Wendy McCammack

    I was emailed this link to a YouTube playlist from San Bernardino Generation Now featuring all of the San Bernardino Mayoral Candidates in the November 5, 2013 San Bernardino Primary Municipal Election.  They are from the October 1, 2013 forum at Valley College.  I think it is the opening statements from each of the candidates.  The video can be shaky at the beginning, so be warned.

    It is interesting to see that as of this posting, the videos have received the following views, with Carey Davis having the most:

    On November 5, 2013, there will be a Recall Election in the Seventh Ward of San Bernardino held at the same time as the Primary Municipal Election.

    Voters will be asked whether Council Member Wendy McCammack should be recalled.  If a majority vote yes, then Council Member Wendy McCammack will be recalled.

    Wendy McCammack is also running for San Bernardino Mayor:

    Her campaign contact information is:

    Facebook: Wendy McCammack’s Mayoral Facebook Page. 

    Website: http://wendy4mayor.com/

    Email: wendy4mayor@gmail.com

    Address: 396 W Highland Ave., San Bernardino, CA.

    Phone number: 909-886-8677

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/wendyformayor

    Voters will also be asked to choose a replacement candidate for Wendy McCammack if she is recalled.  The people running in the recall election are:

    Mike Thomas

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mikethomas4council2013

    James Mulvihill

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Jim-Mulvihill-for-SB-City-Council/149950001757110

    Nick Gonzalez

    No online contact information found as of October 1, 2013.

    Joshua Williamson

    No online contact information found as of October 1, 2013

    Paul Sanborn

    No online contact information found as of October 1, 2013

    The same problem I had with Chas Kelley and Wendy McCammack is that it takes awhile for Google to catch up to new events. Google rewards longstanding content, so older information about these two candidates, who have long been in the public eye, is delivered before the newer content.  Candidates should either keep a continuous web presence (like Rikke Van Johnson), or at least start earlier in the cycle.

    Web: http://chasformayor.com/

    Phone: 909-648-3506

    Mailing address from website: 5066 N. Varsity Avenue,

    San Bernardino, CA 92407

    I said last week that I couldn’t find Wendy McCammack for Mayor’s social media sites, but I have corrected that post.  Here is Wendy McCammack’s Mayoral Facebook Page. 

    Website: http://wendy4mayor.com/

    Email: wendy4mayor@gmail.com

    Address: 396 W Highland Ave., San Bernardino, CA.

    Phone number: 909-886-8677

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/wendyformayor

     

     

     

    According to the Sun today, the Valente Duran Letter is again a campaign topic. I was asked on Facebook if I had a copy of the letter.

    When I was a Deputy City Attorney for the City of San Bernardino, I had to review every mobilehome notice of violation before they were issued. Long-time readers of this blog will remember that I was hired about a month after the City’s closure of the Cypress Inn Mobilehome Park and the Valente Duran letter.

    What does the Valente Duran letter actually say?  For some reason it is not available on anywhere on the web that is searchable by Google, at least the “original letter.”  There were two letters, one in English and one in Spanish.

    However, the English version is available on Laserfiche, the City of San Bernardino’s online records system. It was part of a handout to the Mayor and Common Council entered into the City’s record on April 15, 2002 by Gil Navarro, at public comments, and received by then-City Clerk Rachel Clark.

    The letter is undated, but refers to attachments dated March 18, 2002. The letter is addressed to Paul Smith, Chief of the Intake Division of the United States Department of HUD, California State Office.  The letter says (the all caps are in the original):

    WE HAVE CONDUCTED A THREE MONTH INVESTIGATION AND
    DISCOVERED CITY DOCUMENTS THAT SUPPORT THE FACT THAT THE
    ILLEGAL EVICTION OF THE RESIDENTS OF ” CYPRESS INN TRAILER
    PARK ,” WAS RACIALLY MOTIVATED.
    JAMES PENMAN, THE ELECTED CITY ATTORNEY OF THE CITY
    OF SAN BERNARDINO, IN OUR OPINION, MALICIOUSLY AND DELIBERATELY
    MISLED THE COURTS TO ALLOW A COURT ORDER TO THROW
    THESE LAW ABIDING RESIDENTS OF THE CYPRESS INN INTO THE
    STREETS OF SAN BERNARDINO INTO COCKROACH INFESTED MOTELS;
    LESS THAN TWO WEEKS BEFORE CHRISTMAS.
    THIS ILLEGAL EVICTION DISRUPTED THE RIGHTFUL EDUCATION OF
    UNDER A HUNDRED SCHOOL CHILDREN WHO ALSO WERE INNOCENT
    VICTIMS. JAMES PENMAN, ELECTED CITY ATTORNEY’ S RACIST WRATH
    AGAINST THE LATINO COMMUNITY, RESULTED IN PITTING WHITE
    AND LATINO FAMILIES AGAINST EACH OTHER.
    IN ORDER FOR JAMES PENMAN TO INSURE THAT THE LATINO
    COMMUNITY GOT THE MESSAGE, HOW HE FELT ABOYT [sic] MEXICANS, IN
    GENERAL, HE TOOK IT UPON HIMSELF TO WRITE A LETTER ON OFFICIAL
    CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO LETTERHEAD, TO THE DURAN
    FAMILY, WHO ALREADY WAS [sic] SUFFERING FROM HUMILIATION AND
    DESPAIR, TO DEMAND AN APOLOGY OR ACCEPT A ” ONE WAY TICKET
    BACK TO MEXICO “.
    WE PRAY THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WILL INTERVENE
    AND COMPENSATE ALL OF THE FAMILIES THAT HAVE SUFFERED
    UNDER THE CITY ATTORNEY’ S RACIST DICTATORSHIP OF THE CITY
    OF SAN BERNARDINO AND BRING RELIEF TO THEIR CONTINUE [sic]
    SUFFERING.
    /s/ GIL NAVARRO, CHAIRMAN

    The first thing attached to MAPA’s letter to HUD is the Valente Duran Letter.  This is the English Duran letter: http://www.scribd.com/doc/172196415/Letter-dated-December-20-2000-from-City-Attorney-James-F-Penman-to-Valente-Duran.

    If you don’t like to click through to other documents, here is a transcription of what the Valente Duran letter says:

    [Seal of the City of San Bernardino]

    OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
    CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO

    James F. Penman

    City Attorney

    Mr. Valente Duran

    c/o EZ-8 Motel, Room 237-238
    1750 S. Waterman
    San Bernardino, California  92408

    Re: Cypress Inn Trailer Park

    Dear Mr. Duran:

    I read in the paper yesterday a statement attributed to you, “In Mexico, they treat us better
    than here.”
    The City of San Bernardino, out of concern for the safety of you and your family, evacuated
    you and your family on Thursday, December 14, 2000 from Cypress inn Trailer Park to the EZ-8 Motel.
    Our Fire Department Inspectors believe you and your family were living in a situation that                                  could result in serious injury or even death, due to the condition of the park and your mobile home.

           The people of the City of San Bernardino are presently paying for two rooms at the motel for
    you and your family and are reimbursing the Salvation Army for providing you and your family with  daily meals.

            We intend to continue providing you this assistance for the remainder of the two week period that you were informed of when the evacuation first occurred.

            In addition, as you have also previously been advised, the people of the City of San Bernardino through the City’s Economic Development Agency, is prepared to assist you and your family in obtaining more permanent housing by paying your first month’s rent and a security deposit at a residence that meets fire and building code standards.

             I do not know if the comment attributed to you in the newspaper is correct or not. If it is correct, I understand and respect your feelings for what I assume is your native country.

    300 NORTH “D” STREET •SAN BERNARDINO. CA 92418-0001 • (909) 384-5355 • Fax (909) 384-5238
    [End Page 1]
    [Beginning Page 2]
    Mr. Valente Duran
    Re: Cypress Inn Trailer Park                                                                                                        Page 2

                                                                                                                                                                                           
    However, I want you to know that the comment attributed to you in Tuesday’s paper was
    perceived as a criticism by you of the effort and funds that the people of the City of San Bernardino                        are providing for you and and your family.  We do not believe the criticism of our efforts is justified.

            The people of this City have no desire to deprive you or your family of what you may believe                   would be better treatment by the government of Mexico.  Therefore, in substitution for the housing,                      food, and other assistance the City of San Bernardino is voluntarily providing, we want to give you                         the option of continuing to receive this assistance or accepting our offer to arrange and pay for transportation for you and your family, one way, to Mexico.

               This alternative offer is conditioned upon your signing a release for the City of San
    Bernardino.

                If you choose not to accept this alternative offer the people of the City of San Bernardino will                      continue to assist you in the manner and for the time previously indicated.

                                                                                     Sincerely,

                                                                                                   /s/

                                                                                     JAMES F. PENMAN                                                                                     City Attorney

     

    cc:         Mayor Judith Valles

    City Councilmembers

     

    JFP/js [DURAN.LTR]

     

    [End Valente Duran Letter]

    As I stated, I was not at the City of San Bernardino at the time the letter was created and delivered.  I was still the Staff Attorney at Legal Aid Society of San Bernardino, Inc..

