It’s no Secret that the San Mateo Daily Journal and District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe want Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos to be Re-Elected in the next election.
SMDJ knows this is not quiet the truth, Bolanos — appointed in 2016, Somebody removed this News Release from the Governments website before the July 12, 2016 Board of Supervisor Meeting, John Maltbie was the Clerk to the Supervisors and John Beiers San Mateo County Counsel would have word crafted and final approval of the agenda item. Who removed Michelle Durand’s press release, and Who word crafted the agenda Item. Remember Don Horsley and Carole Groom were asked to RECUSE themselves. They didn’t.
Bolanos — appointed in 2016, elected in 2018 and now running for reelection — said he also routinely receives outlandish emails and communications from people which he said he’s learned to ignore.
Now vindicated, Bolanos said he’s thankful the DA’s office investigated the case and hopes the public will be less inclined to believe such allegations in the future.
“I’m glad the District Attorney’s Office investigated it and determined that there was absolutely no merit to me being involved with that organization,” Bolanos said. “Hopefully people learn from this and recognize that just because somebody says something and tweets something it may not be true. People should do some critical thinking before they assume something.”
This sounded familiar,
“just because somebody says something and tweets something it may not be true.“
I’ve been saying this for just over 20 years, “Just because somebody says something is true, doesn’t mean that it is.” I can’t take credit for the statement I first heard it in court by a very popular San Carlos Attorney named Jeff Cost. He credited it to his father.
The SMDJ in 2018 Endorsed Carlos G. Bolanos for Sheriff which is fine, but they also printed a False statement about Him being “OUTSIDE the entire time.” Operation Dollhouse, FBI Sting Las Vegas Nevada, April 21, 2007.
Everybody and their Mother knows that is a Lie.
Here is the entire SMDJ article from December 15, 2021
San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office solves mystery over Oath Keeper account Belmont resident responsible for creating memberships for sheriff, police chief to far-right group By Sierra Lopez Daily Journal staff 3 hrs ago Carlos Bolanos A Belmont resident was responsible for registering Sheriff Carlos Bolanos and former Belmont Police Chief Dan DeSmidt with a far-right anti-government organization as a reminder of their oath to the Constitution, an investigation by the San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office found.“ Anybody who knows me knows I’m not of the persuasion that would join an organization like that. They knew it was a joke but unfortunately, it got taken seriously and it wasn’t funny anymore,” Bolanos said. In October, allegations that Bolanos was affiliated with the Oath Keepers, a national right-wing militia group, were first made online after his email was discovered in a leaked database published and stored by the anti-secrecy organization Distribution Denial of Secrets. At the time, Bolanos denied being a member of the organization and asserted that someone else must have registered him, though he was unsure of who would have done so. Bolanos said a news organization discovered that a third party likely registered him with the organization and he immediately turned that information over to the DA’s office.Additional information was also shared with the office from the San Mateo County Counsel’s Office, Bill Massey, chief investigator with the DA’s office, said. The department did not go through the leaked database but Massey said they did reach out to the Oath Keepers, which was unresponsive. What their investigation did find was that a Belmont resident registered Bolanos and DeSmidt with the organization in 2017. The Belmont Police Department was also made aware of the incident back in 2017, but declined to pursue the case at the time because they were familiar with the individual’s behavior, Massey said.“Without going into detail, he’s a very outspoken individual. He has some views that may not be mainstream so he’s known in the city of Belmont,” Massey said about the person who created the accounts for the officials.When questioned, Massey said the individual confessed to registering the public officials with the organization with the intent of reminding them of their oath to the U.S. Constitution. Massey said they verified the individual was responsible for the accounts by reviewing packages from the Oath Keepers which were addressed to Bolanos and DeSmidt but sent to the Belmont resident’s home.Massey said the DA’s office was investigating the issue of impersonation and identity theft of Bolanos given that the Sheriff’s Office couldn’t investigate a case in which the sheriff is the victim. Under Penal Code 528.5, the individual could have been charged with a misdemeanor for impersonating an individual online without permission with the intent of harming, intimidating, threatening or defrauding another person.But the DA’s office opted to not file charges because they could not verify that the individual’s actions were done maliciously. Additionally, the investigation fell outside a one-year statute of limitation embedded in the penal code because the Belmont Police Department was aware of the issue around 2017, triggering the statute countdown.Bolanos — appointed in 2016, elected in 2018 and now running for reelection — said he also routinely receives outlandish emails and communications from people which he said he’s learned to ignore.Now vindicated, Bolanos said he’s thankful the DA’s office investigated the case and hopes the public will be less inclined to believe such allegations in the future.“I’m glad the District Attorney’s Office investigated it and determined that there was absolutely no merit to me being involved with that organization,” Bolanos said. “Hopefully people learn from this and recognize that just because somebody says something and tweets something it may not be true. People should do some critical thinking before they assume something.”email@example.com(650) 344-5200 ext. 106
Here is a simple question for Reporter Sierra Lopez, What is the name of the Belmont Resident?
