What Will Happen if David McKenna Defeats Jim Penman for City Attorney?

By Michael Reiter, Attorney at Law.

First, a little history to explain how we arrived at the November 8, 2011 City Attorney election.  The first elected San Bernardino City Attorney was elected in 1907.  Ralph E. Swing,  later California State Senator and namesake of Swing Auditorium, was the first elected City Attorney, but before he was elected, he was already the appointed City Attorney.  Even though the 1905 Charter took effect in 1905, the first City Attorney election was not held until April 1907:

Sec. 13 . . . The present trustees of the third and fifth wards shall hold office during their present term, and shall act as members of the common council from said third and fifth wards until the second Monday of May, 1907. The city marshal, city attorney, city clerk, treasurer, assessor, police judge and recorder shall also continue to hold office and act as such under this charter, until said second Monday of May, 1907.

Sec. 14. There shall be elected at a general municipal election to be held on the second Monday of April, 1907, and every fourth year thereafter, two members of the common council, one each from the third and fifth wards, who shall be elected by the qualified electors of their respective wards; a mayor, city attorney, city clerk and police judge.  Charter of the City of San Bernardino, 1905

That’s why the Council races for Third and Fifth Wards are held together with the City Attorney, City Clerk, and City Treasurer elections.  When the Sixth and Seventh Wards were added, they were added to the City Attorney, City Clerk, City Treasurer, Third Ward and Fifth Ward elections.  The Mayor was originally elected every two years, but the Charter was subsequently amended.

Since the first City Attorney election 104 years ago, there have been less than ten occupants of the office.  Six men, Ralph E. Swing (one term), Charles Allison (one term), William Guthrie (five terms), Howard Reginald Griffin (four terms), Waldo Willhoft (one term), William A. Flory (one term) were  the elected City Attorney for the first 52 years.   For the next 52 years, there have been two: Ralph H. Prince  (1959 to 1987 (seven terms)) and James F. Penman (1987 to present (six terms)).  Since 1959, there has only been one transition, that of Ralph Prince to Jim Penman.

The minutes of the Mayor and Common Council meeting of May 11, 1987 give a hint of the change over from Ralph Prince to Jim Penman:

TRANSITION PLAN FOR CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE  – CONTINUED FROM MAY 11, 1987 [which is probably a misprint]

This is the time and place continued to for discussion on a Transition Plan for the City Attorney’s Office, to insure that there will be a smooth transition to the new elected City Attorney.

City Attorney Prince stated that he and Mr. Penman had met and worked out an agreement which would permit Mr. Penman to act as Counsel to the City Attorney in order that he could be present at Closed Session.

City Attorney Prince explained to the Council why he had not prepared a transition plan in writing.

City Attorney Elect Penman stated he was happy about being able to go into Closed Sessions, and that he had found a replacement for the Administrative Operations Supervisor.  He will have Dolores Delgado as Executive Secretary and Margaret Scroggin As [sic] Administrative Operations Supervisor.

. . .City Attorney Elect Penman answered questions regarding his progress on the General Plan case stating that he had met with Deputy City Attorney  Cynthia Grace on Tuesday, and that he was trying to get up to speed.  He presented concerns about the wording in the Interim Ordinance where the legal description of the boundaries are given.

The Council stressed the importance of two priorities: The General Plan Lawsuit; and the agreement for the new, uncompleted downtown hotel located on “E” Street between Second and Court Streets.

City Attorney Elect Penman was encouraged to meet with former Sr. Assistant City Attorney Briggs to discuss the hotel agreement.

Mr. Penman state that he had 80 cases remaining from his private practice that he must reassign within the next three weeks.

City Attorney Prince stated that presently there are 26 open cases in the City Attorney’s Office and they are all assigned out to attorneys in the office and outside counsel.

City Attorney Elect Penman explained to the Council why it would have been better if he and Mr. Prince had started the transition sooner.

City Attorney Elect Penman spoke regarding employee changes in the City Attorney’s Office.

It was the general consensus of the Council [that] the transition is as efficient as possible, based on the circumstances.

You can sense from the minutes that there was tension in the transition from Ralph H. Prince to Jim Penman.  What would happen if David McKenna, today’s challenger defeats James F. Penman, today’s incumbent?

The City Attorney’s staff is not within the City of San Bernardino’s Civil Service system.  They serve at the pleasure of the City Attorney. That means that upon an regime change,  the new City Attorney can fire everyone on staff and hand-pick his own staff.   New appointments are contingent upon approval by the Mayor and Common Council.  I was hired as a Deputy City Attorney about a month after the Valente Duran letter, which was a low point of Jim Penman/Council relations.  However, there was no opposition to my appointment.

At the very least, I would expect Mr. McKenna to replace the Senior Assistant City Attorneys and the Administrative Operations Supervisor and Executive Secretary.   1987 holds some lessons, as I believe then-Deputy City Attorney John Wilson made the transition from Ralph Prince to Jim Penman.  Other than that, it is my understanding that there were no long-term hold-overs between the two administrations.  I think as a matter of practicality, it would be difficult to fire and hire the entire staff all at once.  Common decency would require the lower level staff a chance to find new jobs or the chance to interview for their jobs.  However, the law does not require the new City Attorney to keep the existing staff, unless the dismissals were against public policy.

In the first debate, David McKenna said he would get rid of the City Attorney investigators, and have larger case-loads for in-house City Attorneys, hinted that there were too many secretaries,  try some cases himself, and still send some cases to outside-counsel.   He said at the second debate that the City could do with one Deputy City Attorney prosecuting code enforcement versus two.   He, like Marianne Milligan before him, suggests that an era of good feelings would follow.   However, there were disputes between the City Attorney and the Mayor before Jim Penman became City Attorney.  If David McKenna were to win, and ally himself with Mayor Patrick Morris, I would expect the previously pro-Penman forces to at least be cool towards David McKenna.

You can read my post which explains my current position on who will likely win the 2011 San Bernardino City Attorney’s Election.

The information you obtain at this blog is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is established by reading or commenting on this blog. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation.

Address : 1255 W. Colton Ave., Suite 104
                     Redlands, CA 92374
Telephone: (909) 708-6055

The San Bernardino City Clerk’s Forum: A First Person Report

By Michael Reiter, Attorney at Law

This is part two of my visit to San Bernardino City Hall last night for the San Bernardino City Attorney and City Clerk’s forum.  The forums will be replayed on Channel 3, and will be posted online at http://www.iemediagroup.org/.  However, to get the full impact, I would recommend that voters actually attend in person next time.

I was much more interested in this forum, even though it lacked the obvious fireworks of the City Attorney’s debate.  I wanted to see how each of the candidates reacted in the spotlight.  I think four of the five are qualified for the job, even though none of them have worked in a City Clerk’s Office.  I think that there will be a run-off, but I am not ready to pick the top two candidates.  I think the important thing is to find someone who understands the office, is a good manager, and gets along with others.

