D.A. & FPPC Clear Pacifica City Council Member Sue Digre

The San Mateo County District Attorney and the Enforcement Division of the State of California, Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) have cleared Pacifica City Council member Sue Digre regarding the anonymous complaints against her. See the letters below for details.

D.A. Letter

FPPC Letter

Comments

[Lionel Emde]

"I attended a Planning Commission and City Council meeting where the unfounded charges and allegations against Sue Digre were presented in such a mean-spirited and hateful way. All those who participated in that display should now go back and admit they were wrong and apologize for that mean-spirited behavior."

HA!
Leo, you know that when large sums of money are riding on the outcome, the greedy and powerful will stop at nothing to achieve their ever-greater solvency.

[Laurie Soca]

"... mean-spirited and hateful way..."
Sounds familiar. Once again, Pacifica is a leader.

Who can forget the local hooligans' disruption of a California Native Plant Society meeting in Pacifica Community Center a few years ago (hint: at least one of them is on this thread!)? Or some of the nasty diatribes in the local paper?

They go low, we go high.
Time to "go high," Pacifica!

[Dan Moroso]

Oh, the irony! One of the flimflam men, who was involved in trying to get Sue Digre thrown off City Council, has been thrown out of his own house multiple times.

Tears in your beers.

[Leo Leon]

I attended a Planning Commission and City Council meeting where the unfounded charges and allegations against Sue Digre were presented in such a mean-spirited and hateful way. All those who participated in that display should now go back and admit they were wrong and apologize for that mean-spirited behavior. Their names and their comments are all recorded on the videos of those meetings. I warned them all that the truth would eventually leave them with egg on their faces. I hope that people learn from this. One thing for sure, we do not need well-funded outside sources financing and getting involved in our local elections and issues. Sue took the high road and I applaud her for that.

[Alan Wald]

Pacifica palindrome lovers who post with their real name suggest we settle this the old-fashioned way: "Draw, o' coward!"

[big banker]

Butch:

Using real names doesn't work, either.

Take a look over on Pacifica NextDoor.

[Dan Stegink]

Lest the trolls mis-remember what Mary Ann Nihart's actual situation was, let these words from the City Attorney remind them:

http://www.pacifica.city/images/PAC_CAND_MAN_withdrawal_city_comments.jpg

Nihart HERSELF contacted the office of U.S. Special Counsel, concerned that she might be committing a federal crime:
"...Attached, you will find an opinion from the U.S. Special Counsel that is on point for endorsement by county political committees. This was previously sent to me in 2012 with an email response that I am having our IT department search for from our General Counsel and the Special Counsel. At that time, I had forwarded the email to then chair David Burrutto. It surprised everyone in 2012, but Karen and I both refused endorsement and I was able to continue. Now after eight years of service, both on the Pacifica City Council as well as county-wide positions including C/CAG chair for 2 plus years, ABAG and SMCTA, I am faced with some highly difficult decisions. In 2008, when I originally ran for office, I was not a Federal employee in the Executive Branch and I was endorsed by the Democratic Party. That situation changed in 2010. In 2012, I asked for an opinion from the Special Counsel and was clearly told that there was no bright line but that if anyone was endorsed by a political party that I could not run. The attached decision was what I was given in 2012. I worked with David at that time, shared the email with him, and as I mentioned both Karen and I did not accept the endorsement. ..."

[Stars War?]

"Speaking of which, when are you going to tell us who you really are?"

Why would I ever do this? As the editor of this site, you've just permitted an individual to post a call for an investigation into a private citizen over filing a complaint with the D.A. So, no thank you, I'd rather not have someone go Travis Bickle on me.

The hypocrisy is amazing. Someone exercises his/her legal right to file a complaint with the D.A. and it's called a witch-hunt, and then someone unironically suggests a private investigator be hired to look into the complainant.

Again, I'm wondering where all this faux outrage about filing complaints was when anonymous complainers successfully disenfranchised voters in 2016. I suspect at least two of them have posted in this very thread.

[Butch Larroche]

"And, true to form, they use fake names. Cowards."

Riptide allows fake names. Jay Bird, Me, Linty Marr, Laurie Soca, just to name a few.

I really wish that all blogs would disallow this. Make people use their real names.

(EDITOR'S NOTE: Butch, I totally agree with you. Over the years, I have tried to enforce that rule, but people from ALL sides objected, so in the interest of free speech, I kept the policy loose.)