Pretty cool to Solve a Mystery with an Unnamed and Uncharged Belmont Resident.
If San Mateo County Sheriff Greg Munks, and UnderSheriff Carlos G. Bolanos would lie about this you can bet they would lie about anything. It’s been 14 years, they are not the only ones lying about it.
Since Carlos G. Bolanos Candidate for Re-Election of Sheriff 2022 refused to answer any of these questions four years ago they still apply today.
This full page ad page 7 in the May edition of the Spectrum, He identifies himself as the incumbent he’s not. He was illegally appointed by three Supervisors led by Don Horsley on July 12, 2016. The ballot has it right as appointed Sheriff. Jerry Hill should have fired him on April 22, 2007, he simple refused to do his job. Now he is endorsing him.
Heinz Puschendorf (Photo by Dave Boyce/The Almanac)
Deputy Heinz Puschendorf, at one time the president of the San Mateo County Deputy Sheriff’s Association, is running for the top job of sheriff in the June 5 election.
Puschendorf is a write-in candidate, having thrown his hat into the ring, he said, due to his dissatisfaction with the April 25 public forum in which questions were posed to his electoral competitors: appointed incumbent Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos and Deputy Mark D. Melville.
After a series of interviews with The Almanac, Puschendorf’s status with the Sheriff’s Office is still unclear – although he’s still listed on the department roster as a disabled employee.
During the interviews, he made a series of claims about the department, including assertions that he has been persecuted by department higher-ups. The Almanac was unable to confirm these claims, and Puschendorf provided no documentation.
Asked for his priorities if elected, Puschendorf said they include addressing a system of mandatory overtime that he considers abusive, resolving an irregular distribution of detectives that shortchanges property crime investigations, and correcting an unfair system of rotation of detective assignments.
He also wants a competitive election, he said, but expects retribution for being outspoken. “I am the lone voice,” Puschendorf said in one interview. “Why do I run? Because I’m the last chance and opportunity for the truth to hopefully get out before it gets smothered,” he said. Because “they’re going to smother me. They’re going to do all the bad stuff, but I’m holding the aces in my hand because I have all the secrets. I know where the bodies are buried.”
The “truth” he refers to concerns what happened in April 2007 in Las Vegas, when Bolanos was detained by police along with then-sheriff Greg Munks when FBI agents raided an illegal and run-down brothel in a residential neighborhood.
Puschendorf said his account is based on visiting Las Vegas after the incident and researching the facts as presented by media accounts and talking with people who told him they witnessed the events of that night.
Records of that night have disappeared, he claimed, but he said he has thousands of pages of documents, including emails and depositions, that attest to a story that has not been told. He provided none of this documentation to The Almanac. He asserted that Bolanos has demanded silence from everyone.
His papers and the story they tell, he insisted, “is how I’ve kept my job. I have everybody with dirty stuff and (dirty) laundry. They’re trying to do all the stuff to get me. … That’s why I had to go public and run for (sheriff). I’m afraid of getting victimized even further.”
Puschendorf, 51, has not worked since April 2016 due to an injury incident in 2014 in which he was told to subdue an inmate in the jail. But while he is not being paid, his name is still on a roster that he provided to The Almanac. He is listed as disabled, but says he has not received any of the disability pay he’s entitled to. His situation has been manipulated, he claimed, to effectively render him a ghost on the roster and prevent him from getting due process.
