Michael Stogner is setting the pace for bringing this craziness to light. Gina Papan's quote: "significant concessions were made and the county is saving millions on this contract."

Guess who got the cop union money? It's not hard to figure out.

I simply don't understand how this raise could have been granted during this economic crisis. What doesn't surprise me in the least though is that it was on the consent calendar. Business as usual.

Disgusting, but sadly par for the course where government employees are concerned.

Davis states:"sadly par for the course where government employees are concerned."

No, the problem is not the public employees but rather elected officials who lack financial awareness and courage who allow this to happen.

An egregious mistake that the residents of San Mateo County will be paying for, for YEARS to come.......

These supervisors must be living in a parallel universe.

Roy Thiele-Sardiña

Considering that the County is running a deficit, giving the Sheriff Deputies any raise is irresponsible. The two service requests I have had in 42 years in Ladera have left me with a poor opinion of what to expect. - Deputies are not underpaid and are earning a good living. Obligating the County for more funds without an income to pay for the promises is exactly how most constituencies get into financial trouble.
I doubt that the SM County Sheriffs are better than any other areas law enforcement people, they just seem to be able to lean harder on the Supervisors. Does having the former Sheriff onthe Voard have anything to do with that? Did he make promises for support?

From a different article same subject.

Supervisor Don Horsley quotes.

When asked where is the money going to come from?

"We'll have to worry about that at the time."

"We're hoping the economy will get better."

"It helps us with our budget and doesn't solve the whole problem, but (the deputies) are contributing to the solution."

Supervisor Carole Groom quote.

"She can't predict what the economy will be in 2015, but is hopeful it will turn around for everyone."

Source:DP article 4/19/11

not only were raises granted, but the County now guarantees that our deputies will get salaries that are higher than their counterparts. This is exactly the kind of legislation that drives up costs around the Bay Area--at a time when other communities are coming to grips with police costs and when the shortage of policemen is not the issue it was. An irresponsible act that has widespread repurcussions. We need to pay more attention to the County Supervisors we elect.

Winkler states:"We need to pay more attention to the County Supervisors we elect."

The current election is by mail-in ballot only - voting couldn't be easier; and yet I predict that far less than 50% of the eligible voters will even take the time to vote.

I also predict that the winner will be someone who has been endorsed by the unions and who will therefore take office with a debt to pay.

Peter, I agree with you.
Just under 74,000 ballots have been received as of now. Thats about 21% .

For the record - I voted for Stogner - because he is a not career politician, he did not take union money or accept union endorsements and he is committed to fiscal responsibility.

It's getting late. Is there a place to drop off ballots if we don't fill them out until this weekend, when the mail might not be a good idea?

Diana, The ballot has to be received by May 3. You can go to a main post office and send tomorrow at the latest.

Our family of 5 voters -- all for DAVE PINE !!!!

Diana,

Voted today is right. Our votes were mailed today. We do need to pay more attention to our county supervisors. After reading through all of these Almanac blogs we made our decision. 4 votes from us for Dave Pine.

Another question on the 3% raise to Sheriff Deputies, is how many meetings and how many people were involved in this agreement before it got on the consent agenda?

I have deep appreciation and respect for our law enforcement personnel both in Atherton and San Mateo County who risk their lives every day to keep us safe.

This was an agreement in which significant concessions were made by the sheriff deputies. If we want to attract the best, most capable men and women to protect us, we need to pay competitive compensation.

Gina Papan is experienced enough to understand these realities. It is very easy to turn this issue into talking points for a campaign or as part of vendettas some people have with law enforcement. These are important considerations for your vote.

Elizabeth:

please enlighten us, just what concessions did the deputies make?

Lewis states:"If we want to attract the best, most capable men and women to protect us, we need to pay competitive compensation."

In the current market there is NO justification for increasing the deputies' compensation. There are hundreds of experienced, well trained law enforcement professionals who have been laid off by Oakland, San Jose and elsewhere who would glad step into any open position in San Mateo for less than what the deputies are being paid.

