Category Archives: SMC Measure W 2018

November 15, 2020 · 8:11 am

Six Years ago, Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez phone call.

By Michael G. Stogner

November 14, 2014 Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez and I were talking on the phone. Abruptly Juan said “Got to go.” I said bye and call was ended. A couple of hours later I received a call from Juan’s girlfriend asking if I knew were Juan was I said said no why? She told me that Juan’s son told her he had been arrested at gun point in his front yard. I told her that would have explained the “Got to go” phone call. I asked her which home was he arrested at, she told me and I called Santa Rita Jail and confirmed that they had him in Jail. They couldn’t tell me why he was just in a holding cell not booked.

That was the start of so far a 6 year Journey in the San Mateo County Justice System. You will recall a Press Conference was called and District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe informed the World that San Mateo County Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez Smuggled a cellphone and drugs to a Hells Angel Gang Member Inmate. Now if that were TRUE that would be a Bad Thing the good news is just 2.5 years later those completely fabricated charges were DISMISSED.

The Residents of San Mateo County and the Editors/Reporters of the 7 print media didn’t seem bothered that the District Attorney’s Office would have knowingly filed False Charges against a Sheriff Deputy.

San Mateo County District Attorney Inspector William Massey is at the heart of the San Mateo County Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez case. That is no secret.

William Massey in the Sandra Lee Harmon Homicide Investigation on May 5, 2020 Half Moon Bay, California. He interviewed San Mateo County Sheriff Sergeant Goulart. “This interview was not recorded.” Why?

I have a suggestion for Law Enforcement in San Mateo County, RECORD ALL INTERVIEWS.

Back to Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez Criminal case now 6 plus years and counting, through in a PANDEMIC, reduced Courtrooms, Public Access Restricted, and in the heart of Silicon Valley the Superior Courts of San Mateo County are NOT allowing ZOOM. Why?

I have a suggestion for San Mateo County Superior Courts. Have all Court appearances on ZOOM.

You might recall the Zain Jaffer Criminal Case October 15, 2017 He was arrested for Attempted Murder of a Child, and multiple Sexual Assault charges etc. That entire case from start to finish lasted less than 9 months. How is that possible?

I have a suggestion for San Mateo County Residents and all Elected Officials. Audits are normal, Audits are a Good Thing.

AUDIT the Zain Jaffer case and Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez case, Compare the two cases, find out What Worked and What didn’t Work. This would help speed the log jam of court cases in SMC. The Jaffer Case should be taught at all the Universities and Law Schools.

Juan P. Lopez case is scheduled to be in court Monday November 16, 2020 for Jury Trial, several motions need to be heard first, trial is expected to last 4 to 6 weeks. This is going to be an exciting trial.

1 Comment

Filed under #2americas, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, Charles Stone, Citizen Journalist, D.J. Wozniak, David Silberman, Evidence Tampering, Former Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez, Jamie Draper, John Beiers, John Warren, Jordan Boyd, Michael G. Stogner, Public Corruption, San Mateo County District Attorney Office, San Mateo County News, SMC Measure W 2018, SMCSO Sgt. Jason Peardon, Steve Wagstaffe, Susan Bassi, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Zain Jaffer

December 23, 2019 · 8:21 am

Supervisor Warren Slocum asked to Resign from Verified Voting. Why does he have to be asked?

Supervisor Warren Slocum

Brent Turner

By Michael G. Stogner

In the last month Verified Voting has had 2 Advisory Board Members (Whistleblowers) Resign. The question I have is why haven’t the other 45 members done the same?

Community election reform activist Brent Turner has been warning San Mateo County and the USA about the vulnerabilities surrounding election systems. For the past six months Turner has publicly requested Supervisor Slocum step down due to a conflict of interest as Slocum sits on the board of Verified Voting. Turner has for years alleged Verified Voting had ” unclean hands” as a ” consumer watchdog ” as Verifed has business relationship with Microsoft and vendors. Turner originally became familiar with Verified Voting’s and Stanford professor David Dill from Dill’s ability to obtain Federal grant monies. Turner has alleged that Dill and his associates have blocked best election security efforts for personal gain. The following correspondence explains further.

Warren–

As citizens of San Mateo County we are embarrassed by your association with this apparently nefarious activity.

Please consider joining other Verified Voting board members in stepping down from this group.

Please advise- https://www.fastcompany.com/90441559/two-experts-quit-election-accountability-group-over-claims-it-has-been-endorsing-untrustworthy-machines

Brent Turner

I would like to underscore and amplify Mr. Turner’s recent message by urging that all individuals who wish to maintain integrity in elections, who are in positions of leadership or affiliated with Verified Voting, should promptly resign. Before doing so, though, they should immediately move to have the VerifiedVoting.org organization dissolved and the Verified Voting Foundation removed from its 501(c)(3) status.

Everything that Mr. Turner has mentioned about the manner in which I and my company, Notable Software, Inc. were robbed of our share of the NSF ACCURATE grant, including by members of Verified Voting, despite the grantee’s continued and unauthorized use of my intellectual property, both in their funding application and in the naming of the Center, is true and well-documented.

Please also note certain highlights of the recent Fast Company article, as follows:

Richard DeMillo <https://www.cc.gatech.edu/people/richard-demillo>, a Georgia Tech professor who sat on Verified Voting’s advisory board, and UC Berkeley statistics professor and associate dean Philip Stark <https://www.stat.berkeley.edu/~stark/>, a VV board member, have resigned from the advocacy group, stating that they believe that Verified Voting has been giving election officials false confidence in some voting machines and providing cover for the companies that make and sell these machines.

In DeMillo’s December 1 resignation letter to Barbara Simons (chair of VV’s board of directors), he claimed that “Verified Voting’s policy positions were unpredictable, contradictory, and not aligned with the values I once believed we shared. On more than one occasion, Verified Voting has taken contradictory public stances in the span of a few days, undercutting allies and supporters. The pattern of espousing new positions and making public statements that take local VV stakeholders by surprise is nothing new. Rather than seeking out advice, Verified Voting has gone to great lengths to avoid it.”

With respect to VV’s involvement in a Risk Limiting Audit (RLA) pilot in Georgia, DeMillo claimed that “Verified Voting’s seal of approval for the security theatrics in Bartow County undermines efforts to make elections more accountable. … No audit based on an untrustworthy audit trail can confirm the correctness of the outcome. Billing such an exercise as an RLA and touting it as a proof of security plays into the hands of cynics.”