I liked Gigi Hanna’s performance.  I think she was well-prepared, her ideas were good, and I think she is qualified for the position.  I think she has done the best job so far in communicating her message both on her website and her mailer, which I have previously reviewed.  I think one thing that sets her apart is that she went through City Clerk training.  I am not sure why the other candidates have not done that so far.  I think she generally had a handle on how the office worked, and I was impressed by her knowledge of the Office. I heard comments that with her water experience she should run for one of the water boards.

If there were sides, it was clearly rest-of-field versus Amelia Sanchez-Lopez because she is  positioning herself with City Attorney Jim Penman. I think she presented herself as competent, if a little stiff.  She is qualified for the office based on her past experience. Generally, she made good marks in her closing comments when she pointed out that she was the only public opponent of Measure C.  If Measure C had amended the Charter making the City Clerk appointed, none of the candidates would have been able to run for office.

Esther Jimenez established her San Bernardino bona-fides.  I think she would also be qualified for office.  There has been some speculation that she will split the Latino vote, but I do not see any empirical evidence for that.  Yes, the conventional wisdom is that being Latino in a city like San Bernardino is an electoral advantage. City Clerk Rachel Clark ran as Rachel Mendoza Clark, and former Mayor Judith Valles-Smith ran as Judith Valles.  I’m not sure if there is any empirical data to support that conventional wisdom.

Peggi Hazlett appears that she is serious about running . . . away from Mayor Morris.  No one accused her of working for Mayor Morris or being supported by Mayor Morris, but she took great pains not to mention his name, and to stress her independence.  This may be Mayor Morris’ lowest hour, so I think that is a wise decision.  Her strongest point, as echoed by the newspaper, is that she will not need on-the-job training.  Her existing City Hall ties, ties that go back to before I started working for the City of San Bernardino, are her strength.  I understand that she is walking the precincts, which is one of the keys of this race.  I think she is weak on communicating her message (other than emphasizing her personal strengths) on how she will run the office.  I think part of that are the questions that were asked.

William Valle is not ready for prime time.  He was handy with buzz-words, but he lacked the polish of a public official.  He should continue his education, stay political active, and perhaps run for Council next-time.

Election politics is the process by which candidates distinguish themselves from one another.  What was the biggest  issue of the forum?  The move of business registration from the Clerk’s Office to Finance.   Gigi Hanna stated:

“Ultimately, the decision about where the Business registrations are housed is the city manager’s to make, based on what is best for the day-to-day operation of the city. It wouldn’t be unusual for it to be housed in the Finance Department—many cities do handle businesses in their finance department and it seems a clear nexus. But it is inappropriate for the city clerk to take a stance on policy decisions.  It is irrelevant who provides the service…”

Amelia Sanchez-Lopez opposed the move of business registration to Finance.  Otherwise, the candidates probably agreed on 95 percent of the issues facing the City Clerk’s Office.

Right now, I figure that no one will get a majority, that there will be a run-off, and it will include two of the following three: Peggi Hazlett, Gigi Hanna and Amelia Sanchez-Lopez.

The information you obtain at this blog is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is established by reading or commenting on this blog. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation.

Address : 1255 W. Colton Ave., Suite 104
                   Redlands, CA 92374
Telephone: (909) 708-6055

The San Bernardino City Attorney Forum: A First Person Report

By Michael Reiter, Attorney at Law

Yesterday involved three City Halls for me:  I attended a meeting at Hesperia City Hall in the morning, a City of Highland City Council Meeting starting at 6 P.M., and I attended 95 percent of the San Bernardino City Attorney debate last night, and all of the City Clerk’s debate at San Bernardino City Hall.

I sat near Josh Dulaney during the City Attorney’s forum.  He was tweeting the debate, with an Acer netbook or small laptop on his lap with a Verizon Wireless dongle, and he had a traditional pad for notes next to him.  The majority of his time was spent Twittering which you can see on the Sun’s website (at the time of this post) or on his Twitter feed.  His article in the paper today reads like his tweets. He left before the City Clerk forum, which was unfortunate.  The PE’s reporter stayed through both and had a paragraph regarding the substance of the Clerk’s forum.

I arrived late to the City Attorney’s forum because my City of Highland agenda item did not end until about 6:50, and it takes time to get from east Base Line in Highland to North D in downtown San Bernardino.  The council chambers were maybe half  full during the City Attorney’s forum.  However, it looked more crowded because people like to sit on the ends of rows instead of the middle, so there was a large standing room crowd.

The forums will be replayed on Channel 3, and will be posted online at http://www.iemediagroup.org/.  However, to get the full impact, voters should attend in person next time.

From a political perspective, City Attorney Penman was in peak form.  His use of visual aids was good, though I seem to remember that the visual aids he used against Marianne Milligan were larger.  All the candidates were given the questions ahead of time, and the remarks were largely prepared.  I think it was necessary for the candidates to read their responses because of the time limitations.  The problem with the forums is that they are not debates, and are not a good format for candidates to differentiate themselves from one another if the format is followed.

Luckily, neither challenger David L. McKenna, nor City Attorney Jim Penman stick to the format.  There is always a highly charged atmosphere in these forums, and this one was no dr.  Former mayoral candidate, and son of the previous City Attorney, attorney Tim Prince was present, and he heckled City Attorney Penman as usual.

Previously, I made this observation:

 Expect City Attorney James F. Penman to emphasize his record, the recent attempts to cut the City Attorney budget, the history of corruption in the City and the City Attorney’s record against corruption, and attempts to portray the challenger, David L McKenna as a carpetbagger, and allegations regarding the challenger’s actions as Public Defender and County Supervisor.  Expect challenger David McKenna to attack the longevity of City Attorney Penman’s career as City Attorney (the change mantra), the history of the City Attorney’s relationships with others in the City, and no doubt the same allegations that were brought up in the last City Attorney’s race.  Expect the budget to be an issue for the challenger, as well.

How did I do?  City Attorney Penman did the things that I expected in the debate, and then piled on from there.   City Attorney Penman brought up David McKenna’s past controversies when McKennna was Public Defender and County Supervisor.  Penman lambasted McKenna for wanting to try cases if McKenna was City Attorney, and attacked McKenna for being out-of-touch when McKenna criticized the City Attorney’s Office for unsuccessfully trying a panhandling case.  There was the innuendo about David McKenna’s  inactive status with the State Bar (if we had an effective local press, this issue would have already come up) and the picture of the Mayor’s car in front of David McKenna’s rented house.  That touches upon the carpetbagger theme, and is an attempt to tie the candidate McKenna with incumbent — and embattled — Mayor Pat Morris. Penman emphasized his long-standing mantra of City Attorney as  “independent watchdog.”  I think that has been a winning argument in three contested elections (so far).