[Stars War?]

Speaking of anonymous cowards, are the individuals who filed complaints against Mary Ann Nihart during the 2016 campaign ever going to step up and identify themselves or does this sort of faux outrage apply only when someone you support is targeted?
(EDITOR'S NOTE: Beats me, Stars War? Speaking of which, when are you going to tell us who you really are? Pot kettle black!)

[Joe Lewis]

The rogue realtors in Pacifica were too afraid to come to City Council. They were afraid of losing business. They are losing market share to out-of-town real estate offices.

Sour grapes by a bored few. The next witch-hunt was how Deirdre "stole" the election.

There will be serious repercussions for the Pacifica realtors who are involved.

[John Maybury]

And, true to form, they use fake names. Cowards.

[Peter Loeb]

I predicted this. After the FPPC and the D.A. both say there's no violation, nothing to the charges, the Sue Digre witch-hunters will still say she's guilty.

[Me]

The FPPC is useless -- Google it.
And the D.A. letter lacks evidence needed for a courtroom to prove the domicile question.
Somebody has friends. I have no dog in this, just that this proves nothing.

[Mark Choppa]

Perhaps the person who initiated the complaint has some conflict of interest and should consider his legal standing. Perhaps he has something to hide. Like greed and envy. Maybe he should be investigated by a credible P.I.

[Dan Stegink]

Here's the text of the District Attorney letter:
http://www.pacificariptide.com/files/from.pdf

"Dear Sir or Madam,

Last month, an anonymous complainant brought to my attention
allegations of wrongdoing by Pacifica City Councilmember Sue
Digre. Because you expressed interest or concern regarding those
allegations, I am writing to inform you that the investigation has been
concluded and that no criminal charges will be filed.

There were two principal areas of inquiry. The first related to the address
Ms. Digre provided in connection with registering to vote and running for
public office. Both her listed address and her actual place of residence
were within the City of Pacifica. California law allows a person to have
more than one “residence” but only one “domicile,” which is considered
a person’s residence for voting purposes. My review of the evidence
satisfies me that the home Ms. Digre owns on Edgemar Avenue, and
which she set forth on the forms, was in fact her domicile during the
period in question.

The other area related to a possible conflict of interest for failing to
disclose that she was residing at the mobile home park that was, for a
period of time, the subject of considerable public interest. Generally
speaking, a public official must not participate in or attempt to influence
a governmental decision in which she knows she has a financial interest.
While Ms. Digre did participate in discussions relating to the topic of rent
control, which could have indirectly affected her tenancy, she did not
cross the line into decisions directly affecting the mobile home park or
her tenancy there.

It bears noting in these types of review the limited role of the District
Attorney. My conclusion here expresses no position on the merits of rent
control or the underlying issues relating to the mobile home park, nor
does it endorse Ms. Digre’s decision to not publicly disclose her tenancy
at that park. Such issues are best left to the democratic process, or to
other agencies such as the FPPC, which may impose civil or
administrative sanctions. My role is to determine whether the conduct in
question amounted to a criminal violation meriting prosecution. Where,
as here, it does not, not further action by my office is warranted and the
investigation is therefore closed.

Best regards,
Albert A. Serrato
Assistant District Attorney
400 County Center, 3rd Floor
Redwood City, CA 94063
(650) 363-4823"

[Dan Stegink]

The Chief of Enforcement at the FPPC has confirmed this letter's authenticity:
http://www.pacificariptide.com/files/insufficient.foundnoviolation.pdf

"STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION
428 J Street • Suite 620 • Sacramento, CA 95814-2329

May 23, 2017

Frank Vella
Via Email: frank@frankvella.com

Re: Sworn Complaint Against Susan Digre

Dear Mr. Vella:

The Fair Political Practices Commission’s Enforcement Division has reviewed your sworn complaint regarding Ms. Digre and her decisions regarding the City of Pacifica’s rent control discussions. After review, staff found that the complaint contained insufficient evidence of a violation of the Political Reform Act. We will, therefore, not pursue the matter further.

Sincerely,

GWest [signature]

Galena West
Chief, Enforcement Division

GW/tr
cc: Susan Digre (via email)"

[Jay Bird]

The letter addresses Mr. Frank Vella.
Is this the same Frank Vella of Pacifica listed on the SAMCAR website?

[Linty Marr]

Now that this nonsense has passed, where can Pacifica take a shower?

[Julie]

Was Frank "Anonymous"?