The incumbent and her supporters are crying foul at every opportunity – claiming bullying, mistruths and name calling. The incumbent’s “news” page on her campaign site covers such critical issues as:
Jensen Campaign: Dirty or Just Dumb? — written by her campaign manager
The Dirtiest Campaign — again, written by her campaign manager
Committee Supporting Jensen Pays $2500 to Endorse — A lie perpetrated by SJI owned by the sheriff’s friend and her daughter’s employer, Dan Pulcrano
Santa Clara Sheriff Wanna-be Jensen and his backers have some explaining to do — a link to a political local link aggregator linking to the above article by SJI. They also desperately attempt to tie the DSA/CPOA to Vic Aljouny — a piece of information they knew was a blatant lie.
Sheriff Smith Crushing Kevin — another link to a political local link aggregator that links to a blog done by her campaign manager about a poll they did early in the campaign prior to Jensen gaining name recognition. Deputies are referred to as “disgruntled”, “getting kicked in the you know whats” and misguided… for starters.
What do you notice about all the above that is the same?
They address issues important to the voter? No.
They address issues that have been brought up re: the quality of service under the incumbent? No.
They address accomplishments improving the office rather than herself? No.
They address the sheriff’s own financial irregularities that she’s attempting to correct with the FPPC? Nope.
They address the short staffing, lost programs and other internal issues of the office under her? Ye..no.
They address the questions about the sheriff’s background history? Uhuh.
They all rely on name calling and misinformation? BINGO! You get the stuffed animal.
I could go find plenty of other blogs and newspaper articles out there where the incumbent and her people call deputies “losers”, “keystone kops”, “distrusted”, “spreading disinformation”, engaging in a “coup”, or the funniest and probably closest to an admission of illegal behavior we’ll ever get from the incumbent — that the DSA was “hijacked” out of her control by crooked deputies. Deputies who, by the way, are acting on the demands of the VOTING majority of the body — 90+% voted to endorse Kevin Jensen. They voted to create a PAC with the CPOA and they voted to spend the money they had earmarked for political efforts. All above board, all available to see upon request.
What I can’t find is one blog, article, video, or other form of media where the incumbent addresses any of the concerns. Not Sierra LaMar, not Audrie Pott, not the failure to effectively deal with AB109 inmates and thereby endangering personnel unnecessarily, not putting correctional deputies on the street in an enforcement capacity without the necessary level of training — none of it. The more we bring our concerns to the public, the bigger the drama gets — we’re “bullying”, we’re all dirty cops she’s had to keep under control and now we’ve hijacked her union, and in a moment of failing reading comprehension, Robinson attempts to claim our efforts are “cannibalizing” deputies. But still no direct effort to provide any real information to the voter through all that muck.
We ask about AB109 staffing, we’re told she saved $10M in the jails.
We ask about the increasing crime rates in the county, in response we get the sheriff manages two of the safest (and rather wealthy) cities in California as contracts. No mention of the fact she is the sheriff of the unincorporated area — 3rd in the county for homicides, 20+% increase in property crimes, and skyrocketing domestic violence incidents.
We ask about the failures of administrative decisions and we hear the “hijacked” union is using deputies money to attack her without regard to truth — no bother to mention there was a vote by the deputies to spend that money, it’s was not an autonomous board decision, and certainly no mention about exactly what is untrue and why.
We ask how she thinks we can afford to provide personnel to San Jose PD? We get dead silence in the face of reality the incumbent doesn’t want you to know — the Sheriff’s office staffing is more dire than San Jose’s — “Enforcement deputies are understaffed by 18 percent, not including those who are out on injury, medical and military leave, which brings the shortage to 23 percent in the Sheriff’s Office. In contrast, San Jose police are 10 percent understaffed, with the shortage rising to 20 percent when personnel unable to work the street are taken into account.”
All we get in response to all this is attacks from her on her own personnel. Attacks that Kevin Jensen, her challenger, is “playing dirty”, and implications that what the DSA is doing is without majority support and thereby wrong. Is this the kind of leader you want? One who won’t answer questions, will throw her own people under the bus in every effort to avoid answering questions, refuses to appear in any public debates using poor excuses…?
It didn’t even start with the DSA or the CPOA doing anything more than daring to hold an endorsement vote she didn’t approve of. Right at the beginning, she went so far as to send each of the associations (DSA Letter, CPOA Letter) a bullying and somewhat threatening letter, comparing their efforts to Nazi Germany and explaining how she was in a “politically powerful position in an attempt to shut down an endorsement vote she knew wasn’t likely to go in her favor.
The incumbent has spent the entire campaign, rather than saying why she’s better than her opponent, running against her own people with nothing more than school yard taunts and name calling. She has sent her supporters out to claim injury rather than argue facts. She has sent them to attack Kevin Jensen, her challenger, for every petty issue she can find. But still not facts and no answers from the incumbent.
Please realize, that what the DSA and the CPOA have to say out there may be “ugly” but it’s not a stretch. I’ve talked to people involved in pretty much all the cases we’ve discussed. I’ve no reason to believe that the deputies failed in any effort other than their attempts to overcome the administrative failures they continue to face in this office.
It may seem wrong to point out all these cases to some people, “dirty politics” if you will, but if we remain silent about just how badly these administrative decisions have interfered with multiple cases now, would we be doing the right thing? We would be allowing the incumbent to ride into a 5th term on the belief that she has done a good job, only because the deputies out there are working harder than ever before trying to keep the facade up. Why would they do that? Because what they do is important to them and over 90% of them clearly voted that they want to be able to do a better job with better leadership.
Yes, the information on these cases went out on flyers by the PAC, on my blog, via other means, I’m sure, as people make an effort to reach voters. Is it any dirtier to stand and explain to a single voter, or 30 in a room about the administrative failures that hurt these cases? We have been saying the same thing all along, face to face or in a mailer, or on a blog — these are serious failures on the part of the incumbent and rather than address them, she continues to attack her deputies.
If you just look around at the information provided to the public by all sources, ask yourself, why can’t the sheriff respond to a single question, other than the softball questions she gets to plan for, that is posed to her? Why won’t she really debate? Why does she keep saying she won’t discuss misinformation; but refuses to provide contradictory information — or even clarify what she believes is not true. If we’re wrong about all these cases, why doesn’t she provide a response, documentation — or any of the personnel involved step up to defend the administrative decisions with the facts and documentation she seems to think her opponents are hiding from you?
If we’re all wrong, why is she just resorting to name calling rather than participating in a debate and answering the increasing concerns of the public regarding her ability to lead the sheriff’s office?
A politician who can’t answer questions to their constituents is a politician who needs to be shown the door.
Vote Kevin Jensen.