Challenger David McKenna attacked the longevity of City Attorney Penman’s career, the City Attorney’s history in the political sandbox with others, but he did not trot out the old legal accusations against the City Attorney nor the FPPC violation related to Arrowhead Country Club.  I am not sure if that is a strategy or an omission.  David McKenna did bring up issues involving the City Attorney’s criminal caseload, and it seems clear to me from his comments that his campaign has looked at court records to uncover examples of the perceived misuse of department resources. If he has any chance at all, he needs to nail down specifics of how he is going to streamline the office (beyond getting rid of the investigators).

The biggest laugh of the night came at the expense of David McKenna, when he referred to the Press-Enterprise as “respected” when quoting an editorial.  He came off as impotent.  I am not sure anyone can win the City Attorney’s Office against Jim Penman playing by the Marquess of Quensberry Rules.   The City Attorney is a street-fighter, and his skills in chess (thinking more than one move ahead) cannot be underestimated.  I think a lot of the City Attorney’s opponents think that they are smarter and better than Jim Penman, and I think that is their downfall.  The take-away is that you want to beat him in the arena that he has built for combat, you must play by Hama Rules.  David McKenna failed to anticipate the lines of Penman’s attacks, failed to have answers for those attacks, and just repeated the same things we had heard for years, that the City Attorney was a “bomb-thrower.” McKenna echoed Marianne Milligan’s futile citation of the League of California Cities voluntary ethics code for City Attorneys.  It is a nice document that does not reflect the realities of elected City Attorneys (because there are so few elected city attorneys).  How do you make a position that must run for election not political?  By definition, an elected position is political.  Further, how did the ethics code section cited prevent the City of Bell scandal?

I think David McKenna had the wrong response to the “inactive status” accusation.  He attacked the messenger, calling him insane and unethical and slanderous, and running around after the debate saying he was going to report the City Attorney to the Bar Association.  This is a weak position for a few reasons.  One, it smacks of taking one’s ball and running home.  The second, is because I can think of no California Rule of Professional Conduct that could have possibly been violated here.   Obviously, this is not slander in a legal sense of the word.  We have pure political speech here in a public forum.  He should have given a reason he was on inactive status (or, in the case that the bomb being thrown was true, spun a good answer).

The winner:  City Attorney Jim Penman by a TKO.  Some might question the wisdom of the late-round bomb throwing by the incumbent, but it is a recognized part of his political theater (see: unnamed attorneys drafting the charter, mystery candidate for mayor, and unnamed council members being investigated for corruption) and should have been better anticipated by David McKenna.

The only people that can do the “pure as the driven snow,” “above politics” schtick are judges.   If the Morris camp were serious, which they have shown with the last two challenges that they are not, they would have run a sitting judge against the City Attorney.  You have the example of Judge Jan Goldsmith becoming City Attorney in San Diego against the City Attorney that makes City Attorney Jim Penman look like a rank amateur as far as divisiveness (and actual power of the office), you have Judge Paul Zellerbach beating Rod Pacheco for Riverside County DA (who made former San Bernardino County District Attorney Dennis Stout look reasonable, and you have the more local example of Judge Patrick J. Morris beating City Attorney James Penman for Mayor.  Twice.

I think this is an example of the Morris camp playing checkers when City Attorney Jim Penman plays an excellent game of chess.   They continue to underestimate City Attorney Penman, and at this point, he will exit the office at the time of his choosing.  Short of  major scandal or October surprise, which I doubt exist, I am calling this race for City Attorney Jim Penman.

I’ll review the City Clerk’s forum in the next post.

The information you obtain at this blog is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is established by reading or commenting on this blog. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation.

Address : 1255 W. Colton Ave., Suite 104
                     Redlands, CA 92374
Telephone: (909) 708-6055

PSA: San Bernardino City Election Forum For City Attorney and City Clerk Candidates September 27, 2011 7:00 p.m. 300 North D Street, San Bernardino

By Michael Reiter, Attorney at Law

There will be another candidate forum on September 27, 2011, sponsored by the San Bernardino Area Chamber of Commerce, for the candidates for San Bernardino City Attorney, incumbent City Attorney James F. “Jim” Penman and former Public Defender and County Supervisor David L. McKenna at 7 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 300 North D Street, San Bernardino, CA 92418.  At 8 p.m., there will be a forum for the City Clerk candidates, Gigi Hanna, Peggi Hazlett, William Valle, Amelia Sanchez-Lopez and Esther Jimenez.

The information you obtain at this blog is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is established by reading or commenting on this blog. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation.

Address : 1255 W. Colton Ave., Suite 104
                     Redlands, CA 92374
Telephone: (909) 708-6055

A Closer Look At The November 2011 City of San Bernardino City Clerk’s Race

By Michael Reiter, Attorney at Law

The City Clerk’s Race is interesting because of the number of candidates running, and because it is a wide-open race, and you don’t have any candidates from the City Clerk’s Office running, though Peggi Hazlett does work for the City as Assistant to the Mayor, as she did when I was a Deputy City Attorney (under Mayor Valles).

Why are the candidates interested in this race?  While no doubt the warring camps of San Bernardino City Hall each have a candidate, short of being personal friends with the candidates, there is no way of knowing the motivations, other than a longing to do public service and a commitment to the City.  If anyone is running for a spring-board to further political ambitions, historically, this has not been a good first step, though a previous City Clerk did become City Administrator.

The compensation for San Bernardino City Clerk (obtained from the State of California Controller’s Office for calendar year 2009, the most recent data available:

Department Classification Multiple Positions Annual Salary Minimum Annual Salary Maximum Total Wages Subject to Medicare (Box 5 of W-2) Applicable Defined Benefit Pension Formula Employees’ Share of Pension Contributions Deferred Compensation Health, Dental, Vision
City Clerk Administration City Clerk   — $111,624 $135,684 $127,879 2.7@55 $9,577   — $8,735

Presumably, the new Clerk (will be at a lower pension formula adopted (2%@55) with the possible exception of Peggi Hazlett.  The City Clerk’s salary is set by the Mayor and Common Council pursuant to San Bernardino City Charter Section 24-B.  The Clerk will be going in at the beginning of the salary range shown above.

Because San Bernardino is a charter city, the duties of the City Clerk are set by the Charter and by ordinance of the Mayor and Common Council, and other duties arising out of California law, such as duties under the Political Reform Act.

Section 60 of the San Bernardino City Charter says:

City Clerk
Section 60. Duties. The duties of the City Clerk shall be to keep the corporate seal and all books, papers, records and other documents belonging to his/her office, attend all meetings of the Mayor and Common Council and keep a journal of the proceedings. He/She shall have full power and authority to take all affidavits and administer all oaths necessary in the transaction of city business, but shall make no charge therefor. His/Her official books and records shall be kept properly indexed and be open to public inspection during office hours. He/She shall number and keep a record of all demands allowed and certified to him/her, showing the date of approval, to whom the same is allowed, the nature of the claim, and the fund out of which the same is payable. He/She shall issue all licenses and countersign all warrants on the City Treasury, except warrants of the boards, and shall do and perform all other acts required of him/her by this Charter, or by ordinance, or which may be required of him/her by the Mayor and Common Council.

