Gary Saenz

    Some updates since the last report:

    3rd Ward Council: John Valdivia (Incumbent) Committee to Re-Elect John Valdivia 3rd Ward, City Council 2015, ID#1338703

    5th Ward Council:  Henry Nickel (Incumbent)  http://henrynickel.nationbuilder.com

    6th Ward Council Roxanne Williams http://www.roxannecanwin.com

    7th Ward Council Leticia Garcia (No website or Facebook Page yet found, but announced on Facebook.

    City Treasurer: No update.

    City Clerk: Gigi Hanna (Incumbent) https://www.facebook.com/pages/Committee-to-Reelect-Gigi-Hanna-San-Bernardino-City-Clerk-FPPC-1340217/245037742204878

    City Attorney: Gary Saenz (Incumbent) News story

     

     

     

    Today (April 10, 2015)  Leticia Garcia announced she is running for the 7th Ward Council seat. Jim Mulvihill is the current 7th Ward Council Member. He was first elected in the recall election on November 5, 2013.

    Previously, on Friday, March 27, 2015, City Attorney Gary Saenz announced he is running for re-election for City Attorney. He was first elected in the recall election on November 5, 2013.

    The other elections on November 3, 2015 are:

    • Ward 3 Council
    • Ward 5 Council
    • Ward 6 Council
    • Ward 7 Council
    • City Treasurer
    • City Clerk

    John Valdivia is the 3rd Ward Council Member.  He was first elected on November 8, 2011. His website does not currently have any information about whether he is running for re-election.

    Henry Nickel is the 5th Ward Council Member. He was first elected on February 4, 2014 in the Special Election to fill the vacant seat left on the resignation of Chas Kelley, consolidated with the General Municipal Election. I haven’t seen an announcement, but his website, http://henrynickel.nationbuilder.com has an image that says “Re-Elect Henry Nickel for City Council Ward Five,” so it would be safe to say he is running again.

    Rikke Van Johnson is the 6th Ward Council Member. He was first elected at the Primary Municipal Election, November 4, 2003.  His website remains from his campaign for Mayor in 2013. There is no information about whether he is running for re-election.

    David C. Kennedy is the City Treasurer. He was first elected in the March 5, 1991 at the Primary Municipal Election. His campaign activities are minimal, if any. His first election, he ran against Southern Pacific conductor Wolfram Schlicht and former Family Services Agency supervisor William A. McKinnon. He ran unopposed in 1995 and 1999.  He handily beat David R. Oberhelman on November 4, 2003. He again ran unopposed in 2007 and 2011.

    Georgeann “Gigi” Hanna is the City Clerk. She was first elected on February 7, 2012 in the General Municipal Election. She has not announced a re-election campaign as of this date.

    Once again, this site is neutral in this race.  This information is provided as a public service to voters so that they may make an informed choice in voting.  The hyperpartisans will see bias, always against their side, which shows that I am doing the right thing.

    The Form 460s due in late September for the period of July 1, 2013 to September 21, 2013 have been posted on the City of San Bernardino website.

    The Form 460 for City Attorney James F. Penman is from the Penman for City Attorney 2015 committee. It was received on September 23, 2013 at 3:52 p.m.  In that time period, City Attorney James F. Penman received $7,679 in monetary contributions, with $12,179 in year-t0-date contributions.  No loans were received during this period, but $32,000 in loans were received year to date. Additionally, the Committee also received $3,218.72 in non-monetary contributions, with $4,118.72 total year-t0-date.

    At the same time City Attorney James F. Penman made $2,970.97 in payments during the filing period, with $7,652.43 year to date.  The committee also made $11,400 in loans.  There were $3,218.72 in non-monetary adjustments during the filing period, and $4,118.72 in non-monetary adjustments year-to-date.

    Current cash for City Attorney James F. Penman’s committee was $3,921.29, which along with the $7,679 in cash receipts during the period and miscellaneous increases to cash of $669.30, and subtracting cash payments of $2,970.97, left a cash balance of $9,298.62.  The committee also had cash equivalents of $11,400, and outstanding debts of $32,000.

     

    Form 460 requires candidates to report contributions of $100 or over, either in single transactions or cumulative year to date, or per election to date if required.

    Here are the contributors during the period to City Attorney James F. Penman

    On August 7, 2013, law firm Gresham Savage Nolan & Tilden, long-time law firm with roots going back to San Bernardino City Attorney William Guthriecontributed $2,500, with a cumulative amount of $6,000 for this calendar year, and $2,500 towards the 2013 election.

    On August 30, 2013, Johnie Carnell, who is listed with a Highland address and as a hairstylist at Trendsetters salon in San Bernardino donated $100.

    Robert Matich, who is listed with a Newport Beach address, and as an officer of Matich Corporation, the long-time engineering contractors, and longtime political supporters, donated $2,000 on September 10, 2013.

    ABO Enterprises, Inc., with a San Bernardino address, donated $1,000 on September 18, 2013. In this earlier piece, Jack Katzman of ABO Enterprises, Inc. was listed as a sponsor of an October 2, 2013 fundraiser. According to a press release found online dated February 22, 2012, A:

    ABO Enterprises, Inc. manages 600 office buildings in the Inland Empire.  Leasing opportunities range from 200 to 150,000 square feet.  They include the Town and Country Center formerly the Gateway Center complex on South E Street in San Bernardino to executive office buildings.  ABO Enterprises has office buildings in Riverside, San Bernardino, Highland, Yucaipa, Grand Terrace, Redlands, Rialto, Fontana, Colton, Moreno Valley and many other cities in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties.

    Next listed is Bates Auto Body of San Bernardino.  On September 18, 2013, Bates Auto Body gave the campaign $1,000.  Their Facebook page says they are family owned, and located on Mill Street in San Bernardino.

    On September 18, 2013, Mabel Biddinger, who is listed as retired, donated $100. She is listed online as a member of the San Bernardino City Libary Foundation.  Mike Hartley of San Bernardino, listed as a consultant at Hartley Consulting donated $250 on the same date.

    Additionally, unitemized ($99 or less) contributions of $729 are listed.  If they each gave $99, that’s slightly more than seven.  So, it’s a number between 8 and 729.

    Schedule B Part 1 lists an outstanding balance of $32,000 in loans from James F. Penman to James F. Penman campaigns incurred between 2002 and 2006 from earlier campaigns.

