Referendum on Sheriff Munks

[Jack Kirkpatrick]

First order of politics or being a doctor is "to help" that has been reinterpreted to, "Do no Harm... or words to that effect.

Sheriff Munks "leadership" seduced many county residents into believing that he was a victim of circumstances at the brothel.

David Katz, a county resident believed that the constitution should protect the sheriff since no
laws were broken. However, the Court of Public Opinion is always at play if the "ring of truth" nourishes the seeds of doubt. Katz offered to pay the costs incurred to attend the Baker to Vegas relay after the sheriff lied about not using public money to participate in the relay. Mr. Katz presented a check, but has since revoked his offer as he feels our county leaders
disrespected him and were ungrateful! While the donation seems unethical on its merits, the sheriff unintentionally sold David Katz a bill of goods about his
behavior and created a great harm and injustice upon him.

It is now time to have a referendum on Sheriff Munks and since the difficulty of a recall creates its own problems, the defeat of Supervisor Jerry Hill for termed out Gene Mullin's Assembly seat will send a strong message to Sheriff Munks and the Board of Supervisors that they screwed up royally and ethically and did harm to Mr. Katz and our citizens. Jerry Hill will not lose a job - he is not removed from the Board if he loses and maybe he will become rehabilitated -- sort of like probation without losing his political career.

[I Wrote Jerry]

I bet Jerry Hill received more e-mails on the Munks matter than the contention that he received fewer than 10 e-mails on the scandal from concerned residents.

I don't think I believe Jerry Hills e-mail count!

I know I wrote several and I suggest he do a search on e-mails for 6 months after the Baker to Vegas relay. He might try the search words: Munks, Sheriff, Bolanos, Baker to Vegas, brothel.... Surely, we do not want a freedom of Information inquiry!

By the way, he or his staff memeber wrote back that he could do nothing as the Sheriff was elected independently but thanked me for my concern.

AKA: JK

[Jack Kirkpatrick]

A vote for Millbrae Mayor Gina Papan or Community College District Board of Trustees President Richard Holober would send an important symbolic message to our city and county elected officials about Sheriff Munks conduct in the brothel incident in Las Vegas and provide a referendum on the Sheriff's behavior!

Care needs to be taken not to split the vote between Papan and Hobler, so Jerry Hill ekes out a win!

I can say that Gina's father, Lou Papan, was an FBI agent and he would have been disciplined if not fired by the FBI if he had been caught at a brothel. His pugilistic behavior in state politics after retiring was his weakness, but I think his ethics would have been above reproach when he served out his elected positions!

Maybe Holbler would be a better choice. I guess we'll have to see as I do not have a dong in that fight.

Jerry Hill with all his endorsements is not a good choice and Congresswoman Anna Eschoo (who called for an investigation against Munks) and Keith Kreitman, a Foster City resident, undermined the ethics and accountability that should have been required of Jerry Hill and Sheriff Munks. The two are embedded with one another for too long!

Even Jackie Speier who now has Lantos' seat called for an investigation of Sheriff Munks and she and Ecshoo also criticized the county Board of Supervisors and Jerry Hill for his acceptance of his behavior and securing political money from the Munks family. When Hill saw the writing on the wall in the last few weeks, he distanced himself and returned the money from both the sheriff and his wife! It shouldn't have taken him that long to size up the situation that occurred in April 2007!

So... vote carefully, but vote! A strong vote and elector presence against Hill is a symbolic referendum against Sheriff Munks, Undersheriff Bolanos and the Board of Supervisors and any elected official in the county!

[Ready to vote]

I just voted for Jackie Speier on my mail ballot, but I want to know if Mark Church, Rose Jacobs Gibson, and Adrienne J. Tissier are part of the group of elected officials that have done nothing to remove or thoroughly investigate Munks and Bolanos. Can someone let me know?

[Step up or]

From the Daily News:

"Aides for supervisors Jerry Hill and Adrienne Tissier - the two officials who have called publicly on the county counsel to explore reforming county government - report that their offices have each received fewer than 10 e-mails on the scandal from concerned residents."

