Wilder, however, according to an article in the San Mateo County Times, opposes a selection process.

"I've always believed that an election is the right thing to do because it gives the people a choice as opposed to just four other individuals," said Wilder, vice chairwoman of the local GOP.

Wilder has echoed the sentiments expressed by the San Mateo County Democratic Party Committee whose members passed a resolution last month also calling for a special election.

In a previous Times article, Democratic Party Committee member Nicklas Akers, who authored the resolution, argued that the Supervisor seats are rarely contested and an open seat should be put to a vote.

"Our county's at-large system for electing supervisors gives a strong advantage to incumbents. It has been nearly three decades since a supervisor running for re-election has been defeated,” said Akers. “The People of San Mateo County should be given the opportunity to fill this open seat."

In the same edition of the Times, San Mateo Union High School District Trustee Dave Pine penned an opinion piece on the issue. Pine challenged the notion that the cost of calling a special election should trump the democratic process.

“Holding an election to fill the vacant supervisor seat would encourage a rigorous and thoughtful debate on county issues, allow the voters to choose who will represent them, and energize our local democracy,” said Pine. “To do otherwise would be a disservice to the residents of San Mateo County.”

The county board is slated to make an appointment at the board’s Dec, 16 meeting. If for some reason the four board members are not able to agree on an appointment, the board may be forced to call a special election.

Ironically, Groom, who is serving her second term on the San Mateo City Council, ran unnopposed in 2000 in a special election following the untimely death of former San Mateo City Councilman Gary Yates.

Wanted: A San Mateo County Supervisor

2008-12-01T18:04:00.000-08:00

Non-Approved Candidates Need Not Apply

The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors has released its application for candidates interested in replacing former supervisor and now Assemblyman Jerry Hill on the county board. The application, according to an article in the San Mateo County Times, is the first step in a process adopted by the four remaining supervisors to appoint a replacement for Hill in lieu of calling a special election.

Under the plan approved by the board, any and all candidates must submit an application for the board members to consider. On Dec. 9, the board will hold a public hearing for input on possible appointment criteria. Candidates would offer a 15-minute public presentation Monday, Dec. 15 followed by 10 minutes of public testimony on each applicant’s behalf. The public hearings could be mediated by either the League of Women Voters or another third party. The following day, Dec. 16, the Board of Supervisors would either appoint one of the candidates or set a date for a special election.

The application released today asks only for a brief description of past service in elective office, local service work, educational background and work history. The simple application belies the intense political process that the board will undertake as the decision to appoint Hill’s replacement has touched off a chorus of criticism from local activists, orgaizations and other local elected officials who have decried the anti-democratic approach.

Opposition has arisen from such organizations such as the San Mateo County Democratic Party, Millbrae Mayor Gina Papan, San Mateo Union High School District Trustee Dave Pine as well as the Daily Journal, Daily News Columnist Bill Paul and the San Mateo County Times.

The names of several potential candidates including San Mateo Mayor Carole Groom, San Mateo County Board of Education member Rod Hsiao and former clerk to the Board of Supervisors Ric Silver have been bandied about as potential contenders but in the end the public will have very little input on selecting the fifth member of the Board of Supervisors.

Local citizens interested in applying can fill out the questionnaire and run the gauntlet of the appointment process but it is likely that the board members already have an idea who the next supervisor will be.

Columnist Bill Paul Issues Warning Over Supervisor Appointment

2008-11-27T13:10:00.000-08:00

San Mateo Daily News Columnist Bill Paul has issued a missive warning that lack of elections for the five-member county board of supervisors has lead to a government body that is becoming “a self-perpetuating group that could potentially suffer from inbreeding.”

Paul attacked the notion of filling a vacancy on the board via an appointment process that has been favored by the four remaining supervisors. Supervisor Jerry Hill was recently elected to the State Assembly and will vacate his seat at the end of the month. Despite public demand for the supervisors to fill the vacancy by calling a special election, the board has moved forward on an appointment plan that will bypass the voters.

The articulated rationale for making an appointment is the cost of conducting a special election – estimated to be approximately $1.6 million.

To that, Paul states: When the argument for making an appointment is that the person selected could well be the same person who’d be elected, or that supervisors will definitely pick the most qualified, experienced, and smartest person, then we need to ask, why have a representative, republic form of government anyway? The fact is that politicking and battling things out from the trenches is the American way, for better or for worse.

In calling on the Supervisors to undertake a democratic process to replace Hill, Paul joins the San Mateo County Democratic Party, the Daily Journal, Millbrae Mayor Gina Papan and San Mateo Union High School District Trustee Dave Pine.

In addition, the Insider Blog at the San Mateo County Times has also opined against an appointment process, stating sarcastically that San Mateo County's government in no way has a reputation "...for being clubby and nontransparent — cough, cough."

As the pressure mounts on the board, an appointment process may be looking more like a political hot potato. Voters may yet have a voice in who their representatives may be.

Democrats Call for Special Election for Vacant Supervisor Seat

2008-11-26T12:21:00.000-08:00

The San Mateo County Democratic Party has issued a resolution supporting a special election to fill the Board of Supervisors vacancy left by Supervisor Jerry Hill who will be resigning at the end of the month to take a seat in the State Assembly, according to an article in the Daily Journal.

Hill’s colleagues on the board have pushed for an appointment process which, according to the Democratic Party statement, will virtually ensure that the appointee replacing Hill will get a free ride until 2022, or 14 years in office.

"Our county's at-large system for electing supervisors gives a strong advantage to incumbents. It has been nearly three decades since a supervisor running for re-election has been defeated,” said Nick Akers, the proponent of the Party’s official resolution. “The People of San Mateo County should be given the opportunity to fill this open seat."

According to an article in the San Mateo County Times, the San Mateo County Supervisors have complained that the cost of a special election would be approximately $1.6 million at a time when the county faces serious financial challenges. In response, the Democratic Party resolution highlighted the fact that the State will likely hold a special election on June 2, 2009 in order to place revenue measures on the state ballot as part of a budget balancing effort. With a special election already likely, the issue of cost is de minimis.

