Sign up for Express
New from the Almanac, Express is an e-edition delivered via email each weekday.
Sign up to receive Express!
Login | Register
Sign up for eBulletins
Click for Menlo Park, California Forecast
Almanac News
Increase font Increase font
Decrease font Decrease font
Adjust text size

County's Measure B questions status quo, Gordon says  

Bookmark and Share
For the past couple of decades in San Mateo County, according to former supervisor and current state Assemblyman Rich Gordon, most candidates elected as county supervisor have won the countywide vote and the vote in the supervisor district in which they lived.

The obvious question: If a candidate is likely to win his or her district, why oppose a ballot measure that would have candidates run only in the district, nullifying the expense and complications of a countywide campaign?

Measure B would switch from countywide elections to by-district elections. San Mateo County is alone among California's 58 counties in using at-large elections to elect supervisors.

Opponents of Measure B -- among them, supervisors Carole Groom and Rose Jacobs Gibson and Sheriff Greg Munks -- assert that supervisors elected at-large are accountable to all voters. "Your influence and ability to have your voice heard will be reduced if we turn to a system where elected representatives are only interested in their district," the ballot argument says. By-district elections, they add, would lead to influence by "special interests" and a shift toward parochial concerns by individual supervisors.

"I think that a large part of what this particular measure is about, it's a debate," Mr. Gordon told the Almanac. "It's a test between the status quo and those who want change. I think those who want change may not be fully organized as a group, but I think they represent folks in under-served communities. I think those are folks who are concerned about how expensive campaigning has become."

Among the backers at a "Yes on B" website: candidates for supervisor Shelly Masur and Warren Slocum, Supervisor Dave Pine, Portola Valley Mayor Maryann Moise Derwin, council members Peter Ohtaki of Menlo Park and Elizabeth Lewis of Atherton, and Virginia Chang Kiraly of the Menlo Park Fire Protection District board.

The San Francisco-based Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights sued the county in April 2011 on the substance of this measure, as they threatened to do in 2010. That was before the formation of a county Charter Review Committee, which recommended that the board approve a ballot measure to let the voters weigh in. Mr. Gordon's was the lone supporting vote on the Board of Supervisors.

In interviews, candidates have said that reaching likely voters via direct mail takes about $40,000, given the county's 340,000 registered voters. By-district elections would shrink that pool by 80 percent. "I think you have to wonder, if the cost of running for office is reduced, does it make it easier for candidates?" Mr. Gordon asked. That answer would be yes? "I don't think there's any other answer," he said. "(Activists) in under-served communities see an opportunity for greater diversity if there were district elections."

Are by-district elections a threat to incumbents? The Almanac asked Ms. Groom, Ms. Jacobs Gibson and Sheriff Munks for comments.

Threat to incumbents?
Sheriff Munks emphasized the supervisors' need to focus on countywide issues such as the homeless and the jail, and the value of the winnowing function of fundraising. "There's got to be some sort of vetting process," he told the Almanac. "The way to do that is to go to the public and find people willing to support you."

And about the fact that Warren Slocum acquired family loans of $143,000? "Some people are in a position to loan themselves money and some people aren't," Mr. Munks said.

Speculating on public funding for elections, he imagined up to 200 people with "no credentials, no experience and no qualifications (saying) 'I want to run for office.' If everybody is treated equally, where do you draw the line?" he asked. "Believe me, I'm not insensitive to the (idea) that it's more difficult to run countywide. I'm not suggesting that running by-district is not plausible. I see the other side and I see that (running at-large) is a hurdle and makes it tougher to run.

Measure B, Mr. Munks conceded, would lower the cost of campaigns and encourage a broader base of candidates."I think these are positive outcomes. What is the clincher for me, I think, is the breadth and depth of experience and qualifications of candidates would be less." And if voters want to try something different? "That's what democracy is all about. Good people will step forward and there will be more of them," Mr. Munks said.

In a voice mail, Ms. Groom replied to the question on the threat to incumbents by elaborating on the ballot argument against Measure B. The board deals with regional issues, and at-large candidates are "much more engaged" with those issues, she said. In unincorporated areas, where the board acts as city council, if Measure B passes, "they'll only have one representative instead of five and I think that's a lack of access to government."

Running at-large
Asked about the effect of running countywide, Mr. Gordon said it did lead to relationships with people outside District 3, which includes Portola Valley and Woodside. "I think it goes to the core argument of folks who support countywide elections," he said. "You're going to have to pay attention to issues outside your own district."

But such attention is a fact of life in governing bodies, he added. In the Assembly, he votes on timber resource issues in the northern end of the state and water resource issues at the southern end. "I get elected from a district, but I vote on issues that affect the entire state," he said. "I may not necessarily know people in those districts."

Would opponents of Measure B support statewide elections for state Assembly and Senate candidates? Citing the regional issues that supervisors deal with, Ms. Groom called the comparison "apples and oranges."

"I do believe that having countywide elections is beneficial to incumbents," Mr. Gordon said. Countywide campaigns "are expensive, more money has to be raised, it's much harder to do a grass roots campaign, (and) consultants become an important factor," he said.

"The more expensive a race, the more personal wealth a candidate must have. That may be daunting to some folks who are interested in running for the Board of Supervisors."

San Mateo County limits donations to supervisorial candidates to $1,000 per donor. Candidate Shelly Masur has raised about $183,000, all in donations, campaign finance reports show. Warren Slocum raised $224,000, including $143,000 in family loans.