Stark, who resigned on November 21, accused VV of being on the “wrong side” saying: “Our message to jurisdictions that buy poorly designed, insecure, universal-use BMD [ballot marking device systems] should be, ‘We tried to warn you. You need a better voting system’ … Instead, we’re saying, ‘Don’t worry: VV will teach you to sprinkle magic RLA dust and fantasies about parallel testing on your untrustworthy election. All will be fine; you can use our authority and reputation to silence your critics.'” [End of Article Summary]

I personally worked side-by-side with some of the members of Verified Voting in the early years. It is to our collective credit, in part, that Voter Verified Paper Ballots (a concept that I promoted extensively, years prior to the formation of VV, and even prior to Bush v. Gore) are now considered the Gold Standard for elections.

Those of you who have, since then, endorsed technologies that promise to undercut the authenticity of these ballots, have put an indelible blemish on your formerly fine work. You should be ashamed of yourselves and embarrassed about what you are doing to endanger voting at this critical time in history, when it is likely that the Impeached US President will be running for re-election. Please leave your egos at the door and dissolve Verified Voting, as it is now as untrustworthy as some of the voting machines and methodologies you have encouraged for adoption. The World Is Watching.

With extreme sincerity,

Rebecca Mercuri, Ph.D.

December 1, 2019

Barbara Simons, Chair Verified Voting Board of Directors

Dear Barbara,

It is with profound regret that I resign from the VV Board of Advisors. When you invited me to join the board shortly after the 2016 elections, I agreed for three reasons. First, Verified Voting’s promise to promote policy positions that “are based on scientific evidence and understood best practices in election administration” offered hope in addressing a decade or more of willful neglect of those principles in Georgia. Second, I thought that lending my name to the organization would help in the fight to eliminate vulnerable, unauditable voting machines in Georgia and nationwide. Third, I understood that my voice would be joined with the voices of respected colleagues to be sought out, valued, and debated by the organization’s leadership. However, it soon became apparent that Verified Voting’s policy positions were unpredictable, contradictory, and not aligned with the values I once believed we shared. On more than one occasion, Verified Voting has taken contradictory public stances in the span of a few days, undercutting allies and supporters. The pattern of espousing new positions and making public statements that take local VV stakeholders by surprise is nothing new. Rather than seeking out advice, Verified Voting has gone to great lengths to

avoid it.

I have tried over the last two years to engage in dialog, but you, Marian, and her team have been unwilling to have face to face conversations, even when we are in the same city and sometimes the same building. These apparent disconnects have been seized upon and exploited in Georgia and other states to weaken, not enhance, the cause of accurate and verifiable elections. Although my concerns have been growing for some time now, Verified Voting’s involvement in a “pilot RLA” in Georgia following the recent election makes it impossible to continue as a member of the advisory board. VV issued and supported misleading public statements that those pilots confirm outcomes and even prove the security of new election systems. Verified Voting’s seal of approval for the security theatrics in Bartow County undermines efforts to make elections more accountable. This exercise conducted behind closed doors and billed as a practice run—even if flawlessly conducted—could only confirm the correctness of the tally of the unverified (and therefore possibly corrupted) ballots, not that the ballots tallied were correctly marked. No audit based on an untrustworthy audit trail can confirm the correctness of the outcome. Billing such an exercise as an RLA and touting it as a proof of security plays into the hands of cynics. Whatever benefits accrue from this practice, it does not help public understanding to aid election officials in misstating the results. A similar false claim was made in Pennsylvania the following week. Verified Voting subsequently tweeted a weak repudiation of the incorrect Pennsylvania claim, but let stand an identical incorrect assertion in Georgia. That unrefuted statement will surely be a factor in future litigation. Most recently, Marian’s essay, posted on verifiedvoting.org shortly after Philip Stark’s November 22 resignation from the board, doubled down on these and other expanded claims. It is a short essay, but I count at least nine distinct contradictions of prior Verified Voting statements and published positions. In light of this, the promise to pursue policy positions based on scientific evidence and best practices rings hollow. I can no longer lend my name to Verified Voting. Some, including anti-transparency activists, conflicted supporters of ballot marking devices, politicians trying to silence and intimidate critics, and opponents of evidence-based policy, have already mischaracterized the mainly technical debates within the election integrity community. If they are successful at confusing the public about the correctness of election outcomes in Georgia and elsewhere, I fear it will be in some measure due to the absence of values once embraced by Verified Voting.

Respectfully,

Richard DeMillo Charlotte B. and Roger C. Warren Professor of Computing and Executive Director of the Center for 21st

Century Universities Georgia Tech Atlanta, GA

1 Comment

Filed under #SanMateoCountyNews, Brent Turner, Citizen Journalist, electioneering, Outrageous Government Conduct, Philip Stark, Rebecca Mercuri, Ph.D, Richard DeMillo, San Mateo County Elections Office, San Mateo County Grand Jury, SMC, SMC Measure W 2018, Tax Payer's Advocate, Those Who Matter, Verified Voting, Victim's Advocate, Warren Slocum

February 6, 2019 · 5:49 am

San Mateo County’s Measure W should be audited. It passed by about 500 votes in the last 2 days of counting. DMV