That sentiment was echoed by San Mateo Union High District Trustee Dave Pine, according to an article in the San Mateo County Times, when Pine testified in front of the board of Supervisors in protest of an appointment process on November 18.

Pine stated that sitting supervisors have been unchallenged because it is a daunting task to mount a countywide campaign, thereby protecting incumbents. As a result, said Pine, "We can never have a dialogue with the citizenry about the county government.”

The Daily Journal also issued an editorial critical of an appointment process on Nov. 19. In Today’s edition the Daily Journal Millbrae Mayor Gina Papan penned a letter also calling for a special election stating “Voters have not had a real opportunity to shape county policy for over a decade as there have been no seriously contested elections since 1997.”

Under the plan approved by the board Tuesday, these two candidates and any other hopeful must submit an application made available Dec. 1 when Hill’s vacancy becomes official. On Dec. 9, the board will hold a public hearing for input on possible appointment criteria. Candidates would offer a 15-minute public presentation Monday, Dec. 15 followed by 10 minutes of public testimony on each applicant’s behalf. The public hearings could be mediated by either the League of Women Voters or another third party. The following day, Dec. 16, the Board of Supervisors would either appoint one of the candidates or set a date for a special election.

Opposition to County Board Appointment Grows

2008-11-19T13:46:00.000-08:00

On Tuesday, November 18, 2008 the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to move forward with a process to appoint a replacement for Supervisor Jerry who is resigning in the middle of his four year term to take a seat in the State Legislature.

An appointment will all but guarantee the beneficiary of a likely 14-year run on the powerful Board of Supervisors which oversees a $1.8 billion annual budget and maintains substantial influence over other government agencies and programs such as the San Mateo County Transit District and the Transit Authority to name two.

Despite the Supervisors apparent determination to avoid a democratic process in favor of an appointment, opposition to this plan is growing.

In fact, Dave Pine, a San Mateo Union High School District Trustee spoke passionately against an appointment process stating that "democratic principles and benefits far exceed the costs," according to an article in the San Mateo County Times.

Pine challenged the lack of the elections for San Mateo County board seats as a result of the cost of running a countywide campaign – a fact that has guaranteed a self-perpetuating board for nearly 30 years with very few exceptions or surprises.

On Wednesday, November 19, the San Mateo Daily Journal published an editorial also calling for an election rather than an appointment. The Daily Journal stated:

Today, the county faces a true opportunity to have a dialogue about the role of the county’s largest governing board, the issues it faces and what may solve those complicated issues. By opening up this seat to an election, whatever the cost, democracy will be truly served and voters will have a chance to weigh in on the person who will fill an important leadership role for what could be more than a decade.
Although the Supervisors are moving forward with an appointment process on the basis that a special election would cost too much, the four remaining supervisors’ refusal to embrace a democratic process for replacing a colleague may have generated some real resistance and potential for political backlash.

Obama Election May Cause Political Shifts in San Mateo County

2008-11-16T22:27:00.000-08:00

With the election of Barak Obama to the Presidency, politicians and officials from across the nation are on pins and needles awaiting a call from the superstar President-Elect to serve in his administration.

This is true for South Bay Congressman Mike Honda who, according to a recent article in the San Jose Mercury News, may be in the running for the position of Secretary of Education.

In the article Honda is quoted as saying: "If I don't throw my name out, it won't show up in the mix.”

Honda, who has 30 years in public education including stints as a San Jose middle school principal and San Jose Unified School Board member, has served in Congress since 2001.

Should Honda be tapped for the position it would set off a veritable game musical chairs as local and state officials seek to fill voids left by those in higher office.

The logical heavyweight in the mix is State Senator Joe Simitian who was just elected to his second a final four-year term. Should Honda get the nod, Simitian, whose senate district overlaps a bit with Honda’s congressional district, would be on the odds-on favorite to succeed Honda.

Challengers may include termed-out Assemblywoman Sally Lieber or second-term Assemblyman Jim Beall. Although Lieber has already opened a campaign fund to run for the 13th Senate District Seat that will be vacated by second term State Senator Elaine Alquist in 2012, according to the Secretary of State’s Web site.

However, Beall may opt to take a run at the state senate seat vacated by Simitian in what would likely be a special election in the spring of 2009. Beall would undoubtedly face Assemblyman Ira Ruskin who is now in his third and final term.

Should either Ruskin or Beall win the seat, a vacated Assembly seat would then be available causing another special election.

Likely candidates to fill Ruskin’s seat should he be successful could include Santa Clara County Supervisor Liz Kniss or San Mateo County Supervisor’s Rose Jacobs Gibson or Rich Gordon.

Should one of the Supervisors exit early a scrum at the local level would be likely, which in turn would lead to scrums lower down the ticket.

According to the Mercury News article, however, Honda may have some heavyweight competition including: former Secretary of State Colin Powell; Caroline Kennedy; and the school chiefs of New York City and Chicago; and Stanford education professor Linda Darling Hammond, an adviser to Barack Obama during the campaign.

But the clock is ticking. It is likely that the President-Elect will make his selections before the end of the year and prior to taking office in January. It is a good bet that many local politicians have taken notice and begun preparations for what could be months of electoral volatility.

*Note: The Fifteenth Congressional District encompasses much of the central, northeastern and southwestern area of Santa Clara County. This includes the cities of Cupertino, Milpitas, Santa Clara, Campbell, Los Gatos, the west and some southern parts of San Jose, and Gilroy.

Supervisors’ Double Standard for County Treasurer

2008-11-12T13:08:00.000-08:00

Following revelations that the investment pool managed by San Mateo County Treasurer Lee Buffington lost $155 million in the wake of the collapse of the Lehman Brothers Investment Bank, San Mateo County Supervisors’ have called Buffington on the carpet, according to an article in the Almanac Newspaper.