    Schedule C shows nonmonetary contributions in this period of $3,218.72 contributed by the Committee for Integrity, FPPC ID 971747, with a year-to-date contribution of 4,118.72, with only $3,218.72 attributable to this election.

    The description for this period is “Petition gathering is [sic] support of James F. Penman against recall.”

    Schedule E shows payments made. James F. Penman was paid $73 for candidate travel, lodging and/or meals.  Council member and Mayoral candidate Wendy McCammack was reimbursed for domain names in the amount of $194.95, and the Central Labor Council of San Bernardino and Riverside Counties was paid $225 for a meeting or appearance.  Chris Jones Consulting of Newcastle, California was paid $1,500 as a campaign consultant.  Express Printing & Signs, of San Bernardino and owned by council member and Mayoral candidate Wendy McCammack was paid $215.54 for fundraising event(s).  A second payment of $669.10 was paid to Express Printing & Signs, of San Bernardino was paid for fundraising event(s).

    Schedule H lists an outstanding balance of $11,400 on a loan from the Committee for Integrity originally incurred on 2/14/2001.  Schedule I lists miscellaneous increases to cash of $669.30 of voided payments not cashed from 2011 from the Friends of Jim Penman 2011, a predecessor campaign committee.

    That concludes City Attorney Jim Penman’s Form 460.  To recap, City Attorney James F. Penman is facing a recall election in which voters will be asked a yes or no question about whether City Attorney James F. Penman should be recalled.  If a majority of voters answers no, he will retain his position until 2016 based on his 2011 election.  If the majority of voters vote no, then one of two replacement candidates will be elected for the remainder of City Attorney James F. Penman.  Those two men are Timothy Prince and Gary D. Saenz.  Whomever has more votes will be elected as the City Attorney until 2016.

    Next up is replacement candidate Timothy P. Prince’s Form 460 filed September 30, 2013 at 5:42 p.m.  His campaign committee is named Tim Prince for City Attorney 2013.  The period covered is August 23, 2013 to September 21, 2013.

    Tim Prince received $3,475 in monetary contributions both for the period and the year. He also received loans of $22,636, and nonmonetary contributions of 285  for a total of $26396.

    Tim Prince for City Attorney 2013 made payments of $9629 during the period.  The committee began with a zero balance and ended with a cash balance of  $16,482.

    Schedule A lists monetary contributions received.

    On August 25, 2013, Jesus Sandoval and Mary Sandoval of Fontana, California donated $100. Mr. Sandoval is listed as a supervisor for the City of San Bernardino, and he is listed as a councilman for the City of Fontana.  His City website says that he was elected in 2012, and that he is currently employed by the City of San Bernardino.  In a story about his election, the article says that he is a parks maintenance supervisor.

    On August 30, 2013, Retired Judge John Ingro and his wife Olaya Ingro, both of San Bernardino, donated $150. Judge Ingro was one of the inaugural winners of the San Bernardino County Bar Association’s  Kaufman-Campbell Award.

    On August 30, 2013, Professor Gary Negin, of Redlands and Cal State San Bernardino, donated $100 to Tim Prince’s campaign.  According to his LinkedIn profile, he is a professor in the education department, and has been at CSUSB since 1985.

    Also on August 30, 2013, Kathleen Pettersen, listed as a family member of Tim Prince, donated $100.

    The next day, John Lemay, of Grand Terrace who is listed as a Professor at CSUSB donated $100.  I didn’t find a Professor John Lemay at Cal State online.

    Long-time Tim Prince ally and Attorney Allen Bartleman donated $250 on September 15, 2013.

    Dr. Ana Marie Lorenz of Alta Loma, California, of Lorenz Consulting Services, and a professional psychologist donated $100 two days earlier.

    Former 2nd Ward Council member Dennis Baxter, and the Executive Director of the San Bernardino Area Habitat for Humanity, donated $300 on September 20, 2013.

    The San Bernardino Democratic Luncheon Club donated $200 on the same day.

    Tim Prince matches Jim Penman’s hairdresser donation by receiving a donation from Jami Haydis of Highland, (listed as the owner of the “JR Randall Hair Salon.”  I was unable to find a JR Randall Hair Salon, but there is a J Randall Salon in Redlands.

    Renee Prince of San Bernardino, who is listed as a student, but I believe is also Tim’s sister, donated .  I believe that she is doctoral student in psychology. She donated a $1000.

    Lillie Houston of Rialto donated $200 on September 12, 2013.

    Shireen Dunwoody of Ventura, in the field of medical communications with Dunwoody Consulting, donated $250 on September 19, 2013.

    Laura Vasquez, a Registered Nurse with Kaiser Permanente with an Irvine address, donated $100 to Tim Prince on September 19, 2013.

    Tim Prince also received $375 in contributions of $99 or less.

    Now for the big money. Tim Prince loaned his campaign $22,636 during this period.  He had $22,921 in cumulative contributions this period.

    On Schedule C, Tim Prince gave himself the following non-monetary contributions:

    On September 10, 2013, he donated materials labeled “Web” in the amount of $87, with a cumulative value of $123 for the year.

    On September 16, 2013, Tim Prince donated campaign materials in the amount of $50, with a cumulative value of $173 for the year.

    The next day, Tim Prince donated postage of $20, with a cumulative value of $193 for the year.

    Three days later, Tim Prince donated “Campaign office item” of $92, with a cumulative value in the same category of $285 for the year.

    There were also unitemized nonmonetary contributions of $37.

    Where did Tim Prince for City Attorney 2013 spend money during this period?

    The committee used nextdayfliers.com of Rancho Dominguez, California to print campaign literature in the amount of 157.  Office rent of $1,500  was paid to Triland Capital LLC  of Los Angeles.

    Campaign photos by David Earhart Photography of San Bernardino were purchased for $190.  Super Cheap Signs of Austin, Texas, was paid $950, presumably for signs.

    Aitra Generic Reseller Card, Cardholder Services LLC  of Fort Lauderdale FL was paid $736, which is listed as “office expenses.”

    Jennifer Elzarraz of Moreno Valley was paid $400 for campaign consulting.

    The City of San Bernardino was paid $2,314 for filing fees, and $3,327 for a ballot statement.

    There were also unitemized payments of $55.

    That concludes Tim Prince’s 460 for this time period.

    Gary Saenz is running as a replacement candidate for City Attorney should City Attorney James F. Penman be recalled by voters.  Gary D. Saenz for City Attorney 2013 filed a Form 460 for the period of January 1, 2013 through September 21, 2013.   The Form 460 was  filed at 1:58 p.m. on September 26, 2013.