By Michael G. Stogner

LATIMES today Jan. 6, 2019

DMV under scrutiny in voting glitch
State leaders will assess whether registration errors changed November election results.
By John Myers
SACRAMENTO — Faced with evidence that some voter registration forms weren’t properly filed by California’s Department of Motor Vehicles, state officials will now investigate whether any votes were wrongly rejected and whether the final results in any state or local races should be reconsidered.
Secretary of State Alex Padilla and leaders of the agency that oversees the DMV agreed on Monday to settle a federal lawsuit brought by advocacy groups including the League of Women Voters of California and the American Civil Liberties Union. The settlement, in part, states that Padilla’s office will “take steps to ensure that every vote is counted” if ballots were rejected and will provide “guidance to elections officials in the relevant jurisdiction(s) on how to count the affected ballots and, if appropriate, recertify election results.”
On Dec. 14, DMV officials revealed that staff members had not transmitted voter registration files for 589 people whose applications or updated applications were filled out before the close of registration for the Nov. 6 statewide election. At the time, state officials could not confirm whether any of those voters had been turned away on election day, or if any had cast last-minute provisional ballots that were rejected in the final tally.
Monday’s settlement raises the possibility that a full investigation of the delayed voter registration documents could reveal races in which the outcome might have changed had those voters been allowed to participate.
State officials now have 60 days to complete an investigation into the identity of those voters and why DMV staff members failed to transmit the files in a timely fashion.
The error was the latest in a series of mishaps revealed in the first six months of operation for California’s new automated “motor voter” program, under which DMV customers are registered to vote unless they decline.
“I am committed to working with new leadership at DMV and the new administration to ensure integrity of the motor voter program and accuracy of the data,” Padilla said in a statement Monday night. “This settlement continues to move those efforts forward.”
Padilla’s office said on Tuesday that a preliminary investigation had not found any instances in which voter registration delays would have changed the outcome of a race.
The deadline to register for November’s election was Oct. 22. The records in question either came in before that deadline, or included documents signed and dated before that date. A Dec. 14 letter to Padilla from Jean Shiomoto, who was then DMV director, said the registration records weren’t submitted “due to a misunderstanding on the part of the department, for which we take responsibility.”
Shiomoto retired from state government at the end of 2018. Gov. Gavin Newsom has yet to appoint a new permanent director.
“We continue to actively work with our stakeholders to ensure full transparency for the California motor voter program,” Melissa Figueroa, deputy secretary for communications at the California State Transportation Agency, said in a statement Monday. “As an agency, we are committed to getting this right.”
The settlement, filed Monday in a San Francisco federal court, said that DMV staffers failed to transmit voter registration documents in a timely fashion beginning Oct. 12 and that all documents were held back for the three weeks following election day.
Several other problems were reported just days after state officials launched the DMV’s automated voter registration system in late April.
Those included multiple registration forms sent to counties for the same voter , flawed registrations for 23,000 DMV customers and a limited number of non-U.S. citizens — permanent green-card residents — mistakenly added to the voter rolls.
The agreement to investigate why DMV officials didn’t promptly submit hundreds of voter registration forms “establishes concrete steps that California will take to investigate and improve the DMV voter registration system,” said Melissa Breach, executive director of the League of Women Voters of California.

1 Comment

Filed under #SanMateo, #SanMateoCounty, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, Attorney Generals Office, Bill Silverfarb, Board of Supervisors, Carole Groom, Charles Stone, Chris Hunter, Citizens Oversight Committee, Criminal Enforcement Task Force, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, David Silberman, electioneering, Felony misappropriation of public money., Grand Jury, Hanson Bridgett LLP, Jim Hartnett, Jody L. Williams, John Warren, Jordan Boyd, Juan P. Lopez, Judicial Misconduct, Mark Church, Mark Simon, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, Ordinance 04430, Organized Crime, Prosecutorial Misconduct, R.E.A.C.T. Task Force, RICO, SamTrans, SamTrans Fraud Investigation, San Mateo County Clerk to Supervisors, San Mateo County District Attorney Office, San Mateo County Elections Office, San Mateo County Manager, San Mateo County Sheriff Office, Secret/Hidden Search Warrants, Senator Jerry Hill, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, Silicon Valley, SMC, SMC Measure W 2018, Steve Wagstaffe, Tax Payer's Advocate, Those Who Matter, Uncategorized, Victim's Advocate

February 2, 2019 · 10:46 am

San Mateo County Residents are the Winners.

For Immediate Release:

The Peninsula Progressives Announce Winners for Assembly Delegates, District 22

Self-Organized Slate Representing the People of District 22 of San Mateo County

SAN MATEO, CA — February 1, 2019 — The San Mateo County Peninsula Progressives, a group of citizens who organized its own slate, announce the election win of all nine of their founding members to the California Democratic Party Delegates representing Assembly District 22.

The winners include: Regina Islas, Victoria Sanchez De Alba, Adonica Shaw-Porter, Uma Krishnan, Dan Stegink, Ted McKinnon, You You Xue, Joe Little, and Mike Dunham.

“We are unified Democrats, a self-organizing slate by the People and for the People to represent the District of San Mateo County,” said Dan Stegink, a Founding Member of the Peninsula Progressives. It was great to see people who were energized to turn out to vote and as we prepare for the 2020 Presidential, as well as for California state elections.”

Diverse representation, especially women, in leadership positions, is needed to accurately reflect the demographics of San Mateo County; as well as in state, and federal offices. It is vital now, because the Democratic Party will be selecting a new Chairperson and endorsing the next State Senator for the district.

The Progressives platform is based on the needs and wants of the many people in the community to build an inclusive, equitable, representative and just society for all Californians. And, we look forward to serving, listening, and learning more about what our communities need in order to bring these needs and visions into reality, including:

*Representation and Justice for all; *Medicare for All; *Women’s and LGBTQI Rights Unbridged; *Remove Corporate Money from Elections; *California Green New Deal; *Affordable Housing and Renter Protections and *Law Enforcement Oversight.

The Peninsula Progressives won 9-5 over the Assemblymember Kevin Mullin and State Senator Jerry Hill slate. We extend hearty congratulations to our fellow delegates: Harini Krishnan, Supervisor Carole Groom, San Mateo City Council Member Rick Bonilla and Foster City Mayor Sam Hindi for their election as delegates and to Chelsea Bonini for her election to the Executive Board.

The Peninsula Progressives appreciate the welcome of Senator Hill and Assemblymember Mullin. “We are excited to be working together to resolve critical issues facing our communities and the upcoming election of a new Democratic Party Chair and the endorsement of a new State Senator,” said Regina Islas, a Founding Member.

Most importantly, we want to thank each and every voter and supporter who gave their time, effort and interest on Saturday, Jan. 26 to make this slate a reality, we are humbled and proud to serve you!

The Progressives welcomes inquiries at: penprogressives@gmail.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Peninsula-Progressives-2217190631676730/

About The Peninsula Progressives: Representation & Justice for ALL CALIFORNIANS; Green New Deal; Med4All; Affordable Housing Renters Rights and Law Enforcement Oversight.

Notice the photo Mark Simon uses for his article. Our Flag at half mast, Why?

Political Climate with Mark Simon: Peninsula Democratic Party elections expose left-wing divide

Published on January 29, 2019 in Featured/Headline/PoliticalClimate by Mark Simon

There was good news and some not-so-good news from the Peninsula Democratic Party this past weekend.

