This is just one more example of why unions have no place in local elections.

We should all pledge not to vote for anyone who accepts either a union endorsement or a union's financial support.

Remember that the unions have only ONE objective in local elections and that is to serve the interests of THEIR members, not the public interest.

If a candidate is talking to a Chamber of Commerce type group or a group of businesses (Business Roundtable, National Association of Manufacturers or some local version of such) should the same rules apply? The business lobby would scream - free speech!!!!

Would Peter be offended that a reporter isn't invited or welcome to a business lobby grilling a candidate? Sunshine policy for businesses that meet with candidate? How about an extreme like when Enron's Ken Lay and a bunch of "leaders" met with Ah-nuld before the recall in 2001? That one only cost the state $9 billion that Enron owed us.

Guess we just be worried about those all powerful working folk, you know, the ones that work for a living.

Example:

from 2003 - "At the center of the story is a private lawsuit filed last year by California’s Lieutenant Governor Cruz Bustamante to make Enron and other power companies pay back $9 billion in illicit profits. The suit shows how they carried off the profits by fraudulent reporting of sales transactions, megawatt "laundering," fake power delivery scheduling. Greg Palast (with the BBC) cites a 34-page internal Enron memo he obtained.

Schwarzenegger has yet to deny that on May 17, 2001 he met with Enron chieftain Kenneth Lay and convicted stock swindler Mike Milken in a hotel room in Los Angeles. The meeting was allegedly part of a plan to recall Gov. Gray Davis and replace him with someone who could make the legal threat go away."

Peter's Comment is powerful and succinct.

The status of Union benefits being directly negotiated with governments to the exclusion and detriment of the taxpayer should be disallowed by law. It should never have been permitted by FDR and is the source of great and unmanageable debt being incurred at every level of government today.

Pension and benefit reform MUST be brought to the public for voter review and institutionalized on an ongoing basis - as is being currently executed in Santa Clara Count and San Diego County.

The failure of the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors to seek the approval of the Electorate on all issues is abhorrent and tyrannical.

Abuses will continue until voters decide they are tired of being exploited by this special interest controlled system.

If you ever want a Supervisor who is fundamentally and primarily dedicated to the common interest of the taxpayer and the individual citizen across the board in every issue, vote for Michael Stogner the next chance you get.

Eight people have qaulified for the District 4 Supervisor. This is from the San Mateo County Chief Elections Office & Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder poste at 6:41 PM Friday Night The candidates are

Qualified: 1 CARLOS ROMERO Candidate Stmt Filed? Yes - 3/09/2012
Councilmember/ Economic Developer
Res: 2211 Ralmar Ave
East Palo Alto, CA 94303
Mail: 2211 Ralmar Ave
East Palo Alto, CA 94303
Eve:(650)328-4363 Fax:
Email: [email protected]

Qualified: 2 SHELLY MASUR Candidate Stmt Filed? Yes - 3/08/2012
School Trustee/Mother
Res: 440 Birch St
Redwood City, CA 94062
Mail: 440 Birch St
Redwood City, CA 94062
Day:(650)814-0349
Eve:(650)814-0349
Email: [email protected]
www.shellymasur.com

Qualified: 3 KIRSTEN KEITH Candidate Stmt Filed? Yes - 3/09/2012
Mayor Menlo Park/Attorney
Res: 322 Oak Ct
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Mail: 322 Oak Ct
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Eve:(650)796-1009 Fax:
Email: [email protected]
www.KirstenKeith.com

Qualified: 4 ERNESTO "ERNIE" SCHMIDT Candidate Stmt Filed? Yes - 2/28/2012
Vice-Chair Planning Commissioner
Res: Not Authorized to Release Mail: Not Authorized to Release
Day:
Eve:(650)275-4391 Fax:
Email: [email protected]
www.ernieschmidt.com

Qualified: 5 ANDY COHEN Candidate Stmt Filed? No
Councilmember Menlo Park
Res: Not Authorized to Release Mail: Menlo Park, CA 94025
Day: Not Auth to Release
Eve: Not Auth to Release
Fax:
Email:
Not Auth to Release
[email protected]

Qualified: 6 DAVID E. WOODS Candidate Stmt Filed? No
City Council Member
Res: Not Authorized to Release Mail: Not Authorized to Release
Day:Not Auth to Release
Eve: Not Auth to Release
Fax:
Email:
Not Auth to Release
[email protected]
www.davidewoods.com