    Gary Saenz’s committee received $15,000 in monetary contributions this year.   His committee received a loan of $100.  Payments of $2,375 were made during the filing period. There are $10,402 in unpaid bills.  Gary Saenz’s committee’s ending cash balance is $12,725.00 with $10,502 in outstanding debts.

    Gary D Saenz for City Attorney 2013 received two contributions.

    On September 17, 2013, William Easley of San Bernardino, listed as the owner of Goforth & Marti, with offices in Riverside, Redlands and San Diego, donated $10,000.

    On the same date, the law firm of Mirau, Edwards, Cannon, Lewin & Tooke of Redlands donated $5,000.  I can assure you that the first two named partners of that firm are firmly in the Not Fans of Jim Penman Club.

    Gary Saenz made a loan to the campaign of $100 on September 16, 2013.

    A payment was made to Gary Saenz of $2,325 for filing fees.  I don’t know why his were more expensive then Tim Prince’s filing fees.

    There was also an unitemized payment of $50.

    Schedule F lists Gary D. Saenz For City Attorney 2013’s Unpaid Bills:

    Chris Perez Consulting of Corona California is owed $6,700 for campaign consulting.

    Lysa Ray Campaign Services of Santa Ana, California is owed $375 for professional services.

    Gary D. Saenz is owed $3,327 for filing fees, presumably for the ballot statement.

    That ends Gary D. Saenz for City Attorney 2013’s inaugural Form 460.

     

     

    As I told one of the candidates in the City Attorney recall election last night who thanked me for my neutrality in this race, and as I told a paid Orange County public relations consultant on Twitter, I do not pick sides on this blog because I am neutral.  After the election, I will have to work with James F. Penman, Tim Prince or Gary D. Saenz.

     

    With that I present the first Gary D. Saenz for City Attorney mailer has arrived in mailboxes.  Or at least the first one I obtained.

    The front of the mailer says “San Bernardino” at the top, along with an unbalanced scales of justice, with a stock photograph of the Federal Supplement in a law library, with a photograph of candidate Gary D. Saenz  superimposed in what is likely his office. That is based on the fact that behind Gary D. Saenz is his University of California diploma showing his first name.  Gary Sanez is dressed in a pinstripe gray suit, with a black tie.

    This is what I call a “meet the candidate” brochure.  In fact, under the picture of Gary D. Saenz is the verbiage “Meet Gary D. Saenz For City Attorney” with the tagline in italics, Taking Politics Out of the City Attorney [sic] Office.

    The second page of the flier says:

    From the Desk of Gary Saenz

    Your Next City Attorney

    I am not a politician. I have never held an elected position, nor
    do I intend to ever hold another. But I do believe strongly in the
    Office of the City Attorney and the important role it plays in
    advising your City Council on all matters of the law.
    But the Office of the City Attorney has become a political animal
    that hasn’t been good for San Bernardino. It has become a
    lightning rod of political gamesmanship, and it has divided and
    separated City Hall.
    My starting point will always be the law – it is not the role of the
    City Attorney to influence public policy. I have no tolerance for
    political infighting or political alliances. I intend to work with the
    Council and Mayor to provide the best legal advice to all of them,
    and work against none of them. My only agenda is whatever is in
    the best legal interest of the City.
    I love this city and I want my grandchildren to inherit a better
    community than we have today I can do my part by restoring
    integrity to this office and I would be honored to serve as
    your City Attorney.
    Very Truly Yours,

    [/s/ Gary D. Saenz]

    Join us on Facebook [No link given]

    On the third page is a Gary D. Saenz For City Attorney San Bernardino Logo.  Underneath is this text:

    Meet Gary D. Saenz …
    City Attorney Candidate Gary D. Saenz is truly a son of
    San Bernardino.
    The Saenz family goes back a full century in San Bernardino, when
    Gary’s grandparents took up residence on 6th Street near Mount
    Vernon Avenue in 1913. Gary’s mother and
    father were childhood sweethearts from San
    Bernardino High School, and Gary himself was
    born at Saint Bernadine’s Hospital in 1951. He
    grew up playing Little League at the corner of 14th and Mt. Vernon, and graduated from
    Eisenhower High School in 1969.
    Gary earned his Law Degree at UCLA before
    returning to his hometown to practice law. He
    has practiced law for over 35 years, serving
    his community and maintaining an unblemished
    active status with the California State Bar.
    Currently Gary focuses on real estate law from
    his office in downtown, but he finds time to
    serve on the boards of many local and
    regional nonprofit organizations. He and his
    wife Linda have been married for 24 years
    and have two college-age children.

    See my Facebook Page for more information. [No link given]

    Be sure to attend a fundraiser for Gary’s campaign, Tuesday,
    October 8, 2013 from 6:30 – 8:00pm at Mitla Café in San Bernardino.

    This page has another photograph taken in Gary D. Saenz’s office from a different angle, a black and white picture of what the reader can assume is his wife Linda and his two children as toddlers, and a dog, and what appears to be a more recent photo of Gary Saenz and his wife.  They are in black and white, but considering that 24 years ago was 1989, I would guess the originals were both in color and did not have a white border.  It is not an important point, it should be chalked up to artistic license and the idea that Gary D. Saenz has roots in the community.

    Two interesting points.  Gary D. Saenz mentions that he has “an unblemished active status with the California State Bar.”  If you recall, one of the points that City Attorney James F. Penman jumped on his challenger, David L. McKenna, in the 2011 San Bernardino Primary Municipal Election was the fact that David L. McKenna had a period of inactivity.  The “get to know” you brochures usually avoid mentioning opponents, and City Attorney James F. Penman is mentioned only on the fourth page.  However, the reader is supposed to know when Gary D. Saenz says “I am not a politician” he is referring to City Attorney James F. Penman.  When he says “the Office of the City Attorney has become a political animal that hasn’t been good for San Bernardino” he means the Office of the City Attorney under James F. Penman has become a political animal that hasn’t been good for San Bernardino.”  It was also smart to avoid mentioning the other replacement candidate, Tim Prince, because that makes it even more confusing for voters, at least in the first mail piece.

    Further, when Gary D. Saenz uses the passive voice to say “It has become a lightning rod of political gamesmanship, and his has divided and separated City Hall” the reader is supposed to understand it as Jim Penman is a lightning rod, Jim Penman is a political gamesman, and Jim Penman has divided and separated City Hall.  I do not think Gary D. Saenz is suggesting that the rank-and-file deputy city attorneys are a problem.