The good news is the massive turnouts at two caucuses to elect regional representatives to the California Democratic Party. The caucuses are held in each of the state’s Assembly districts and turnout Saturday in the 22^nd (represented by Kevin Mullin) and in the 24^th (represented by Marc Berman) was huge with well over 600 attendees at each event.

This is a dramatic improvement over prior caucuses, where turnout was a couple of dozen or so.

Clearly, Peninsula Democrats are energized by the success of the 2018 congressional races, by the policies and conduct of the current president and by the prospect of winning the White House and the U.S. Senate in 2020.

The not-so-good news is that the party is split between self-described progressives and “establishment” Democrats, reflecting a national divide that could undermine the Democrats’ chances of winning in 2020. And, because this is the Democratic Party, there is even a split among the progressives, although it can get a little confusing because every Democrat running for these delegate slots seemed to self-describe as a progressive.

And speaking of self-description, the party doesn’t divide delegates into male and female candidates. They divide themselves “self-identified female” and “other than self-identified female.” Sometimes a thing just speaks for itself.

In the 22^nd District caucus, a slate of Peninsula Progressives essentially took the lunch money of a slate backed by Mullin and state Senator Jerry Hill. The Progressive slate won 9-5 over the Mullin/Hill slate, despite the very high-profile presence of both legislators at the caucus.

Some of this is a function of fundamental politics – the Progressive slate, said to have been organized by political activist and county Harbor Commissioner Sabrina Brennan, worked harder to get more of their voters to the caucus.

Still, it’s a slap at the influence of two well-established Peninsula politicians. The Mullin/Hill slate was heavily populated by other elected officials and three of the five lost – Burlingame Councilwoman Emily Beach, Belmont Councilman Charles Stone and San Bruno Mayor Rico Medina.

In the 24^th, the fight was between two Progressive slates and while they each won their share, it does not bode well for Democratic unity that the left wing of the party is competing with itself.

ANY NUMBER OF ANGRY PEOPLE: If there is a message in the defeat of an establishment slate, it might be further reflected in a 12-8 vote Friday by San Mateo County Cities Selection Committee to put Millbrae Councilwoman Gina Papan on the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and oust Redwood City Councilwoman Alicia Aguirre.

One of the factors driving Papan’s victory was concern – more like anger and distrust — that the region is moving swiftly to establish housing construction quotas that are aimed, quite particularly, at San Mateo County. Papan positioned herself as someone who would be appropriately aggressive in fighting that effort, and her selection is another example of an insurgent victory over the local status quo.

AN OPEN FIELD: The 24^th Assembly District caucus was a nice win for former Assemblywoman Sally Lieber, who is running for Hill’s Senate seat. She was the top vote-getter among the “self-identified female” candidates, showing she still can carry the day among Santa Clara County progressives.

Lieber was a Mountain View councilwoman before winning an Assembly seat in 2002. She ran against Hill for the open Senate seat in 2012, and he won by a 2-1 margin. But Lieber outpolled Hill by 8 points in the Santa Clara County portion of the district.

The Senate candidates will report their 2018 fundraising totals at the end of the week, and it is expected that public interest entrepreneur Josh Becker will report a total in excess of $300,000, well ahead of his three opponents – Lieber, Redwood City Councilwoman Shelly Masur and Burlingame Councilman Michael Brownrigg.

You can expect they will say it is too early to assume anyone has taken command of the race, and that is the problem for the four candidates.

Rumors are quite active that another candidate could get into the race and change everything. The names that are being offered – not by these individuals, but by those who want them to run – are Mullin, who represents half the Senate district, former Assemblyman Rich Gordon, now president and CEO of the California Forestry Association (and, by all accounts, quite happy to be out of Sacramento), and San Mateo Mayor Diane Papan.

Contact Mark Simon at mark.simon24@yahoo.com.

“Still, it’s a slap at the influence of two well-established Peninsula politicians. The Mullin/Hill slate was heavily populated by other elected officials and three of the five lost – Burlingame Councilwoman Emily Beach, Belmont Councilman Charles Stone and San Bruno Mayor Rico Medina.”

It’s about time the residents of San Mateo County woke up. Jerry Hill, Kevin Mullin, Charles Stone, Mark Simon all members of TEAM “Those Who Matter” Did more than simply endorse the Yes on Measure W campaign and all except Simon endorsed Carlos G. Bolanos for Sheriff in the last election.

Not one of them is in favor of Law Enforcement Oversight.

That’s telling and their Silence on the Murder by Sheriff Deputies of Chinedu V. Okobi October 3, 2018 in Millbrae should cause the residents to pay attention.

By Michael G. Stogner

1 Comment

Filed under #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, Bill Silverfarb, Carole Groom, Charles Stone, Chinedu Okobi, Chris Hunter, City of Millbrae, Dan Stegink, Dave Canepa, David Burruto, David Silberman, Don Horsley, Hanson Bridgett LLP, Jim Hartnett, Joe Little, Mark Simon, Marshall Wilson, Michael G. Stogner, Mike Dunham, Positional Asphyxia, Sabrina Brennan, Senator Jerry Hill, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, SMC Measure W 2018, Ted McKinnon, Those Who Matter, Uma Krishnan, Victim's Advocate, Victoria Sanchez De Alba, Warren Slocum, You You Xue

January 30, 2019 · 8:30 am

San Mateo County’s E-mail Deletion Policy, Put on Hold by Mike Callagy

San Mateo County Manager Mike Callagy

San Mateo County Manager Mike Callagy has stopped/paused/delayed this policy from going into effect Feb. 1, 2019. May 1, 2019 is the date it will go into effect unless it is rescinded.

I’ll give just a couple of examples of why this is a terrible policy. San Mateo County’s last election had a tax measure W pass in the last couple of days by about 500 votes with more than 270,000 ballots cast. Several elected officials made public statements including Audit/Recall the elections office and officer. That is pretty unusual, it will be important to go back years to find all communications between the elected officials, county counsel attorneys, Supervisors, Assemblymen, Wordcrafters who communicated about placing Measure W on the ballot in the first place, using public monies to promote it etc.

San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office used as a weapon, falsely charging people: Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez criminal case is a perfect example, you will recall Steve Wagstaffe told the world he smuggled a cellphone and drugs to a gang member in jail. That was a lie from day one,

I said falsely charging people: Jody L. Williams of Las Vegas should be considered. Her case is sealed why? 2007 she was in Las Vegas when Operation Dollhouse netted Carlos G. Bolanos at a single family home which had Human Trafficked Sex Slaves including a minor.

