An investigation into allegations of vote trading attempts by individuals trying to influence the San Mateo mayoral process is now in the hands of the San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office.
San Mateo County District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe said the city of San Mateo submitted a letter to his office Thursday morning asking to investigate the allegations individuals tried to convince a San Mateo councilmember to trade their vote.
San Mateo Mayor Amourence Lee said she was approached on Dec. 7 and Dec. 11 by individuals claiming she could be voted mayor if she agreed to vote for a certain candidate to fill a vacant council seat.
“Any time there is an allegation someone was trying to violate the law by offering to trade a position of appointment, it strikes at the core of the democratic process, and we take it very seriously,” Wagstaffe said.
At a Dec. 12 council meeting, Lee said individuals attempted to convince her to support Cliff Robbins, a member of the San Mateo Sustainability and Infrastructure Commission, for the fifth seat in exchange for her becoming mayor. Lee has declined to say who approached her. Robbins publicly denied any knowledge or involvement.
The situation occurred over an impasse in appointing Lee as mayor by a four-person council. Two councilmembers wanted to fill the council seat first so five people could appoint the mayor instead of four, while two others wanted to vote for the mayor first.
The deadlock lasted a week and left the city without a mayor during that time. The system calls for the councilmembers to rotate annually amongst themselves for the mayor position, and the city charter calls for the council to appoint a member to fill the mayor vacancy.
If the council deadlocks 2-2 to fill the vacancy, the mayor is allowed to make the tiebreak decision within 30 days, according to the charter.
(22) comments
Story says "the city of San Mateo submitted" the letter calling for an investigation. Who signed the letter? Lee has the moral compass of Joe McCarthy. I am surprised more people don't see this. He dealt i guilt by association and so did Lee in her attacking Linares for working for the Catholic Church. Now she waves an envelope the way Joe did and saying it contained the names of "known Communists."
Sounds like you were at a completely different meeting than I was, back in the real world the envelope was to confirm that the name candidate that the back room dealers were pushing for was known before the first vote.
Also, stop crybabying over the voters choice. Voters have a right to know how candidates stand on one of the most important current issues, Linares lost fair and square.
''stop crybabying over the voters choice." I assume you kept your mouth shut when Trump was our leader.
I don't know exactly who signed the letter, but I'm sure it was staff -- either the city attorney or the city manager. They are obligated by law to report such an allegation.
So the saga of “The Days of Our Lives in San Mateo” continues. Let’s see if Mr. Wagstaffe can provide a twist in this soap opera and reverse the decision to make Ms. Lee the mayor. I hope the national press begins paying attention and we get talking heads, including lawyers, of course. San Mateo may hit the big time…
Oh knock it off. Let's return to regular order and get the business of the city done. Hopefully Nash and Newsom are now ready to settle down and do the work.
Well - at least its clear who Westy is working for: Lee_2.0
To be clear, I don't know Amourance Lee and though I had heard her name I knew nothing about her before the disruption of the San Mateo city council meeting. This led me to ask what was behind 2 city council members disregarding the oath of office they had just taken and 100 years of precedent to refuse to appoint a mayor. The answers I found were very interesting.
Whoa, Westy...
Are you suggesting your interest in Amourence Lee's involvement in issues connected with November's election just blossomed magically, and mystically last week when you attended a city council meeting? As I recall, you have been very vocal in supporting Lee's ambush tactics against Candidate Linhares.
Dear Ray, Yep. And it furthermore has been and remains a mystery to me that you keep blaming Lee for Linares' loss because it is perfectly appropriate for his stance against human rights to have been brought to light before the vote. I'll take your word for it if Lee helped raise it, and if she did, I thank her for it. We cannot elevate people to office who consider some of us as not having rights to our own bodies.
Double whoa, Westy
You wrote that I "keep blaming Lee for Linares' loss" because of his position on abortion?
I have been pretty clear that the tactics used by Amourence Lee were out of bounds for an election to a nonpartisan city council election. While I disagree with the appropriateness of such tactics... when did I attribute Rod's loss to those tactics?
We really don't know Rod's position on abortion with respect to Proposition 1. Most Catholics support some form of legalized abortion. So, a member of the Catholic faith may support abortion but not support Proposition 1. For anyone to suggest that Rod's choice to not answer Amourence's question about Proposition 1 means that he is committed to subverting human rights... as you did... is wholly inappropriate.
What's particularly odd about this exchange is what's missing... two former San Mateo mayors have declared in these pages that it was wrong for Amourence to introduce abortion into the San Mateo city council election. When asked twice for your response to the opinion of those two former mayors... what do we hear? Crickets.