    A little context for the letter.  In 2000, there was a battle between the City Attorney, his Council allies and the forces of then-Mayor Judith Valles regarding Measure M, which was to pass a new charter for the City of San Bernardino.  Among the things that Measure M was going to do is make the City Attorney elected versus appointed.  Measure M was defeated by the voters. Measure M was drafted by a charter commission appointed by the Mayor and Common Council, and it was chaired by Jim Morris, the son of then-Judge Patrick Morris, and future chief of staff to now-Mayor Patrick J. Morris.

    The aftermath of the Valente Duran apparently lives on today. The reactions were immediate as well.

    According to an article by Stephen Wall in the Sun that is included in the backup for the January 8, 2001 Mayor and Common Council Meeting, the quote from Valente Duran appeared in the Sun on December 19, 2000.  That would mean the quote was probably on December 18, 2000.

    San Bernardino Mayor and Common Council Resolution Number 2001-007 was passed by the Mayor and Common Council by a vote of 5-2 on January 8, 2001.  The title of Resolution Number 2001-007 is “A Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino to Censure the City Attorney for Unauthorized and Insensitive Conduct.” The votes for the Resolution were Esther Estrada, Susan Lien, Gordon McGinnis, Frank Schnetz, and Joe Suarez. Voting against the Resolution were Betty Dean Anderson and Wendy McCammack.  It was also signed by Mayor Judith Valles.  The “approved as to form and content” is unsigned.

    A slightly different version of the Duran Letter is attached to Resolution 2001-007 as Exhibit “A.”  This version of the Valente Duran Letter is time and date stamped by “Common Council Office City of San Bernardino” on “00 Dec 20 P.M. 5:21″

    At the same time, the Council repealed a 1984 ordinance regarding the need for City Attorney approval prior to hiring outside attorneys.  That issue was later resolved, I believe, with a Charter amendment, but had been a long-simmering issue between the Mayor and Common Council and the City Attorney’s Office, which dated back to Holcomb and Ralph Prince fights.

    Here are the minutes of that discussion:

    THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO REPEALING CHAPTER 2.
    20 OF THE SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING
    TO CITY ATTORNEY APPROVAL TO RETAIN OUTSIDE
    SPECIAL COUNSEL SERVICES. (Discussed later in the
    meeting – page 25)  . . .

    Council Member Estrada stated that she would like to discuss an item that arose subsequent to the posting
    of the agenda, which was related to a comment made in the newspaper by representatives of
    the Mexican American Political Association (MAPA) that they were going
    to request that the United States Department of Justice investigate what they believe to
    be a violation of civil rights of residents of the Cypress Inn Mobile Home Park. City Attorney
    Penman advised that the law requires that two- thirds of the Council vote that
    the matter arose after the agenda was posted; and in fact, the matter arose on December
    20, when the letter (a letter from City Attorney Penman to Mr. Duran, a resident
    of the Cypress Inn Mobile Home Park) was delivered to the Mayor’s Office and
    the Council Office. He noted that there was a newspaper article on Thursday morning,
    and members of the Council and the Mayor were contacted on Wednesday, long
    before the agenda was posted; therefore, in order to cast a vote that the need to take action rose after the agenda was posted, the event would need to have taken place since Friday morning.

    Council Member Estrada pointed out that it was only on the 5th of January
    Friday) that the threat of litigation was made public by MAPA.
    Council Member Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council Member Lien,
    that the matter arose subsequent to the posting of the agenda.
    The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Estrada,
    Lien, McGinnis, Schnetz, Suarez. Nays: Council Members Anderson, McCarnmack.
    Absent: None.

    Council Member Estrada stated that earlier, before going into closed session,
    she had asked the Mayor and Council if they could address the issue in the newspaper
    regarding the controversy over a letter that was directed to a gentleman by the name of
    Mr. Duran. She stated that the reason she wanted to go into closed session was to be
    able to discuss privately the potential liability surrounding this issue. However, she had
    a concern as to whether the Council could receive an unbiased opinion or advice, since
    the person the Council would ask for advice is the very same person that is involved in
    this public controversy. She also stated that she did not think it would be fair to put a
    burden on the employees of the City Attorney’s Office by placing them in a
    situation where they could be asked to produce information that the Council might need on
    this matter. Ms. Estrada advised that this is very clearly the type of situation, in
    her opinion, where the City Attorney comes into conflict–the Conunon Council
    needs legal advice on a matter in which the City Attorney
    is involved. Council Member Estrada continued by explaining her concerns
    relative to Chapter 2.20 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code, which states that
    the City Attorney must approve any outside counsel that the Mayor and Council would
    desire to hire. She pointed out that the original City Charter clearly gave the Mayor
    and Council authority to hire outside counsel, when needed. However, 15 to 16 years
    ago the Municipal Code was changed, and Chapter 2.20 was approved. She stated that
    it was her opinion that this chapter of the code needs to
    be addressed. At this time, Ms. Estrada presented a draft ordinance she
    had prepared rescinding Municipal Code Chapter 2.20 and asked City Clerk Clark for her
    help in finalizing it for Council approval. She stated that it was her understanding that
    in order for the Council to take this action on an ordinance, that there has to be
    something equal or higher replacing it, and it was also her understanding that what was contained
    in the charter already gives that authority to the Mayor and Council. She also
    understood that there must be 5 to 7 days before the second reading; therefore, if
    the ordinance received first reading today, this meeting could be continued to the
    following Monday,and the Council could act on the second reading at
    that time.

    Discussion ensued regarding the wording of the ordinance, the use of the word
    rescinded” versus “repealed,” and the fact that it must be approved as to form and
    legal content by the City Attorney’s Office.

    City Attorney Penman advised that should the City be sued over the letter
    he sent to Mr. Duran, the City Attorney’s Office would automatically recuse
    itself. He stated that it was the opinion of prior City Attorney Prince that the only
    thing Chapter 2.20 does is to codify what state law and case law is. He also advised that last
    year an independent evaluation of Section 2.20 was done by Attorney Allen Gresham,
    who also stated that Section 2.20 is merely a codification of the
    current law. Mr. Penman stated that insofar as that section of the City
    Charter which authorizes the Mayor and Council to retain legal counsel as needed–
    as Mr. Gresham’s opinion says, the words “as needed” have been interpreted by
    the courts to mean exactly what is written in Section2.20 of the Municipal
    Code. Mr. Penman contended that repealing Section2.20 would not give the Council authority
    to hire outside counsel.Mr. Penman stated that even though Council
    Member Estrada opposed Measure M, she came out at the same time wanting language put in
    the proposed charter that would do just what she was now proposing. He stated that Ms.
    Estrada has had a problem for years with the decision of the taxpayers to elect the
    City Attorney and to prevent the Mayor and Council from hiring attorneys of
    their own without the permission of the City Attorney. He stated that, in his opinion,
    Measure M was a strong reaffirmation of this policy, and by adopting the
    proposed ordinance the Council was setting the stage, first, for litigation; and secondly, for
    some more onerous civil action.

    Council Member McCammack expressed concern that repealing this section of the Municipal Code would provide an opportunity for
    future Councils to take advantage, possibly leaving the City open to litigation and costing
    the City hundreds of thousands of dollars. She questioned why, if the state bar and
    state law already require that if there is a lawsuit naming Mr. Pemnan, that he
    would automatically have to remove himself, the Council would need to repeal an ordinance that in
    the long run is going to endupcostingthe taxpayers hundreds of thousands of
    dollars. She stated that the issue is that of leaving the
    City open for litigation. Council Member Anderson questioned whether the
    action taken by City Attorney Penman was within his scope of duties as an elected
    official and whether he had violated any protocol, stating that she would hate to see
    the Council changing the Municipal Code every time something comes up
    they don’t agree with.
    Council Member Estrada reiterated that this action had nothing to do with what
    Mr. Penman had or had not done; it had to do with what she sees as a conflict, in that
    the person that would be giving the Council advice in this matter is the same person
    involved in the controversy. She stated that given these facts, it brings everything back
    to this ordinance which, according to Mr. Penman, is meaningless because the state
    statute prevails; and if that is the case, then no one should be opposed to going back to
    the original Charter.
    Mayor Valles pointed out that this has been a topic of discussion and a concern
    for much longer than this recent incident–that it was not something that just came
    up. She added that the timing is such that this may be the time to do it, and she
    believed this was the point Council Member Estrada was trying to
    make. City Attorney Penman expressed his opinion that this action was aimed at
    him personally, stating that it was incredible that a groupof elected officials would take
    an action so strongly against the will of the majority of the people in the city. He
    stated that in his opinion the Council was claiming falsely that the matter arose subsequent
    to the posting of the agenda, thereby denying the public the opportunity to attend one
    of the hearings relative to this ordinance.