He provided no documentation of efforts on his part to receive disability pay, and no explanation as to why he hasn’t filed for disability retirement.
Union management does not have his back and is in cahoots with the sheriff, Puschendorf said.
If he doesn’t win the election, he said, he’ll try for a recall “and do what it takes to take back control from these corrupt politicians and give control back to the good people of San Mateo County.”
I like this last statement and it falls in line with what Supervisor District 3 Candidate Dan Stegink said to the San Mateo Daily Journal. Even if Mr. Bolanos is elected it is unlikely he will complete his term.
Heinz has said publicly many times to vote for Mark Melville.
If you are seeing this advertisement you are most likely in District 2. Ask yourself, do you know who your Supervisor is or know what the Board of Supervisors does? They are in charge of spending tax dollars for the County and are widely unknown. They are also a place for concerned citizens to go with complaints against government agencies or people.
Morgan is a Write In candidate. He decided to run after he saw his opponent was unopposed.
Morgan is concerned for the average resident, his opponent is not, Morgan understands and respects Conflict of Interest, his opponent does not. Morgan respects Whistleblowers his opponent does not. Morgan will not mislead the residents his opponent does. Morgan Endorses Mark Melville for Sheriff his opponent Endorses Carlos Bolanos when she should have Investigated then fired him. Bolanos was caught and detained as a customer of Human Trafficked Sex Slaves including a child. Morgan is opposed to Human Trafficking in San Mateo County his opponent is not.
2012 the Grand Jury warned the residents of San Mateo County that it’s leaders (Supervisors) misled the Voters on the County’s financial status, in order to pass Measure A. The Supervisors reported a deficit when in reality the Grand Jury had found the County had a surplus, making Measure A dishonest and unnecessary. Carole Groom was a Supervisor at that time.
Below is a link to the report. If you do not have the time to read the entire report I would suggest going to page 11 and reading the Findings list. Item number 7 and 8 specifically tell of the mistruths.
An inconvenient truth about San Mateo County’s “structural deficit” is that … there isn’t one!
The Almanac May 9, 2018 article by Dave Boyce, “Challengers square off against an appointed incumbent for Sheriff.”
Reporter Dave Boyce did not think this statement was worth a follow up question. Why?
Update: I spoke with Heinz by phone and he informed me that Dave Boyce did know it was Carlos Bolanos who ordered him not to talk. Dave Boyce left that out of the article. Why?
April 21, 2007 is when San Mateo County’s top two Sheriff & Undersheriff known as 1&2 were caught and detained (how long remains to be answered) as CUSTOMERS in a single family house that had Human Trafficked Sex Slaves including a Child in it.
April 21, 2007 Heinz Puschendorf was the President of the San Mateo County Sheriff Deputies Association, DSA. He was the Go to Guy. He started receiving phone calls from Las Vegas around 10:15 PM that night. This is the only SMCSO Deputy who was not in Las Vegas that night that would know what happened that night.
You would think that Dave Boyce would see the opportunity to finally break the truth free here. He could have asked Heinz, Who Ordered You to not talk about Vegas or mention it? I might be able to help the Almanac out here. Heinz Puschendorf told me,
“Carlos Bolanos ordered Heinz Puschendorf the President of the DSA not to talk about Vegas or mention it.” “Directed down the chain of command the same order.”
I ask why? “We wish there were two better candidates in this race.” They don’t mention the 3rd candidate for Sheriff, Heinz Puschendorf is a Write In candidate that the Daily Post is aware of. Why?
“This won’t be an easy choice for informed voters.” That is an understatement. How would any San Mateo County Voter expect to be informed? Hint, it would look, feel and act like a Newspaper.
“A key issue for Melville is Operation Dollhouse, the 2007 FBI raid of a Las Vegas house of prostitution.” This was not a house of prostitution, this was a Human Trafficking Sex Slave residential house that included a minor. Dave Price leaves that out. Why?