The Charter also includes other duties of the Clerk, such as being an ex-officio secretary of the Water Board.  San Bernardino City Charter section 168.

There is actually a job description adopted by the Mayor and Common Council on January 24, 2011 (according to the document, I was not able to find it in the staff report for that date) and available on the City’s website.  This description may be useful in helping voters determine which candidate to pick.

The first section of the document is labeled “Job Summary” and it says:

As an elected official and under legislative policy direction from the Mayor and City Council, plans, organizes, manages, directs and coordinates the programs and activities of the City Clerk’s Office; serves as clerk/recorder for the City Council; directs the City’s business registration program, provides policy guidance and expert professional assistance to City departments in areas of responsibility; and performs related duties as assigned.

The next section is labeled “Distinguishing Characteristics:”

City Clerk is an elected position, responsible for managing and integrating a variety of programs and services that enable the Mayor and City Council and City departments to accomplish City business efficiently and effectively while ensuring that procedures and processes meet legal requirements and are implemented with integrity.  The incumbent manages a variety of programs and services including: business registration and collection of business, transient occupancy and utility taxes: issuance of U.S. passports; a records management and document imaging program; maintenance of official City records; Statements of Economic Interest; and analysis and enforcement of laws pertaining to elections, public records and conflict of interest.  As City Clerk, the incumbent is responsible for preparation of Council agenda and minutes and for conduct of City elections, including election and campaign financing disclosure.  Many City Clerk functions and activities are prescribed [sic] by the City Charter, Municipal Code and other state and federal laws.  Assignments are broad in scope and allow for a high degree of administrative discretion in their execution.

The document continues with “Essential Duties and Responsibilities:”

The duties listed below are intended only as illustrations of the various types of work that may be performed.  The omission of specific statements of duties does not exclude them from the position if the work is similar, related or a logical assignment to the class.

1. Plans, organizes, controls, manages and evaluates the work of the City Clerk’s office; with subordinate managers and supervisors, participates in establishing operational plans and initiatives to meet department goals and objectives; implements departmental plans, work programs, processes, procedures and policies required to achieve overall department performance results; coordinates and integrates department functions and responsibilities to achieve optimal efficiency and effectiveness; participates in developing and monitoring performance against the annual departmental budget.

2. Participates with the City Manager, elected officials and other managers in establishing strategic plans for the City; sets overall management and policy goals and objectives for the City Clerk’s Office with the administrative and legislative framework established by the City Manger and the Mayor and City Council; coordinates department program and policy issues with managers of other departments and/or on a City-wide basis.

3. Plans and evaluates the performance of supervisors and staff; establishes performance requirements and personal development targets; monitors performance and provides coaching for performance improvement and development; provides or recommends compensation and other rewards to recognize performance; takes disciplinary action, up to and including termination, to address performance deficiencies, subject to management concurrence, in accordance with the City’s human resources policies and procedures, Civil Service Commission Rules and labor contract provisions.

4. Provides leadership and works with supervisors and staff to develop and retain highly competent, customer service-oriented staff through selection, compensation, training and day-to-day management practices that support the City’s mission, strategic goals and core values.

5. Attends CIty Council meetings and directs preparation of the agenda and supporting materials; takes minutes, records votes and administers oaths or affirmations; direct the documentation, maintenance and dissemination of all City Council actions including minutes, ordinances, resolutions, agreements and deeds; prepares requests for Council action; directs the legal posting and publication of notices, postings, ordinances, bids and public hearings to ensure Brown Act requirements are met; attends pre-agenda meetings and agenda briefings.

6. Directs and coordinates a records management program for official City records and archives; acts as custodian of official, permanent ordinances, resolutions and other documents for which the City Clerk’s Office is the office of record; review resolutions and ordinances for correctness and codifies ordinances in the City’s Municipal Code; periodically publishes and distributes Municipal Code updates.

7.  Directs and manages the City’s business registration program; manages the issuance of all business registrations and collection of business registration taxes; directs the collection of transient occupancy and utility taxes; directs review of applications and issuance of U.S. passports in accordance with requirements of the U.S. Passport Agency.

8. Plans, supervises, coordinates and administers the conduct of municipal elections; plans voter outreach initiatives and directs the registration of voters; in collaboration iwth the City Attorney ensures the legality of election proceedings in accordance with state and local election and campaign financing laws; administer procedures for filing Statements of Economic Interest and campaign financing statements and reporting; notifies affected parties of FPPC requirements and deadlines and answers questions regarding filing issues from the Mayor and City Council, designated City employees, candidates, consultants, the media and the public; certifies election results.

9. Analyzes and ensures compliance with local, state and federal laws pertaining to public records, municipal elections, campaign financing and conflict of interest and advises the City Manager and the Mayor and City Council regarding the requirements of such legislation.

10. Researches and prepares reports for the City Manager and the Mayor and City Council; works closely with the City Manger, Mayor, City Council, City departments, other public and private entities, the media and the public in providing public records information and services, responds to and resolves difficult and sensitive citizen inquiries and complaints, assists the public and CIty staff by providing information and research assistance; certifies the authenticity of City documents.

11. Maintains official custody of the City seal and shares signatory power on ordinance,s resolutions and agreements; certifies copies of official documents.

12. Receives the services of claims and subpoenas on behalf of the City; officiates at bid openings and prepares or directs the preparation of related documents.

13. Participates in a variety of public relations activities on behalf of the City, including liaison with Sister City representatives, Chambers of Commerce, community organizations and the media.

14. Attends professional and community events and meetings.

15. Notarizes official documents as necessary.

The job description continues with a section titled “General Qualifications:”

Knowledge of:

1. Policies, procedures and requirements governing the actions of an elected City Council and the general functions of a municipal government.

2. Organization, functions, procedures and rules of the Council and Council Committees.

3. City Charter and Municipal Code provisions related to the operations of the City Clerk’s function and matters which come before the Council and its Committees.

4. The Brown Act, Roberts Rules of Order, parliamentary procedure and other rules and procedures governing the notice and conduct of public hearings.

5. The California State Election Code and other applicable ordinances and laws pertaining to the conduct of municipal elections.

6. The California Public Records Act and other applicable federal, state and local law governing the maintenance and retention of public records.

7. Other federal, state and local laws, regulations and court decisions applicable to assigned areas of responsibility.

8. Principles and practices of public administration, including budgeting, purchasing, contract administration and maintenance of public records.

9. Research methods and analysis techniques.

10. Principles and practices of sound business communication.

11. Principles and practices of effective management and supervision.

12. City human resources policies and procedures, Civil Service Commission Rules and labor contract provisions.

Ability to:

1. Plan, organize, direct, integrate and evaluate a variety of City Clerk’s Office programs and services.

2. Develop and implement goals, objectives, policies, procedures and internal controls.

3. Analyze, interpret, explain and apply complex legal documents, contracts and administrative procedures and regulations.