Qualified: 7 MEMO MORANTES Candidate Stmt Filed? Yes - 3/08/2012
Trustee San Mateo County Board of Education
Res: Not Authorized to Release Mail: PO Box 5484
San Mateo, CA 94402
Day:
Eve: (650)759-5910 Fax:
Email: www.memomorantes.com

Qualified: 8 WARREN SLOCUM Candidate Stmt Filed? Yes - 3/09/2012
Res: 2160 Euclid Ave
Redwood City, CA 94061
Mail: 2160 Euclid Ave
Redwood City, CA 94061
Day:(650)722-4507
Eve:(650)363-0253
Fax:
Email: [email protected]
www.warrenslocum.com

Race Tracker, Did all 8 candidates attend the Candidates Forum at the San Mateo County Labor Council meeting located on Chess Drive in Foster City.

The meeting the Post reporter was told to leave.

San Mateo County is the only County out of 58 in the State of California that votes for Supervisor who has to live in a District yet the vote is At Large meaning the entire County votes. Last election a total of 95,664 votes were cast.

Shelly Kessler of SMC Labor, Chess Drive Foster City, has a membership of 70,000 plus spouses.

That is one of the big problems with At Large Elections

po bidness lobby mommy,

You might want to start your own thread. This thread is very specific it's about San Mateo County Labor Council hosting a Supervisor Candidate Forum.

It's about telling a reporter from the Palo Alto Daily Post to leave the meeting.

This message is also to Race Tracker who might want to start a different thread on the 8 candidates which is an entirely different subject.

Shelly Kessler of the San Mateo County Labor Council supports At Large Elections so much that she didn't want the Voters/Taxpayers to even have a say or vote on the issue.

I wonder if that is because she thought she would lose her influence of her 70,000 members and spouses.

Web Link

This is exactly why At Large Elections are detrimental to the interest of the people. We San Mateo County are the ONLY county in the State that does it this way.

Taxpayers should realize that as long as public employee unions retain their powerful control over local elections that we will never solve the pension driven problem of increasing pension liabilities and less and less money left over to perform the essential responsibilities of local government.

Wise taxpayers will refuse to contribute to or vote for any local candidate who accepts either union endorsement or union campaign support.

"You might want to start your own thread." "This message is also to Race Tracker who might want to start a different thread"

Don't want to interfere with the 3 self appointed experts and their mutual *********** session.

Ever notice the vast difference in participation and response between PA Online and this set of forums?

The Almanac can go 6 hours in mid day during weekdays and not have a single thread get updates.

Specifically, you have here the regulars Tim and PC and Stog telling others to quit commenting on their threads.

Take away those posters and the Almanac would be a dead forum.

Unless on the other hand, in taking away the self appointed experts listed, other folks might find more value and acceptance in these forums and participation increases as a result.

But Stoggie will just tell me to open a new thread for that discussion.

Read quick, cuz this will be deleted. A sure fire way to increase participation, increase page views and satisfy advertisers. Not.

Po - you are always welcome add value by thoughtful postings. The hurdle is 'thoughtful'.

po bidness lobby mommy,aka as a distractor....

I was simply stating if you wish to write about something different than this thread's topic which is the fact that a reporter from the Palo Alto Daily Post was told to leave a meeting at the San Mateo County Labor Council office involving the candidates for Supervisor.

That is the subject of this thread. You have twice chosen to write about other subjects.

I'm not sensing mommy anywhere here.....maybe a man pretending to be woman for some reason who knows....

When I ran for the Coastside Fire Protection District, I ran against several candidates who were backed by Union 2400. I wasn't surprised that they didn't endorse me or feather my campaign nest. In fact, I have never spent more than $700 on a campaign. I have won three elections since 2001 (2005,2009) and I never take endorsements and/or monies from Union 2400. I am elected by the public who want an unbiased representative sitting on the board.

PC says the candidates shouldn't take union money or endorsements.

There are any number of influencers in elections. All of them want to protect their interests. Even INTEL contributes about $500,000 / year (see their 2010 report on their website) to PACs and candidates because it is in the interest of their shareholders.

Unions (groups of voting members of society) have interests not unlike INTEL and other Corporations. They are entitled to be heard and exert whatever level of influence that is allowed by law.

You may want to hold your nose if you don't like the way the sausage is made.

What the local unions are doing is not illegal but that does not mean that well informed voters should not avoid the union's candidates like the plague. Yes, the unions have 'interests' but those interests have noting to do with the public's interests.

The arrogance.

"I'm not sensing mommy anywhere here.....maybe a man pretending to be woman for some reason who knows...."

"Po - you are always welcome add value by thoughtful postings. The hurdle is 'thoughtful'. "

I'm with po business lobby mom, these two don't take intrusion on their turf well.