Fiscal responsibility dictates that public agencies not engage in wage escalation as a form of self promotion.

Lewis states:"If we want to attract the best, most capable men and women to protect us, we need to pay competitive compensation."

Sadly this is the mantra of those public officials who do not understand that local government is out of money and that it is imperative to reduce, not increase, public employee compensation and benefits.

"I'm glad to see they're making 7 percent more," said Supervisor Don Horsley, the county's former sheriff. "San Mateo County has a much higher cost to live in the county than Alameda, Solano, and Contra Costa counties."

That might apply if the deputies lived in San Mateo County.

From what I understand we have many Deputies who don't live in our County. If they don't live in our County why are we paying them the highest wage? They don't spend their income here. They don't invest here. They just earn their income here.

What was not even considered was the fact that all throughout the State of California there are REDUCTIONS in salaries, cuts to staff. San Mateo County could have reduced the salaries of the deputies and they still would be among the highest paid. Does this 1% clause also get go down if other agencies decrease their salaries. Is it tied to just one other organization or several?

The key issue here is that the public was not part of this process.

This is a turning point issue for California. How and why San Mateo County could have done something so blatant just days before an election is a mystery. What is obvious is that unions are buying candidates, who pay them back with unsustainable pensions and salaries, raising our taxes, and California is still broke. Something needs to change. Pine appears to have the right position on this but the amount of money pumped into his campaign troubles me. Stogner is independent and not taking money from anyone. He also seems to have the right positions on these issues.

Diana,

You can drop off your ballot Monday at your city hall or directly to the county offices in RC.

Councilperson Lewis,

If you compare the sheriff's contract to pre-2007 alternative, when fantasy money paid for raise after raise, I guess you're right, deputies made a "concession" taking this latest raise and "allowing" future hires to get less than $122,850 annual pensions they will get starting at 50 years old. But honestly, are you really still living in 2006 and playing with funny money? I notice your town just came within two years from bankruptcy, but you may not have known that either - nor would union funded Gina Papan.

Agree w/Turning Point. Liked both candidates and was ready to vote Stogner but read through a large number of comments from him on these forums and have been concerned with the tone towards several posters. Have researched all candidates and my vote is now going to Pine. Will take advice and go to post office early tomorrow am.

Media check,

I just noticed that the title of Ms. Eslinger's article has been changed.

It started out as:

"A Different kind of Police Protection." by Bonnie Eslinger 4/29/11 The Daily News

Now:

"Contract guarantees San Mateo County sheriff's deputies will be the best paid in the Bay Area."

Also this story has not been published in the other two papers she writes for, SMC Times, and SJ Mercury News.

I have said throughout this campaign, San Mateo County needs several new Supervisors not just one. This issue is a perfect example.

Here is a story about how Palo Alto is addressing the same subject. No 3% raise.......

Palo Alto city manager: Police and fire unions must agree to cuts or face layoffs

Web Link

Elizabeth:

still waiting to hear what "concessions" the deputies made. [Portion deleted. Don't attack posters] ... [Portion deleted. Not on topic.]

MV -

I'm sure you're not holding your breath for an answer.

But one thing is for certain, Ms. Lewis does pay careful attention to this blog!

Menlo Voter,

I never said anything about concessions. I only answered Diana's question about voting timeframes and said my family voted for Dave Pine.

And now the San Jose police are agreeing to a 10% CUT.

Our Supervisors are not paying attention or spending our tax dollars well.