    On the fourth page, the address page, the Gary D. Saenz logo is repeated with a “Vote YES to Recall James Penman” logo above.

    The return address says “Paid for By: Gary D. Saenz for City Attorney, FPPC ID 1360835, 1002 N. D Street, San Bernardino CA 92410”  That is the address of Gary D. Saenz’s law office. The Presorted standard postage block says Paid ZAP COLOR, mailed from Zip Code 92878. That is the zip code for Corona, Riverside County, California.

    Overall, I think the mailing accomplishes the goals for Gary D. Saenz: educate voters in who is, his legal roots, his political philosophy, and remind them to vote yes on the recall question.  It also smartly avoids a battle with Tim Prince, who has much more political experience.  For now, Gary Saenz’s proxies are attacking Tim Prince, and he should leave that to the proxies.  If someone asked me, and no one did, I would point out that Mayor Valles appointed Gary Saenz to the Library Board. While not legally related, it shows some experience with the City, and from what I can tell, particularly compared to the current regime, Mayor Judith Valles is still politically popular, and relatively, her reign is seen as the last era of good feelings in San Bernardino.  I expect Judith Valles’ name to be used extensively by City Attorney James F. Penman’s campaign.

    I would expect to get mail very soon from City Attorney James F. Penman.  The first mail from him during the 2011 Primary Municipal Election came about October 2, 2011. 

    Other than the email from Tim Prince’s campaign, I have not

    So far nothing has been written on City Attorney James F. “Jim” Penman’s Recall Election campaign, beyond this post.  I strive to remain neutral in these elections; however, I have some observations.

    I have not seen any signs in San Bernardino.  I have not received official campaign literature.  I have not received a fundraising letter from the campaign itself.  I have been informed that there is an October 2nd 2013 fundraiser against the recall.  The flier for the fundraiser has a campaign style sign in the upper right hand corner that says “San Bernardino is Not For Sale NO Recall.

    According to the flier, the fundraiser is cosponsored by former Mayors Judith Valles, Evlyn Wilcox, and Dr. Barbara Flores. Also according to the flier, the honorary co-sponsors are Retired Superior Court Judges Paul Bryant, Stanley W. Hodge, Craig Kamansky, John Martin, and John Wade. The flier says that more honorary co-sponsors are attorneys Joe Arias, Rene Jacober, George Theios, Bradley White, and the law firm of Gresham, Savage, Nolan and Tilden.  More co-sponsors, according to the flier are Sharon Gaitan-Blechinger of the Mexico Cafe, Robert Gastel of Arrowhead Mechanical, Jack Katzman, ABO, Inc., George Kritikos, George’s Burgers, and Jeremy LeClair of The Mug Restaurant. The flier says that it is a partial list.

    In the 2011 election, I said:

    When I was a Deputy City Attorney for the City of San Bernardino, I learned a thing or two about San Bernardino politics.   One was that you shouldn’t bother spending money before Labor Day for a November election.  The second thing I learned is that with more voters using vote by mail (what used to be called absentee voting), candidates have to send direct mail earlier, and last minute hit pieces don’t work as well as they used to do.  Typically, a candidate will send a positive mailer first, particularly if they are not well-known.

    What surprises me now, if there is such a thing left as surprise in modern San Bernardino politics, is that I have not received any mail from City Attorney James F. Penman in this cycle.  The first ballots should arrive in in the second week in October.  I do not recall that there was a working James F. Penman website in the 2011 race.  There is not one now, but I would argue that electronic campaign presence is more important now than in the past.  If you look at the 2011-2012 San Bernardino City Clerk’s race, which was so close, a modern campaign must use all electronic means to contact supporters and voters.

    History shows that City Attorney James F. Penman’s  election margins and votes have gone down since 1995.  That can be attributed to a number factors, including changing of demographics, with some of City Attorney James F. Penman’s core supporters either leaving the City, leaving the area, and sometimes ceasing to exist, either by changing from a supporter to an opponent, or shall we euphemistically say, “pining for the fjords.

    What is the support for the assertion that City Attorney Jim Penman is losing support?

    Here are the results by election:

    19870307 Primary Municipal Election James Frank “Jim” Penman  No data
    Ralph H. Prince  No Data
    19910305 Primary Municipal Election James Frank “Jim” Penman  No Data
    19951107 Primary Municipal Election Jim Penman 9305 72.82 SB Clerk
    Stan Tomlinson 3472 27.17 13,893 ballots cast, 77,185 registered voters
    No Vote Recorded 1116 Not included
    19991102 Primary Municipal Election James Frank “Jim” Penman 7560 100 SBROV
    20031104 Primary Municipal Election Jim Penman 7,999 96.11 SBROV
    Write-In 324 3.89
    20071106 Primary Municipal Election James Frank “Jim” Penman 7,001 51.46 SBROV
    Marianne Milligan 6,557 48.2
    Write-In 47 0.35
    20111108 Primary Municipal Election James Frank “Jim” Penman 6,447 51.72 ROV/Clerk
    David L. McKenna 6,019 48.28
    No Vote Recorded 489 Not included 12,955 ballots cast

    What does this data mean? Though the population has increased from 1990 (164,164) to now (2012 estimate: 213,295), an increase of thirty percent, Jim Penman’s votes have fallen about 30 percent.

    These numbers should be alarming to City Attorney James F. Penman’s campaign.  The 2011 numbers should also be alarming to Jim Penman’s campaign.  The 489 undervotes, spoiled ballots, or unrecognized write-ins had a potential of changing the election.  Again, the 2011-2012 City Clerk elections shows every vote counts.

    Even more alarming are the reported number of valid recall signatures.  Though a signature is not a vote, as there are multiple barriers to voting versus signing a petition, and even though there were allegations of signature fraud, the reported number of valid signatures is 11,855, just over the required 15 percent of registered voters at the time of the circulation of the petition:

    There were 11,855 valid signatures to recall Penman, out of 77,254 registered voters, according to Hanna. That’s 15.3 percent, just over the 15 percent threshold to put a city-wide office on the ballot for a recall.  The Sun, Ryan Hagen, “Penman, two council members to be on San Bernardino recall ballot,” posted at sbsun.com .