“An FBI report indicates Munks went into the home while Bolanos stayed outside.” Dave Price has refused to identify or produce the FBI report. Why?
“He’s reached out to the Latin community,” It’s Latino, and what does that even mean? no communication/interviews by the Post, of anybody who is Latino.
The Palo Alto Daly Post has censored and deleted comments on this Endorsement.
In the June primary, San Mateo County voters will see two candidates on the ballot for sheriff, the first time that’s happened since 1993, when Don Horsley was first elected to that post. We wish there were two better candidates in this race. This won’t be an easy choice for informed voters.
The candidates are Sheriff Carlos Bolanos, a former Redwood City police chief and county undersheriff. He was appointed sheriff in 2016, when Greg Munks retired. He is facing one of his own deputies, Mark Melville, who is currently assigned to patrol an area on the coast.
A key issue for Melville is Operation Dollhouse, the 2007 FBI raid of a Las Vegas house of prostitution during which Munks and Bolanos, then the undersheriff, were detained. Prostitution is legal in many places in Nevada, but not in Clark County, where the raid took place.
Munks and Bolanos weren’t charged. An FBI report indicates Munks went into the home while Bolanos stayed outside.
When they got back to San Mateo County, Munks issued a brief statement saying he thought they were visiting a “legitimate business.” After that, Munks dodged questions about the raid.
We recall a June 18, 2009, interview Munks gave to a Post reporter about the campaign for a new jail. At the end, the reporter asked about the Las Vegas incident. Munks abruptly halted the interview and ushered the reporter out of his office.
By staying silent about the incident over the years, Munks kept a cloud of suspicion hanging over himself and Bolanos.
When we interviewed Bolanos the other day, his attitude was very different. He was willing to talk about the incident without flinching. But he was adamant that he did nothing wrong that night in Vegas.
“I refuse to apologize for something I didn’t do,” Bolanos said.
And nobody has been able to prove that Bolanos did anything more than stand outside that brothel while Munks went inside.
The suggestion that Munks and Bolanos were lax on prostitution isn’t supported by the record.
The North Fair Oaks neighborhood in unincorporated San Mateo County, where the sheriff serves as the local police department, was previously littered with massage parlors that, according to online rating sites, were actually houses of prostitution.
In 2015, the sheriff’s office — headed by Munks with Bolanos as undersheriff — worked with code enforcers and the county counsel to shut down nine parlors. It was a considerable achievement that hasn’t been brought up in this campaign by either side.
While Bolanos doesn’t deserve a free pass for his involvement in the Vegas incident, nobody has been able to make the case that his department is enforcing the law any differently because of it.
Generally, we’ve liked what we’ve seen during Bolanos’ time as sheriff. The department has been more transparent, there have been very few instances of unprofessional conduct by deputies, and Bolanos has demonstrated that he’s fiscally conservative when spending the public’s money.
He’s reached out to the Latin community, which can be a difficult area for law enforcement agencies given the apprehension over immigration policy. His cooperation with ICE is dictated by state law, and Bolanos has been following that law. He has said repeatedly that his officers will not be asking about the immigration status of those they contact, and he doesn’t feel county deputies should enforce federal immigration law.
We question whether his opponent, Melville, would be capable of running a large sheriff’s department with 800 employees. It was disappointing that none of the county’s police chiefs or sheriff’s captains entered this race. Anybody who succeeds in one of those jobs would automatically be considered a strong candidate for sheriff.
Melville, currently a patrol deputy, does have executive experience, though not on the scale of running a major sheriff’s office like the one in San Mateo County. He was a city councilman in the small Central Valley town of Gustine (population 5,520) from 2002 to 2006. The Merced Sun-Star said he was fined $400 by the state Fair Political Practices Commission for not reporting on his financial disclosure forms that he owned a consulting business that worked on city projects.
He was city manager and public safety director in Livingston (population 13,058) from 1999 to 2002 and held a similar position in Gustine from 1988 to 1999, working as its city manager and police chief.
No perfect choice
We give Melville credit for jumping into the race and offering voters a choice. While neither is the perfect candidate, Bolanos wins our recommenddation because he has the strongest record and the most experience. — Editor Dave Price