4. Analyze complex technical and administrative problems, evaluate alternatives and adopt effective courses of action.

5. Prepare clear, concise and comprehensive correspondence, minutes, reports, studies and other written materials.

6. Plan, organize and coordinate effective municipal elections.

7. Prepare and present organized and accurate oral reports.

8. Exercise sound expert judgment with general policy guidelines.

9. Exercise tact and diplomacy in dealing with sensitive and complex issues and situations.

10. Establish and maintain effective working relationships with the City Manager, Mayor, Council members,  departments directors and staff, customers, professional and community organizations, the media, the public and others encountered in the course of work.

The Minimum qualifications are listed as “Education, Training and Experience: As determined by the electors of the City of San Bernardino.”

While the document is chock-full of human resources jargon, it can be a good tool for voters to use in choosing a candidate.  As far as I can tell, none of the candidates have been a City Clerk, and none have worked in a City Clerk’s Office.  The downside of the document is that in some ways it reflects how City Clerk Rachel Clark has run the office.  The new City Clerk has the opportunity, within the bounds of the law, to reshape the environment in the office, including its employees, and changing the discretionary duties of the office.

Charter Section 242 reads:

Section 242. Qualifications of City Employees and Appointment. The Mayor and Common Council may prescribe the number, qualification and
compensation of the deputies, clerks, assistants, employees and attaches of the City Attorney, City Treasurer and City Clerk. All deputies, clerks, assistants,
attaches and employees of the City Attorney, City Clerk and City Treasurer shall be appointed by the respective officers with the consent and approval of the Mayor
and Common Council, and shall hold office at the pleasure of the officers appointing them.

This section means that the new City Clerk can, to some degree, start with a fresh plate and get rid of the existing staff. That’s far more likely to happen in the City Attorney’s Office than the Clerk’s Office, but that decision is up to the City Clerk.

Reading the job description, the City Clerk needs to have management skills, knowledge of how the City works, knowledge of the law, basic grasp of the English language, and the ability to work well with others.  Of  course, the actual requirement is election to office is in the Charter: “Section 235. Qualification of officers. The City Clerk and City Treasurer shall have been qualified electors and residents of the City for a period of at least thirty (30) consecutive days prior to their appointment or filing of their nomination papers for election to office.”

Here is a matrix of available information that I have found online regarding the candidates and their qualifications for the office.  I couldn’t find any information in some areas.  The information I have that is most complete is for Gigi Hanna; she was the first to send out information, and her Facebook page fills out any details.  She is listed first because she is first on the Registrar of Voters’ list.

Name Education Management Experience Public  Entity Experience Communications Ability City Clerk Training?
Georgeann “Gigi” Hanna M.A. Yes Yes Journalism, PR Yes
Peggi Hazlett B.A. Yes Yes Assistant to Mayor Unknown
Esther Jimenez B.A. Unknown Yes Sr. Legislative Assistant Unknown
Amelia Sanchez-Lopez B.A. Yes Yes Cordinator, SB County Unknown
William A. Valle A.A. Unknown No Platoon Leader Unknown

The information you obtain at this blog is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is established by reading or commenting on this blog. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation.

Address : 1255 W. Colton Ave., Suite 104
Redlands, CA 92374
Telephone: (909) 708-6055

Using Historical Data To Handicap The City of San Bernardino Fifth Ward City Council Election in November 2011 Between Chas Kelley and Larry Lee

By Michael Reiter, Attorney at Law

This is the latest installment in my series about historical election results, and what they may mean in the November 2011 San Bernardino Municipal Election.  The previous posts are about the Third Ward and the City Attorney’s Race.  I was unable to attend the candidates forum held at San Bernardino City Hall yesterday because I was busy watching the City of Redlands Council Meeting on television in Redlands.  I read the highlights in the local newspaper, including the microblog (via Twitter) which has apparently replaced the defunct SBNow blog.   The Fifth Ward race does not look particularly exciting.   Other than yard signs and billboards, and participation in the candidate debate, I have not seen any new information from the incumbent, Chas Kelley.  What I have seen from the challenger, Larry A. Lee, (as found on his website) is that his platform is:

·      No Tax or Fee Increases
·      Fair Share of City Services for all 5th Ward neighborhoods
·      Promote Development
·      Work to Bring Jobs back to the City.
·      To be a Team Player for the Good of the Whole City.
·      To Represent the Entire 5th Ward and City Well.
·      Promote Civility, Respect, and Honor
·      Build a Strong Network of Communication through Healthy and Personal Relationships.
·      To Connect and Work with Our Youth (Our Next Leaders)
·      To Change the Perceived Image of Our City, by first Changing the way we think of it
There is no doubt in my mind that Chas Kelley would agree with these principles, so Larry Lee needs to do a better job of showing why he can do a better job than Chas Kelley if he wants to be a council member.  Though I have heard mild grumblings about Chas Kelley over the years mostly  personal attacks that cannot be taken seriously, and occasionally policy disagreements), I do not think he is unpopular in the 5th Ward, at least not like his predecessor.  Larry Lee’s talking points listed above do suggest possible angles to differentiate Pastor Lee from Council Member Kelley.  “Fair Share of City Services for all 5th Ward neighborhoods.”  The achievements that Council member Kelley likes to talk about (the Community Center, the trail system, Ronald Reagan Park) tend to serve Kendall Hills and Verdemont.  Pastor Lee should point that out to the people living adjacent to Little Mountain.  “To Be A Team Player for the Good of the Whole City” and “Promote Civility, Respect and Honor” sound like they are generic platitudes, but it alludes to the confrontations between Mayor Morris and Council Member Kelley.  Strangely, Larry Lee has not put his endorsements up yet.  However, judging from the Facebook photos of Mayor Morris at his fundraiser, comments from Sixth Ward Council Member Rikke Van Johnson on his Facebook Wall, and a comment from City Attorney candidate and recent San Bernardino resident David McKenna, we can conclude that he is squarely in the Morris camp.  I have no idea how popular the Mayor is in the 5th Ward, but I find it puzzling that Pastor Lee has not updated his webpage with endorsements.

Here is the last race, November 2007:

COUNCIL MEMBER – CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO WARD 5
Vote For 1

17 of 17 Precincts Reporting

CANDIDATE

VOTES

PERCENT

CHAS A. KELLEY 1638 59.80%
CAROLYN A. TILLMAN 596 21.76%
RICK AVILA 417 15.22%
RANDY LEE 85 3.10%
Write-In 3 0.11%

Council Member Chas Kelley won easily in a four person field.    I would expect a similar turnout in this election.  The relationship between Council member and Mayor Morris has stayed relatively the same since the last election, so I would guess the Mayor’s supporters will vote for Pastor Lee, and Chas Kelley, as long he has not been ignoring his constituents in the last four years, should be reelected.   The demographics of the 5th Ward have changed with the collapse of the housing markets, but I doubt that will have an impact on Council member Kelley since Pastor Lee’s platform is not markedly different from what I expect Chas Kelley’s platform to be once he sends out campaign fliers or has a website or a Facebook account. Pastor Lee has to demonstrate the City’s and Ward’s failings (one only has to look at the lack of street lights on the Kendall curve), and try to connect those to Chas Kelley.  In short, he has to give a reason for 5th Ward voters to dump the incumbent.