The Supervisors need to adopt a policy like that of the Fire District which requires that any proposed new labor agreement be posted for 15 days before the Supervisors could vote on said proposal:

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MENLO PARK FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT ADOPTING A POLICY REGARDING DISTRIBUTION
OF PROPOSED COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS


WHEREAS, in accordance with the policy of promoting prompt public access to government records, the California Public Records Act broadly defines public records (Gov. Code Section 6252, subdivision (3)) and the exceptions to disclosing public records under the California Public Records Act are narrow; and

WHEREAS, the Ralph M. Brown Act, Government Code Sections 54950 through 54963, enacted into law in 1953, requires open meetings of local agencies “to curb misuse of the democratic process by secret legislation of public bodies”; and

WHEREAS, the Ralph M. Brown Act “…reflects a legislative determination that ‘public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people’s business,’ and an intent ‘that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly’ (Gov. Code Section 54950); and

WHEREAS, the Ralph M. Brown Act and the California Public Records Act require the District to conduct its business in a transparent manner; and

WHEREAS, the Board, as duly elected representatives of the citizens within the District, in conformance with the Ralph M. Brown Act and the California Public Records Act, is committed to providing the District’s citizens with information considered by the Board in making its decisions; and

WHEREAS, the Board believes due to the importance of proposed collective bargaining agreements with the District employee labor representatives, that these proposed agreements should be made available to the citizens of the District in sufficient time prior to the Board’s adoption of the proposed agreements so as to allow for adequate review and comment by the public prior to final Board action.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Menlo Park Fire Protection District does hereby move that any proposed collectively bargained labor agreement between the District and designated District employee representatives shall be made publicly available at least fifteen (15) calendar days before the meeting at which the agreement will be acted on by the Board.


PASSED AND ADOPTED as a resolution of the Board of Directors of the Menlo Park Fire Protection District at the Regular Meeting held on the 16th day of December 2008 by the

Peter,

"Our Supervisors are not paying attention or spending our tax dollars well."

I say Our Supervisors are paying attention, but not to the Taxpayers, and they are not spending our tax dollars well.

Most people in San Mateo County do not know who the Supervisors are or what they are supposed to do. Currently we have 4 Supervisors with one vacant seat. Two of the 4 (Rose Gibson, and Carole Groom) were appointed, not elected by the voters. Supervisor Don Horsley just invested a reported $400,000 plus a promise to not accept any of the salary and benefits to be Supervisor.......WHY?

Now we have a candidate investing a reported $557,000 for this election.

Wake up San Mateo County........Lets Vote

When the truth comes out about what some of the San Mateo Sheriff's Deputies have been doing on the job- activities that have nothing to do with their official duties- I guarantee you that the community is going to be in an even bigger uproar about this increase in pay.

The votes are being counted, and I believe a lot more are coming in for Stogner than anyone ever thought. The unions and their hired officials are running scared. Now instead of laughing about Stogner, the Palo Alto Post is running hit pieces on him for bringing this sheriff's deputy raise to light. No one counted on the public outcry.

Keep it up, Michael. I believe these votes are going to get "counted" in a very creative way by the elections committee, helped out by law enforcement and unions.

I was really high on Stogner and ready to vote for him. However, as I read through some amazingly rude comments he made to some people that commented on the Almanac forums this last week, I changed my vote to Pine. I liked what Stogner said he was going to do to help our county, but if he is going to react as he did here, how would he do if he were elected? Dave Pine becomes the best option.

Thanks Voting,

I have given that subject (vote counting) some thought, since I am the ONLY candidate who personally asked Mark Church to resign as Supervisor in order to save the Taxpayers of San Mateo County this $1,100,000 cost for this election.

In fact, some of Stogner's remarks were so offensive that they were removed. We need representatives that listen and treat all constituents with respect.

Voted today, I'll take someone who shoots straight and has no obligations to anyone (from taking their money) over a polished politco who always has a smooth thing to say, any day of the week. Besides, Stogner's frank comments are actually appreciated by many of us since he's right.

Peter Carpenter said it best: Stogner is the best choice because he is not a politician.

GO STOGNER.

Just love these anonymous hit piece postings criticizing those few who have the courage to post in their own name.

PS. Stogner has never had a posting removed because it was offensive, his were usually because they were off the particular topic being discussed. How much better it is to have someone who speaks out than someone who either doesn't say a word (in which case your postings would not be there to be either read or removed) or someone who hides behind a bucketful of different anonymous names.