    He also reminded the Council that the Charter provides that the City
    Attorney’s office shall prepare all ordinances and resolutions. He noted that if the
    Council did otherwise, the ordinance would be subject to being stricken by the court in a
    writ of mandate proceeding, and he strongly believed a citizen’s group would
    move to bring such an action.

    Council Member Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council Member Lien,that the Mayor and Conunon Council direct the City Attorney’ s Office to prepare an ordinance repealing Chapter 2.20 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code and that said ordinance be brought back to the afternoon session of the
    Council meeting for Council consideration.

    The motion carried by the following vote:
    Ayes: Council Members Estrada, Lien, McGinnis, Schnetz, Suarez. Nays:
    Council Members

    During the announcements in the meeting, the minutes say “Mayor Valles also noted that she would be writing a letter to the Duran family.”

    During the same announcements, the minutes summarize City Attorney Penman’s comments as thanking “the large number of people (127) who called his office offering support and expressing agreement with his letter to Mr. Duran. He stated
    that 125 callers voiced support, while 2 of the callers were opposed to the letter.”

    After the repeal of section 2.20 was put on the agenda, this was the discussion at the January 8, 2001 meeting according to the minutes:

    Council Member Estrada reiterated that she had asked the Mayor and Council
    to allow her to bring an item forward that, in her opinion, arose after the posting of
    the agenda for today’ s meeting. She stated that it was also her opinion that the
    matter arose as the result of an article in the newspaper on Friday, January 5,which stated
    that the Mexican American Political Association ( MAPA) was going to be requesting
    that the United States Department of Justice investigate San Bernardino, and the City
    might find itself in litigation. It was her opinion that since City Attorney Penman is the
    person the Council should go to for legal advice, yet he is also the person involved
    in this controversy, that a conflict existed. She noted that for the past 15 or 16
    years the Municipal Code has contained Chapter 2.20, which basically gives authority to
    the City Attorney relative to approving any request by the Mayor and Council to
    seek outside legal advice, which now places the Council in a situation where there is
    a conflict.

    City Attorney Penman stated that it was his opinion that last summer the Mayor
    and Council wanted to have authority to hire their own attorney, and they brought
    forward to the voters Measure M which, among other things, contained language that
    was suggested by Council Member Estrada, who has long objected to the fact that the
    Council cannot hire their own attorney. He stated that the idea was to make the City
    Attorney appointed by the Mayor and Council so they could hire their own attorneys
    and, in his opinion, get confidential or secret advice. Subsequently, Measure M went
    to the voters and was defeated.

    Mr. Penman advised that when the firm of Gresham, Savage, Nolan & Tilden was
    retained to provide an analysis of Measure M, they also provided an analysis of Charter
    Section 241 which states, “The Mayor and Common Council shall have power and
    authority to employ and engage such legal counsel and services and other assistants,
    as may be necessary and proper for the interest and benefit of the City and the
    inhabitants thereof.” Attorney Allen Gresham stated in his analysis, ” As a public officer, the
    City Attorney is, by law, expected to properly and timely provide the services required
    of the office. Indeed it would be tantamount to a waste of taxpayers funds if ”
    outside” counsel were hired to perform duties which the City Attorney was expected to
    discharge. ” Mr. Penman proceeded to read into the record a column from the editorial page of the San
    Bernardino Sun on November 9, 1987, dealing specifically with this issue. According to Mr.
    Penman, the Council, having failed to do away with the elected City Attorney
    by a Charter amendment, are now trying to sneak it in the back door by bringing
    an item forth that was not placed on the agenda, claiming that the need arose after
    the posting of the agenda. He stated that the letter to Mr. Duran is a ruse being used
    by the Council to get back at the voters, but he sees through the subterfuge.

    Mayor Valles stated that as she has researched what the City has spent in legal fees, she noted
    that the City has hired many, many, many outside attorneys, and some of them have
    cost a bundle, based on some decisions that were, perhaps, not made in the best interest
    of the City. She stated she resented the comment that the only reason this is being
    done is because Measure M failed–that one has nothing to do with the other.

    Council Member Estrada pointed out that she has always supported an elected City Attorney,
    and in fact has always seen Mr. Penman as an ally. She stated that if this ordinance
    is so meaningless, why is it that Mr. Penman is being so defensive and why is
    he willing, as he indicated to her, to expend all his money and efforts to beating this. She
    also stated that this has nothing to do with Measure M–it is about going back to
    what the City Forefathers and those who created the Charter planned–something that
    is in the Charter now.

    Ms. Estrada stated that she wanted those people who support Mr. Penman, as
    she has supported Mr. Penman over the years, to know that this is not personally
    against Mr. Penman–it has to do with the conflict of interest that it presents to
    the office of the City Attorney regardless of who sits in that office. She pointed out that
    it is Mr. Penman who continues to keep Measure M alive, and also noted that we are
    a charter city, not a general law city, and some of the rules that apply to general
    law cities do not apply to us.

    Council Member McCammack spoke in opposition to the proposed
    ordinance, stating that she could not support this item because she must be a more
    responsible elected official with the taxpayers money than what repealing this ordinance
    would allow; and for this reason–fiscal responsibility– she would not
    support this ordinance. She also expressed her opinion that there were underlying reasons
    for this action.

    Discussion on this matter continued at length. It was pointed
    out that no individual Council member could go out and hire an attorney and then bill
    the City for these services–that anytime outside counsel would be retained, it
    would have to be approved by the Council.

    Mayor Valles, putting the matter in historical perspective, noted that Attorney’sopinions appeared on the scene in approximately 1987, yet the charter was approved in 1905. Therefore, up until the 1980s the Mayor and Council had the right to hire outside legal counsel, and she did not believe there was ever
    any record of it being abused. Therefore, she requested that the discussion move “off
    of Measure M and off of making this a personal issue.” She stated that what
    Council Member Estrada wanted to do is rescind or repeal Municipal Code Section 2.20 and go
    back to the original Charter.

    The Mayor reiterated that from 1905 to 1987 this edict of the charter was never abused; however, the City has hired a great deal of outside counsel since the mid ’80s and it has cost the City a bundle. In addition, for any
    additional legal expenditures to be made it has to come before this Mayor and Council and must be voted
    on by all of the Council members, who are here to represent their constituents, while the responsibility of the Mayor is to be the real fiscal watchdog of the City. She noted that Council Member Estrada had given this a great deal of thought, it did not happen overnight, she was talking about this long before Measure M,
    and for people to associate one with the other is a false association.

    Council Member McGinnis stated that when he first became a Council member he asked if the Council could get a second opinion and was told “no.” He stated that he believed there were some issues where he could see no harm in obtaining a second opinion; however, he did not think these opinions should be
    separate from Mr.Penman–he should be included in the process.
    Council Member Schnetz reiterated that it would take a majority vote of the
    Council to hire outside counsel, and if it is less than five votes it can be vetoed by the
    Mayor. He advised that he does not see anything in the charter, which the people
    recently reaffirmed they were overwhelmingly in favor of, that anybody in particular
    has a specific watchdog role-that the closest thing he could see that talks about
    the concept of a watchdog” and whose duty that is, is reference to the Mayor of the
    City, as having the oversight or management of the City, making sure the books are
    kept, making sure all contracts of the City are fulfilled and to bring legal action if
    those contracts are not fulfilled.

    Mr. Schnetz stated that he takes it a little personal that in the City
    Attorney’s comments he portrayed the Council as being something less than honorable and
    that this less than honorable body would defeat or restrict the people’s lawyer.
    He stated that the last time he checked, this body was the people’s body–
    the Mayor was elected by the people, and when he was elected he received nearly 66% of
    the vote of his ward, Council Member Estrada 72 % of her ward, and Council Member Lien over
    70 % o f her ward– that this body is the people’s body. Mr. Schnetz
    noted that there have been numerous Council Members and three or four Mayors, and for
    some reason they all get sideways with the City Attorney. He stated that he did
    not understand it–whether it is the process that the City Attorney uses, or if it is
    the personal attributes of the City Attorney–but he does feel that this particular
    ordinance is something that is not needed, and the rescinding of Chapter 2.20 would be in the
    best interest of the people, and this body was elected by the people.

    Council Member Estrada explained that over the course of all these years, many times Council Members have gone as members of the Council (not for personal counsel) to Mr. Penman and brought up different issues,
    and he has said,I “do not represent you, I represent the people” –and
    this has never been clearly clarified. She noted that the Council members represent the people,
    too. They take an oath and state that they will do the best for the City of San
    Bernardino; not just their own ward. She pointed out that this has been a major problem,
    for if Mr. Penman doesn’t represent the Council, who does?

    Ms. Estrada stated that as the legislative body of this City, the Council is charged with the responsibility of
    creating policy. She pointed out that what Chapter 2.20does, is if the Council seeks another
    opinion because they want to create a policy or whatever, and the City Attorney does
    not agree and does not consent to allowing them the opinion of an outside attorney,
    the Council is strung out and cannot move forward, because they have not received the consent
    to do it.Bottom line,they are the legislative body that is supposed to create the policy
    and the laws for the city, but final decision on whether they can do it or not does
    not rest with them, but with the City Attorney’s office, and she finds that
    a conflict. In her opinion, if the Council members are the policy makers, and they are elected by
    the people they should be able to have the freedom, as the City Fathers saw fit, to follow the
    policy contained in the Charter that gives them this authority.