Chas Kelley was well-liked enough to come in third in the first electoral battle in 2005  between now-Mayor Morris and City Attorney James F. Penman:

City of San Bernardino – Mayor
113/113 100.00%

 

Vote Count

Percent

PAT MORRIS

11,249

43.42%

JAMES F. ‘JIM’ PENMAN

6,648

25.66%

CHAS A. KELLEY

4,079

15.74%

RICK AVILA

3,425

13.22%

MICHAEL ELLISON-LEWIS

466

1.80%

Write-In

42

0.16%

Total

25,909

100.00%

 

Here is the data from Chas Kelley’s first election over incumbent Joe Suarez.  This election was impressive because it is difficult to beat an incumbent in San Bernardino.   But he did not beat Joe Suarez, he trounced Joe Suarez in November 2003:

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO

Member City Council,

Ward 5

CHAS A. KELLEY                                 1,519   64.72

JOE V. C. SUAREZ                                 816   34.77

WRITE-IN                                          12    0.51

The powers-that-be in 2003 underestimated Chas Kelley, and that was a mistake because he is a good local politician, and he had a grass-roots view of the 5th Ward.

The last election data I have is the 1999 election when Joe Suarez beat Jim Erwin and Mike Vasquez:

CANDIDATE

VOTES

PERCENT

JAMES H ERWIN

678

36.2%

MIKE VASQUEZ

183

9.7%

JOE SUAREZ

1011

54.0%

I’m not sure what you can draw from this data, except that the population has grown, as have the likely voters.  Also, the Ward boundaries changed between the 1999 and 2003.

The information you obtain at this blog is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is established by reading or commenting on this blog. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation.

Address : 1255 W. Colton Ave., Suite 104
Redlands, CA 92374
Telephone: (909) 708-6055

The Number One Issue in the San Bernardino City Clerk’s Election in November 2011

By Michael Reiter, Attorney at Law

The City of San Bernardino City Clerk’s Office is currently responsible for maintaining and updating the Municipal Code.  While, as I discussed before, the online municipal code is not authoritative, and should not be relied on, good government dictates that cities maintain a fairly up-to-date online municipal code.  Yet, as of the date of this post, the online City of San Bernardino Municipal Code was last revised on November 2, 2009.  This may not be the number one issue in the San Bernardino City Clerk’s Election in November 2011 for the candidates, but it should be.

My recent dealings with the San Bernardino City Clerk’s Office, and indeed my dealings in almost five years as a Deputy City Attorney for the City of San Bernardino, have been good.  When I asked for a copy of the garage sale ordinance, it was emailed to me right away.  They also very promptly presented me with a copy of David L. McKenna’s campaign filings in person.  I recently filed a batch of Government Claims with the City Clerk’s Office, and the staff was professional and courteous.  This is contrast to other dealings with local public entities, such as found in my post, How Not To Handle Government Claims.   The retiring City Clerk, Rachel Clark, was always very nice to me during the duration of my time with the City and after.

However, in this day and age, the online San Bernardino Municipal Code should be online because it takes time away from staff to have to provide updated information not available online.   If the City Clerk’s Office is not open, the public should be able to find out about the current code.  Lastly, even though no one should rely on an online municipal code, nor can they rely on an out-of-date municipal code. If you cannot easily find the current law, how can a resident obey the law?

If the City Clerk’s Office does not have the resources to update the code online, then it should be sent out to a private company.  I am not sure when the codification came in-house, but the City Clerk’s Office handled codification during my entire tenure at the City Attorney’s Office.  Looking at the online code, this was not always the case:

San Bernardino Municipal Code section 1.01.010 Adoption.
Pursuant to the provisions of Sections 50022.1 through 50022.8 and 50022.10 of the Government Code, there is adopted the “San Bernardino Municipal Code” as published by Book Publishing Company, Seattle, Washington, together with those secondary codes adopted by reference as authorized by the California State Legislature, save and except those portions of the secondary codes as are deleted or modified by the provisions of the “San Bernardino Municipal Code.” (Ord. 3981 §1, 1980.)

As far as I can tell, Book Publishing Company or BPC was acquired in 2001, so it no longer exists.  Yet, the Municipal Code still lists it as the Code’s publisher, and as I discussed, it was not the Code’s publisher in 2001, and possibly even before.

In 2011, there is no excuse not to have an accurate online code with timely updates.  Hopefully, the next City Clerk will immediately rectify the situation

The information you obtain at this blog is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is established by reading or commenting on this blog. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation.

Address : 1255 W. Colton Ave., Suite 104
Redlands, CA 92374
Telephone: (909) 708-6055

Using Historical Data To Handicap The November 2011 San Bernardino City Attorney’s Race

By Michael Reiter, Attorney at Law

Modern San Bernardino City Elections are still largely dependent on retail politics: knowing people, being involved in the community, wearing out shoes by walking the precincts going door to door, depending on the Ward, getting an endorsement from the City’s public safety unions, to some degree endorsements, using direct mail to target likely voters and yard signs.  Electronic communications, such as Facebook, websites, YouTube and Twitter will become increasingly important, particularly for organizing support and raising money.  The lessons regarding the use of technology from the 2008 Presidential election hold some answers to candidates wise enough to study them.  However, as far as actual votes, Facebook and Twitter may not translate into more votes just yet.   Facebook will attract “support” that does not necessarily translate to campaign help (campaign volunteers, donations) or votes.  People can be a candidate’s fan on the Internet, but may not be a registered voter within the ward, or in a city-wide election, within the City of San Bernardino.  This is especially true in the City of San Bernardino which has experienced a population shift of new residents, and old residents leaving to points east (Redlands, City of Highland, Yucaipa, Beaumont and Banning), or simply dying.

I am going to look at data (from the San Bernardino Registrar of Voters) from the most recent elections data involving city-wide elections, all the elections available online regarding the City Attorney’s Office, and all available data regarding the current City Attorney, James F. Penman, that I can find.  I will not actually handicap the race.   I think it will be very close for the reasons stated below.

The most recent referendum on the City Attorney’s Office was Measure C, which would have amended the City Attorney to make the offices of City Treasurer, City Clerk and City Attorney appointed instead of elected.  It was in a consolidated election with statewide elections of consequence (including Governor), federal midterm elections, but no other San Bernardino elections.  Both of the elected City Treasurer and elected City Clerk endorsed the measure, as did the Mayor.  The City Attorney, James F. Penman, opposed the measure, as did the voters.