    The Certificate of Sufficiency of Recall Petition of City Attorney is attached to Resolution 2013-259 passed 5-0-2 at the September 3, 2013 Mayor and Common Council Meeting . The Certificate states that 11,588 valid signatures to qualify, which is shown as 15 percent of 77,254 registered voters. 18,070 signatures were submitted, 18,070 were verified, of which 11,855 were found valid, and 6,215 were found invalid.

    It can and has been said that 59,184 voters did not validly sign a recall petition, and that the recall only had 267 more valid signatures over the minimum.  However, in the November 8, 2011 election, only 12,955 ballots were cast in total.  11,588 valid signatures were found by the City Clerk.  Even if Mr. Penman equals the number of votes (6,447) he received in that election, there are still 5,141 more signatures to recall Mr. Penman in 2013 than votes for Mr. Penman in 2011.

    Recalls are sufficiently rare in San Bernardino that voters may need to be educated on how to vote.  The Penman campaign must educate voters that they must vote “No” to retain James F. Penman.  That can be confusing to some voters.  However, that information is to my knowledge not available to voters.

    It has been argued that the replacement candidates are not sufficiently attractive to motive voters to the polls.  However, this is not a single-issue election, and the number of races exceeds the 2011 Primary Municipal Election. Further, there were huge negatives to the last two challengers.  The two replacement candidates are both longtime San Bernardino residents, if nothing else. It would be a mistake to underestimate the replacement candidates.

    Should City Attorney James F. Penman wish to finish the term to which he was elected in November 8, 2011, he should be concerned about the decline in votes, the number of valid petitions.  The first ballots will be in the hands of voters in a few weeks, the election will be over in about a month and half. No doubt he is sufficiently concerned, however, we have not seen that concern translate into outreach, including traditional walking precincts, campaign mail, or new media.

     

    Officially, San Bernardino Residents for Responsible Government claims to be neutral on the candidate to replace City Attorney James F. Penman, should voters vote to recall Jim Penman on the recall question on the November 5, 2013 ballot.  San Bernardino Residents for Responsible Government is the PAC behind the San Bernardino Recall on the November 5, 2013 ballot.

    San Bernardino Residents for Responsible Government public relations consultant Michael McKinney is quoted as saying:

    “We’re pleased that there have been candidates that have come forward out of the community that are running in this historic chance to have seven of the nine office-holders on the ballot,” said Michael McKinney, manager of the recall campaign, referring to the candidates facing recall plus those already up for election that day. “The recall committee itself will be in the field supporting the recall, urging voters to vote yes, but it’s not allowed under its organization to help any of the candidates.”  The Sun, Ryan Hagen, “Eight candidates qualify for San Bernardino Recall Election, posted 9/6/2013 6:40 PM PDT.

    The San Bernardino Residents for Responsible Government’s website, as of the writing of this post, does not have any information supporting any specific replacement candidates.

    However, on Twitter, Michael McKinney, slams both City Attorney James F. Penman, and replacement candidate Tim Prince in response to a tweet from Ryan Hagen regarding Gary Saenz:

    1. @SBcityNOW very hypocritical of Penman to throw stones while living in a glass house given the active FPPC investigation.

    2. @MICAPRGA I wasn’t familiar with this investigation until now. Was complaint made by SBRFRG?

    3. @SBcityNOW personal complaint filed 28 May 2013 FPPC file no 13/341. Investigation confirmed 16 August 2013.

    4. @MICAPRGA I’ll get the details tomorrow. Thanks for the heads-up.

    @SBcityNOW along the lines of glass houses. 2008 Congressional candidate’s online bio. pic.twitter.com/JdMQ73RHfn

    2:47 PM – 13 Sep 13

    Image will appear as a link
    1. .@MICAPRGA Interesting. @IEPrince, didn’t you say you understood this to be forbidden?

    2. @SBcityNOW The title is proper in a resume as long as it is not used in a book issued for sale (published). The 2007 excerpt complied.

    3. @SBcityNOW Numerous local attorneys including Penman’s longtime outside contract attorney Joseph Arias http://ariaslockwood.com/joseph-arias  use the term.

    4. @IEPrince I see that Arias does list it; perhaps it is common. Context perhaps different on something intended for legal audience?

    5. @IEPrince “public” still seems to be what “intended for publication” means. Why prohibit using it in resume sold as a book?

    6. @SBcityNOW Use of the title in resumes is acceptable as long as it is not intended to sell books (implying the author is a judge).

    7. @IEPrince hmm, I see. I’ll get your perspective in more detail Monday, but thanks for responding.

     Now, perhaps Michael McKinney is acting on his own, but it is curious that someone who is presumably paid by San Bernardino Residents for Responsible Government is slamming Tim Prince.  According to Michael McKinney, as cited above,  “but it’s  not allowed under its [San Bernardino Residents for Responsible Government] organization to help any of the candidates.”
    Considering there are only two replacement candidates running should the recall of San Bernardino City Attorney James F. “Jim” Penman be successful,  the public relations consultant for San Beranrdino Residents for Responsible Government is defending one candidate (Gary Saenz) while slamming the other replacement candidate (Tim Prince).
    Michael McKinney’s statement that San Bernardino Residents for Responsible Government is not allowed to help any of its candidates does not correspond with what their website says:

    What happens next?

    The City needs new and vibrant leadership. San Bernardino Residents for Responsible Government encourages qualified replacement candidates to run for office. This committee will support the Recall initiative and may become involved in recruiting and supporting candidates after the petition phase of the campaign.  San Bernardino Residents for Responsible Government, FAQs, http://www.sanbernardinorecall.org/faqs/ accessed September 20, 2013 11:18 a.m. PDT.

    Therefore, it can be deduced that San Bernardino Residents for Responsible Government is not only supporting the recall of City Attorney James F. Penman, but also supports recall replacement candidate Gary Saenz over Tim Prince.

    In my last post, I described that I did not know much about Gary Saenz, the San Bernardino Attorney running in the recall election on November 5, 2013 in San Bernardino.  In order for Gary Saenz to be elected to fill out the remaining term of City Attorney James F. “Jim” Penman, first voters, by a majority, must vote to recall City Attorney James F. “Jim” Penman, Gary Saenz must get more votes then San Bernardino Attorney Tim Prince, and Gary Saenz must qualify for the position after his election.

    At this point, September 19, 2013, at 10:33 a.m., I have not found a campaign website for Gary Saenz.

    By searching the membership records at the State Bar of California online, I found this information:

    Gary David Sanez, State Bar Number 79539, is an active member of the State Bar of California, admitted on April 28, 1978 and active from that date on.  His undergraduate school was San Diego State University, San Diego, California, and his law school was University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) School of Law.  He has no public record of discipline, and no public record of administrative actions.