Finance reports show Mr. Slocum's expenses included $15,000 on consultants and $126,500 on campaign literature, including $87,400 in the first 20 days of October. Among Ms. Masur's expenses: $30,600 on consultants and $18,700 on polling.

"Overall," Mr. Gordon said, "the more voters you have to reach, the more consultants will charge." He has used a consultant for every election he has run in except a school board election early in his career, he said.

Are you receiving Express, our free daily e-mail edition? See a sample and sign-up for Express.


Comments

Posted by Henry Riggs, a resident of the Menlo Park: Suburban Park/Lorelei Manor/Flood Park Triangle neighborhood, on Oct 31, 2012 at 1:26 pm
Henry Riggs is a member (registered user) of Almanac Online

Mr Munks and the old school supervisors are happy to rely on big campaign donors to reach voters in distant districts, but that shuts out any candidate that is not "connected" to money stream. Wrong concept - thats how we got into the fiscal mess the county is now in. Not one other county in the state elects supervisors at-large, and its long past time we undid the connection between the big donors and incumbents that keeps any others shut out.


Posted by janet, a resident of the Menlo Park: Stanford Weekend Acres neighborhood, on Oct 31, 2012 at 1:38 pm

Would that we could get rid of Munks too. Who needs a sheriff that gets caught outside a brothel?


Posted by Fine Point of the Law, a resident of the Menlo Park: Menlo Oaks neighborhood, on Oct 31, 2012 at 2:06 pm

Excuse me, former Sheriff Munks was caught INSIDE the Brothel.....big difference.


Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community, on Oct 31, 2012 at 2:35 pm

Letter to Editor by John M. Ward a past Supervisor of San Mateo County who won his seat only because of At-Large Elections. Simple meaning is he lost his District but won the organized vote.

Web Link

No wonder he likes it the way it is.


Posted by broad support, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Nov 2, 2012 at 12:37 am

I predict this measure has broad support in Menlo Park, far beyond the two elected officials that [Portion removed. Terms of use.]serve on the Republican Central Committee. The Almanac should consider doing some research, any bozo can put up a self promoting website. There are twenty towns and cities in San Mateo County. I have not read about a single council member coming out against this measure. If the Almanac can identify such a person, then you have something to write about.


Posted by Can't you read?, a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood, on Nov 3, 2012 at 10:25 pm

broad support,

you clearly have a bee in your bonnet! the support for measure b is very broad and definitely not limited to "the two elected officials that serve on the republican central committee." who do you think should be added to the endorsement list? maybe, that person isn't taken seriously in san mate county, so he/she isn't listed.

there are council members who are against measure b. rosanne foust, of cargill fame and who is on the redwood city city council, is a signer for the argument against measure b. it's in your voter guide. maybe, you should learn to read before making ridiculous statements!


Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community, on Nov 4, 2012 at 11:27 am

Carole Groom, Rose Jacobs Gibson both APPOINTED to Supervisor and Sheriff Greg Munks say "Your influence and ability to have your voice heard will be reduced if we turn to a system where elected representatives are only interested in their district,

Here is an example of a Supervisor in this Dave Pine working on an idea that involves a camp that is located in another Supervisor's district.... Good Job Mr. Pine

Web Link


Posted by broad support, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2012 at 12:19 am

Dear Can't you read?,

I took a closer look. The FAQ describes that "No incumbent supervisor has been unseated in the last 30 years", which is true, but that challenger was Jackie Speier, and she signed the argument against this measure.

I did more research to find out about this "san mateo county fair elections" group. The support page Web Link is compelling, especially, "text text text", very well written. I looked into membership Web Link and I must say, that I was hooked at, "text text text". This is a first rate operation.


Posted by Robert, a resident of another community, on Nov 6, 2012 at 2:16 pm

Another reason serial-politician Groom and her ilk are against this measure could be that the big money candidates would all come from the same geographic area, causing one (or more) of them to lose their seat if the county was broken up into geographic districts. Groom and Slocum need to go - career politicians that exist only for themselves.


Posted by at-large elections = taxation without representation, a resident of another community, on Nov 23, 2012 at 11:27 pm

In a voice mail, Ms. Groom replied to the question on the threat to incumbents by elaborating on the ballot argument against Measure B. The board deals with regional issues, and at-large candidates are "much more engaged" with those issues, she said. In unincorporated areas, where the board acts as city council, if Measure B passes, "they'll only have one representative instead of five and I think that's a lack of access to government."

UNINCORPORATED AREAS CURRENTLY HAVE NO REPRESENTATIVE ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS! District elections will give unincorporated area one representative and that's a big improvement over the current lack of representation. Shame on the Supervisors who opposed Measure B.


Posted by Michael Stogner, a resident of another community, on Nov 24, 2012 at 8:03 am

at-large elections wrote, "Shame on the Supervisors who opposed Measure B"

That would be 4 out of 5 Supervisors, that is a high percentage. 2 of the 4 were appointed.

The main organization in San Mateo County that was opposed to Measure B and supported Measure A, aka Jail staffing tax is Service League of San Mateo County, check out its board of directors and advisors.

Web Link


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.
Add a Comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration! Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff
 
We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *
Select your Neighborhood or School Community: * Not sure?
Comment: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box. *
Verification Code:   
 

AlmanacNews.com   ©2013 Embarcadero Media.
All rights reserved.