Much of the investment pool consisted of city and school district reserve funds as well as bond funds. Districts such as the Sequoia Union High School District lost as much as $6.5 million. The San Mateo County Community College District, which has approximately $500 million invested with fund managed by Buffinton’s office, lost as much as $25 million – a loss that will likely impact the capital improvement program at the three colleges which as funded by bonds passed by county voters. Meaning simply, San Mateo County taxpayers will be paying off bonds for which they will get literally nothing in return for.

But the Supervisors’ quick call for answers from Buffington in no way mirrors the year of silence in which the Supervisors refused to require similar answers from San Mateo County Sheriff Greg Munks who was detained in April of 2007 at a Las Vegas brothel.

It was not until an in-depth expose was published in the San Mateo Daily News that the Supervisors’ even contemplated any public response to the Sheriff’s scandal – an incident that had the county sheriff and undersheriff detained at a Las Vegas brothel hosting underage women who were likely trafficked into the U.S. And the best part, the lawmen’s trip to Sin City was financed by San Mateo County taxpayers to the tune of $10,000.

But Munks had some political cover that Buffington does not have. As it turned out, Munks and his family had been and likely will be substantial political contributors to Supervisor Jerry Hill, who was running to succeed Gene Mullin in the State Assembly. Following the brothel incident, Hill consistently defended Munks despite mounting criticism. It wasn’t until Hill’s financial ties to Munks were exposed by his Assembly opponents that he and his fellow Supervisors took action. In an articled in the San Mateo County Times, Hill was blasted by his Assembly opponents for failing to take action.

Only weeks later, according to an article in the Times, did the Board of Supervisors finally take action by creating a Citizens Review Panel to investigate other county elected officials suspected of malfeasance. Such a panel, to be comprised of retired judges, prosecutors and Bar lawyers, will have the power to subpoena, hire investigators and return with a recommendation to the board of supervisors.

But Munks was never to be brought before this panel.

In the Times article, Jerry Hill stated that "This was created to deal with conduct prospectively, not retroactively," he said.

Unlike Munks, however, Buffington, when called by the Supervisors to respond to criticism, was compelled to defend his investment strategy under aggressive questioning by Hill, according to the article in the Almanac Newspaper. Perhaps Buffington should have donated as much to Hill as Munks.

County Board of Supervisors May Close Door on Election for Open Seat

2008-11-07T19:22:00.000-08:00

San Mateo County rarely experiences a real contest for the coveted seats on the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors but with the mid-term departure of Supervisor Jerry Hill who was elected to a seat in the State Assembly, a once-in-a-decade opening will be available as of Dec. 1, 2008. But whether or not the county board of supervisors will allow an election remains an open question. Instead, the county board of supervisors may elect to select Hill’s replacement, essentially ensuring that an appointed replacement will cruise for the next 14 years in office.

According to Daily Journal editor John Mays, many names have been floated as a possible replacement for Hill including San Mateo Mayor Carole Groom, Rod Hsiao, member of the San Mateo County Office of Education, Foster City Councilman John Kiramis and possibly Ted Lempert, former assemblyman, county supervisor and current member of the San Mateo County Office of Education.

But it is common knowledge in political circles that San Mateo’s Groom has had the inside track for as long as Hill had planned to run for the Assembly. But another candidate with a long and colorful history in San Mateo County politics has reared his head, that being Ric Silver, the former San Mateo County Clerk to the Board of Supervisors.

Recently, Silver generated a headline for himself in the Almanac Newspaper calling for the reopening of the Caltrain station in Atherton that was closed two years ago by the Peninsula Joint Powers Board, the board that oversees Caltrain and includes two seats controlled by the San Mateo County Supervisors as part of its membership.

Silver is no stranger to the local political scene, although he has not resided in the county for many years and it is not clear if he has yet relocated.

Silver was once a wheeler dealer political hack while a clerk to the board, a position that was eliminated as part of Silver’s exit. According to an article by former Chronicle Newspaper columnist Mark Simon Silver was removed from duty for a bit of political intrigue that went badly.

According to Simon’s article, some supervisors had prevailed upon Silver to transfer Elaine Walton Horsley out of his clerk’s department. Horsley was apparently the office computer expert, a role some board members thought she performed poorly.

Simon added: She also is the wife of Sheriff Don Horsley.

Some supervisors also told Silver -- as he was frequently instructed -- to leave no paper trail of what was being done, sources said.

Silver then put together an office reorganization that included transferring Elaine Horsley to the Information Services Department.

Sheriff Horsley, also a longtime friend of Silver's, acknowledged that he contacted members of the board, inquiring about the transfer of his wife.

The ensuing political battle ended with Silver exiting the county. Since then he has been an occasional political gadfly. Ironically, if Silver were to run and be successful, he may end up serving on the board next to none other than his old nemesis Don Horsley, the retired San Mateo County Sheriff who is now seeking to succeed Supervisor Rich Gordon when Gordon is termed out in 2010.

Bu whether or not Silver will actually run or even have an opportunity to do so remains unclear. Hill will resign his board seat effective November 30, 2008 with two years left in his term, forcing his colleagues to decide whether to appoint a replacement or to call a special election.

San Mateo County has a long tradition of selecting replacements for vacant supervisorial seats rather than allowing voters to decide for themselves. Former Supervisor Mary Griffin was appointed to her seat, gaining an additional two years in office as a result. In 1999, Supervisor Rose Jacobs Gibson was appointed to her seat and she was just elected to her third and final term with only token opposition.

In announcing his resignation Hill has already laid out the rationale for not calling for an election – that being the estimated cost of $1.7 million to the county to organize a special election. In a statement given to the local press Hill said, “To me that's the real incentive for the Board to make an appointment.”

According to election records, San Mateo County has not had a serious election for one of the Board of Supervisor seats since Rich Gordon won a special election in 1997, over a decade ago. Since then, no sitting Supervisor has been seriously challenged and some seats have even changed hands without a contest. Those with token opposition have never even been forced into a runoff election.