San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office Not charging people: Chinedu V. Okobi Murdered by 5 SMCSO Deputies October 3, 2018.

November 7, 2018 one day after the election Retention Policy par. J

This has felt like one of those runaway train movies. Simply to find out Who put this on the County’s Website, Why was it put on and more importantly How to stop/pause it.

Email messages in a// default folders of a user’s mailbox will be automatically deleted after ninety (90) days. Automatically deleted emails will be accessible in emergency situations for a period of thirty (30) days after they are deleted from the user’s mailbox.

J. E-mail Retention

Email messages are temporary communications and the email system (with the exception of archived email subfolders as set forth below) is not intended to be used as a means of records storage. To the extent that email messages which are generated or received through the County’ s computer systems constitute business records to be retained pursuant to the County’ s (or a department’s) records retention policy, such email messages shall be retained as set forth below. Email messages that do not otherwise serve a business purpose (including, but not limited to, draft communications, administrative communications, etc.) shall be routinely discarded. For that reason, each workforce member who uses the County email system has the same responsibility for their email messages as they do for any document they obtain in the course of their official duties and must decide which communications should be retained for business o legal reasons and which should be discarded. If a workforce member has any questions regarding if an email should be retained as a business record, he or she should seek guidance from his/her supervisor and/or department head who may consult with legal counsel as necessary.

Email messages that constitute records to be retained for business or legal reasons may be saved in excess of ninety (90) days in any of the following ways: (1) saved in Rich Text Format (RTF) or Portable Document Format (PDF) and then transferred to electronic filing systems or other media for long-term storage in accordance with the department’s regular filing and storage procedures; (2) affirmatively “dragged and dropped” or “cut and pasted” into email subfolders created by the user (the user must select the particular retention period that applies to any created subfolders (i.e. one year, two years, ten years, indefinitely, etc.)); or (3) printed in hard copy and filed or stored as appropriate. Any email subfolders created by the user within Microsoft Exchange will, along with the user’s in- box including any migrated mail, count toward the user’s 100GB mailbox space limitation as outlined in Section E of this policy.

Workforce members should seek guidance from their department heads to determine the specific time requirements applicable to records and electronic correspondence generated, received and/or maintained by their department in accordance with their department’s records retention policy. Workforce members are strongly encouraged to review the email content of subfolders on a regular basis and to delete any content for which retention is not required.

Regardless of countywide or departmental records retention requirements, email and other electronic correspondence pertaining to a threatened or actual legal action must be retained until the litigation is concluded. It is the responsibility of the department involved, or County Counsel, to notify ISO in writing, of the need for the hold on electronic communications.

The use or creation of local personal archive files (such as Outlook.pst files) is strictly prohibited and may not be configured on County equipment.

By Michael G. Stogner

Leave a comment

Filed under #Blacklivesmatter, #OperationDollhouse, #OperationLooseEnds, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, Board of Supervisors, Carole Groom, Charles Stone, Chief Deputy District Attorney Al Serrato, Chinedu Okobi, Chris Hunter, Citizens Oversight Committee, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, David Silberman, Don Horsley, electioneering, Felony misappropriation of public money., Hanson Bridgett LLP, Heinz Puschendorf, Jim Hartnett, Jody L. Williams, Juan P. Lopez, Judicial Misconduct, Mark Olbert, Mark Simon, Marshall Wilson, Matt Grocott, Michael G. Stogner, Organized Crime, Positional Asphyxia, Prosecutorial Misconduct, R.E.A.C.T. Task Force, RICO, Rosanne Faust, Sabrina Brennan, SAMCEDA, SamTrans Fraud Investigation, San Mateo County Elections Office, San Mateo County Grand Jury, San Mateo County Manager, San Mateo County News, San Mateo County Sheriff Office, Secret/Hidden Search Warrants, SMC Measure W 2018, Steve Wagstaffe, Tax Payer's Advocate, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Zain Jaffer

December 16, 2018 · 7:55 am

“Those Who Matter”against Quality of Life in San Mateo County. Measure W.

Whenever I see these four people and a small group of their friends and supporters I can’t help but think of my father John Donald Stogner aka Tex. He was an average guy who worked 6 days a week 12 hours a day to support his wife and 4 children. He was in the grocery store business for 38 years. He had no time or interest in politics, he voted every election, my mother worked at the polls every year. Neither one of them suspected that elected officials would spend taxpayer money against them in order to promote or pass a tax measure that would harm them or the business my father earned his living from.

In this video you will see 4 people who were instrumental in the Yes on Measure W campaign, not shown is SamTrans CEO Jim Hartnett husband of Rosanne Faust who claims a victory in getting the message out and beating the opposition which there was none. The opposition would be people like my mother and father hard working people just trying to get by. Rosanne does not mention the $650,000 of taxpayer money her husband spent on Educational Outreach Programs involving 501-C organizations. When you add the $1,100,000 that she raised thats $1,750,000 vs. the $5,700 a few brave individuals put together for the No on W campaign. Note the Yes on W supporters are the people that receive the taxpayer money and the No on W are the people stuck with paying it.

San Mateo County Elected Officials have been misleading the residents for many years. The 2012 SMC Grand Jury warned the residents of it “Inconvenient Truth” They are spending taxpayer money hiring word-crafting consultants, and conspiring to place tax measures on the ballots again using taxpayer money to make sure it will pass if put on the ballots. You will notice the Yes on W Team can’t name one citizen that came before the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, and asked Please place another 1/2 cent sales tax on the ballot to make SMC even more expensive to live in.

It will be interesting to see the communications e-mails, memos, letters, between the power players of San Mateo County that caused Measure W to be created in the first place, funded and passed by 552 votes in the last 2 days of a long count out of a total of 270, 612 votes.

San Mateo County has a new e-mail destruction policy I have written about starting February 1, 2019. I wonder why?