I've emailed, have you?

[Jack Kirkpatrick]

Part 1: Raising the issue to the Sheriff, Board of Supervisors, County Counsel and D.A:

E-mailed the entire Board of Supervisors immediately after the Sheriff Minks brothel incident that an investigation needed to be conducted and all said they could do nothing to hold the sheriff responsible as he was an elected official -- at least two Supervisors personally replied to me by E-mails - Hill and Church. Additionally, I asked the county counsel and the District Attorney that they need to conduct an investigation through my e-mails. I even notified the Sheriff he needs to be more transparent in discussing this matter!

However, under Chief Administrative Officer John Maltbie, a policy was passed that provide oversight on the $15,000 (Sheriff Munks lied about the use of public funds and he and the undersheriff did fly to Los Angeles to help plan the Baker/Vegas Relay) and use of county cars had to have approval for out-of-state use on unrelated criminal investigations. The Board did approve that change in policy and moved on. There was no censure of the Sheriff or the department!

[Jack Kirkpatrick]

Part 2: Call for Grand Jury investigation:

On January 21, 2008, I submitted documents and called for a county grand jury investigation of Sheriff Munks in that he and others has violated their oath of office by failure to enforce immigrations laws and provide mutual assistance to immigration agents. That document is on file and the GJ staff did reply that the request was received and would be reviewed. The issues I raised are:

Issue 1: San Mateo County and city law enforcement authorities and political entities are not enforcing United States immigration laws in accordance with their oath of office when they know that someone is an undocumented immigrant or who are no longer in compliance with our Visa laws.

Issue 2: San Mateo County Board of Supervisors are failing to address the undocumented immigration issue and are intentionally discouraging by their direct actions or inferences to the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Department not to enforce United States immigration laws or who are no longer in compliance with our Visa laws.

Issue 3: The polity of all local governments within San Mateo County: various city mayors and councilpersons are discouraging by their direct actions or inferences to their police departments not to enforce United States immigration laws or who are no longer in compliance with our Visa laws.

Issue 4: Redwood City has designated itself as a “Sanctuary City” and this status de-emphasizes the importance of our obeying our United States immigration laws, discourages the enforcement of our United States immigration laws and encourages the harboring of fugitives within the city who have come to the United States illegally or who are no longer in compliance with our Visa laws.

Issue 5: Business licenses issued by San Mateo County and our local governments within the county are not being enforced as many businesses are hiring undocumented immigrants to conduct their daily operations in violation of United States immigration laws, or who are no longer in compliance with our Visa laws and are in violation of the California Fair Employment laws.

Background information followed the above issues and are too lengthy to support in this thread!

[Dr Doctor]

Jack is enjoying a conversation with himself

[Dr Doctor]

Leadfoot Lou's Daughter is being bought by insurance companies, and Holober isn't experienced enough. College board is not the kind of experience needed.

Hill is the better candidate, hands down. Focus on one issue if you choose.

He has proven himself in education, finance, and commuity.

[SanMateoResident]

Hill has proven himself to be anything but a leader. The guy plays both sides of every fence. His mishandling on the Sheriff scandal is enough to doom his political career.

Holober has a better record and is more experienced than Hill or Papan.
And he is clear on where he stands as the true progressive democrat in the race.

[SanMateoResident]

All five of the Board of Supervisors have sat back and done nothing.
I urge that you not vote for any of these incumbents.
I also urge you to vote for Richard Holober for State Assembly. I think he's a fresh voice in this corrupt county.

Ready to vote wrote:

I just voted for Jackie Speier on my mail ballot, but I want to know if Mark Church, Rose Jacobs Gibson, and Adrienne J. Tissier are part of the group of elected officials that have done nothing to remove or thoroughly investigate Munks and Bolanos. Can someone let me know?