This is despite the fact that the office of supervisor is a coveted full-time political office that oversees a county budget of $1.5 billion, pays a six-figure salary and members hold seats on powerful local and regional agencies such as the San Mateo County Transit District, the San Mateo County Transit Authority, CalTrain and have the power to appoint members to agencies and commissions such as the First Five Commission which doles out large sums of money to local non-profits – a veritable trough of patronage dollars.

The board seats, like legislative seats, are term limited but Supervisors are allowed three four-year terms, which in California’s political landscape is akin to political gold.

But, as is typical of San Mateo County, it appears that voters will again be deprived of the opportunity to actually elect their supervisor.

County Ethics Panel Proposal Deeply Flawed

2008-08-01T13:06:00.000-07:00

On Tuesday, August 5 the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors will consider adopting a county ordinance to establish an “Independent Citizens Review Panel” that would be empowered to “…investigate allegations of serious official misconduct by County elected officials.”

The ordinance is a long-delayed response to the incident in which San Mateo County Sheriff Greg Munks and Undersheriff Carlos Bolanos were detained at a Las Vegas brothel in April of 2007. The County’s two top lawmen were in Vegas for a law enforcement relay race but were swept up in a Las Vegas Police and Justice Department sweep of local houses of ill-repute.

The pair were not arrested but many questions stemming from their detention remain unanswered as both lawmen refused to provide any explanation beyond a terse press release issued shortly after the incident was covered nationally in the media, according to the Daily News.
Well over a year later, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors has finally responded to the Sheriff’s incident, albeit indirectly, by considering a new “Independent Citizens Review Panel” to investigate such malfeasance on the part of county elected officials. The panel proposal comes very late and following withering criticism by local media, particularly by the Daily News, which published a scathing expose of both the Sheriff’s detention and the total lack of response from the county’s inner circle.

Unfortunately, the so-call “Independent Citizens Review Panel” will not include any government outsiders – meaning no average “citizens”.

According to the proposed ordinance, an “Independent Citizens Review Panel” created to investigate serious official misconduct by County elected officials will be comprised of “Panel members…chosen at random (by the Board of Supervisors) from a list compiled and maintained by the County Counsel of citizens from among the following categories: retired judges; former county or city administrators; former grand jury forepersons; and former county counsels, city attorneys and/or district attorneys.”

In short, the so-called “Independent Citizens Review Panel” will be the proverbial fox guarding the hen-house, friends and colleagues of county government insiders investigating county government colleagues.

San Mateo County’s proposed ordinance must be redrafted to open the panel membership to average citizens outside of government.

San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office: Two Years Later

2008-07-31T13:43:00.000-07:00

It has been a little over two years since San Mateo County Sheriff Greg Munks was elected to the Sheriff’s post. Munks, who ran unopposed for the position, previously served 13 years as Undersheriff for former San Mateo County Sheriff Don Horsley and during that time the Sheriff’s Office was, by all accounts, well run and suffered little in the way of public scandal.

But under Munks’ tenure the relative calm waters that Munks inherited have become, by most accounts, storm-filled seas as the Sheriff’s Office has endured a series of scandals and blunders.

Just four months after taking office in April of 2007, Munks and his Undersheriff Carlos Bolanos were detained at a Las Vegas brothel when the two were in Vegas for a law enforcement relay race, according to an article in the Examiner Newspaper.

Neither of the County's two top cops were arrested in the brothel sweep conducted by Las Vegas and Federal authorities but many unanswered questions remained. Both lawmen refused to answer.

Subsequently, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors investigated the Sheriff’s Office use of county vehicles and resources for the trip. As much of $10,000 in public funds were used to plan and take the Vegas jaunt.

The Naked Deputy
Despite the stonewalling, another sex scandal in the Sheriff’s Department was reported by the San Mateo Daily Journal. As it turns out, a court reporter returned to work after hours sometime in May of 2007 and reported seeing a man’s bare backside flee through the hallway that runs behind the courtrooms where the county judges’ offices are located. Upon further investigation, it was revealed that the bare backside belonged to a deputy sheriff who had apparently been having sex with an unidentified woman.

No one was charged with a crime in the incident and as this was a “personnel” matter, no other public disclosures were made.

The $700,000 Flush

The next blunder was not of a sexual nature but rather had to do with the management of the County jail. It was reported in late June of 2007 in the Daily News that jail inmates had been regularly flushing a variety of debris and clothing down the jail’s toilets, damaging and clogging the sewer system and waste treatment facilities operated by the South Bayside System Authority (SBSA) - the joint powers authority which administers Redwood City's sewer system.

Among the many items flushed by jail inmates were the orange jumpsuits worn by the inmates costing the county approximately $700,000 in lost inventory and in billing from the SBSA for the damage to the sewer system.

Munks himself acknowledged the problem by saying, "It's a continuing problem and the bill is only going to get bigger."

The primary reason cited by Munks for the Sheriff’s Office inability to halt the flushing is the rampant overcrowding at the county jail – meaning guards were unable to closely monitor the actions of inmates and prevent the flushing of public dollars.

A Murderer Escapes

Things were quiet for a few months but the Sheriff’s Office landed in the press again when, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, the Sheriff’s Office blundered in its response to the escape of an accused murderer from the County’s Juvenile Hall.

On Thursday, February 14, 2008 a 17-year-old murder suspect escaped from the San Mateo County juvenile facility, stunning county officials and neighbors of the facility.

The escape of Josue Raul Orozco, the youngest person ever charged as an adult with murder in the county and a known gang member, incarcerated for shooting a rival gang member in the back of the head, exposed some major security weaknesses in the two year old facility and a stunning lack of procedural protocols among the County’s Probation and Sheriff’s Department in responding to such an event.