    The top result in Google for his law firm is a Facebook result. There are other similar social media sites that are largely devoid of information except for an address and a phone number.  The address of his law firm near 1oth Street and D Street, when run through the Tax Collector’s website, states that Gary Saenz owns the property as a tenant in common, with Ronald Saenz and Robert Saenz.

    This Likedin profile states that Gary Saenz is an attorney at Saenz Realty.

    What about the local media, what do they have to say about Gary Saenz?

    In a post dated September 6, 2013 at 6:40 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time, Ryan Hagen of the Sun posted an article named”Eight candidates qualify for San Bernardino recall election.” The article provides the following information regarding Gary D. Saenz:

    “I see a tremendous need for a competent attorney to run as the city attorney,” Saenz said. “I see a need for an attorney whose intentions are to do just that: to be an attorney for the city and not to be a politician.”

    Saenz has experience primarily in real estate law, although some cases have involved representing individuals in bankruptcy court. He said the city should hire outside attorneys who specialize in certain areas — as the city has already done with its bankruptcy case.

    “What a good manager does is rely upon other people who are skilled in administering an office, for example, and who are knowledgeable in areas where I am not as knowledgeable, such as public law,” he said. “It would be my intention to have the right staff person or contract attorney, and make sure everything that crosses the desk is a good fit for the city of San Bernardino.”

    Saenz has lived and practiced law in the city for more than 30 years and has volunteered as a library trustee, Equal Opportunity Employment Commission and other charitable organizations as well as a judge pro-tem for San Bernardino County Courts, according to his ballot statement.

    The next online information about Gary Saenz is included in an article posted on September 16, 2013 at 5:09 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time, written by Ryan Hagen of the Sun, named “San Bernardino city attorney candidate Tim Prince called hypocritical

    The article has the following to say about Gary Saenz:

    By contrast, a 2007 policy by San Bernardino Superior Court Judge Larry Allen based on state ethics rules specifically prohibits using the term on a candidate statement that is mailed to voters, as Gary Saenz did until instructed to change it by City Clerk Gigi Hanna.

    . . .

    Saenz maintained that using the term was a technicality that should have no bearing on voters.

    “I have to maintain that this is simply not a pertinent issue to this election,” he said in an email. “It wasn’t an issue when it related to me, and I don’t feel any differently now that it involves Mr. Prince.”

    The change to Saenz’s candidate statement was one of four requested by elections officials, including a change to Prince’s statement.

    That story was in response to a story posted on September 12, 2013 at 5:59 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time by Ryan Hagen of The Sun, “San Bernardino city attorney candidate revises statement,” Gary Saenz is quoted:

    “To say this is a trivial matter is an understatement,” Saenz said in an email. “No one expects an attorney to keep up on laws about judges, especially when one is no longer a judge. But that doesn’t stop my opponents looking for minutia to try and create a political issue.”

    . . .

    By Ryan Hagen, The Sun

    Posted: |

    SAN BERNARDINO >> A candidate for city attorney was forced to change the statement that will be sent to voters in the recall election after the current city attorney pointed out that Gary D. Saenz was not allowed to say that for more than 10 years he had served as “judge-pro-tem.”

    Use of that title — or “temporary judge” as they’re now known — in political ballot statements is specifically forbidden on a two-page policy on temporary judges that San Bernardino Superior Court Judge Larry Allen sent to all temporary judges in 2007.

    That was several years after Saenz, who is primarily a real estate attorney, says he stopped being a judge pro tem.

    “To say this is a trivial matter is an understatement,” Saenz said in an email. “No one expects an attorney to keep up on laws about judges, especially when one is no longer a judge. But that doesn’t stop my opponents looking for minutia to try and create a political issue.”

    According to emails, Penman informed the city clerk’s office that the term was not allowed and City Clerk Gigi Hanna on Wednesday asked Saenz to remove it from his candidate statement. Saenz sent a revised statement — the same as his previous 11-sentence statement but without the sentence mentioning he had been judge pro tem — later that day.

    Saenz has said he would use deputies or contract attorneys to offer advice on specialized areas of law with which he was not familiar, and said this incident shows why a non-politician should hold the office.

    “It is politics as usual from a seat in City Hall that simply should not be political,” he said. “It is exactly why I am running – to remove the political gamesmanship from the City Attorney office.”

    I do not have access to the Sun’s archives, but Gary Saenz is mentioned in the following stories:

    The Sun, September 14, 2003, Alan Schnepf,  “Ex-Waitresses order a reunion” about Nena’s in San Bernardino,

    The Sun, April 15, 2005, David Schwartz,  “Library board looking for book budget funds” where Gary Saenz is quoted as the San Bernardino Public Library Board Vice President.

    The Sun, June 5, 2008, Robert Rogers”A symbol of possibility,” a story about Robert F. Kennedy’s visit to San Bernardino on May 29, 1968, which states in part that “When RFK visited San Bernardino on May 29, a then-16-year old Eisenhower High School student named Gary Saenz tailed the campaign, taking photos . . .”

    The Sun, February 19, 2005, David Schwartz, “Proud to be on A-list” regarding restaurant inspections, Gary Saenz is quoted.

    From public records available on the Internet, he was born in San Bernardino County in 1951.  He lives and owns a home in the 7th Ward of San Bernardino, and has lived at his present home since the mid-1990s.

    From the City’s website, he was appointed to the Library Board of Trustees by Mayor Judith Valles, and approved by the Mayor and Common Council at the January 24, 2000 meeting.  Council Member Frank Schnetz made the motion, seconded by Council Member Estrada, and the motion was unanimously carried.

    In the back-up for that meeting, Gary Saenz gave some autobiographical information.  He has lived in San Bernardino since 1951. In 2000, he was a member of the First Presbyterian Chuch of San Bernardino, a Member of the Board of Directors of the Home of Neighborly Service, and a Parkside Elementary School Council Member.  He graduated from Eisenhower High School in Rialto in 1969, San Diego State University with a BA in 1974, and the UCLA School of Law with a Juris Doctorate in 1977.

    Gary Saenz further stated in the application that he has been an attorney since 1978, a self-employed attorney since 1983, a “U.S. Fed. Govt. Fee Attorney for VA since 1986 – present”, a licensed California Real Estate Broker, and a “Judge Pro Tem S.B. County Courts.”