Westy – if you’d like, I can refer to our city soap opera as “As the San Mateo World Turns.” BTW, you never settled down and did the work to expand upon why starving horses in Saudi Arabia or anyone else consuming alfalfa would save the state from its water shortage problem. Just a reminder that I’m still waiting with bated breath for your plans…
Do your own work TY. There are college courses devoted exclusively to water in the west. I have taken several of them. I suggest you do the same. Though if you can't figure out why growing alfalfa in the Mojave desert is not the best use of our water resources, then there may not be much point.
Hello, Terence
I hate to impose on you but I was unable to locate the discussion about state water policies referenced in your post this afternoon. Can you do my homework? Did that discussion follow an LTE or op-ed piece? Thanks...
Terence
In the words of Emily Litella... "Never mind." I found it. It was the discussion following Dan Walters column, "Can ocean water slake the state's thirst?" In that discussion, I offered the counterpoint to Westy's "desertification" comment. She did not respond.
BTW... guess which San Mateo DJ reader said last week that local government is in "great shape"?
Jorg
Westy – no need for college courses, a small bit of common sense provides a simple solution - one you're unable to dismiss. As for your taking college courses devoted to water in the west, might I suggest you request a refund? If you can’t provide a plan to tackle our water shortage problem other than “growing alfalfa bad” then it’s obvious you missed a few classes or the class wasn’t worth the time. If you can’t figure out why allowing 50% of our water to flow out to sea isn’t the best use of our water resources, perhaps a college class on first aid – to review self-inflicted wounds.
Also, you didn’t provide a preference for our city soap opera name. I’ll assume either is acceptable. Speaking of soap operas, will we soon see another episode of “The Dung and the Pest Mess” regarding the geese poop problem in Foster City? Did the geese leave “presents” before flying south for the winter (or is FC considered the “south”)? It’s too late for Thanksgiving and Christmas, so maybe we can shoot (pun intended) for a solution sometime next year and make use of those predation permits (although I can’t recall whether predation permits have been obtained).
Ray, it’s no problem to do homework for you, but I’m glad you found the discussion. It is too bad Westy never responded to your comment – we may have been able to learn something. As for Jorg, his local government may be limited to his household and he’s been working out or he thinks local government folks have been working out… BTW, isn’t it about time for another Jorg LTE with another twist on “orange man bad”? I'm not sure he's ready to join us in the present, even though presents may be presented to him on Christmas.
Good morning, Terence
In fairness to Jorg, he has apparently been busy revising his new book.
While I enjoy "thrusting and parrying" with other DJ readers in these pages, I've noticed some progressive-leaning contributors will abandon a thread when they are unable to refute an opinion that differs from their own. Further, a response steeped in sloganeering or a retort that reshapes another reader's words are not very persuasive positions on any topic.
Ray - great observations. I figure the contributors you refer to want only to be heard, but not understood. In some ways that’s a shame, because furthering conversations and ideas should be the aim. By now I can pretty much predict when I’ll be ghosted, usually after their opinions and positions are roasted. I know, a bit harsh to hear, but perhaps things will change for the better this coming year. PS Edward Ring of the California Globe wrote a 15 part series earlier this year on the water issue. The series is quite informative if one would like to round out one's knowledge base on the subject. PPS I’ve been watching more episodes of Nazi Megastructures – recommended if one would like to get background on the engineering and structures the German and Japanese built during WWII.
Terence, I think you may have misunderstood what happened. Councilmember Lee was approached asking for her to trade her vote in order to become mayor. Instead of agreeing to this she refused to engage and instead reported it publicly at two separate council meetings (as it happened twice). She was elected mayor despite refusing to engage in vote trading, so there would be no reason to reverse that decision. Both councilmember Lee and Cliff Robbins are victims of underhanded tactics; Lee because she was threatened to not get her expected-by-city-charter mayoral appointment without vote trading; and Cliff because whoever approached councilmember Lee hoping they could get him on council has implicitly tarnished his application, which is not fair to him unless he was aware. (And councilmember Lee did not indicate any reason to believe this was Cliff's fault). I hope that the DA follows through on investigating this.
rballard – thanks for your commentary. If we assume your commentary is accurate and if Ms. Lee wasn’t planning on trading her vote then why would Ms. Lee need to have named, and drag, Mr. Robbins through the mud, so to speak, before Mr. Hedges was chosen? And why wouldn’t Ms. Lee name the names of those that approached her? It could be perceived that Ms. Lee attempted to nudge a vote for Mr. Hedges, else council members would be potentially colored via “guilt by association” if they voted for Mr. Robbins. If Mr. Robbins were named a council member, there's no guarantee Ms. Lee would have been selected as mayor.
Let’s see if any answers will be provided via an investigation (as the only information we’re currently receiving may not be reported completely). I expect the issue will return, perhaps in the near future, but definitely during the next campaign cycle. Maybe even a recall?
If you see horses in Texas, they're not Zebras. [cool]
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.