Orozco escaped the juvenile detention center between 7 p.m. and 7:15 p.m. It is not clear from news reports how long it took facility staff to notice Orozco’s absence but, according to an external review of the incident, Sheriff’s Deputies did not respond to incident for nearly an hour nor did the Sheriff’s Office alert authorities of Orozco’s escape until after 9 p.m. that night.

Sheriff’s officials issued only what is termed a “statewide alert,” essentially a teletype alerting law enforcement throughout the state of the escape.

But, according to San Mateo County Judge Marta Diaz who excoriated public safety officials in a Daily News article, an arrest warrant should have been issued immediately. By issuing an arrest warrant, law enforcement agencies throughout the state would have received a photo of Orozco with an immediate order to make an arrest.

A warrant was not issued until 2 a.m. when Sheriff’s Deputies knocked on Diaz’ door for her signature on the warrant.

Diaz, in a Daily News article stated: "I noticed while I was reading the affidavit that the escape had occurred (6 1/2 hours earlier) - and I was shocked." If (an inmate) is making for the Mexican or Canadian border, you want that arrest warrant in your hot little hands," she said.
Instead, the escaped murderer was given a 7-hour head start and has to date never been located.

In the aftermath it is unclear if any Sheriff’s Office personnel were disciplined for the series of failures in this incident.

A Jailhouse Surprise
It took only weeks after the juvenile hall escape for the Sheriff to commit yet another public relations blunder, according to the Examiner Newspaper.

At the request of the Sheriff’s Office, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors sanctioned the Sheriff’s interest in reopening a temporary jail facility in South San Francisco for female inmates at the South San Francisco Courthouse.

In early March, South San Francisco Councilmember Karyl Matsumoto excoriated the Sheriff’s Office and county officials for failing to contact South San Francisco officials about the proposed jail. According to Matsumoto, no South San Francisco officials were apprised of the jail proposal and not a single community meeting was held before supervisors told Sheriff’s officials to pursue exploring the project. After being called on the carpet by Matsumoto, the Sheriff’s Office and Munks did begin to reach out to the City to get some feedback on the jail proposal.

Operation Lockdown
The nagging questions surrounding the Sheriff’s Las Vegas brothel visit resurfaced in April of 2008, exactly a year later, thanks to a series of articles revisiting the issue published by the Daily News.

Specifically, newly minted Congresswoman Jackie Speier reignited the issue by, for the first time, calling for a full investigation of Munks's brothel visit.

Speier Stated: "This cries out for a comprehensive external investigation, because the highest law enforcement officer in the county should not be under any suspicion of illegal activity at any time, ever.”

Speier’s call for an investigation caused months of wrangling by the Board of Supervisors who only now are considering a proposal to create a County Citizens Review Panel to investigate impropriety on the part of county elected officials. If such a commission is created, it may first and foremost review the Sheriff’s Las Vegas debacle.

Jail Overcrowding
The drive to reopen the South San Francisco facility and the problem of inmates flushing their uniforms down jailhouse toilets were both tied to the overcrowding of both the County’s men’s and women’s correctional facilities, according to Munks and county officials.

But in early May, Sheriff Munks and County Officials were disappointed to learn that the County’s application for State funding to expand two local jail facilities was declined.

San Mateo County lost out on approximately $100 million in state funding to expand the county’s Maguire Correctional facility and women’s jail facility in Redwood City, according to an article in the San Mateo Daily Journal.

The funds, authorized under Assembly Bill 900 in 2007 via a state bond, were made available to local jurisdictions under a competitive proposal process. But San Mateo County’s unwillingness house State prisoners in so-called re-entry wards may have torpedoed the county’s chances, a decision made by the Board of Supervisors.

The total estimated cost for the reconstruction of the jail is approximately $140 million. Without the state dollars, the county must now seek alternative sources or pay the entire cost itself.

But San Mateo County Times columnist John Horgan offered another theory, namely that the negative media coverage of the Sheriff’s detention at a Las Vegas brothel last year may have played a role.

Horgan offers the possibility that State officials may have little confidence in a sheriff who, according to the sheriff’s own statements, accidentally ended up a seedy residential brothel by mistake just in time for a raid by federal and local law enforcement agencies.

Horgan states: “If they are telling the truth in this matter, they come across as two fellows completely out of their element, a pair of country bumpkins loose in the big city and unable, apparently, to tell the difference between a room full of hookers and a Tupperware party.”

Although it is unlikely that such a nexus between the Sheriff’s Las Vegas trouble and the jail funding could ever be established, gun shy political leaders in Sacramento are known to avoid potential political land mines. The Sheriff’s scandal may have qualified in this instance.

Another Felon Goes Free
Finally, in July, San Mateo County residents learned from the Daily Journal that yet another violent felon had somehow been let go from county custody only to disappear. A potential second-striker, one Alfredo Guadalupe Ortiz Jr., 28, convicted of beating his girlfriend and a man who tried intervening on a San Mateo street was erroneously allowed to leave jail custody and flee after a booking process error left his bail set at $25000 instead of no-bail status. It is not yet known where the mistake was made, whether by a court clerk or by Sheriff’s Deputies on his way from the county jail to the courthouse.

Ortiz has yet to be located.

Two Years to Go
With another two years to go in his first term as Sheriff it would be hard to believe that Munks and his department could endure much more. But with the seemingly unending string of failures, blunders and poor decision-making local residents should expect the unexpected.

One thing is likely though -- with so many mistakes and with confidence in Munks’ leadership at an absolute low, local decision-makers may not allow Munks to run again for office unopposed. And if Munks’ Las Vegas episode is finally investigated by a County Citizens Review Panel, a third prolonged review of the brothel visit may be too much for the beleaguered lawman and his office to endure.

San Carlos Councilmember Grocott Targets Assistant City Manager

2008-07-25T13:24:00.000-07:00

San Carlos Councilmember Matt Grocott has come out swinging against a proposed half-cent sales tax measure proposed by his council colleagues to address a projected $1.3 million deficit projected for the 2009-2010 fiscal year and a $1.45 million deficit the following fiscal year. But Grocott’s opposition to the tax could cost veteran Assistant City Manager his job under Grocott’s proposed cost-cutting measures for the beleaguered city, according to reports in the Daily News.

