Town Square

Post a New Topic

Supes race: Bounced checks disqualify candidate

Original post made on Apr 27, 2012

Two bounced checks have done in the candidacy of David E. Woods, a city council member from East Palo Alto who was one of eight candidates running for a seat on the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors in the June 5 election. ==B This is an update to a previous story.==

Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, April 26, 2012, 9:30 PM

Comments (19)

Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Apr 27, 2012 at 7:52 am

I think this falls on Mark Church's shoulders. There is a qualifying date for all applicants to have their paperwork and monies in and once you have met all of those requirements Mark Church deems you qualified.

It is expensive to get on the ballot $1,161.00 plus about $4,000 for 200 word candidate statement.

This does not look well for San Mateo County.


Posted by WhoRUpeople, a resident of another community
on Apr 27, 2012 at 8:05 am

Rediculous comment, sir. If he didn't pay the filing fee on time, how does this fall on anyone's shoulders other than his own?


Posted by POGO, a resident of Woodside: other
on Apr 27, 2012 at 9:06 am

I think Mr. Stogner's point is that it shouldn't be so expensive for someone to run for office.

It's just another impediment to getting good people to run for office.


Posted by Get real, a resident of another community
on Apr 27, 2012 at 9:35 am

The filing fee is not a barrier. Woods could have also collected signatures (at $0.25 per signature) to get the fee down to $0. If the filing fee were only $50, we could have 30 or more people showinng up on the ballot. Having the ability to balance one's checkbook properly, or having thousands of supporters are both valid barriers to entry.

Stoner makes a valid point. The candidates should not have qualified until the fees are paid and the checks have cleared.


Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Apr 27, 2012 at 9:37 am

I think since he was qualified by Mark Church several weeks ago his name should stay on the ballot. I understand this is unusual but I am sure that some acceptable payment plan could have been worked out for the unpaid balance, it's only $911 and for sure get paid in full before investing $4,000 for the printing of the 200 word candidate statement.




Posted by Anne, a resident of Atherton: West Atherton
on Apr 27, 2012 at 9:41 am

Why would he have to pay $4000, if he doesn't write a candidate statement?


Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Apr 27, 2012 at 10:31 am

Anne asks? "Why would he have to pay $4000, if he doesn't write a candidate statement?"

He wouldn't but also he would have been the only candidate to not have a candidate statement, which for a lot of our elder residents means a lot.


Posted by Get real, a resident of another community
on Apr 27, 2012 at 10:38 am

Even if the County were allowed to disregard election laws and deadlines, the public still has a right to know about the bounced checks. This reflects on one's ability to balance priorities and manage a complex budget.

We now have six viable candidates that will not win. One will go on to the November election, and one will come in dead last in June.


Posted by WhoRUpeople, a resident of another community
on Apr 27, 2012 at 1:59 pm

One check written with insufficient funds in the account--oops, benefit of the doubt. Second check written, AFTER paying $250 cash to mitigate the amount the check was for, and it bounces too; sorry, not only not a viable candidate for my vote for a trusted public office, but not a person who I would trust at all. ALso, going back to Mr. Stogner's original post.; according to the Post article, they tried to work with the guy to make it right--their reward, a second bogus check. Satisfied?


Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Apr 27, 2012 at 3:11 pm

My point was they already qualified him, which means they should have already accepted payment which they did. They didn't process the check before he was qualified. Now it should just be a matter of making the check good which they have tried once.


Posted by looking on , a resident of Menlo Park: Downtown
on Apr 27, 2012 at 7:16 pm

My word! You want a supervisor who goes around bouncing checks!!

With Keith raking in big bucks as a candidate being backed by David Bohanon and his crowd, what chnce does he have. I wonder what Bohanon has in mind with putting up capital to promote her. He must have his eyes on some County project and needs a vote.


Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Apr 28, 2012 at 11:44 am

Looking says "My word! You want a supervisor who goes around bouncing checks!!

I never said that or suggested that, what I've been saying is he should have never been qualified but since he was let him stay on.

It will make ZERO difference in the outcome anyway.

Bill Nack and Shelly Kessler have already have already decided for San Mateo County.


Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Apr 28, 2012 at 11:46 am

Sorry for the extra ....have already


Posted by Oh Come on?, a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Apr 28, 2012 at 10:02 pm

Is it true that he wrote checks that bounced? Let's be thankful that he's not balancing our county funds. This conduct has nothing to do with the cost of the filing fee, but the irresponsible way he handled this situation. He should resign from public office and the San Mateo County District Attorney should consider charging him with fraud and larceny. Not one check, but two? Looks like intent to commit a crime to me.


Posted by Get real, a resident of another community
on Apr 29, 2012 at 8:19 pm

Looking on suggests that Bohannon and his crowd have kicked in big bucks, and the next 460 will reveal if this is so, but the limit is $1000 per person. Mailing the county costs about $50K, so Bohannon will need lots of friends to make an impact. We've also heard that Keith may self-fund her own campaign, including additional billboards. Getting her picture on the front page of the Wall Street Journal, for a story about the pending Facebook IPO, will create far more name recognition that Masur or Slocum can buy, sorry.

Eslinger reported that Ken Fisher's family and employees kicked in $15K for Masur. Not enough for a single mailer, but he must have some interest in the County.


Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Apr 30, 2012 at 7:10 am

Bill Nack and Shelly Kessler have already decided for San Mateo County. They have told their 70,000 members plus spouses who they want for Supervisor.

Spending $50,000 for a mailing to the at-large county not likely to make impact.


Posted by Martin L., a resident of Menlo Park: Belle Haven
on Apr 30, 2012 at 11:27 am

To Get real...
Maybe Bohannon doesn't have that many "real" friends to canalize campaign donations through the. But he sure has a lot of minnions. When he bankrolled the Gateway Project campaign, he even got the local church to work for him by giving away hamburgers and sodas.

Jackie Speier has endorsed Carlos Romero. He doesn't have the kind of rich friends the leading candidate has, but principled candidates often have to run on a shoestring.
Let Bohannon spend his money trying to rig the system. I'm cinfident the electorate will be able to steer away from candidates that will answer to a few privileg citizens.


Posted by Get Real, a resident of another community
on Apr 30, 2012 at 12:32 pm

Memo is doing a better job broadcasting that he is the one endorsed by Jackie Speier:
Web Link


Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Apr 30, 2012 at 3:34 pm

Memo is endorsed by Sheriff Greg Munks


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

Post 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: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Touring the Southern California “Ivies:” Pomona and Cal Tech
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 5 comments | 2,989 views

Couples: Parallel Play or Interactive Play?
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,305 views

Just say no
By Jessica T | 6 comments | 1,214 views

Getting High in Menlo Park
By Paul Bendix | 3 comments | 810 views

As They Head Back To School, Arm Them With This
By Erin Glanville | 2 comments | 209 views