    City Attorney Penman stated he has never been asked for a second opinion when
    the Mayor and Council’s opinion agreed with the City Attorney’ s opinion.
    The only time they ask for a second opinion is when they disagree, and then what
    they are looking for is not a second opinion, they are looking for a different
    opinion. He reiterated that if a lawsuit is filed against the City because of the letter he wrote
    to Mr.Duran, the City Attorney’s Office would conflict off on that lawsuit as
    they have done in the past, and another attorney would be hired by the Mayor and
    Council. He stated it is a rehash of the issues involved in Measure M, and it looks like the
    issue will be brought back to the people again, because the Council knows their
    ordinance will be subject to a referendum and they will get the opportunity to place it on
    the ballot. He admonished the Council, stating that they were going to cost the City
    more money, for another election, and the public is not going to
    change their minds.

    Lee McConahy, 261 S. Arrowhead , San Bernardino, CA, stated that Charter Section 55 states that the City Attorney shall be the chief legal officer  of the city who shall represent or advise the Mayor and Common Council and City Officers in all manner of law pertaining to the offices. He noted that the key word is “advise.” He stated that he believed the Mayor and Council need to take the advice of the City Attorney, but they also need to be able to seek other opinions. City Clerk Clark provided a full reading of the ordinance into
    the record. Council Member Estrada made a motion, seconded by Council
    Member Lien,that said ordinance be laid over for final adoption.The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Estrada,Lien, McGinnis, Schnetz, Suarez. Nays: Council Members
    Anderson and McCammack.

    Then, the meeting turned to the vote to censure the City Attorney for the Valente Duran letter.  The minutes say:

    Council Member Lien stated she would like the Council to consider an
    item that came up after the posting of the agenda–a resolution to censure the
    City Attorney. She stated that she did not take pleasure in this action; however, the
    letter Mr. Penman wrote to Mr. Duran left her no choice.
    Council Member Lien provided background information, stating that Mr. Duran
    and his family and neighbors were turned out of their homes when the City was forced
    to act, and at that time the City and the conununity reached out to do everything they
    could for these families. Nonetheless, under these very stressful circumstances, Mr.
    Duran lashed out, saying that, “In Mexico they treat us better than here.” Ms. Lien pointed
    out that this kind of statement could have been said by anyone in similar circumstances;
    in fact, the Council hears charges against them at meetings all the time.

    Council Member Lien pointed out how fearful Mr. Duran must have been when he
    received this letter that represented the mighty power of the City. She noted that Mr.
    Duran and his family were here legally–four of his children were born here–
    and many of the Latino community were incensed by the letter, which offered a man
    and his family a one-way ticket to leave the country.

    Ms. Lien stated that this was a throw- back to an all too prevalent attitude that unfortunately still lingers, and there is a lot of history that fuels this type of anger in minorities when these things surface. She questioned what could be more offensive than a public official offering a man and his family a one-way
    ticket to leave the country. She noted that the good people of San Bernardino are fighting
    hard to put this city back on its feet, and the Cypress Inn (where Mr. Duran and his
    family lived) is just one example of the physical blights plaguing our city; however,
    far worse than the blight is the image that the City Attorney now
    casts on our city.

    Council Member Lien stated that the City would not easily
    rid itself of this public disgrace, and if the executive and legislative powers of the
    City didn’t take swift and responsible action, they would become complacent
    accomplices to an act of intolerance. She stated she was outraged, livid,
    furious, and heartbroken for Mr. Duran and his family, but most of all she was heartbroken
    and ashamed for the city. She stated that the Council must act today and should
    not leave the Council Chambers before attempting to do so.

    Council Member Lien made a motion, seconded by Council Member Suarez, that the matter arose subsequent to the posting of the agenda.

    The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Estrada, Lien, McGinnis, Schnetz, Suarez.
    Nays: Council Members Anderson, McCammack. Absent: None.

    Council Member Lien provided a full reading of the resolution for the record.

    Council Member Estrada stated that given on the prior issue she attempted to separate the two matters of the letter to Mr. Duran and Section 2.20 of the Municipal Code, she had not had an opportunity to make public
    statements relative to Mr. Duran’s letter, but she felt she needed to let the people of San Bernardino know why. She explained that over the last three weeks she has been on vacation–a couple of days
    one week and three days the next–and she had no idea this situation was developing until she read the papers and got caught with what had happened over the course of the last three to four weeks, going back to
    December 20.

    Ms.Estrada advised that right before Christmas and right before New Years she had come in and gone through her mail; however, there was not a copy of Mr.Penman’ s letter in her correspondence. Council Member Estrada
    stated that she considered Mr. Penman a very smart individual, but what she did
    not understand is why the letter was ever written. She stated that Mr. Penman, due
    to his legal experience, understands better than any one of the Council members, that everyone residing in this country is guaranteed freedom of speech. She acknowledged that as elected officials they may not like what some people have to say, but this country does guarantee everyone the right
    to free speech.

    Council Member Estrada continued her comments, pointing out
    that as elected officials, they do not have the privilege that the general public
    has–when they speak their words they must be very careful, because they have to make sure
    that at the same time they are protecting the taxpayers of the city and that they
    are not committing the City to face liability that they are not entitled to
    commit the City for.

    Council Member Estrada stated that she, too, was elected
    to represent all the people–not just those she agrees with or that agree with
    her. What this issue has brought to light is that we need to develop guidelines on what
    we can and can’t say publicly. She stated that no resident, legal or otherwise,
    should be treated the way this family had been treated, and she pledged to work to
    make sure that this does not happen again. She asked the community to give the
    City a chance to correct this problem, because we must work together to correct it.

    She also addressed Mr. Penman, stating that she knew in his heart he did not want to do anything that would harm the city, and to please be very careful of what he says and does from this point forward, as
    everyone must be. She addressed her colleagues, stating that they were elected to exercise
    leadership, and they must do what is right for the people of San Bernardino– and that
    includes all ofthe people of San Bernardino.

    Council Member Estrada asked for clarification on the censure, stating that she would like to make sure that
    everybody, including herself, understood in what context it is being used.

    Mayor Valles stated that she thought the language in the censure was very clear; it states a series of principles of the City, and certainly of our country, and the fact that the comments, or the infamous letter, are being
    perceived by many in the community as  divisive, and that she and the Council members, as elected officials, as leaders of this community, must make every effort possible to combat continuing prejudices, bias, and
    discrimination to overcome hostility toward immigrants and heal the wounds of racism,
    bigotry, and other forms of discrimination. She stated she was sure that Mr. Penman
    did not intend his comments to be racist; however, that is how they were being viewed,
    and it is incumbent upon City officials, as the leaders in this community, to make sure
    that it does not take a foothold in this community and that it does not divide us any
    further. She stated that she believed that this was the intent of the censure.

    Mayor Valles stated that she also understood that a resolution must be drafted by
    the City Attorney according to the Charter; however, as she read the Charter it says
    that, “he or she ( City Attorney) shall attend meetings of the City Council, draft
    proposed ordinances and resolutions”; however, it does not indicate exclusivity to the
    writing of a resolution to the City Attorney. She noted that this resolution, obviously,
    could not have been written by the City Attorney.
    City Attorney Penman stated that it has been a mark of pride for him in his 13 1/2
    years as City Attorney to be condemned by a previous City Council, a previous Mayor,
    and a City Administrator. He maintained that the right thing was done in writing the
    letter–that if the same situation should arise next week, he would write another
    letter. He stated that the proposed resolution was filled with inaccurate and untrue
    statements.

    Mr. Penman stated that he thought it was very unfortunate that the Council
    had just claimed a few minutes ago that the ordinance to repeal Section 2.20 of
    the Municipal Code was not personal, yet it was brought up orally by Council
    Member Estrada, and then afterwards the so-called censure. He stated that the Council
    had no authority to initiate a censure; however, that did not bother the Council, as
    it was already written, printed, and copied.

    Mr. Penman restated his opinion that this was a personal attack–
    that Measure M was a personal attack and this was a continuation of Measure M.
    He ascertained that the letter was not racist– that it was anything but that. and that
    anyone who knows him,knows better than that–and this Council is not qualified to
    make a determination as to whether Jim Penman has done something racially
    inappropriate or not. He challenged them to cast their votes, stating that he would proudly use
    that vote everywhere he goes to say, as he introduces himself, “This is Jim Penman, the man
    who was called a racist by MAPA and the man whom one mayor and
    five council members, obviously in MAPA’s pocket, agreed with MAPA and passed a
    resolution that they had no authority to pass, on an issue that if they were serving the
    public, they would have taken the same stand as the
    Office of the City Attorney. ”

    Council Member Anderson stated that she was not a person who promotes dissention or divisiveness– that she has tried not to do that–and that she was really very hurt that this was the
    point to which the Council had come.