Grocott, according to reports in the San Mateo County Times and the Daily Journal, has crossed swords with City administrators before and may have no great affecting for Moura.

The backdrop to the tax debate stems from the fact that the City Council is now considering declaring a fiscal emergency to smooth the way for a sales tax. By declaring a fiscal emergency, under California law, the threshold for passing such a measure drops from a two-thirds voter majority requirement to a simple majority. But such a declaration requires a unanimous vote of the five-member council and Grocott, a well-known fiscal conservative who has vocally opposed past tax measures including the County’s Measure A sales for local transportation needs, who has publicly stated that he will not support the declaration – thereby preventing the council from declaring a fiscal emergency.

Grocott is demanding that before asking voters to approve a new tax the council make cuts to balance the budget by eliminating slashing the assistant city manager position, which would save $200,000; not adding two planning positions at costs of $80,000 and $90,000; and not giving a $2,644 pay raise to the contracted city public works director, Parviz Mokhtari, who already earns $210,000 a year plus fees of $90 to $100 an hour for any outside subcontracting work.

San Carlos has had ample experience with local tax measures designed to pay for fire services and for the former SCOOT shuttle program. All such measures have failed in San Carlos in recent years. Although early polling indicates that a sales tax may pass this time around – particularly in a Presidential Election year – should it require a two-thirds majority to pass that could prove to be too high a hurdle.

The tax effort could be further complicated by the fact that the San Carlos School District has moved to place a parcel tax measure on the November 4, 2008 ballot that would compete with a local sales tax measure, according to the San Mateo County Times.

Redwood City Mayor May be Wading into Ethical Breach

2008-07-18T13:41:00.000-07:00

According to an article in the San Mateo Daily Journal, Redwood City Mayor Rosanne Foust was named vice president of programs and business development for the San Mateo County Economic Development Association (SAMCEDA), a pro business and pro-development lobbying and advocacy organization.

Among the many business and economic development projects touted by SAMCEDA include the recent arrival of Virgin America Airlines at San Francisco International Airport and SAMCEDA’s interest in support of the redevelopment of El Camino Real throughout San Mateo County into a new and improved Grand Boulevard, as it has been termed by local policy makers and developers alike.

Foust’s involvement with SAMCEDA is not a major professional leap as for many years Foust worked for the French Government doing business development. But the peculiar aspect of her employment with SAMCEDA is her position as a local policymaker as the mayor of Redwood City and as the Chair of the San Mateo County Transit Authority - an independent agency formed to administer the proceeds of a county wide half-cent sales tax, Measure A, approved by voters in 1998 and reauthorized for an additional 25 years in 2004.

As a Vice President of SAMCEDA, Foust will now draw a salary from an organization funded by many interests she may oversee and/or regulate and as a councilmember. For example, major contributors to SAMCEDA include the Bohannon Development Company, SummerHill Homes, Foster Enterprises, BKF Engineers, Embarcadero Capital Partners LLC, KEECH Properties, LLC and Webcor Builders to name a few.

Oddly, one of the listed members of SAMCEDA’s Board of Directors, albeit an Emeritus member, is Paul Shepherd of Cargill Salt. Shepherd’s relationship with Cargill is interesting as Redwood City is now in throws of a pitched battle over the use of Cargill Salt’s industrial property on the Bayshore of Redwood City

At stake are 1,433 acres of Bay-side land now owned by the salt manufacturing conglomerate. The Bay-side property and associated salt ponds are targeted for a massive development. The development enterprise of Cargill and DMB has worked for months to build support for an as of yet undefined housing and commercial development.

This Spring, however, several environmental groups including Save the Bay, Friends of Redwood City and the Committee for Green Foothills gathered signatures in a petition drive to place a measure on the Redwood City ballot to halt all development on the little remaining open space and parkland in Redwood City and require voter approval of such developments in the future by a two-thirds majority.

The City Council and Foust in particular, according to recent news reports, has reacted almost violently to the petition that now rests in the council’s hands as the council must now place such a measure on the local ballot in the near future.

The difficulty for Foust is if one of the members of the Board of Directors of SAMCEDA is an agent of Cargill Salt and if Cargill provides funding for SAMCEDA, whom will Foust answer to?

Beyond the Cargill question, SAMCEDA also receives financial support from Sequoia Hospital/Catholic Healthcare West, the large and lucrative hospital based in Redwood City that will be undertaking a massive reconstruction in the near future, a project that Foust may also have to weigh in on as a member of the Redwood City Council.

Other likely conflicts may include AT & T which likely has a utility franchise agreement with the City.

In short, Foust’s decision to work for SAMCEDA may be fraught with ethical challenges some of which her opponents would be wise to exploit in the coming electoral battles.

County Board Responds to Sheriff's Scandal

2008-06-28T19:34:00.000-07:00

After weeks of discussion, according to an article in the San Mateo County Times, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors will soon discuss placing a measure on the November ballot to endow the Supervisors with the authority to discipline other county elected officials.

The proposed measure is in response to the April 2007 incident in which San Mateo County Sheriff Greg Munks was detained at a Las Vegas brothel by local and federal law enforcement agencies.

Munks was not arrested but beyond a brief written statement released to the local media, Munks never addressed the incident and never fully explained his presence at the brothel.

Following a series of articles in the San Mateo County Times and the Daily News a year after the incident, renewed interest in the Sheriff’s misadventures compelled the Supervisors to react.

Supervisor Jerry Hill proposed a potential county charter amendment to endow him and his colleagues with the power to discipline county officials. But the proposal is already running into choppy waters as such powers are few and far between, shared only by San Bernadino County and the City and County of San Francisco. Neither county has ever actually attempted to use such powers although San Francisco came very close this year with the suspension of disgraced San Francisco Supervisor Ed Jew who was indicted for attempting to extort money from local businesses in his district. Jew was suspended from his position as a supervisor and was to face a quasi-judicial proceeding to remove him from office but Jew resigned before that process was undertaken.