Measure C – San Bernardino City
148/148 100.00%

Vote Count

Percent

YES

11,333

36.86%

NO

19,409

63.14%

Total

30,742

100.00%

By a vote of almost two to one, the citizens of San Bernardino rejected the move to make the City Attorney appointed.  In his Media Conference Statement on June 29, 2011, challenger David McKenna said “Under the City Charter, the Office of the City Attorney is an elected position and the responsibilities of the office are clearly enumerated. During the last city election, voters overwhelmingly voted “No” on Measure C and affirmed that the City Attorney should remain an elected position and be independent of the Mayor and Council. On this point, I wholeheartedly agree and pledge that I will keep the office independent and elected.”  I would not read too much into the Measure C result as a predictor of the City Attorney’s race because one of the things opponents argued is that if you don’t like an official, you should vote the official out, not abolish the office.

In some ways, Measure C was another attempt at Measure M, the year 2000 Charter Reform measure led by the now-Mayor’s son.  It, too, included a provision to make the City Attorney, City Clerk, and City Treasurer appointed instead of elected.  Measure M also included other changes to the Charter unrelated to making the City Attorney, City Clerk, and City Treasurer appointive.   The Measure M election was November 7, 2000, the same time as a Presidential Election, other Federal elections, and other state-wide issues.

MEASURE M

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO

#PCT: 79

#RPT: 79

%RPT: 100.0%

Vote for: 1

ADOPT NEW            YES 11,277 32.2%

CITY CHARTER          NO 23,691 67.7%

In Measure M, the voters rejected the Charter changes by more than two to one.  More people voted, but it was a closely contested Presidential election (George W. Bush versus Al Gore).  However, there were other Charter changes, so some of the people voting No may have disliked the new Charter but still supported the change from elected to appointed.

The next data that should be examined is the last City Attorney election:  November 2007.  This was one of three contested City Attorney James F. Penman has faced.  The other elections were against Stan Tomlinson in 1995, and against then-City Attorney Ralph Prince in 1987.  The November 2007 election involved former San Bernardino Senior Assistant City Attorney Marianne Milligan versus City Attorney James F. Penman.  It was a close race:

ATTORNEY – CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Vote For 1

120 of 120 Precincts Reporting

CANDIDATE

VOTES

PERCENT

JAMES FRANK ”JIM” PENMAN 7001 51.46%
MARIANNE MILLIGAN 6557 48.20%
Write-In 47 0.35%

In comparison, the City Clerk’s election that year was also contested.  1,932 more people voted in the City Attorney’s contest then did in the City Clerk’s election.

The previous City Attorney’s election, held in November 2003, was uncontested.

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO

City Attorney

JIM PENMAN                                     7,999   96.11

WRITE-IN                                         324    3.89

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO

City Clerk

RACHEL MENDOZA CLARK                           8,464   98.67

WRITE-IN                                         114    1.33

CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO

City Treasurer

DAVID C. KENNEDY                               7,024   75.43

DAVID R. OBERHELMAN                            2,261   24.28

WRITE-IN                                          27    0.29

Even though it was contested, almost four percent of the voters wrote in another name.  That can either be a protest against uncontested elections (as can an undervote), or it can be seen as a referendum on the candidate.  Here, Rachel Clark was also running uncontested, and the write-in vote was 210 votes higher, and she received 464 more votes than City Attorney James F. Penman.  There was a contested City Treasurer race; 989 more people voted in the City Treasurer’s race than for City Attorney.  That could be a protest against the City Attorney candidate, or it could be people just don’t like to vote in uncontested elections.  There is no definitive answer to draw from this data.

The last available data are the three Mayoral elections in which City Attorney James F. Penman ran for election.  The most recent was November 3, 2009:

MAYOR – CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
178/178 100.00%

Vote Count

Percent

RICK AVILA

1,205

8.07%

JIM PENMAN

5,376

36.01%

PAT MORRIS

8,349

55.92%

Total

14,930

100.00%

Here, City Attorney Penman received 5,376 votes.  I think that is the minimum he will receive in this election, and that about 15,000 votes will be cast.  I don’t think all the Morris votes were anti-Penman votes in the Mayoral election, many were pro-Pat Morris votes.   The Mayoral run-off of February 7, 2006 had this result:

SAN BERNARDINO Mayor Run-off
113/113 100.00%

 

 

Vote Count

Percent

PAT MORRIS

10,093

63.47%

JAMES F. ‘JIM’ PENMAN

5,809

36.53%

Even in a three way race, with less votes cast between 2006 and 2009, City Attorney Penman only lost about nine percent of his vote between 2006 and 2009.  Some of that could be attributed to liking Rick Avila more, or changing from a Penman vote to a Morris vote, or wanting to keep Penman as City Attorney.

And lastly, here is the 2005 race for Mayor that created the run-off:

City of San Bernardino – Mayor
113/113 100.00%

 

 

Vote Count

Percent

PAT MORRIS

11,249

43.42%

JAMES F. ‘JIM’ PENMAN

6,648

25.66%

CHAS A. KELLEY

4,079

15.74%

RICK AVILA

3,425

13.22%

MICHAEL ELLISON-LEWIS

466

1.80%

Write-In

42

0.16%

Total

25,909

100.00%

I don’t have any other data available, but online sources say that City Attorney Penman beat Stan Tomlinson by a 3 to 1 margin in 1995, a 1994 Los Angeles Times story that gives the June 9, 1994 San Bernardino County District Attorney race as: Dennis Stout: 64,186 (44%) Jim Penman: 46,249 (32%) Michael A. McDowell: 35,074 (24%).

This election is largely a municipal election without having statewide or federal races driving turn-out.  I would expect the turn-out to be around 15,000.

The takeaway: The race will be close.  Expect City Attorney James F. Penman to emphasize his records, the recent attempts to cut the City Attorney budget, the history of corruption in the City and the City Attorney’s record against corruption, and attempts to portray the challenger, David L McKenna as a carpetbagger, and allegations regarding the challenger’s actions as Public Defender and County Supervisor.  Expect challenger David McKenna to attack the longevity of City Attorney Penman’s career as City Attorney (the change mantra), the history of the City Attorney’s relationships with others in the City, and no doubt the same allegations that were brought up in the last City Attorney’s race.  Expect the budget to be an issue for the challenger, as well.

The information you obtain at this blog is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is established by reading or commenting on this blog. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation.

Address : 1255 W. Colton Ave., Suite 104
Redlands, CA 92374
Telephone: (909) 708-6055

 

Contact Information for City of San Bernardino Candidates Election 2011

By Michael Reiter, Attorney at Law

[Updated October 18, 2011]

The City of San Bernardino’s municipal election in November 2011  is very important to the people of San Bernardino.  Traditionally, there has not been a lot of quality information, and as local news-gathering diminishes, I thought, as a public service, I could provide a list of contact information.  I was frustrated a few years ago in a “Pick 4″ election for a school board.  I knew two of my votes, but rather than undervote, or randomly vote, I tried to find information about the other people running for office.  It was very difficult to do.  In our online age, that should no longer be an issue.  In that spirit, here is the contact information that I have so far as of October 18, 2011 for the November 8, 2011 election.  I am including the contested races.  The phone numbers and email are from the public internet, usually the campaign website or the public Facebook Info Page.   If any candidate wants any of this information changed, updated or removed, I will do so upon contact by the campaign.  Once again, the order is the same as on the San Bernardino Registrar of Voters Candidate list :

City of San Bernardino Third Ward

Tobin Brinker:  Website, Facebook. As of the morning of October 7 2011, there is no phone number on the official campaign website,  Email.