Voting, Go back and read through the articles and posts. The remarks were not "frank," they were rude. And they certainly look like they were removed because they were very inappropriate. While I appreciate and applaud "frank," I don't want someone in office who so critically judges those he represents.

Peter Carpenter, "per POGO, no comment."

Voted today ("I don't want someone in office who so critically judges..") has perfectly identified where his/her and my preferences differ - I WANT elected officials who judge both issues and people critically.

It is a sad day when it is politically incorrect to exercise critical judgement or when criticism is unacceptable.

Singing Kumbaya will not solve our problems.

As usual Peter twists the words of others. per POGO, no comment.

For Stogner to attack posters online to the point of having posts removed is not someone I want representing me. He could have taken the high road, but did not, which gives me an indication of what his stint in office might be like.

Stogner states: "I'm glad to see they're making 7 percent more," said Supervisor Don Horsley, the county's former sheriff. "San Mateo County has a much higher cost to live in the county than Alameda, Solano, and Contra Costa counties."

That might apply if the deputies lived in San Mateo County.


Actually, Mr. Stogner, they do live in our county.

"For Stogner to attack posters online to the point of having posts removed...."

An allegation without verification and one being made by anonymous poster who supports another candidate - a real cheap shot.

Web Link

It appears that Peter Carpenter has veered way off topic once again. In regards to the subject of this article I agree that Mr. Horsily probably should have recused himself. Let us hope that new leadership will bring change. Make sure you encourage all of your friends to get out and vote!

From Elizabeth Lewis:

"Menlo Voter,

I never said anything about concessions. I only answered Diana's question about voting timeframes and said my family voted for Dave Pine."

Really Elizabeth?

From your previous post: "This was an agreement in which significant concessions were made by the sheriff deputies. If we want to attract the best, most capable men and women to protect us, we need to pay competitive compensation."

So I ask again Elizabeth, what concessions?

Another way to look at this subject 3% raise to Sheriff Deputies,

What does this Board of Supervisors intend to do with the other 109 Unions Now.

The 109 figure comes from articles stating that we have 110 Unions in San Mateo County.

Menlo Voter, I think you have "Elizabeth" of Lloyden Park/Atherton confused with "Elizabeth Lewis" of West Atherton. Also, I would caution all of you against assuming that "Elizabeth Lewis" is the council person. Anyone can use anyone else's name on this blog, unfortunately.

Look closely, I think you've hit on something that will work both for politicians and the Almanac. These blogs should be used for all political commentary. If public reaction isn't good, the politician can always say someone else wrote it. Haha. But more seriously, I have to believe that was a politician. Most of them do think that way, otherwise these raises wouldn't have been voted in.

Roy, said

"An egregious mistake that the residents of San Mateo County will be paying for, for YEARS to come.......

These supervisors must be living in a parallel universe."

This was no mistake, the 4 Supervisors could not care less about what you and I think or know. They know it takes about 40,000 signatures to recall them. Tell me how many newspapers have covered this story since April 12, 2011. How many citizens in the County even know about this vote? Very few.

Does anyone remember how much money Ms Lewis received for her election campaign for council from Law enforcement? Or was it not reported until after the election so that fewer people would wonder.

Look closely:

I think you should do what your moniker says. Elizabeth Lewis' first post on the subject identified her as being from West Atherton. It's council person Lewis all right.

Still waiting Elizabeth - what "concessions" did the deputies make?

<crickets>

Menlo Voter,

You posted:

"" Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, 18 hours ago

From Elizabeth Lewis:

"Menlo Voter,

I never said anything about concessions. I only answered Diana's question about voting timeframes and said my family voted for Dave Pine."

Really Elizabeth?""

That was NOT from Elizabeth Lewis, but from me. I am NOT Elizabeth Lewis.

"That was NOT from Elizabeth Lewis, but from me. I am NOT Elizabeth Lewis."