Without any precedent, the San Mateo County board may be able to acquire such powers through a ballot measure but whether or not it could be effectively utilized and hold up under court review is another question.

The real question, however, is whether or not the Supervisors will actually attempt to remove Munks from office or compel the embattled Sheriff to better explain his brothel visit.

Does Speier Endorsement of Hill Spell Trouble for the County Sheriff?

2008-05-26T13:15:00.000-07:00

According to the Pacifica Riptide blog, Congresswoman Jackie Speier has endorsed San Mateo County Supervisor Jerry Hill in his bid for the 19th Assembly District seat. Hill is running against Millbrae Mayor Gina Papan and San Mateo County Community College Trustee Richard Holober.

The extremely late endorsement is a new twist in an already heated election and comes on the heels of Speier’s involvement in generating some bad press for Hill.

In mid-April, newly minted Congresswoman Jackie Speier blasted the San Mateo County board of Supervisors for the board members’ inaction in response to Sheriff Greg Munks’ detention at a Las Vegas bordello in April of 2007.

In a Daily News investigative article Speier stated: "This cries out for a comprehensive external investigation, because the highest law enforcement officer in the county should not be under any suspicion of illegal activity at any time, ever.”

The renewed interest in the scandal sparked largely by Speier had a disproportionately negative impact on the Assembly candidacy of San Mateo County Supervisor Jerry Hill. Hill had the misfortune of having accepted nearly $12,000 in direct campaign contributions from Sheriff Munks and his extended family, including Munks’ father-in-law Bill Lane, owner of Sunset Magazine.

In fact, Lane donated $3,000 to Hill’s campaign just over a month after the news of the brothel bust hit the local papers.

Sheriff Munks himself hosted a campaign fundraiser for Hill on November 11, 2007, just a few months later.

News of the Munks’ largesse towards Hill was problematic as members of the public and Hill’s opponents in the Democratic Primary roundly criticized Hill for accepting such large donations from Munks and family as Hill and his colleagues failed to request that Munks explain his detention at a bordello by Las Vegas and federal law enforcement agents.

Following Speier’s call for an investigation, the new pressure forced Hill to return a portion of the funds he received from Munks – although Hill did not return the funds from the Lane family.

Speier’s announcement of an endorsement of Hill over the weekend is a peculiar twist in a volatile Assembly race. Political wags have speculated that Speier’s endorsement may be tied to a political change of heart by Hill in his continued support of Munks- meaning Hill may now turn on his old friend.

It is rumored that Hill may now call for an investigation of Munks. In turn, Speier would support her pick for Sheriff in that of San Mateo Police Chief Susan Mannheimer. It has already been whispered both publicly and privately that some would like to see Mannheimer replace Munks sooner rather than later. In fact Half Moon Bay Review editor Clay Lambert floated such an idea in the wake of the Sheriff’s scandal in 2007.

So the question is, did Hill trade Munks for Speier’s endorsement?

Holober Supporters Attack Papan

2008-05-16T13:57:00.000-07:00

Supporters of Assembly candidate and community college trustee Richard Holober have launched a smear campaign against Democratic rival Millbrae Mayor Gina Papan.

The first in what is likely a series of mail pieces intended to engender negative impressions of Papan in favor of Holober was sent via what are termed “Independent Expenditure Committees.” Such committees are comprised of moneyed interest groups acting on behalf of a particular candidate or cause.

In Holober’s case, it is the so-called Consumer Attorneys acting on his behalf. Those same attorneys who work to create opportunities for lawsuits against any available deep pocket. The consumer attorneys are greatly responsible for increasing the costs of just about every consumer service and commodity as the deep pockets usually just pass along the legal costs to consumers.

But what is the greatest irony of the attack by the independent expenditure committee is that the consumer attorneys are blasting Papan for getting support from….independent expenditure committees.

For the confused, this concept will be repeated.

Papan, according to a recent article in the Daily News, has garnered significant support by interests disconnected from her campaign and, according to Papan, without her knowledge. Her opponents have criticized such support in the local press. Holober went so far as to say "That's not the kind of money I would ever accept.”

But then, Holober supporters, disconnected from his campaign and, perhaps without his knowledge, have launched an attack against Papan for receiving the same kind of support.

The popularity of campaigning through Independent Expenditure Committees exploded since the passage of Proposition 34 in 2000 which strictly capped the amount candidates for state office can receive directly from donors.

But this circumstance is just too bizarre. One independent expenditure committee attacking a candidate on behalf of another candidate over support from other independent expenditure committees.

What the hell kind of world is this?

Veteran School Board Member Announces Retirement

2008-05-13T11:37:00.000-07:00

Veteran Jefferson Union High School District School Board Member Jean Brink announced that she would not seek a sixth term this November at the board’s May 6, 2008 meeting.

The JUHSD is comprised of the communities of Daly City, Pacifica, Brisbane, Colma and the unincorporated community of Broadmoor. Brink has served on the board since 1988 and is one of three members of the five-member board who hail from the City of Pacifica. This is despite the fact that Daly City is the largest community within the district. Brink’s retirement from the board may offer a would-be Daly City candidate an opportunity to seek a rare vacancy on the board.

County Loses Out on State Funding for New Jail
San Mateo County has lost out on approximately $100 million in state funding to expand the county’s Maguire Correctional facility and women’s jail facility in Redwood City, according to an article in the San Mateo Daily Journal.

The funds, authorized under Assembly Bill 900 in 2007 via a state bond, were made available to local jurisdictions under a competitive proposal process. But San Mateo County’s unwillingness house State prisoners in so-called re-entry wards may have torpedoed the county’s chances, a decision made by the Board of Supervisors.