John Valdivia:  WebsiteFacebook,  Phone number: (877) 825–3270, Email.

City of San Bernardino Fifth Ward

Chas Kelley: Friends of Chas Kelley sent a letter with a magnet.  The magnet says, among other things, “Visit Chas on Facebook,” but I’m still unable to find a Facebook profile for Council Member Kelley as of October 7, 2011.  The magnet also gives a Phone Number: (909) 648-3506 and an Email.

Larry A. Lee:  Website, FacebookEmail.

City of San Bernardino Seventh Ward

Wendy McCammack does not appear to have an online campaign presence at this time.  I was unable to locate an email address nor a phone number as of October 18, 2011

Jim Mulvihill: Facebook,  Phone Number (from public Facebook Page): 909-886-1333, Email.

City of San Bernardino City Clerk

Georgeann “Gigi” Hanna  FacebookWebsite, Phone Number from Public Facebook Page: 909-709-2019, Email.

Peggi Hazlett:  Facebook, as of October 6, 2011, no other information.

Esther Jimenez:  Facebook, Email.

Amelia Sanchez-Lopez:  WebsiteFacebook, Phone number (from Jim Penman’s mailer #2) (909) 882-7085,  Email.

William A. Valle: Website,  Facebook, Phone Number from Public Facebook Page: (909) 486-5636, Email.

City Attorney

David L. McKenna:  Website, Facebook, Phone Number from Campaign Flier and Campaign Website: (909) 264-9021, Email.

James F. “Jim” Penman: Website (as of 10/18/2011, not yet functional, but mentioned in second mailer), Phone Number from Mailers: (909) 882-8986, Email.

The information you obtain at this blog is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is established by reading or commenting on this blog. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation.

Address : 1255 W. Colton Ave., Suite 104
                     Redlands, CA 92374
Telephone: (909) 708-6055

Signs of Fall: Election Billboards and Campaign Signs Popping Up in San Bernardino for Election 2011

By Michael Reiter, Attorney at Law

Chas Kelley, before he was elected to the Council, told a story of how he kept calling a local billboard company to make sure that he would be able to rent the billboards.  Apparently, he still is in contact with the billboard company because the Chas Kelley billboard, appropriately in Kelly green, is up on Kendall Drive.  There is also a Gigi Hanna lawn sign on the Habitat for Humanity house  built on E Street, and a Larry Lee yard sign further south on E Street, including a website address on the sign.

Let’s look at the state of affairs in the 2011 election so far (taken, in the same order, and same ballot titles as the San Bernardino Registrar of Voters Candidate list :

The candidates

Third Ward:

Tobin Brinker, Teacher/Councilman

John Valdivia, Advertising Representative

Fifth Ward

Chas A. Kelley, City Councilman, 5th Ward

Larry A. Lee, Minister/Sr. Pastor

Sixth Ward

Rikke Van Johnson

Seventh Ward

Wendy J. McCammack, Councilwoman/Business Owner

Jim Mulvihill, University Professor/Businessman

City Clerk

Georgeann “Gigi” Hanna, Communications/Administration Manager

Peggi Hazlett, Assistant to Mayor

Esther Jimenez, Senior Legislative Assistant

Amelia Sanchez-Lopez, Health Education Specialist

William A. Valle, Maintenance Clerk

City Attorney

David L. McKenna, Civil Litigation Attorney

James F. “Jim” Penman

San Bernardino City Attorney

City Treasurer

David C. Kennedy
Where are we in this campaign?  It’s just getting started.  As I related in the earlier discussion regarding the City Clerk’s race; local candidates wait until after Labor Day, but can be punished if they wait too long because of the effect of vote by mail.  According to the Registrar, the first day that Vote by Mail ballots can be mailed is October 11, 2011.  Similarly, early voting at the Registrar of Voters begins on October 11, 2011, a little than a month before the elections.  This is the “get to know you” part of the campaign, where candidates extoll their virtues rather than attack their opponent (the City Attorney’s race notwithstanding).

So, which candidates are on the ball and have working internet sites (that can be found at this date and time)?

As of the morning of September 13, 2011, less than two months from the election, in the same Registrar of Voters order:

City of San Bernardino Third Ward

These are the most notable sites of all the elections:

Third Ward council member Tobin Brinker has a functional, up-to-date website, and a Facebook page.  The main site has a blog.  There are links to YouTube endorsement videos, which is a cost-effective use of video.

Third Ward challenger John Valdivia has a website, too.  And a Facebook page and a Twitter feed.  They are not quite as polished as council member Brinker’s sites, but they are full of enthusiasm that any challenger could use as a model.

City of San Bernardino Fifth Ward

Fifth Ward council member Chas Kelley does not appear to have a website up and running at this moment.

Fifth Ward challenger Larry A. Lee has a website and a more active Facebook page.

City of San Bernardino Sixth Ward

Rikke Van Johnson is running unopposed.  Council member Johnson does have a personal Facebook page.  There is a link to website on the page, but it is currently a dead link.

City of San Bernardino Seventh Ward

Seventh Ward Council member Wendy McCammack does not appear to have an online presence at this time.

Perennial Seventh Ward challenger Jim Mulvihill has a Facebook page, but does not appear to have a website.

City of San Bernardino City Clerk

This is a rare open race with no incumbent.

City Clerk candidate Georgeann “Gigi” Hanna.  It took a little searching, but Ms. Hanna does have a Facebook page.

City Clerk candidate Peggi Hazlett, does not appear to have a web presence at the moment beyond a LinkedIn page that is not related to her bid.

City Clerk candidate Esther Jimenez has a Facebook page.  She does not appear to have a website.

City Clerk candidate Amelia Sanchez-Lopez has a brochure-style website.  Ms. Sanchez-Lopez does not appear to have a Facebook page.

City Clerk candidate William A. Valle has a Facebook page.  He also has a website.

City Attorney

City Attorney challenger David L. McKenna has a very simple website.  He may have a Facebook page, but I was unable to find it.

San Bernardino City Attorney James F. “Jim” Penman does have a website, electpenman.com that still features his last Mayoral campaign.

City Treasurer

City Treasurer David C. Kennedy is unchallenged, and virtually absent from the Internet.

The most interesting information that I have found on the web is the Third Ward race.  I think the other candidates in contested elections should look at the two contenders in that race for ideas about what to do.

The information you obtain at this blog is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is established by reading or commenting on this blog. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation.

Address : 1255 W. Colton Ave., Suite 104
Redlands, CA 92374
Telephone: (909) 708-6055
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 31 other followers