    Council Member Lien made a motion, seconded by Council Member Suarez,
    that said resolution be adopted. ( Note: The vote was taken following additional
    discussion and comments.)
    Council Member McCammack stated that there were inaccuracies in the
    resolution that could come back to haunt the Council in court at another time.
    Mayor Valles asked Mrs. McCammack to point out the inaccuracies.
    Council Member Anderson stated that the Council did not need to be on such a
    fast track to do things that are going to divide this community–that it was going to
    be hard to knit back together. She noted that San Bernardino is on the cusp of
    being developed by a very good development agency, we are on the cusp of doing some
    great things and getting out of this “hole” that we have been in for the last 10-20
    years, and now we’re sitting up here as elected officials going at each other throats.
    She stated she did not like being a part of anything like this; that everyone should back off
    and have a reality check with each other and stop being so divisive and petty. She
    stated that they were all professionals and it was time for them to start acting that way
    and stop doing this to each other. According to Mrs. Anderson. this
    resolution–with one elected official censuring another elected official–was wrong, and
    a reality check was needed.

    Council Member McCammack stated that she believed that the Mayor should at least talk to someone in the City Attorney’s Office to make sure that there was nothing in the resolution that would cause future litigation with suits going on in this City. She again stated that there were inaccuracies, one of
    them being that Code Enforcement did not cause this.

    The Mayor stated that this could be corrected right now. She thought it started with the Fire Marshall, but eventually everyone got into it, including Code Enforcement. Council Member McCamrnack stated that
    the Council should also find out whether Mr. Penman’ s Office was or was not
    authorized to make that offer, since he had been authorized
    to make similar offers to other individuals.

    Mayor Valles stated that she did not believe thatMr. Penman had been authorized to give people passage out of
    this country or even out of California.

    City Attorney Penman advised that the offer made in the letter was within his purview, under those circumstances, based on past Council actions and based on expenditures that he can make out of his own budget. He indicated that this part of the resolution was also inaccurate.
    The following individuals spoke in support of the resolution to censure City
    Attorney Pemnan:
    Attorney Timothy Prince, 290 North “D” Street, San Bernardino, CA.
    Shirley Goodwin, 3715 Camellia Drive, San Bernardino, CA.
    Gail Fry, 7066 Andes Trail, Apple Valley, CA, whose comments centered
    around what she termed “code enforcement raids” and the right of everyone to feel safe
    and secure in their homes.
    Attorney Eloise Gomez Reyes, 290 North “D” Street, Ste. 805, San
    Bernardino, CA, who pointed out that the First Amendment does allow both Mr.
    Duran, in his criticism, and Mr. Penman, as a citizen, the right of free speech;
    however, Mr. Penman’s comments were made not as a private citizen but as
    a representative of the City of San Bernardino.

    Jay Lindberg, 6340 Orange Knoll, San Bernardino,
    CA. Note: City Attorney Penman took exception to several comments made by
    the above speakers.)

    The following individuals spoke in opposition to the resolution to
    censure City Attorney Penman:

    Pam Zander, 597 East 29th Street, SanBernardino,
    CA.

    James Roe, 325 West Sixth Street, San Bernardino,
    CA.

    Gary Kirby, 1505 Yardley Street, San Bernardino, CA, who stated that
    he clearly sees this as an attack on Mr. Penman because of his opposition to Measure
    M and a desire to promote victimhood by certain organizations who make their living
    by creating victims and attacking people because of a victimhood
    status.

    Dan Walker, Conejo Street, San Bernardino, CA.

    Mayor Valles suggested that before proceeding further, due to the
    conunents made by Council Member McCarnmack and City Attorney Penman, a change should
    be made in the seventh paragraph of the resolution to change the words, “by
    code enforcement actions,” to state, ” because of  health and safety issues.”
    City Attorney Penman noted that the resolution indicated that a copy of the letter
    to Mr. Duran from City Attorney Penman) was attached as Exhibit “A,” yet no copy
    of the letter was attached to his copy of the resolution, and he would want to make sure
    that everyone who reads the resolution is also able to read the letter that he wrote.
    Council Member Lien amended her motion, seconded by Council Member
    Suarez, that said resolution be adopted, as amended in paragraph 7, lines 3 and 4, by
    replacing the words “by code enforcement actions” with the words “because of health
    and safety issues.”
    The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members Estrada,
    Lien, McGinnis, Schnetz, Suarez. Nays: Council Members Anderson, McCanunack.
    Absent: None.

    On July 5, 2001, Sixth Ward Councilmember Betty Dean Anderson submitted a Request for Council Action to repeal Resolution 2001-007.  In her memorandum of the same date, Councilmember Anderson stated:

    In January of this year, the city government was still living in the aftermath of what had been a bitter November 2000 special city election.  Resolution No. 2001-007 was adopted hurriedly in this atmosphere.

    The Duran letter is also available online in the backup to the July 9, 2001 agenda item, which was tabled by the same vote.  City Attorney James F. Penman and Gil Navarro both spoke on the item.

    While the issue of the Cypress Inn Mobile Home relocations continued throughout 2001, and the EDA helped rehabilitate the park, the issue lay mostly dormant until the HUD investigation.  An abstract of an article dated December 27, 2001 in the Sun by Joe Nelson states that: HUD “launched an investigation into allegations that San Bernardino violated the Fair Housing Act and civil-rights laws when officials evicted dozens of Latino residents from a squalid mobile home park last year.” The same article says that the HUD complaint was filed on December 21, 2001.  If I recall correctly, the HUD complaint came in to the City Attorney’s Office December 26, 2001.

    On June 17, 2001, a professional services agreement was filed between the City and Lewis D’Amoto (and Joseph Arias in particular) to represent the City.

    HUD continued their investigation until October 2002.  The final report, according to the Sun, said that the City did not discriminate against Latinos in closing Cypress Inn Mobilehome Park.

    I never saw that report, and it is not available in the City’s online records.

     

    So said future Associate Supreme Court Justice and lawyer Louis Brandeis.  It is the lack of sunlight in the San Bernardino Primary Municipal Election that is disturbing.  While you can go to the City Clerk’s Office to look at particular records, many of the records posted were taken off-line by the San Bernardino City Clerk’s Office.  However, some of them are back up.  They are available in the Requested Folder, the Campaign Statements Public folder or the not-quite-ready-for-prime-time Public Access Portal.

    San Bernardino lacks some institutional memory; most people cannot remember much politically before Ralph Prince was City Attorney or Al Ballard was Mayor. Things have gotten worse as The Sun does not have the same beat reporter from the last election.

    The residents of San Bernardino need to step up and discover the information for themselves.  For example City Clerk Gigi Hanna had this to say in 2011 before the 2011 Primary Municipal Election:

    As the elections officer and record keeper for the City and the public’s main link to its local government, the City Clerk must be committed to ethics, value open government and be an effective administrator

    Further, in a letter to voters dated October 12, 2011, Gigi Hanna said:

    City Clerk is a natural fit for me; I have the experience, education, passion, skills and personality to lead the department, maintain records, and uphold state and federal statutes, determining open meetings and public records. My commitment to open and transparent government did not begin when I decided to run for office, nor will it end November 8.  I have spent 25 years working to makes sure people know what their government is doing, and holding elected officials accountable to those they serve. I have a Bachelor’s degree in Journalism with a minor in political science and my graduate work in Communications focused on public records and open meeting law, key components of the City Clerk’s job.

    Is City Clerk Gigi Hanna making good on the promises of candidate Gigi Hanna?The Public Access Portal listed above appears to be the future home of online filed documents. For documents filed in 2013, it gives these candidates:

    Avila, Rick
    Barrios, Benito
    Brinker, Tobin
    Castro, Richard
    Crawford, Draymond
    Dailey, Casey
    Davis, Carey
    Hanna, Georgeann
    Jenkins, Robert
    Johnson, Rikke
    Jones, Anthony
    Kelley, Chas
    Korner, Matthew
    Lee, Larry
    Longville, John
    Marquez, Virginia
    McCammack, Wendy
    McKenna, David
    Mlynarski, David
    Morris, Pat

    Also, it has these committees:

    Anthony Jones for San Bernardino City Council 2013
    Barrios for City Council 2013
    Business for Better Government
    Casey Dailey for San Bernardino City Council 2013
    Chas Kelley for City Council 2011
    Chas Kelley for Mayor 2013
    Citizens for Accountable City Government
    Committee for Integrity in San Bernardino City Government
    Committee to Elect Draymond Crawford II for Mayor 2013
    Committee to Elect Gigi Hanna City Clerk 2011
    Committee to Elect John Valdivia City Council 2011
    Committee to Elect Virginia Marquez for City Council 2009
    Committee to Re-elect Mayor Pat Morris for Mayor 2009
    Committee to Re-elect Wendy McCammack San Bernardino City Council 2011
    David McKenna for City Attorney 2011
    Davis for Mayor 2013, Carey
    Fred Shorett for City Council 2009
    Friends of Amelia Sanchez-Lopez for San Bernardino City Clerk 2011
    Friends of Brinker for Council 2011
    Friends of Castro for Mayor 2013
    Friends of John Longville City Council 2011
    Friends of Mulvihill for Council 2011
    Friends of Rikke Van Johnson for City Council 2011
    Friends of Tim Prince
    Friends of Wendy McCammack for San Bernardino Mayor 2013
    Henry Nickel for San Bernardino Mayor 2013
    Karmel Roe Your Mayor 4 Prayer 2013
    Larry Lee for City Council 2011
    Matt Korner for Mayor 2013
    Mlynarski for City Council 2011
    Penman for San Bernardino City Attorney 2011
    Rick Avila for Mayor 2013
    Rikke Van Johnson for Mayor 2013
    Robert Jenkins for City Council 2011

    Some of these documents must exist, when they were in the records section of the Clerk’s website, I linked to and quoted them. As your dutiful servant, I clicked on each of these links, and the only thing listed were:

    146090788 Friends of Wendy McCammack for San Bernardino Mayor 2013 09/19/2013 FPPC 497 ( 09/18/2013 ) E-Filing
    146090701 Friends of Wendy McCammack for San Bernardino Mayor 2013 09/19/2013 FPPC 497 ( 09/18/2013 ) E-Filing
    145863638 Committee to Re-elect Wendy McCammack San Bernardino City Council 2011 09/10/2013 FPPC 497 ( 09/09/2013 ) E-Filing
    144829378 Committee to Re-elect Wendy McCammack San Bernardino City Council 2011 07/31/2013 FPPC 460 ( 01/01/2013 to 06/30/2013 ) E-Filing
    146077271 Friends of Wendy McCammack for San Bernardino Mayor 2013 07/31/2013 FPPC 460 ( 01/01/2013 to 06/30/2013 ) Office
    139325234 Committee to Re-elect Wendy McCammack San Bernardino City Council 2011 01/28/2013 FPPC 460 ( 07/01/2012 to 12/31/2012 ) E-Filing

    And

    ling ID Filed By Filing Date Form Covers Period View Filing
    146056522 Penman for San Bernardino City Attorney 2011 09/18/2013 FPPC 497 ( 09/18/2013 ) E-Filing
    146054771 Penman for San Bernardino City Attorney 2011 09/18/2013 FPPC 497 ( 09/17/2013 ) E-Filing
    145863273 Penman for San Bernardino City Attorney 2011 09/10/2013 FPPC 497 ( 09/09/2013 ) E-Filing
    145690525 Penman for San Bernardino City Attorney 2011 09/04/2013 FPPC 497 ( 08/07/2013 ) E-Filing
    144828537 Penman for San Bernardino City Attorney 2011 07/31/2013 FPPC 460 ( 01/01/2013 to 06/30/2013 ) E-Filing
    139325046 Penman for San Bernardino City Attorney 2011 01/28/2013 FPPC 460 ( 07/01/2012 to 12/31/2012 ) E-Filing

    Why are only City Attorney James F. Penman and Council member and Mayoral Candidate Wendy McCammack’s campaign disclosures available online? My educated guess is that they were e-filed, so they were automatically populated, whereas the other filers did it by hand.

    However, that in no way excuses the lack of information within the system by the City Clerk’s Office. For example, elsewhere on the City’s website is the Form 460 filed by Gigi Hanna for 2013 for the period ending June 30, 2013. But it’s not available in the Public Access Portal.

    What did City Clerk Gigi Hanna take in in the first six months? $859 in contributions, three of them made by City Clerk Gigi Hanna (to her committee), and $99 in unitemized donations, presumably from one other person.

    She still has $13,540 owed to herself for a loan of $15,300 made in her campaign.

    She still owes $1,200 on another loan.

    She made a payment of $500 to Reed and Davidson, the Los Angeles law firm that provided the “legal defense of [Gigi Hanna’s] election win.”  She still owes them $29,807.

    She made a payment of $200 to Marty Graham for “voter polling following election.”She still owes him $250 at the end of the period

    She made a payment of $280 for a table purchase at a Rosa Parks Foundation fundraiser at Cal State San Bernardino.

    She also made $224 in unitemized payments during the period.

    Looking back to her July 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012 Form 460,

    Of interest, she received a contribution from Lynda Savage for School Board of $300.  Gigi Hanna paid herself $1160 on her outstanding loan balance of $14,140; and she paid Crown Printers $768 for mailers.

    There are also some campaign statements for office holders found in the same place.  However, they should all exist in one place, online, and they should be posted online for everyone.  Residents should not have to go to City Hall in this day and age to look at campaign public records.

    This is not acceptable within a month of an election, days away from early voting, and in this day and age.  The public should express their displeasure with the state of affairs in the Office of the City Clerk.

    The San Bernardino Mayoral Primary Election is November 5, 2013.

    Websites, Contact Information and Social Media for San Bernardino Mayoral Candidates in no particular order:

     

    Henry W. Nickel

    Website:  http://demandaccountability.com/

    Telephone: (909) 733-6208

    Email: hnickel@demandaccountability.com

     

    Wendy McCammack

    Website: http://wendy4mayor.com/

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Wendy4Mayor?ref=stream

    Email: wendy4mayor@gmail.com

    Physical Address: 396 W Highland Ave., San Bernardino, CA.

    Phone number: 909-886-8677

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/wendyformayor

    Matthew C. Korner

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MattKornerForMayor

    Email: MattKORNERforMAYOR@mail.com

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/MattKorner

    Phone: (909) 648-2844

    Chas A. Kelley

    Web: http://chasformayor.com/

    Phone: 909-648-3506

    Mailing address from website: 5066 N. Varsity Avenue,

    San Bernardino, CA 92407

    Rikke Van Johnson

    Website: http://rikkevanjohnson.com/

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RVJ4Mayor

    Phone number (from campaign website): (909) 725-1053 ph

    Email (from campaign website): thatsus@rikkevanjohnson.com

    Karmel Roe

    Website: http://yourmayor4prayer.com/

    Contact Information from Campaign Website

    Address: 1177 North E Street, San Bernardino, CA

    Phone Number: (909) 887-5787

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/KarmelRoe

    Concepcion M. Powell

    Website: http://powellformayor2013.com/

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/concepcion.m.powell

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/PowellForMayor

    Carey Davis

    Website: http://careydavis.us/

    Blog: http://careydavisca.wordpress.com/

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/carey.davis.520

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/CareyDavisCA

    Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/careydavisca

    Draymond (Dray) Crawford

    Website: http://mysite.verizon.net/resxnnzb/

    Email (from campaign website): d.crawford81@verizon.net

    Phone (from campaign website): (909) 374-4843

    Twitter https://twitter.com/CrawfordDray

    Richard T. Castro

    Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGjokzOmXMk

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RichardCastroforMayor?ref=stream&hc_location=timeline

    Website: http://richardcastroforsbmayor.nationbuilder.com/

    Rick P. Avila

    No campaign website found.

    A great friend has sent me the order of names on the San Bernardino Primary Municipal Election Ballot to be held November 5, 2013.  Why is this important?  One reason is the primacy effect, which can make a difference in tight elections.

    Order of Names on Ballot

    Mayor

     

    1 Richard T. Castro Retired Teacher/Coach
    2 Draymond “Dray” Crawford City of San Bernardino Graffiti Removal
    3 Matt Korner Start-up Founder
    4 Chas A. Kelley Community Representative/Councilman
    5 Rick Avila Contractor
    6 Carey Davis Corporate Controller/CPA
    7 H. W. Nickel Financial Analyst
    8 Wendy J. McCammack Businesswoman/Taxpayer Advocate
    9 Karmel Roe Real Estate Broker
    10 Concepcion Powell Economic Development Consultant
    11 Rikke Van Johnson Councilman/Small Businessman

     

     

     

    City of San Bernardino

    Primary Municipal Election

    November 5, 2013

    Order of Names on Ballot

    Ward 1 Council Member

     

    1 John J. Abad Retired Teacher
    2 Casey Dailey Transportation Professional
    3 Virginia Marquez Incumbent

     

     


     

    City of San Bernardino

    Primary Municipal Election

    November 5, 2013

    Order of Names on Ballot

    Ward 2 Council Member

     

    1 Benito J. Barrios Small Business Owner
    2 Robert Jenkins Teacher/Council Member

     

     

     


     

     

    City of San Bernardino

    Primary Municipal Election

    November 5, 2013

    Order of Names on Ballot

    Ward 4 Council Member

     

     

    1 Fred Shorett Businessman/Council Member
    2 Kathy Pinegar Property Manager
    3 Anthony Jones Business Owner

     

     The choice of ballot designations are interesting.  As background, here is an excerpt from the 2013 Consolidated General Election November 5, 2013 Candidate Filing Guide on this issue:

    B. GUIDELINES FOR SELECTING A BALLOT DESIGNATION
    Ballot designations are restricted to the following:

    •  No more than three words.
    • Limited to space allotted on the ballot, approximately 55 characters including spaces and punctuation.
    • Must appear on the declaration of candidacy form at the time it is filed.
    •  Become public record once the information is filed on the Declaration of Candidacy Form.
    •  Cannot be changed after the final date to file candidate filing documents.
    • The listing of a designation on the ballot is OPTIONAL. Only one of the following categories is allowed:

    1. Elective Office Title: Words describing an elective office title may be used IF the candidate holds the office at the time nomination documents are filed and the office was filled by a vote of the people. The elective office title may be included with another principal occupation.