See what a tangled web we weave when we use anonymous names...

"The Supervisors cannot give raises now or promise to grant them in the future," said candidate Dave Pine

The problem with this statement is that it just did happen. The 4 Supervisors just approved this raise.


This is part of a letter to the editor I sent to all newspapers in San Mateo County last week. It never got published but the Daily Post took a small part of it to attack me.

County Supervisors Approved 3% raise to Sheriff Deputies.
If Terrible and Egregious aren’t enough, Illegal action should be.

When everyone else on the planet is cutting salaries and positions,  Supervisors Adrienne, Carole, Don, and Rose went a different direction, and they might have to unwind this one in the near future. Turns out that this was an ILLEGAL action by the Board of Supervisors. CalPERS requires that such a vote NOT be done as a consent item, as this was April 12, 2011 Consent Item 41

Mr. Carpenter,

My name is Elizabeth--what is anonymous about that???!!! And I'm telling you the neighborhood I live in.

Please not the terms of use listed for Town Square: "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."

I did exactly that.

I have one more comment. There is something very wrong with this Town Forum and some of the people that take every opportunity to malign other posters. I wrote a couple of times here: first to say that I agreed that we need to pay closer attention to our supervisors. I mentioned who I was voting for. Many others here did the same. I then gave a response to Diana as to when the last day to vote was.

I was next reprimanded by Menlo Voter, who had obviously made a mistake. I can not be responsible for another person named Elizabeth Lewis posting here. But our "neighborhoods" are different. I made that correction only to be attacked by Peter Carpenter for being "anonymous."

I listed my name and neighborhood per the terms of posting here. I was respectful and just supported a comment, expressed a view about who I was voting for, and gave some voting timeframe information to someone who asked a question.

Why can't this forum and those who write here focus on the issues instead of attacks on people who follow the rules??

The Rules clearly state "We prefer that you use your real name...." and when people elect to use anonymous names confusion often results.

Not a problem for me but clearly a problem for the multiple posters who use the same name.

Your choice and your confusion.

Peter,

I did use my real name. It is Elizabeth and I live in Lloyden Park. It's not my fault if there are two people here with the same name, any more than you can help it if there are multiple people with the name Peter. The confusion lies in the inability of readers like yourself to note that, for example, I am Elizabeth from Lloyden Park, and there is an Elizabeth Lewis from West Atherton --two entirely different names and neighborhoods.

To say: "Your choice and your confusion." is not a necessary comment.

I can say that Pogo, Menlo Voter, etc. don't use their names--do you attack them as well.

It is very discouraging to have people make these types of comments, Peter, when all I did was make a few, respectful remarks here. Why do you try to turn everything into a confrontation? Apology???

Elizabeth, asks "Why can't this forum and those who write here focus on the issues instead of attacks on people who follow the rules??"

This thread is about 4 Supervisors Approving a 3% Raise to the Sheriff Deputies on April 12, 2011....It was Consent Item 41

You might want to start a different thread re: your subject.

I have alway written under my full name, including middle int. I know of at least one time when someone else pretended to be me. That will always be a challenge. We are all learning how to use this media.

Michael Stogner,

Please read my posts and remarks. I stated my name and neighborhood, per terms listed here. I made a comment supporting your statement that we needed to pay close attention to our county supervisors. I expressed who I was voting for. I responded to Diana's question about last day to vote. I was polite and respectful. Menlo Voter sent a reply to me about something that I did not say, but Elizabeth Lewis of West Atherton did. I corrected this statement--again respectfully.

I was then attacked by Peter Carpenter. Please read through his remarks. Yes, we are learning to use this "media," but the comments he made were totally unnecessary. Unfortunately I have no further desire to either read Town Square or contribute. It should not be the playground of one person, but a vehicle for many to contribute.

Elizabeth
Lloyden Park, Atherton

Elizabeth, I have read all of your posts, and I fully understand what you are talking about.
What I was suggesting was that you start your own thread on that topic.