Larry I can understand you being with po, or whoever you want. There is no problem

This thread is about the San Mateo County Labor Council hosting a meeting with some unknown number of Supervisor candidates. The main part of this thread was that a reporter from the Palo Alto Daily Post was TOLD TO LEAVE.

That is what this thread is about. There is no intrusion here you have not added to the topic.

PACMAN = R Gordon

please editors, pay attention

" these two don't take intrusion on their turf well."

On the contrary, we welcome those was can add thoughtful contributions to the subject of each thread.

And it helps to have read and understood this Forums rules:

"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."

"Terms of Use:
AlmanacNews.com provides an opportunity for community members to post opinions and other content directly onto the AlmanacNews.com Website. The Terms of Use outlined below are intended to govern and restrict your use of AlmanacNews.com, and your use of AlmanacNews.com constitutes a binding agreement to these terms between you and Embarcadero Media. If you do not wish to accept these terms, then do not post anything.

You agree to be respectful of others, be truthful and be solely responsible for all postings you make.
You agree not to use any profanity, nor post any information that is hateful, libelous or obscene, or that is threatening, abusive or offensive to any individual, group or class of person.
You agree not to post comments under multiple names. Postings within a single topic from the same IP address made under different names will be deleted.
You agree not to disclose personal information about another person, nor post anything that misleads others as to the source of the posting.
You grant to Embarcadero Media a nonexclusive license to republish in its newspapers or in other media formats, at its sole discretion, all or portions of the content you post on AlmanacNews.com.
You agree not to post anything on AlmanacNews.com that is not your original work, unless you know with certainty that it is legally in the public domain and permissible under U.S. copyright laws.
You agree not to make posts that are primarily intended to promote, or create links to another Website.
You agree not to make posts of a commercial nature that promote a business, product or service.
You agree not to republish in any form the posts that others make on AlmanacNews.com.
You acknowledge that although we do not have any obligation to review, monitor or screen the content that is posted on AlmanacNews.com, and that we do not own such content, we are the sole judge of whether the content you post meets these Terms of Use, and that we may edit, remove or lock content you post on AlmanacNews.com at our sole discretion for any reason, even if not specifically addressed in this Terms of Use.
You acknowledge that in spite of these Terms of Use, we make no assurances as to the accuracy or truthfulness of any content posted on AlmanacNews.com and are not responsible for content posted by others."

" these two don't take intrusion on their turf well."

On the contrary, we welcome those was can add thoughtful contributions to the subject of each thread.

And it helps to have read and understood this Forums rules:

"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."

"Terms of Use:.
Web Link

"I'm not sensing mommy anywhere here.....maybe a man pretending to be woman for some reason who knows...."

"Po - you are always welcome add value by thoughtful postings. The hurdle is 'thoughtful'. "

Responses to highlighting the above comments include posting of rules and admonitions to stay strictly on topic.

How are the above slights strictly on topic?

po business lobby mom highlighted what she/he sees as differences some see in attitude to organized labor vs business group lobbying. Didn't fit the narrative of the "self appointed experts and their mutual *********** session" as the poster called it and then came the slights from MS and PC above.

I'm sticking with arrogance.

MS and PC disagree. Or can't see it. Continue talking among yourselves, boys. You clearly don't care for it when others intrude on your playground. Plays right into the comment he/she made on 3/11 about lowered participation levels on the Almanac town square forums.

Larry - it is very simple - when you go into someone's home then you play by their rules.

"AlmanacNews.com provides an opportunity for community members to post opinions and other content directly onto the AlmanacNews.com Website. The Terms of Use outlined below are intended to govern and restrict your use of AlmanacNews.com, and your use of AlmanacNews.com constitutes a binding agreement to these terms between you and Embarcadero Media. If you do not wish to accept these terms, then do not post anything."

So, if you don't like the rules then don't post anything.

Larry says...."Plays right into the comment he/she made on 3/11 about lowered participation levels on the Almanac town square forums."

I think 530 views of this Shelly Kessler/San Mateo County Labor Council blog is pretty good for just a couple of days.

This might help.

The San Mateo County Charter Review Committee's vote and recommendation on whether the voters should have a choice in the District vs. At Large Election issue.

Please pay Special attention to Shelly Kessler's vote for AT LARGE and NO letting the voters decide.


Web Link

Reminder Shelly Kessler has influence with 70,000 members plus spouses.

this is how you stay on topic

This is another relevant story.
The Supervisors are ignoring the recommendations as well, they went with the recommendation of only two members of Charter Review Committee. Shelly Kessler of San Mateo County Central Labor Council just happened to be one of them.... WHY???