The total estimated cost for the reconstruction of the jail is approximately $140 million. Without the state dollars, the county must now seek alternative sources or pay the entire cost itself.

But San Mateo County Times columnist John Horgan recently offered another theory, namely that the recent media coverage of the Sheriff’s detainment at a Las Vegas brothel last year may have played a role.

Sheriff Scandal Plagues Assembly Candidate

2008-05-08T13:32:00.000-07:00

As three local Democrats toil away in the hopes of succeeding termed out Assemblyman Gene Mullin in the 19th Assembly District, the scandal surrounding San Mateo County Sheriff Greg Munks is beginning to play a pivotal role in the race.

In yet another article in the Daily News regarding the Sheriff and his connection to San Mateo County Supervisor and Assembly aspirant Jerry Hill, Republican candidate Catherine Brinkman blasted Hill for his “too late and too little” response to the Sheriff’s scandal.

San Mateo County residents may recall the revelations last April that San Mateo County Sheriff Greg Munks, and his Undersheriff Carlos Bolanos, were caught up in a brothel bust when the two top cops in San Mateo County were in Las Vegas for a relay race for law enforcement.

Both lawmen were “detained” and released along with numerous other patrons of the Las Vegas neighborhood brothel but many women were taken into custody as well as cash and approximately 3,500 tabs of the drug Ecstasy.

San Mateo County officialdom was largely silent on the event. In fact, some even defended Munks in lieu of condemning the visit of the two top cops to a house of ill repute. San Mateo County Supervisor and State Assembly aspirant Jerry Hill was particularly vociferous in his defense of Munks.

As pressure has mounted however, particularly from Congresswomen Jackie Speier and Anna Eshoo – both of whom publicly called for an investigation in April of this year – Hill and company backtracked and promised to develop proposals to allow the board to address the issue. Hill, according to an Examiner Newspaper article, proposed a possible county charter amendment to allow the Supervisors to discipline Munks. But two weeks later at the board’s regularly scheduled meeting on May 6, no such proposal was forthcoming. In fact, there was no discussion of the Munks issue at all.

In a Daily News article following the meeting, Hill did indicate that he is still working on the issue.

But the lack of action apparently did not sit well with another Assembly candidate. Republican Assembly candidate Catherine Brinkman issued a blistering statement in response to Hill’s lack of action, criticizing Hill for trying to again “…sweep the malfeasance of the Sheriff and Hill’s own support of the Sheriff back under the rug,” according to a full copy of the statement available on the Pacifica Riptide Web site.

In a Daily News article, Hill’s campaign manager, Ed McGovern shot back calling Brinkman “stupid” and stating that she has only brought up the issue again for political reasons.

Whatever the cause, the Daily News article took Hill to task for his ever shifting positions on the Munks scandal. In an editorial published last month by the San Mateo County Times, the newspaper predicted that the Munks scandal and Hill’s subsequent fumble would have an impact on the Assembly race in favor of Hill’s competitors Richard Holober, a San Mateo County Community College Trustee and Gina Papan, the Mayor of Millbrae.

It appears that the Times prediction is coming true as Hill struggles to find a way out of the political quagmire he has made for himself.

Times Reporter Solicits Public Reaction to Sheriff’s Scandal

2008-05-01T09:42:00.000-07:00

In an unusual request to members of the public, San Mateo County Times reporter Michael Manekin posted the following letter on the San Mateo Daily News site requesting responses from members of the public regarding the ongoing turmoil over San Mateo County Sheriff Greg Munks.

Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Hello, My name is Michael Manekin.
I'm a reporter at the San Mateo Times, and I'm working on a story about the public's reaction to the Vegas scandal.

I want to know if county residents care about the incident--and if they do, what they think should be done. Recall the sheriff? An independent investigation? An ethics commission? A change to the county charter? Nothing at all?

If you're a resident of San Mateo County and have an opinion on this matter, I'd like to arrange an interview.

Please e-mail me at mmanekin@bayareanewsgroup.com.

Thank you,

Michael

It has been a year since Munks and Undersheriff Carlos Bolanos were detained by law enforcement officials in a sweep of brothels in Las Vegas, Nevada under a two year investigation named “Operation Dollhouse”.

Both lawmen were in Las Vegas for a relay race for law enforcement agencies throughout the Western United States. At the time, Munks and company were the subject of a fierce media storm and weathered editorial calls for their resignations issued by, among many, the Daily Journal and the Half Moon Bay Review. But weather the storm they did, with the help of compliant political allies on the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors who did nothing in response. And that has been the modis operandi for a year.

That had been the case until Friday, April 18, 2008 when the San Mateo Daily News published a stunning expose and reexamination of the Sheriff’s visit to a house of ill-repute and subsequent silence on the issue on the part of the county’s leadership. Of greatest significance in the expose is the new call for an investigation of Munks and Bolanos by the county’s two top political leaders, Congresswomen Jackie Speier and Anna Eshoo.

Since then there have been numerous articles, op-eds, letters to the editor and even accusations between candidates now running to replace Assemblyman Gene Mullin in the June Democratic Primary.

San Mateo County Supervisor Jerry Hill has been at the center of the media firestorm as he is now one of the candidates running for Assembly and had taken thousands of dollars in donations from Munks and members of Munks’ family who also hosted a fundraiser for Hill in November of 2007, just months after the brothel bust.

In response Hill has returned some of the funds he collected from Munks and, in concert with Supervisor Adrienne Tissier, is poised to suggest options for the county to respond to the Munks event, and perhaps future events by independently elected county officials.

Hill and company’s response, a full year after the brothel bust, is likely in a reaction to the intense media scrutiny and the looming election.

In preparation for that event, Times reporter Manekin is soliciting perspectives from county residents and voters to gauge voter interest in seeing that county officials take action to discipline Munks and, perhaps more importantly, publicly react to questionable behavior on the part of elected officials rather than simply turning a blind eye – or have them host a fundraiser.