SMCN.com Article County deleting e-mails

THE GAME

Leave a comment

Filed under #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, Board of Supervisors, Carlos G. Bolanos, Carole Groom, Charles Stone, Chris Hunter, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, David Silberman, Don Horsley, electioneering, Felony misappropriation of public money., Grand Jury, Greg Conlon, Hanson Bridgett LLP, Heinz Puschendorf, Jim Hartnett, John Beiers, John Maltbie, Mark Church, Mark Olbert, Marshall Wilson, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, Organized Crime, RICO, Robert Foucrault, Rosanne Faust, SamTrans, SamTrans Fraud Investigation, San Mateo County Clerk to Supervisors, San Mateo County Elections Office, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, SMC Measure W 2018, Tax Payer's Advocate, TBWB, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Warren Slocum, Yes on Measure A 2012

December 11, 2018 · 10:40 am

Greg Conlon to Supervisors, Fund the recount of Measure W.

December 11, 2018 San Mateo County Board of Supervisor Meeting, Public comment.

December 4, 2018 Supervisor Meeting, Heinz Puschendorf, Fund the recount.

1 Comment

Filed under #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, Bill Silverfarb, Board of Supervisors, Carlos G. Bolanos, Carole Groom, Charles Stone, Chris Hunter, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, Don Horsley, electioneering, Felony misappropriation of public money., Grand Jury, Hanson Bridgett LLP, Heinz Puschendorf, Jim Hartnett, Jim Sutton, John Beiers, Lennie Roberts, Mark Church, Mark Olbert, Mark Simon, Marshall Wilson, Matt Grocott, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, Organized Crime, RICO, Robert Foucrault, Ron Collins, Rosanne Faust, Sabrina Brennan, SAMCEDA, SamTrans, San Mateo County Clerk to Supervisors, San Mateo County Elections Office, San Mateo County Manager, San Mateo County News, San Mateo County Sheriff Office, Senator Jerry Hill, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, SMC Measure W 2018, Tax Payer's Advocate, TBWB, Those Who Matter, Warren Slocum

December 10, 2018 · 1:05 pm

Why SMC Supervisors should pay for the recount of Measure W.

HILLSBOROUGH, CA – August 28 – Jim Hartnett and Rosanne Faust attend Auxiliary of Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) of San Mateo County Annual Garden Party on August 28th 2016 at Private Garden in Hillsborough in Hillsborough, CA (Photo – Susana Bates for Drew Altizer Photography)

Supervisor Carlos Groom

Supervisor Dave Pine

Supervisor Warren Slocum

Supervisor Don Horsley

SMC Supervisor David Canepa

August 8, 2017 the Supervisors gave $350,000 of taxpayer money to Jim Hartnett to pay for the behind the scenes Outreach Consultants to work against the taxpayers.

See if the title for Agenda item 4 sounds honest: Study Session Regarding Transportation Obstacles, Opportunities, and Needs. The reason I ask is the Grand Jury reported the Supervisors mislead the residents to pass Measure A in 2102.

2012 Grand Jury Report

August 8, 2017 BOS meeting click on #4,7

Heinz Puschendorf requesting the recount of Measure W

Leave a comment

Filed under #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, Bill Silverfarb, Board of Supervisors, Carlos G. Bolanos, Carole Groom, Charles Stone, Chris Hunter, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, David Silberman, Don Horsley, Felony misappropriation of public money., Grand Jury, Hanson Bridgett LLP, Heinz Puschendorf, Jim Hartnett, John Beiers, Mark Church, Mark Olbert, Marshall Wilson, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, Organized Crime, RICO, Robert Foucrault, Rosanne Faust, Sabrina Brennan, SAMCEDA, SamTrans, San Mateo County Elections Office, Senator Jerry Hill, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, SMC, SMC Measure W 2018, Tax Payer's Advocate, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Will Holsinger, Yes on Measure A 2012

December 10, 2018 · 9:37 am

SMC Supervisors Interest Level of Murder by Sheriff Deputies.

If you want to see the 5 Supervisors interested or excited about a subject just look up any of the “Revenue Enhancement” meetings where they use taxpayer money for consultants and think tank people for the word crafting for Measure W etc.

Chinedu Oboki was murdered October 3, 2018 at 1400 El Camino Real Millbrae, California by 5 San Mateo County Sheriff Deputies. He was unarmed, committed no crimes other than walking while black. Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos is responsible for this.

The public is saying 5 deputies murdered Chindeu Oboki.

Regina Islas demanding the release of the video and audio recordings of Chinedu Oboki’s murder.

Photos from December 4, 2018 Board of Supervisors Public Comment.

Board of Supervisor Meeting

FB Message

Rabbi Steven Weil wrote a meditation on suffering after the devastation of Hurricane Sandy. In it, he quotes the Talmudic theologian, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, who theorized that Judaism’s approach to suffering rests on three pillars. The first is accepting that suffering and evil exist. The second pillar demands active, steadfast resistance to evil. The final pillar calls for faith that resistance will eventually be rewarded, even in the face of defeat.

There is also a Christian tradition of standing in the gap. It refers to being an intercessor, a go-between, a person who takes the weight, who intercedes on behalf of another for mercy, or salvation, or justice.

I am not, despite my wonderful mother’s very best efforts, a person of religious faith. I am, however, a person of conviction, and I am thinking of this because this week, over 50 people stood in the gap for our family, for justice, when they attended the San Mateo County Board of Supervisor’s Meeting. Social justice activists, veterans, Morehouse alumni, faith leaders, my Facebook colleagues current and former, employees of other tech companies, San Mateo county citizens-a coalition of people with the courage and conviction to stand in the gap.

One of the items for review during that Board meeting was a request from the San Mateo County Sheriff for a $4 million contract to Axon Enterprise. This was notable, because Axon is the manufacturer of tasers. While the revised stated purpose is for body cameras, the resolution authorizes the Sheriff to amend the term and the services provided without review, and waives the normal proposal process for any changes carrying a cost of $100,000 or less. The resolution was passed.

That a county in which 3 unarmed citizens were killed with supposedly non-lethal tasers within 10 months would allow a resolution giving the Sheriff a $100,000 blank check for the purchase of more tasers, before its coroner has even returned a report on the last killing-it certainly feels like defeat. That a county in the process of investigating its third taser killing, after having imposed no sanction at all on any of the officers involved in the first two, would allow all six deputies who killed the third victim back to work-that certainly feels like defeat. That the San Mateo County Sheriff would go one step farther and actually assign one of those deputies to work on the day of the Board of Supervisors meeting so that friends and family of the most recently deceased would see him on their way in-that certainly feels like defeat. That those deputies were back at work before my mother could get a permanent marker for my brother’s grave-that certainly feels like defeat.

And yet.