This thread is not about you and your belief about being attacked.

Michael Stogner,

Then I guess you should give Peter Carpenter the same advice.

And please note Mr. Sogner that all I did was make a correction to someone addressong my comment as Elizabeth Lewis'. Then Peter Carpenter decided to tell me that I was anonymous and causing conflict. It was HE at that time who should have started a separate thread. My response was only to reiterate that I was, in fact, using, y own name.

Elizabeth
Lloyden Park, Atherton

For those interested in this topic.

San Mateo County Counsel has informed me that the 3% raise to the Sheriff Deputies is a decrease......reduction.

This might require some more articles by reporters.

We shall see. Raise vs. Decrease which is it?

Elizabeth (of Loyden Park):

my appologies for confusing you with Elizabeth Lewis. [Portion removed.]

Yes, I do not use my real name and yes, Peter has given me a hard time about it.

Thank you Menlo Voter. Enjoy reading your comments.

Elizabeth

Lloyden Park, Atherton

Elizabeth from Lloyden -

I stated "Not a problem for me but clearly a problem for the multiple posters who use the same name.

Your choice and your confusion."

I was not "attacking you" or anybody, I was just stating the obvious fact that when multiple posters use the same single name there is often, as you have seen, the potential for confusion. That is part of learning to using this media and, since you have chosen to post anonymously, there is no other way to give you constructive advice than to post that advice in this thread. It is your choice but the rules do state that the Town Square Forum prefers that posters use their real names...

What's it going to take for residents in this county to recognize the damage its political machine is doing to us? Is anyone really paying attention? I'm hoping that Stogner or Pine, both of whom supported letting voters decide how to elect their supervisors, take a seat on the board, but I'm not optimistic. This system is so broken and residents so apathetic it's hard to have hope.

Elizabeth of Lloyden Park, thanks for your civility on this forum. Menlo Voter, good of you to apologize, though I have to wonder what the editor had to remove.

Stogner, thanks for your diligence and integrity. If you don't win the race, I hope you stay in the fight. We need you.

Look:

what I said that the editors chose to delete was that I could understand why Elizabeth would not want to be confused with Elizabeth Lewis. Why that is deemed objectionable is beyond me.

Look closely,
Good summary recap and I agree. Hoping to hear some good news on elections, but like you, not sure. Do you know when results will be announced?

To both Menlo Voter and Look closely,
Please keep up all of your posting and comments. You are giving readers excellent insight into issues. Do know that it is appreciated by many.

To Peter Carpenter,
You said "since you have chosen to post anonymously" and "the Town Square Forum prefers that posters use their real names..." Please note that I am not posting anonymously. My real name is Elizabeth and I live in Lloyden Park, Atherton.

Elizabeth
Lloyden Park, Atherton

Elizabeth - Thank you for participating in this discussion.


Posted from Istanbul

The Election results will be first reported at 8:05 PM May 3, 2011

You can watch results at Shape the Future.

Web Link

Lets Vote, I'm voting tomorrow its my birthday.

Thank you for the voting info. I know so many of us are hoping for positive change.

And Happy Birthday Michael Stogner!

[Post removed; off topic.]

Here is what San Jose is doing. "Must give up the raises"

City leaders promise it will only get worse if all 11 employee unions don't agree to 10 percent ongoing compensation cuts. Two of the unions also must agree to give up raises they received last year.

Even if all the unions agree to the concessions, the numbers are grim. Of the 588 positions that could be cut, 370 employees could be subject to actual layoffs.

Web Link

Mr. Stogner -

So much for those naysayers who have been saying all of this has been overblown!

PS - Good luck in the election!

Today is the last day to get those ballot in, and it's too late to mail them. Please drop your ballots off at the nearest city hall.

I voted for Dave Pine, who has been endorsed by Jackie Speier, Rich Gordon, and many other local leaders. Dave Pine is the only candidate endorsed by the Sierra Club, the San Mateo Daily Journal and the San Mateo County Times.