    Example A: Governing Board Member

    Example B: Board Member, XYZ School District

    Example C: County Supervisor/Teacher

    2. Incumbent: The word Incumbent may be used IF the candidate is seeking re-election to the same office and was elected to that office by a vote of the people or was appointed as a nominated candidate in lieu of an election. Incumbent must stand alone as a ballot designation.

    3. Appointed Official: The words Appointed Incumbent must be used IF the candidate was appointed to the office and is seeking election to that office as the incumbent. The word “Appointed” must be used if the candidate was appointed and is using the elective office title.

    Example A: Appointed Incumbent

    Example B: Appointed Board Member, XYZ School District

    II. BALLOT DESIGNATION AND DECLARATION OF CANDIDACY

    Example C: Board Member, XYZ School District, Appointed

    Exception: Candidates appointed to office in lieu of an election do not have to use the word “appointed.”

    4. Principal Occupation: No more than three words to describe the current principal profession(s), vocation(s), or occupation(s) of the candidate. Or, if the candidate has no current principal profession, vocation, or occupation, the principal profession(s), vocation(s), or occupation(s) of the candidate during the calendar year immediately preceding the filing of nomination documents. Geographical names are considered one word. The elective office title may be included with another principal occupation.

    Example A: High School Teacher

    Example B: Attorney/Educator/Rancher

    Example C: CEO/Councilmember

    5. Community Volunteer: A person who engages in an activity or performs a service for or on behalf of, without profiting monetarily, one or more of the following:

    •  A charitable, educational, or religious organization as defined by the United States Internal Revenue Code §501(c)(3);
    • A governmental agency; or
    • An educational institution.The activity or service must constitute substantial involvement of the candidate’s time and effort such that the activity or service is the sole, primary, main or leading professional, vocational or occupational endeavor of the candidate.California Administrative Code § 20714.5 (a)(b)

    6.No Occupation Desired: If no ballot designation is requested, write the word “NONE” and place your initials in the space provided for ballot designation on the Declaration of Candidacy Form.Pursuant to California Elections Code §13107(b), the election official shall not accept a ballot designation if:

    • It would mislead the voter.
    • It would suggest an evaluation of a candidate, such as outstanding, leading, expert, virtuous, or eminent.
    • It abbreviates the word “retired” or places it following any word(s) that it modifies.
    • It includes a word or prefix, such as “former” or “ex,” which means a prior status. The only exception is the use of the word “retired.”
    • It includes the name of any political party, whether or not it has qualified for the ballot.
    •  It includes a word or words referring to a racial, religious or ethnic group.
    • It refers to any activity that is prohibited by law.


    The use of “incumbent” by Virginia Marquez is interesting.  Wendy McCammack does not use Council Member or Councilwoman at all. I have no idea what Chas Kelley’s designation as “Community Representative” means; if it refers to being a council member or a district representative for an elected official.

    We learn a little about the candidates for which there was little information yesterday.  Kathy Pinegar is listed as “Property Manager,” Anthony Jones is a “Business Owner,” ” Benito J. Barrios is a “Small Business Owner,” and Richard T. Castro is a “Retired Teacher/Coach.”

     

    The final deadline passed last night.   Here are your 2013 Mayoral Primary Election Lineup, in reverse alphabetical order (enough for a soccer team):

    Karmel Roe

    Website: http://yourmayor4prayer.com/

    About (from website:)

    I was born and raised in San Bernardino and am the mother to four brilliant children. I attended both Crafton Hills and Valley College. In 2006 I received my B.S. Degree from Cal State in Marketing, Business & Public Relations, and Public Administration. I am a real estate and mortgage broker and have operated my own firm in down-town San Bernardino since 2003, where I manage multiple housing units and have brokered millions of dollars in real estate loans. I am currently studying for my law degree.

    Concepcion M. Powell

    Website: http://powellformayor2013.com/

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/concepcion.m.powell

    About (from HWGA website:)

    A Luminary, Award winning achiever on national and global economic development challenges of the 21st century, Ms. Powell is a highly-successful, well-respected business woman and a pioneer of community-to-global business in the United States, México and Latin America.

    Ms. Powell is a high-ranking expert on transcending cultures and serves as an International economic/business development consultant. She opens doors between multi-cultural societies to improve understanding and interconnection in international business and community development. She applies her extensive experience and refined effectiveness in emerging communities for development with marketing and research. She provides her expertise to a high spectrum through education ranging from grassroots level to the highest diplomatic collaboration in the United States, México and Latin America.

    Her attributes of the success as the Founder of the Economic Development Forums between the United States and México have excelled her expertise as a transcontinental business facilitator, expert, and consultant; including providing international business relations, governmental relations, intercontinental government branches, extensive international governmental relations, extensive public relations, wide-ranging of national and international business network, media liaison, transcontinental event and conference management, and funding development.

    Ms. Powell has been a member of many local, regional, state, national and international boards and is currently the Chairman and Founder of an International organization–the HWGA-Hispanic Women Grocers of America. She also served on the advisory board for the Institute of Mexicans in the Exteriors-CCIME constituted by Mexican President Vicente Fox in 2006 and served under President Felipe Calderon in 2007-2008. Her involvement was directly with Secretary of Commerce, Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary of Education and Secretary of External Affairs of North America. Their purpose was to advise on International Trade and Economic Development between the United States and México.

    In this capacity, she leads and coordinates the Country’s efforts related to international business development and trade opportunities. In addition, Ms. Powell supports efforts of local trade promotion with organizations collectively gathered to advance the state’s export efforts with Mexico.

    Henry W. Nickel

    No website found as of publishing date.

    About: Was elected to Republican Party County Central Committee, 5th District in 2012, also has run for San Bernardino Unified School Board, Redlands City Council and California Assembly.

    Wendy McCammack

    No website found as of publishing date.

    About (from City Council website:)

    Wendy McCammack is presently serving her fourth term on the San Bernardino City Council. Her current term continues to the year 2016.

    Councilwoman McCammack serves as Chair of the Ways & Means Committee, and serves on the Community Development Block Grant Ad Hoc Committee (CDBG), the Fire Equipment Ad Hoc Committee, the Grants Ad Hoc Committee, the Military Banner Ad Hoc Committee, the Budget Ad Hoc Committee and the Taxi Cab Ad Hoc Committee.  She also currently serves on the Mayor’s Bankruptcy Ad Hoc committee and served with Mayor Valles on her Budget Ad Hoc committee.

    As well as her involvement as a City official, Wendy takes great satisfaction in staying active at the State and National levels regarding issues that directly affect local citizens and government.  She served six years on the State’s League of California Cities Housing Policy Committee.   For 2002-2003, she was elected to the League’s Inland Empire Division as a Director where legislators lobby the State for their city’s best interest.

    Wendy is a member of the Chamber of Commerce and has attended many governmental affairs sessions as well as Legislative Action Days in Sacramento on behalf of the business community in San Bernardino.  She has participated in the Chamber Leadership Program speaking on how to get to know your elected officials and how to participate in the legislative process.  She attends many of the Business After Hours, Open Houses and Ribbon Cuttings and feels this is a great way to get to know many community business leaders.

    She is a member of the Republican Women Federated of San Bernardino.  She has served as the Membership Chairwoman in her San Bernardino Kiwanis Club and was also a Board Member for 2002-2004.  Wendy currently serves as the President of the Assistance League of San Bernardino and annually edits and donates the printing of the membership directory.  Wendy is a supporting member of the Childhelp USA San Bernardino Chapter.  She is a member of Lutheran Church of Our Savior.  Wendy was elected for 2-1/2 years to the Holy Rosary Academy School Board.  She and her husband are former members of the Cal State Coyote Athletic Association and Wendy is a member of the Ladies Auxiliary of the American Legion Post 777.  She served on the Board of the Highland Avenue Business Association (HAAVA) for two years.  For HAABA, she sponsored a business improvement clean-up day and was vocal in getting Highland Avenue the powers of eminent domain back so non-compliant property owners could be pressured into complying with City building and safety standards.  Further, Wendy is a lifetime Girl Scout.

    Wendy has an extensive background in marketing, sales and accounting.  She grew up and was educated on the East Coast.  She went to Drew University and Kean College in New Jersey.  She and her husband, Dave, own Express Printing, Signs and T’s, Creative Advertising and Apple Tax Service.  Those small businesses have been in San Bernardino since 1982.