    Gary Saenz made a public comment in the Mayor and Common Council Meeting of August 4, 2000 regarding a proposed charter change (what would become Measure M on the November 2000 ballot).  The minutes, back before action minutes, stated that Gary Saenz “expressed his concerns and opposition to [proposed Charter] Section 1401, specifically the language which provides that any person appointed to the Board of Library Trustees may be removed by the affirmative vote of at least five members of the Common Council, except for purposes of censorship.”

    Gary Saenz was reappointed to the Board of Library Trustees on the September 9, 2002 Mayor and Common Council Agenda.  However, according to the September 23, 2002 minutes, the reappointment was rescinded “due to subsequent clarification showing that MR. Saenz has two years remaining on his current term.”  That vote was seven to zero, Common Council Members Esther Estrada, Susan Lien, Gordon McGinnis, Neil Derry, Joe Surarez, Betty Dean Anderson and Wendy McCammack voting aye.

    According to the current list of the Library Board of Trustees, Gary Saenz is not currently a library commissioner.

    The agenda backup for the December 20, 2004 meeting stated that Gary Saenz’s then-present Board of Library Trustees was from May 2002 to May 2006.  The agenda backup from December 18, 2006 said that Gary Saenz’s term was from May 2006 to May 2010.

    From the State of California Bureau of Real Estate database, it gives the following information on Gary David Saenz.  His mailing address is the same as for the State Bar.  He is a Broker, his license ID is 00884293, and his Broker’s license expires on March 26, 2017.  His Broker license was issued on 3/29/1985 (taken from secondary records), and he has no former names, no current DBAs, no current branches, no current affiliated corporations, no disciplinary actions, an no other public comments.

    Searching the City Clerk’s Business Registration form, which is very difficult to use, I found two current City Business Licenses for Gary D. Saenz

    Business Name Business Address Owner Name Business Phone Expiration Date STATUS
    GARY D SAENZ 1010 N D ST GARY D SAENZ (909)388-8727 10/31/2013 Active

    and

    Business Name Business Address Owner Name Business Phone Expiration Date STATUS
    GARY D SAENZ, REAL ESTATE BROKER 1002 N D ST GARY D SAENZ (909)889-2668 03/31/2014 Active

    As far as Saenz Realty, Inc., (you can see a “Saenz Realty” sign on Google Street view at 1002 N D Street), the agent for service of process is Ronald Saenz, not Gary Saenz.  I could find no other information other than on LinkedIn regarding Gary Saenz’s involvement with Saenz Realty. Corportion Wiki, which I would not deem reliable, says that Ronald Saenz is the president of Saenz Realty, Inc.

    That is the sum total of information that I could find on City Attorney replacement candidate Gary Saenz, beyond some civil court cases which are not interesting or relevant.  The search of the online permit manager at the City’s website was unremarkable, and the database has some issues.

    I am not going to tell you how to vote; this site is neutral.

    However, if you already have an opinion about the Office of City Attorney, or the existing candidates, I am going to run through a few scenarios.

    As my reader(s) know, I worked for the City of San Bernardino as a Deputy City Attorney from February 2001 to January 2006. I first met the current City Attorney of the City of San Bernardino, James F. “Jim” Penman somewhere between 1988 and 1990 at the home of the late attorney Richard R Beswick.  I first met recall candidate Timothy “Tim” Prince in 1999 while either volunteering or working at Legal Aid Society of San Bernardino, Inc.  Though I have worked as an attorney in San Bernardino since 1998, I have never met recall candidate Gary Saenz, nor had any legal work associated with recall candidate Gary Saenz. I have heard the name before, but I do not know Gary Saenz, nor do I know his reputation.  At all.

    I have checked the Internet today, and as far as I can tell, there is no website for the incumbent City Attorney, James F. “Jim” Penman, and as far as I can tell, that includes Twitter, email and Facebook.  I do not know the strategy of City Attorney Penman in defeating the recall.  I have not been directly contacted by City Attorney Penman regarding the recall in any capacity.

    Similarly, I have not seen City Attorney recall candidate Timothy Prince in person, I believe, this year.  We have not discussed the recall.  I do not think we have discussed City politics since the 2011 election at the second City Attorney debate at Arrowhead Country Club.  While he invited me to his congressional announcement in Mentone when he ran against Jerry Lewis, I do not believe that I have ever been invited to any other Tim Prince election event.

    The State Bar gives the following information about Mr. Prince, City Attorney Penman and Mr. Saenz:

    Gary David Sanez, State Bar Number 79539, is an active member of the State Bar of California, admitted on April 28, 1978 and active from that date on.  His undergraduate school was San Diego State University, San Diego, California, and his law school was University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) School of Law.  He has no public record of discipline, and no public record of administrative actions.

    City Attorney James Frank Penman, State Bar Number 91761, is an active member of the State Bar of California, admitted on May 30, 1980, and active from that date forward. His undergraduate school was California State University, San Bernardino, and his law school was Western State University College of Law. He has no public record of discipline, and no public record of administrative actions.

    Timothy Peter Prince, State Bar Number 151245, is an active member of the State Bar of California, admitted on December 11, 1990, and active from that date on.  His undergraduate school was the University of California (Berkeley), and his law school was University of California Hastings College of Law in San Francisco. He has no public record of discipline, and no public record of administrative actions.

    The recall is a procedure under the Charter of the City of San Bernardino. In this case, sufficient numbers of registered voters city-wide signed recall petitions to put the recall measure on the November 5, 2013 ballot, which is also a Primary Municipal Election for San Bernardino.  San Bernardino City Charter Section 122 gives the following information about what is on the ballot:

    The ballots used when voting upon said proposed recall shall contain the
    words “shall (title of office and the name of the person against whom the recall is
    filed) be recalled?” and the words “yes” and “no.”

    I have seen neither the ballot nor the sample ballot, but it should read “Shall City Attorney James F. Penman be recalled?”

    Voters then have the option of voting yes or no by drawing a line to complete the arrow next to their choice.

    Next, Charter section 122 states:

    Qualified candidates to succeed the person against whom the recall is filed,
    shall be listed on the ballot, except that the incumbent shall not be eligible to
    succeed himself/herself in any such recall election.
    In any such removal election, if a majority of the votes cast is for “yes” on
    the question of whether or not the incumbent should be recalled, the candidate
    receiving the highest number of votes shall be declared elected. The incumbent
    shall thereupon be deemed removed from the office upon qualification of his/her
    successor. In case the party who received the highest number of votes should fail
    to qualify within ten (10) days after receiving notification of election, the office shall
    be deemed vacant. The successor of any officer so removed shall hold office
    during the unexpired term of his/her predecessor.