Just to be clear I did not submit for Sierra Club endorsement even though I support them fully. I refused to meet with the editors of The San Mateo Daily Journal and The San Mateo Times.

Lets Vote....I just did

And Michael Stogner is endorsed by none of them, which is quite appealing to some of us who are fed up with most of our politicians and special interest groups.

Not being endorsed by "the usual suspects" is a positive in my mind. That's why I voted Stogner.

What a sad commentary on our democracy -"Of the 341,303 registered voters, only 24 percent -- or 81,806 -- cast votes in this all-mail special election. " Even walking to their malbox with a postage paid envelope was too hard for over 75% of the voters.

Peter

I hear you. I love what Australia does, they FINE you for NOT voting.

Then again there are the statistics that show Republicans have a much higher voting average in mail-in election and it makes it a little easier to note that we may win an election based on the apathy of Democrats...there is always a silver lining.

The sadest part is that when these "elected" officials try to do their jobs and make cuts, the 74% of non-voters will all cry foul

Roy Thiele-Sardina

Contra Costa County County is cutting Jobs.
Those public safety departments are losing 82 positions under the new budget that calls for the elimination of 138 county jobs in all. Not every position is filled, however, so the number of layoffs will be fewer.

The Sheriff's Office is poised to lose 40 deputies


Web Link

Michael:
The actual number of lay offs may be much fewer as the list of deputies who will be spending time behind bars grows as Contra Costa's drug scandal unfolds--yet another deputy was arrested today.
Maybe just cleaning up the various departments will save the jobs of the better employees.

I saw that, They are dropping like flies over there. I was trying to keep this on topic of Supervisors and budgets etc.....

The other little thing they have over there is a DA that will go after law enforcement. We don't have that here in San Mateo County.

It's taken three years for all of you to come to my way of thinking but the only difference is that corruption is no longer a thing to worry about unless someone develops a plan that actually involves the people and not the select few who love to play smart.
Age seems like the likely enemy since almost everything there is to read is repetition and forgetting that SMC has now joined the list as "losers".
The younger politicians have nothing on which to base their qualifications because of the crappy way the COUNTY has been totally crushed by GREED and old fashioned ideas.
To hear one of the foggies mention Parallel Universe just about knocked me out of my private jet plane seat.
It would not surprise me if people began wanting TRUMP demands from the officials running.In THAT case, I would have loved to have seen a thorough investigation of every elected official in SMC for the past 20 years.
The only people who do not complain, but, instead, donate huge amounts to improve life for millions from their profits, are the younger entrepreneurs, whose wealth intimidates those not in the billion dollar categories. In those cases, it is a blessing to have an online meeting place to show a myriad of old fashioned thinking.
Begin by questioning issues a bit larger that problems which only affect your personal comforts. Those days are over.

While Contra Costa County is arresting criminal cops, now the new Santa Clara DA, Jeff Rosen, is pulling prosecutors who commit egregious misconduct from cases.

Top headline in Mercury News today: Print version says " DA Pulls Prosecutor From Case."

Web Link

You will NEVER see Wagstaffe do this. Instead he defends prosecutors like Al Giannini, who has already been found by the California Bar to have withheld evidence from THREE cases and has been sanctioned. Wagstaffe ALWAYS defends his prosecutors, deputies and sheriffs - even when it's clear they've committed criminal misconduct t.

While other counties are wising up, San Mateo is entrenched in its corrupt ways. Something has to change.

Did, Adrienne, Carole, Don and Rose know about this information when they voted 4-0 in favor of a pay raise to our Sheriff Deputies? Most likely they did.

Front Page of the San Francisco Sunday Examiner today.

HOME VALUES SINKING

Sharp increase in "underwater" properties in San Mateo County sparks fears of the next foreclosure wave.

Web Link

Read this 1999 article, I'm starting to see a pattern here.

Web Link