When I watch those clergy, friends, colleagues, concerned citizens stand in the gap-I take heart. When I hear from many of the thousands of people who have called and written District Attorney Wagstaffe to demand transparency-I take heart. When I hear from so many people who had previously lived lives untouched by police brutality tell me about how they are getting and staying proximate, I take heart.

I am not a person of faith. I am convinced that the arc of the moral universe bends toward justice, but not through magical thinking. It bends ONLY when we fight for every single inch.

As Frederick Douglass said-

”Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted.”

I am so grateful to those of you who resist.

**To get proximate, to help-
1. You can call DA Wagstaffe (try doing it once a week!) to demand justice and transparency-ask him to assure the public that the outside investigator is truly independent : (650) 363-4636. Office hours are M-F 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. PT.
2. If you are interested in doing more-DM me, or reach out to any of the social justice orgs below.

Shaun King
Anti Police-Terror Project
Faith in Action Bay Area
Black Alliance for Just Immigration
Color Of Change
Congregational Church of San Mateo United Church of Christ
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Redwood City – UUFRC
Pacifica Social Justice
Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Asian Law Caucus
Fools Mission
SV De-Bug
Mothersquest
PICO California
Unitarian Universalists of San Mateo
Trinity Presbyterian Church, San Carlos
Woodside Road United Methodist Church
Amy Eilberg
University AME Zion Church
Peninsula Democratic Socialists of America
Live Free

By Michael G. Stogner

Leave a comment

Filed under #Blacklivesmatter, #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, Attorney Generals Office, Bill Silverfarb, Board of Supervisors, Carlos G. Bolanos, Carole Groom, Chinedu Okobi, Chris Hunter, City of Millbrae, Criminal Enforcement Task Force, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, David Silberman, DOJ, Don Horsley, Errol Chang R.I.P., Grand Jury, John Beiers, Marshall Wilson, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, NAACP, Organized Crime, Positional Asphyxia, Ramsey Saad R.I.P., RICO, Robert Foucrault, San Mateo County Clerk to Supervisors, San Mateo County Sheriff Office, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, Silicon Valley, SMC, SMC Measure W 2018, Steve Wagstaffe, Tax Payer's Advocate, TBWB, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Warren Slocum, Yanira Serrano Garcia R.I.P., Yes on Measure A 2012

December 8, 2018 · 9:21 am

San Mateo County Government E-mails should be preserved not deleted.

Why would government want to delete, destroy e-mails? E-mails should be preserved permanently. They show the public the behind the scenes communications between elected officials who have taken an oath, and high ranking appointed officials who are supposed to represent the public’s best interest.

Below is just one example of 4 top SMC Officials communicating their support of Human Trafficked Sex Slaves being used for their personal pleasure, and their distain for the media. All 5 Supervisors shared the same idea. These e-mails are 11 years old and still current when you add what is happening to Jody L. Williams today in SMC by Steve Wagstaffe, and John Warren.

SMC E-mail Policy November 7, 2018

J. E-mail Retention

The use or creation of local personal archive files (such as Outlook.pst files) is strictly prohibited and may not be configured on County equipment.

From: Michael Stogner <michaelgstogner@yahoo.com>

To: Michael Callagy <MCallagy@smcgov.org>

Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2019, 11:24:13 AM PST

Subject: Re: Status on the e-mail deletion policy

That might be just fine, but as you can see very few people even know about this and you can stop this for a 6 month review period starting today until you decide the proper time period to hold e-mails like 20 years etc.

Michael

On Saturday, January 26, 2019, 11:09:10 AM PST, Michael Callagy <MCallagy@smcgov.org> wrote:

Michael,

As I understand it, the policy has been in place for years and that is the info I’m trying to obtain. I think ISD realized we were not reaching our objective to get rid of the clutter of emails in the system, so this policy was brought back to address that. I’m trying to find out exactly how this came back up, but it was in the works well before Nov. 2018.

Best regards,

Mike

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 26, 2019, at 10:50 AM, Michael Stogner <michaelgstogner@yahoo.com> wrote:

Mike,

It looks like November 7, 2018 is when this 90 day old e-mails are to be deleted Policy was created by ISD, Who came up with this if Not You?

ADMINISTRATIVE MEMORANDUM COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

NUMBER: F-2

SUBJECT: E-Mail Policy

RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: Information Services Department (ISD)

DATE: November 7, 2018

J. E-mail Retention

Email messages in a// default folders of a user’s mailbox will be automatically deleted after ninety (90) days. Automatically deleted emails will be accessible in emergency situations for a period of thirty (30) days after they are deleted from the user’s mailbox.

As you and most County Officials and staff know I am a Private Victim’s Advocate and have worked on behalf of several San Mateo County Sheriff Deputies and employees. Just to mention a few, Female Deputy who reported Rape Video on County Computers being viewed and shared with upper management of the Sheriff’s Office. Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez being abused by San Mateo County Counsel John Beiers, David Silberman and others including Carlos G. Bolanos,Steve Wagstaffe, John Warren, Sheriff Deputy Heinz Puschendorf who has not been unable to get to his emails. Jody L. Williams of Las Vegas connected to Operation Dollhouse recently criminally charge in SMC. Measure A,K,W e-mails. Zain Jaffer criminal 8 felony case dismissed for lack of evidence, (sure) I can think of 60,000,000 reasons this case was dismissed. Yanira Serrano-Garcia murdered by Sheriff Deputy, Errol Chan Murdered by Swat, Chinedu V. Okobi Murdered by 5 SMCSO Deputies. SMCSO Lt. Kristina Bell DV Call to 911, James McGee 17.5 hour standoff two Swat teams after 911 call for DV no DV charges. Ramsey Saad R.I.P.

That is a short list. Please consider this a formal request to save all emails regarding any of the people and subjects mentioned above.

This subject should be discussed with the public before ANY e-mails are deleted. What is the cost to keep them?

I hope you will stop this today.

Michael G. Stogner

On Friday, January 25, 2019, 6:12:20 PM PST, Michael Callagy <MCallagy@smcgov.org> wrote:

Michael, I’m still researching this as I want to be clear when this policy started. The policy, as I understand it, has been around a long time. It is a matter of now enforcing it. Im trying to determine how far back the policy goes. We don’t have unlimited storage for emails so there has to be controls in place. Employees are encouraged to save their emails and put them in files. It is an easy process. I will get you the history soon. Have a nice weekend. Mike

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 25, 2019, at 4:30 AM, Michael Stogner <michaelgstogner@yahoo.com> wrote:

Good morning Michael,

What is the status on the County wide policy to delete e-mails after they are 90 days old starting Feb 1, 2019?