    In this election, two candidates have qualified, Gary D. Saenz and Tim Prince. From the language of the Charter, there does not appear to be any ability to write-in a candidate. Should the majority of votes (that is, fifty percent plus one) be to remove City Attorney James F. Penman, then the person who has the highest amount of votes between Gary D. Saenz and Tim Prince will be the winner.  If there is a tie, then the tie-breaking rules of the Election Code would probably prevail.  If neither of Gary D. Saenz nor Tim Prince failed to qualify within ten days after election, then the office would be vacant and would be filled according to the Charter.  Examples of failing to qualify is if City Attorney James F. Penman were recalled, and if either Gary Saenz or Tim Prince had more votes, but moved out of San Bernardino, or lost his license to practice law, he would fail to qualify.

    So, how should you vote in the recall election for City Attorney?

    IF YOU ARE SATISFIED WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF CITY ATTORNEY JAMES F. PENMAN

    If you are satisfied with the performance of City Attorney James F. Penman, or in the alternative, if you are supportive of Jim Penman as a leader, you support Jim Penman’s world view, policy choices, approaches, you should vote “No” on the issue of the recall.

    IF YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF CITY ATTORNEY JAMES F. “JIM” PENMAN, BUT DO NOT LIKE RECALLS, OR DO NOT LIKE THIS RECALL

    If you are not satisfied or dissatisfied by City Attorney Jim Penman’s performance, but you do not like the concept of recalls, then you should vote “No” on the issue of the recall.

    IF YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF CITY ATTORNEY JAMES F. “JIM” PENMAN, HAVE NO ISSUES WITH RECALLS, BUT DO NOT LIKE THE PROPOSED REPLACEMENT CANDIDATES

    If you are not satisfied or dissatisfied by City Attorney James F. “Jim” Penman, have no issues with the concept of a recall, but do not want either Tim Prince or Gary Saenz to be the elected City Attorney for the City of San Bernardino until the next election in 2015, then you should vote “No” on the issue of the recall.

    IF YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF CITY ATTORNEY JAMES F. “JIM” PENMAN, HAVE NO ISSUES WITH RECALLS, BUT LIKE TIM PRINCE, BUT NOT GARY SAENZ

    If you are dissatisfied or not satisfied with the performance of City Attorney James F. “Jim” Penman, or you don’t like him personally, or his policies, or his staff, or you don’t like how he handled a particular matter, or you just want to punish him, and you like Tim Prince, but you don’t like Gary Saenz, then you should vote “Yes” on the issue of the recall, and for Tim Prince. You can only vote for one replacement candidate, and if you mark both Tim Prince and Gary Saenz, you will invalidate your ballot.

    IF YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF CITY ATTORNEY JAMES F. “JIM” PENMAN, HAVE NO ISSUES WITH RECALLS, BUT LIKE GARY SAENZ, BUT NOT TIM PRINCE

    If you are dissatisfied or not satisfied with the performance of City Attorney James F. “Jim” Penman, or you don’t like him personally, or his policies, or his staff, or you don’t like how he handled a particular matter, or you just want to punish him, and you like Gary Saenz, but you don’t like Tim Prince, then you should vote “Yes” on the issue of the recall, and for Gary Saenz. You can only vote for one replacement candidate, and if you mark both Tim Prince and Gary Saenz, you will invalidate your ballot.

    IF YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF CITY ATTORNEY JAMES F. “JIM” PENMAN, HAVE NO ISSUES WITH RECALLS, BUT CANNOT CHOSE A REPLACEMENT CANDIDATE, OR DISLIKE BOTH GARY SAENZ AND TIMOTHY PRINCE

    If you are dissatisfied or not satisfied with the performance of City Attorney James F. “Jim” Penman, or you don’t like him personally, or his policies, or his staff, or you don’t like how he handled a particular matter, or you just want to punish him, but you cannot pick a replacement candidate, then you should vote “Yes” on the issue of the recall, and you should either pick the what in your mind is the lesser of two evils between Gary Saenz and Tim Prince, OR you can undervote the replacement candidate portion of the ballot.  That is, you pick neither Tim Prince nor Gary Saenz.  Then you can say that you voted to recall City Attorney James F. Penman, but that you are not responsible for electing either Tim Prince or Gary Saenz.  As long as they qualify, one of them has to win, as long as they get one more vote then the other.

    IF YOU VOTED NO ON THE RECALL OF CITY ATTORNEY JAMES F. PENMAN, AND LIKE NEITHER OF THE RECALL CANDIDATES

    This is trickier.  If, despite your no vote on the recall, City Attorney Jim Penman is recalled, it is almost mathematically certain that one of the two replacement candidates will be the next City Attorney of the City of San Bernardino.  The only thing stopping them is if neither of them gets a vote (which is unlikely, because they would likely vote for themselves) or neither qualifies after being elected (which is unlikely). As far as I can tell, any write-in vote will not qualify and will not be counted, and there is always the possibility that it will invalidate your ballot. However, perhaps as a protest vote, someone could write-in a name, that would only come to light if there was an election challenge, like in the Minnesota Senate race where someone wrote in a vote for the Lizard People while simultaneously voting for Al Franken. The other option is to undervote, and then claim that the total number of people voting on the recall question does not equal the amount of votes for the replacement candidates, thus showing that their election was not legitimate, in order to challenge the replacement candidate before the next regular primary election, and in the next regular primary election. If you like to get into arguments on the Internet, this may be the choice for you.

    IF YOU VOTED YES ON THE RECALL OF CITY ATTORNEY JAMES F. PENMAN, AND LIKE NEITHER OF THE RECALL CANDIDATES

    Not as tricky.  You can undervote as described above as a protest (non-)vote.  You can use random chance to pick either Tim Prince or Gary Saenz.  You can possibly invalidate your ballot with a write-in that won’t be counted.

    ANY OTHER OPTIONS?

    You can undervote both the recall and the replacement.  You can vote just for a replacement and undervote the recall.  You can not vote at all so as not to dilute the votes of informed voters.  Ultimately, you alone must chose your path. Even though you have strong opinions as stated above, you can vote against your own interests.  You can vote based on national partisan issues in this non-partisan local election.  You can vote only on this recall issue, and no other issues on the November 5, 2013 ballot.  The choice is yours.