Web Link

Labor unions are destroying our country. They have no place in a free market society based on capitalism. If anyone wonders why our country doesn't compete in manufacturing, and why we are losing our status as a world super power, just thank the unions.

To "Not a chance" I say--AMEN!!

The problem is not the unions, the problem is Shelly Kessler mailing false information to her membership of 70,000 + Spouses who rely and trust her to advise them.

Example a recent mailer "Union Busters are Community Wreckers"

"The problem is not the unions, the problem is Shelly Kessler mailings"

Oh, my.

Silly me, I thought deviating from the EXACT topic of the thread was punishable. Looks like if one posts anti-union rants that don't pertain to the topic, one gets mild corrections from MG. If one posts thoughts on business group lobbying vs unions, MG and PC go arrogant. PC even starts citing rules, as if the original poster "po" broke some rule.

Hmmmmmm.

"this is how you stay on topic"

"I'm not sensing mommy anywhere here.....maybe a man pretending to be woman for some reason who knows...."

"Po - you are always welcome add value by thoughtful postings. The hurdle is 'thoughtful'. "

Regarding volume of posts: sister paper Palo Alto Online has far more posts than Almanac - I can only imagine that's what poster "po" meant. Example: PA Online has twenty topics commentted on in the last 24 hours, Almanac has ten.

Quality? Subjective. Though pasting copies of the terms and suggesting a poster violated the terms seems less enlightening than some may come to expect. Until they get used to PC's style.

Enjoy your playground, boys.

Larry, 653 views. Seems to be working.

Just reminding the reader that this is about AT LARGE elections being impacted by the special interest community LEADER.

"Just reminding the reader that this is about AT LARGE elections being impacted by the special interest community LEADER."

Really? I don't see the initial topic referencing either.

"As reported by the Palo Alto Daily Post 3/6/12 by Ryan McCarthy "Union Group Questions Supervisor Candidates" "The San Mateo Labor Council, one of the most powerful forces in San Mateo County elections, questioned candidates running for the county Board of Supervisors election last night, during which a Post reporter was told to leave the room." Does this seem like any type of violation? This was a Supervisor candidates forum, so people can ask questions, and the answers be publicly spoken."

Don't see any reference to "at-large" or the woman (Kessler) you like to attack in the initial post. In fact you were the first to bring up either "at-large" of Kessler, two days after the original post.

Yup, I'm sticking with arrogance. And sticking with the claim I made that PA Online gets twice as much participation without the "terms police" copying and pasting rules for no reason.

Great question Larry,

this is more from the article
"A woman, who would not give her name, told a reporter that the meeting was an internal event and not a public forum."

I didn't put the whole article into the post however, when the reporter was TOLD to leave, the woman who kicked him out refused to identify herself and stated that it was an internal event. I'm not sure if this woman who refused to identify herself was Shelly Kessler, but she does work out of the address that the meeting was held.

Larry - perhaps you would like to contribute to the topic. What are your thoughtful contributions?

PacMan said "Unions (groups of voting members of society) have interests not unlike INTEL and other Corporations. They are entitled to be heard and exert whatever level of influence that is allowed by law."

What better way to be heard than to have a news reporter present at your candidate event? Something to hide?

Larry, objection overruled. The topic is about union shenanigans, beginning with their expulsion of a Post reporter from a public candidate forum.

Maybe I'm being a bit touchy, and it certainly is complimentary to be grouped with public figures such as Stogner and Peter, but I am quite sure I have never made statements calling for anyone's censure or exclusion on this forum.

On the other hand, I'd like to point out that the Editor has made a censuring policy and used it to delete non-relevant topics in responses on blog threads previously. I'd also like to point out that he has not intervened in pro-union advocates attempting to digress from topic as shown in the allowed comments here.

This discrepancy of application of rules is of interest and does not go unnoticed.

One of the great values of public forum is that it is public. It is recordable. It is observable. Actions can be revisited.

It is for this reason that it is imperative for each of us to attend to accuracy, civility and thoughtful content for the purpose of maintaining our public credibility.

I hope that I will be able to do this, and I certainly do try.

I would also like to point out that Mr. Stogner and Mr. Carpenter have a years long track record in terms of accomplishing this. This can only be laudable and in the long run serve their interests well.

Whoever these people are who are commenting for the pro-union side and others, their credibility is diminished by their anonymity, and the resonate credibility, or lack thereof, of their presented content does not, to me, compensate for this diminution.