    Wendy’s hobbies are, first and foremost, her college age children, Chelsea – 21 and Mckenzee – 23 and her husband.  She enjoys many water sports, such as swimming, kayaking, sailing and fishing.  She also loves singing and playing instrumental music.  She is a devout animal lover.

    Matthew C. Korner

    No photo provided to the City Clerk

    No website found

    About: Lives in the 7th Ward

    Chas A. Kelley

    No campaign website found.

    About (from Council website):

    Councilman Chas A. Kelley was elected to the City Council in November 2003 and re-elected in November 2007 and was sworn in to represent the residents of the Fifth Ward of the City of San Bernardino on March 1, 2004. He has since been re-elected for the third time on November 8, 2011.  Chas Kelley’s term will expire in March 2016. He currently serves as the of the Chair Ways & Means Committee and is a member of the of the Grants Ad Hoc Committee, Education Bridge Committee and the San Bernardino Economic Development Corporation (SBEDC).  He has previously served on the Legislative Review Committee and Personnel Committee.

    As well as his involvement as a City official, Councilman Kelley is an active member of Our Lady of The Assumption Catholic Church where he serves on the Pastoral Council. He is also a Cub Scout Leader, a Little League Coach with Post 777; President of Kendall Hills Neighborhood Association, and a member of the Neighborhood Cluster Association Advisory Board. Before his election to the Fifth Ward, he served on the Community Television Commission.

    Mr. Kelley and his wife, Teri have four children, Brandon, Autumn, Christian and Dylan.

    Rikke Van Johnson

    Website: http://rikkevanjohnson.com/

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RVJ4Mayor

    Phone number (from campaign website): (909) 725-1053 ph

    Email (from campaign website): thatsus@rikkevanjohnson.com

    About (from campaign website):

    Rikke Van Johnson is a 52 year resident of San Bernardino. He is a graduate of Eisenhower High School in Rialto and has an Associate of Arts Degree from San Bernardino Valley College, where he graduated in 1981.

    Mr. Johnson is retired from the United States Postal Service after 27 years of service. He is presently employed as a Bail Agent and Manager for Greenwood Bail Bonds in San Bernardino.

    Mr. Johnson was elected to the City Council in November 2003 and was sworn in to represent the residents of the Sixth Ward of the City of San Bernardino on March 1, 2004. He was re-elected to his third term on the City Council in November 2011. His current term will expire in March 2016.

    He has served on various City Committees and presently serves on the Personnel Committee, Ways and Means Committee, Economic Strategic Plan Committee and the Military Banner Ad Hoc Committee. Further he serves as a member of the Inland Valley Development Agency and the San Bernardino International Airport Authority.

    Mr. Johnson is a Deacon at Ecclesia Christian Fellowship Church in San Bernardino. He is a member of the Westside Action Group (WAG), National Alliance of Postal and Federal Employees (NAPFE), the California Bail Agents Association (CBAA), the Broome Family Foundation (BFF), the Newman Leadership Academy (NLA) and is also a lifetime member of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).

    Mr. Johnson is happily married to Sharon and they have two daughters, Monique and Erika, one son, Julian Marsailes and two granddaughters, Kiara and Savii.

    Carey Davis

    Website: http://careydavis.us/

    Blog: http://careydavisca.wordpress.com/

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/carey.davis.520

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/CareyDavisCA

    Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/careydavisca

    About (from website):

    Who is Carey Davis?

    • Trusted and experienced leader with integrity; committed to return San Bernardino to financial health.
    • 35 years successful accounting and financial management experience.
    • Certified Public Accountant (CPA).
    • Master’s Business Administration, Cal State San Bernardino (CSUSB).
    • Born and raised in San Bernardino; Pacific High School class of ’70.
    • Married 40 years, Carey and Johnetta raised their four children to server their families and communities.
    • Local Church leader

    Draymond (Dray) Crawford

    Website: http://mysite.verizon.net/resxnnzb/

    Email (from campaign website): d.crawford81@verizon.net

    Phone (from campaign website): (909) 374-4843

    About (from campaign website):

    I am not new to our city or region, I know the history of the area. I know San Bernardino.

    I opened one of the first homework safe zones in the city, while also offering free computer training to adults to improve their job skills. Also holding the position of Executive Director of Self Education Law Enforcement Family (S.E.L.F.) youth program that targeted at risk boys. I have also served as the Inland Empire Peace Officers Association President.

    Strong Family ties, married for 29 years.

    Affiliations

    Current Chairperson of City of San Bernardino Police Commission

    Member of Local 12 Operators & Engineers

    Past member of 1183 Labors Union

    Awards

    NAACP Small Business Leader

    City of San Bernardino, Citizen of the month

     

    Coached at San Bernardino Valley College with Ron Smedley during championship years of the early 80’s

    Served as a U.S. Marine

    Long Beach P.D.

    Richard T. Castro

    No campaign website found.

    About: Lives in 5th Ward, was chair of the Concerned Citizens Coalition of San Bernardino.

    Rick P. Avila

    No campaign website found.

    About: Has run for mayor previously.

     

    The people running for Mayor of the City of San Bernardino keeps growing.  The last post, in April highlighed Rick Avila and Rikke Van Johnson:

    2014 is the date of the general election should no one get a majority in the primary municipal election on November 5, 2013.   It is also the date the mayor-elect (should Mayor Patrick J. Morris not run again, as reported) will be sworn-in.

    Here is Council Member Rikke Van Johnson’s Form 501.  If he indeed filed a Form 410, it is not available online as of April 24, 2013.  The Form 501 is signed and dated February 22, 2013, stamped received by the Secretary of State on February 27, 2013, filed and crossed-out by the Registrar of Voters on some date (presumably sent from the Secretary of State to the Registrar of Voters, not realizing that the City Clerk is the elections official), and then filed by the City Clerk on March 28, 2013.

    Other than that donation page and the footer that says “Paid for by Elect Rikke Van Johnson for Mayor 2014,” the site does not seem to mention Rikke Van Johnson’s platform for Mayor of San Bernardino.

    Rick Avila does not appear to have a Form 501 online, but the aforementioned Form 410 is available here. Rick Avila does not appear to have a campaign website active at this moment.  Most links I could find refer to earlier runs.  For example, this post from this site, A Brief History of Mayoral Elections in San Bernardino from 1905 to 2013, Rick Avila has run twice before:

    Additionally, Draymond M. Crawford II filed FPPC Form 501 on March 13, 2013 stating his intention to run for Mayor in 2013.  That completed form is found on the City’s website.  He announced last year, and his website is here.

    Also running according to the City’s website: Concepción M. Powell, who filed her Form 501 on March 27, 2013.  She has a mayoral website.

    R. Carey Davis filed a Form 501 on April 8, 2013.

    Karmel F. Roe filed a Form 501 on April 3, 2013, but signed on March 19, 2013 .  She has a mayoral website, http://yourmayor4prayer.com/.

    So far,  five candidates for Mayor of San Bernardino have taken steps towards candidacy.”

    Well, now the total is, as of July 10, 2013, is nine.  That’s more than the modern era (which I count from 1987), when on November 4, 1997, there were a total of 6 candidates:

    MAYOR
    CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO

    #PCT: 49
    #RPT: 49
    %RPT: 100.0%

    Vote for: 1

    PAUL W SANBORN

    529

    3.5%

    TIMOTHY P PRINCE

    3618

    24.3%

    JUDITH VALLES

    4505

    30.3%

    DAVID OBERHELMAN

    3406

    22.9%

    JOHN S BALLARD

    335

    2.2%

    ANN BOTTS

    2464

    16.5%

    That resulted in a General Election in 1998 between former City Attorney Ralph Prince’s son Timothy Prince and the eventual victor, Judith Valles.  Of course, people filing a Form 501 are not necessarily candidates that have qualified.

    What new information do I have on the people running?

    First, the original six: Karmel Roe has filed a Form 410.  Rikke Van Johnson has filed an original and an amended Form 410.  Rick Avila’s Form 501 is still not available online, and I still can’t find a campaign website. Draymond Crawford II’s Form 410 is now available online. Concepción M. Powell’s Form 410 is now available online. R. Carey Davis has filed a Form 410, but still doesn’t have a website that I could find.

    As to the new three:

    Betty Jean Long, a long-time public commenter during Mayor and Common Council meetings, dating back to when I was a Deputy City Attorney filed a Form 501. No website was found.

    Jerry Arispi, who lists himself as a Democrat  on the Form 501, has filed the Form 501.  He has a mayoral website.  His website says that he is a “a former small business owner, community organizer and graduate of Florida State University College of Law (FSU).”

    Lastly, needing no introduction is City Council Member Wendy McCammack.  She filed her Form 501 on May 16, 2013. She filed her Form 410 on May 16, 2013. I was unable to find a campaign website, and if the past is any indication, she uses Facebook for campaigns.