By your response it looks like it was not your policy, Who’s policy is it?

Thank You

Michael G. Stogner

San Mateo County News.com

Kristina Paszek <kpaszek@smcgov.org>

To:michaelgstogner@yahoo.com

Jan 16 at 4:28 PM

Dear Mr. Stogner,

Your correspondence of January 11 to Carole Groom was forwarded to our office for response. I also understand that you recently sent a follow-up e-mail today to Supervisor Groom. This e-mail will respond to both of your e-mails.

The County’s e-mail policy is set forth in the attached Administrative Memo F-2, which was developed (and is revised from time to time) by the County’s Information Services Department, subject to approval by the County Manager. The provisions concerning the deletion of e-mail were adopted in April 2015 around the time that the County switched from Groupwise to Outlook for its e-mail.

The County’s e-mail policy is distinct from the County and department-specific records retention policies that are approved by the Board of Supervisors. With respect to what appear to be your concerns, although the e-mail policy reiterates that the County’s e-mail system is not intended to be a means of records storage, it recognizes that some e-mail messages that are generated or received through the County’s computer systems constitute records that must be retained pursuant to the County’s or a department’s records retention policy (or due to threatened or actual litigation), and it details how those e-mail messages are to be retained. The e-mail policy does not impact each department’s responsibility to retain records in accordance with state law. As explained in the policy, all e-mails that are determined to be records to be retained for business or legal reasons are to be saved. There are a number of ways to retain such e-mails, as detailed in the policy, but we expect that in most cases, a user will simply place the e-mail in an e-mail subfolder. A user can create e-mail subfolders and set a 1-year, 2-year, 10-year retention or mark the folder(s) to be kept permanently. In addition, a mailbox that is being held for litigation will not be subjected to any automatic deletion until after the litigation is resolved.

Regards,

Kristina Paszek

Deputy County Counsel

San Mateo County Counsel’s Office

400 County Center, 6^thFloor

Redwood City, CA 94063

Tel: 650-363-4989

Fax: 650-363-4034

Michael Stogner <michaelgstogner@yahoo.com>

To:Kristina Paszek

Cc:Carole Groom,Don Horsley,Warren Slocum,Dave Pine,Dave Canepaand 3 more…

Jan 17 at 5:57 PM

Dear Kristina,

Thank You for your response on behalf of Board of Supervisor President Carole Groom, I’m still not sure why she couldn’t have just answered my questions directly. I now have more questions regarding the policy to delete e-mails after 90 days. How many of San Mateo County employees have received the memo and how did they get it and when did they get it. How many managers have taken a training course on how to preserve e-mails? How many employees have taken a training course in this policy? What method was used to notify and prepare the employees for this policy?

It might be best for everyone involved to hit the stop/pause button on this policy.

Michael G. Stogner

San Mateo County News.com

Michael Stogner <michaelgstogner@yahoo.com>

To:Carole Groom,Dave Canepa,Dave Pine,Don Horsley,Warren Slocumand 3 more…

Jan 16 at 10:03 AM

Dear San Mateo County Supervisors,

5 days ago I asked President of Board of Supervisors to tell me if the BOS approved this policy. To this day Carole Groom has refused to answer that simple question.

Again I’m asking who is responsible for this idea and policy? What is the status as of today. There are only 15 days left before this terrible/unlawful policy takes effect.

The Public has a right to know this information.

my previous e-mail 1/11/2019

Hello Carole,

Could you please tell me if the Board of Supervisors approved this and if so what date and agenda item was it. I’m doing a follow up story on this subject and wanted to know who is responsible for this policy.

Thank You

Michael G. Stogner

Co-owner of San Mateo County News

Looking forward to getting a response from any of you today.

Sincerely.

Michael G. Stogner

San Mateo County News.com

3 Comments

Filed under #Blacklivesmatter, #Humantraffickedsexslaves, #OperationDollhouse, #SanMateo, #SanMateoCountyNews, #SMCJUSTICE, Adrienne Tissier, Bill Silverfarb, Board of Supervisors, Carole Groom, Charles Stone, Chris Hunter, Criminal Enforcement Task Force, Customers of Human Trafficked Sex Slaves, Dave Canepa, Dave Pine, David Burruto, David Silberman, Don Horsley, electioneering, Felony misappropriation of public money., Hanson Bridgett LLP, Heinz Puschendorf, Jim Hartnett, Jim Sutton, Jody L. Williams, John Beiers, Juan P. Lopez, Mark Church, Mark Olbert, Mark Simon, Marshall Wilson, Michael G. Stogner, Michelle Durand, MTC, Organized Crime, Prosecutorial Misconduct, R.E.A.C.T. Task Force, Rosanne Faust, Sabrina Brennan, SAMCEDA, SamTrans, San Mateo County Clerk to Supervisors, San Mateo County Manager, San Mateo County Sheriff Office, Secret/Hidden Search Warrants, Senator Jerry Hill, Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos, SMC, SMC Measure W 2018, Steve Wagstaffe, Tax Payer's Advocate, TBWB, Those Who Matter, Victim's Advocate, Warren Slocum, Zain Jaffer

Category Archives: SMC Measure W 2018

Six Years ago, Sheriff Deputy Juan P. Lopez phone call.

Supervisor Warren Slocum asked to Resign from Verified Voting. Why does he have to be asked?

San Mateo County’s Measure W should be audited. It passed by about 500 votes in the last 2 days of counting. DMV

San Mateo County Residents are the Winners.

Political Climate with Mark Simon: Peninsula Democratic Party elections expose left-wing divide

San Mateo County’s E-mail Deletion Policy, Put on Hold by Mike Callagy

“Those Who Matter”against Quality of Life in San Mateo County. Measure W.

Greg Conlon to Supervisors, Fund the recount of Measure W.

Why SMC Supervisors should pay for the recount of Measure W.

SMC Supervisors Interest Level of Murder by Sheriff Deputies.

San Mateo County Government E-mails should be preserved not deleted.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

San Mateo County News Official Facebook Page

Follow me on Twitter

Recent Posts

Archives

Meta

San Mateo County News

Meta