[Michael G Stogner]

Ready to vote wrote:

I just voted for Jackie Speier on my mail ballot, but I want to know if Mark Church, Rose Jacobs Gibson, and Adrienne J. Tissier are part of the group of elected officials that have done nothing to remove or thoroughly investigate Munks and Bolanos. Can someone let me know?

They are, Rose Jacobs Gibson even gave supportive statements about Munks right after Operation Dollhouse became public.

http://www.serviceleague.org/board.htm

Supervisor Rich Gordon is the only Supervisor who is not a member of Service League of San Mateo County.
A private organization not affiliated with San Mateo County according to Thomas Casey III.

I think a second legal opinion would be in order on that one.

[Hal]

EXAMPLES PLEASE!

SanMateoResident wrote:

Hill has proven himself to be anything but a leader. The guy plays both sides of every fence. His mishandling on the Sheriff scandal is enough to doom his political career.
Holober has a better record and is more experienced than Hill or Papan.
And he is clear on where he stands as the true progressive democrat in the race.

[Ready to vote]

I didn't vote for any of the incumbents. They could have and should have acted much more assertively against the behavior of Munks-Bolanos.

[Examples]

Bad Examples: Well, there are many ehically omissions:

Hill"s lack of leadership in not independently censuring Sheriff Munks in the brothel incident his lying about the use of public funds; not speaking out about the lack of enforcement of immigration laws by the sheriff's department for those that are here illegally would be another example. Jerry Hill's setting on the fence while taking campaign donations from the Munks family for his current race and then giving it back because he says receiving it as bad form! He should have known that from the Sheriff's previous unethically behavior!

[Dr Doctor]

Any other examples than the Munks thing??

[Michael G Stogner]

Dr Doctor wrote:

Any other examples than the Munks thing??

Jerry Hill told reporter Robert Lyles of CBS 5 San Francisco
in a May interview that these trips happened under the radar, nobody knew these trips were occurring. The San Mateo Daily Journal reported that Jerry Hill was in Las Vegas that weekend celebrating hi 60th Birthady with 18 of his close friends. He knew about these trips, he was there.

[It is About Ethics]

If you fail the basic ethics test on in the Munks matter where it was shown Munks lied and was involved in what appears to be an untoward matter, that is enough to disqualify him as a career politician. Jerry needs a time out of political office for a couple of years to reflect on how he didn't officially and public denounce and censure the sheriff! This omission was so basic and was a recent incident and demonstrated that he didn't have the ethical fortitude to be a standup politician and let it pass.

THAT IS WHY THE VOTERS CAN SEND A MESSAGE TO HILL THAT HE SHOULD NO BE ELECTED AND IT GIVES THE VOTERS A MEANS OF HAVING A REFERENDUM ON SHERIFF MUNKS WHO BLOWS OFF THE PUBlIC AND THE PRESS WHO REQUIRED A TRANSPARENT EXPLAINATION OF HIS CONDUCT.

If the above happened timely, Jerry Hill might have made a good Assemblyman!

Hill is a proforma politician that blows with the winds like Hillary -- depends on the audience he is playing to! He is a back slapper, short on leadership until press by the public about the Munks matter. He will tell you what is popular, not what is doable or what he is capable of at the state level. He sounds like the same politician he was when first running for office and is too chummy with politicians who have really not done much for the voters and non-voters.

[SanMateoResident]

Hill is the same guy who decided to become a Democrat when he realized his political career would go nowhere as a Republican.
He also claims to be an environmentalist while accepting thousands of dollars from developers (including Cargill)
Hill is no leader.
Papan has the insurance companies backing her with $200,000 already spent on mailers.

[SanMateoResident]

On the environment-
Hill sided with the auto companies on lowering the amount of zero emission vehicles that they had to produce.
He claims to be an environmentalist, yet he accepts thousands of dollars from major developers.

Hill is the ultimate flip-flopping candidate. Playing both sides of the fence in the hopes that everyone likes him.
But leadership is about taking bold stands. Whether it's asking the sheriff to resign or standing up to developers or the insurance companies, Hill has failed the test each and every time.