SD10: Hayashi launches ‘FrackBob.com’ site

Democratic former assemblywoman Mary Hayashi of Hayward has launched another website against her main rival for the 10th State Senate District seat, Assemblyman Bob Wieckowski, D-Fremont.

The new “FrackBob.com” site calls attention to Wieckowski’s opposition to a moratorium on fracking, or hydraulic fracturing – the use of pressurized water to break rock formations and free the oil or gas within.

It goes hand-in-hand with a mailer that landed in district voters’ mailboxes this week, and coincides with the failure of a state Senate bill that would’ve imposed just such a moratorium.

Hayashi fracking mailer_1

Hayashi fracking mailer_2

Hayashi’s website features an embedded, brief video clip of Wieckowski, at the Bay Area News Group’s editorial board meeting, saying he doesn’t support a moratorium. But here’s Wieckowski’s full answer to the question:

“I do not support the ban on fracking. As everyone knows, I introduced the first bill to bring transparency to the issue of what was going on with fracking. I spent three years of my life working on two bills that were defeated by a combination of the oil companies and the environmentalists.

“And what we have now as a result of that work, we have regulations that were promulgated that will provide for pre-notification to landowners, disclosure of how much water is being used, disclosure of where the water is going, monitoring of the wellheads after, a website that goes up, complete disclosure of the chemicals that are used in the frack, and also – if you claim ‘trade secret’ – we created a private right of action for any citizen that would be affected by that, if the executive director of DOGGR [Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources] did not challenge the trade secret claim.

“Those are the regulations. That brings transparency so we know what is going on. I’m proud of that.”

Hayashi’s website and mailer say Wieckowski “supports fracking in the Bay Area.” I don’t see that he ever has said anything about this specific region, so I assume Hayashi is concluding that if he doesn’t support a fracking moratorium, he by extension must support fracking anywhere.

“The reality is, there is no oil in the Bay Area, so fracking in the Bay Area would not be happening,” Wieckowski campaign consultant Lisa Tucker said Thursday, adding that California now has the “toughest disclosure law in the country” as a result of Wieckowski’s earlier legislation. “Like all of their communications against Bob, it’s disingenuous and it’s just part of the story.”

The website also features a sound file of a robocall from “Theresa, a longtime Sierra Club member and a lifetime environmentalist” who criticizes Wieckowski’s position. Michelle Myers, director of the club’s Bay Area chapter, said Thursday she has heard from some members who were confused by or concerned about the call.

“We did not make an endorsement in that race,” Myers said, describing the caller’s self-identification “a tactic used by the campaign to identify themselves with the Sierra Club brand, and that is not appropriate.”

At least this website and mailer deal with a real issue on which the candidates have a real difference of opinion. Most of the nasty mailers, ads and websites in this race have either been about Hayashi’s 2012 shoplifting conviction, for which she remains on probation, or Hayashi’s claim that Wieckowski “protected rapists” by voting against a certain bill in committee in 2012, even though he later voted for an amended version on the Assembly floor.

Josh Richman

Josh Richman covers state and national politics for the Bay Area News Group. A New York City native, he earned a bachelor’s degree in journalism from the University of Missouri and reported for the Express-Times of Easton, Pa. for five years before coming to the Oakland Tribune and ANG Newspapers in 1997. He is a frequent guest on KQED Channel 9’s “This Week in Northern California;” a proud father; an Eagle Scout; a somewhat skilled player of low-stakes poker; a rather good cook; a firm believer in the use of semicolons; and an unabashed political junkie who will never, EVER seek elected office.

  • The logic of Mary Hayashi and her campaign is absurd. Everything she does is either a flat out lie–like her rapist site–or is intended to mislead or deceive, like her bully website and this fracking website.

    Sounds like a desperate politician that will say or do anything to get ahead.

  • RRSenileColumnist

    Hayashi has one ace up her sleeve: the ex-convict vote

  • Willis James

    I find it rather interesting to watch Hayashi’s final efforts.
    I can’t figure out if she is just worried about making it into the top two, or if she harbors some real hope that she will win in November.

    It may be that she thinks if she can get within 10 points of Weicowski on June 3rd, that suddenly money and support will come flooding her way.
    How else can she retain any confidence for her chances in November?

    Mostly right from the beginning she seems caught up in her own delusions.
    She did the same thing in the supervisor race in 2012. Each time her hired “pollsters” gave her surveys indicating that the public’s attitude towards her and her positions made winning possible. She spent over $30,000 on polls this time. In 2012, the polling was wildly off base.
    I’m guessing the same will be true in 2014.
    It would seem that polling firms are more than willing to take surveys that provide a positive outcome, such that a candidate desperate to get back into office, will delude themselves into running, despite all common sense.

    It will be interesting to see how Mary faces up to the latest reality check on June 3.
    Simply put, there is no path to a November victory for her, short of some scandal coming out about Weicowski.

    Mary seems to have convinced herself so thoroughly that she didn’t intentionally shoplift, that she now thinks the public will buy her denials that she even shoplifted at all. That she took a plea deal and was sentenced to 3 years probation seems to have escaped her sense of reality.
    I’d love to see her diary during the past year or two, to see what she tells herself every day.

    The poll she should have conducted was a simple one, consisting of one question.

    1. Would you vote for a candidate to represent you in the California State Senate if that candidate was currently on probation for shoplifting $2,500 of clothing from a retail store?

    I’m thinking none of Mary’s pollsters told her that they should ask that simple and direct question.

  • Marga

    Hayashi is gettings lots of late contributions, so clearly she’s not the only one who thinks she can win if more money is poured into her: http://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/Campaign/Committees/Detail.aspx?id=1336374&session=2013&view=late1

  • Willis James

    I had not looked since about 5/14
    Since then, what I now see is about $19,000 directly to Mary’s fund, and about $50,000 to the outside expenditure committee.

    When I look at Bob during that same time, I see $80,000 plus $25,000 he kicked in, and another $80,000 to the outside expenditure committee.

    My only mild surprise for Mary is PORAC (Peace Officers Research Association of California)

    Which gave her $25,000 recently.
    For some reason, this group always gives Mary money.
    Heck, even in 2012, fresh from her conviction, they gave her money and other support.
    Imagine, a police officers group pouring money into the hands of person arrested for felony grand theft shoplifting only months after she takes a plea deal.
    A ugly commentary on their values.

    Anyway, on the latest contributions, Wieckowski gets far more in total contributions.
    If Mary is spending down to below $200K or even $100k, she isn’t going to have any monetary advantage in the November election.
    In fact she will be at a monetary disadvantage.
    Weickowski will easily be able to raise more than she can over the summer and fall.

    I think a huge amount of damage was done to Mary in the past couple weeks as every TV station went forth with the newly released video.
    I saw ABC7 run it at 5, 6, and 11
    CBS5 really did a job on it, at Noon, 5, 6, and 11 and even coupled the store surveillance video with the Chronicle interview video.
    The combo was amazingly effective and then they ended it by saying “she is still on probation”.
    Also KTVU ran it at least at 5 and 10
    I didn’t see KNTV or KRON.

    Any chance Mary had went out the door with that wall to wall coverage of those newly obtained videos… She has still not recovered and we have to remember, people were already voting when they saw those videos. I’d say those videos counterbalanced half the money she had spent up to that point.
    Plus, they’ll be the gift that keeps on giving in the Fall.

    We shall see. I don’ t see Mary reaching over 29% even after spending $500,000+
    If she gets under $25% as was the case in the supervisors race, then she is dead in the water.

    Its going to be so interesting to see how the voters have taken it all in.
    I say the shoplifting and being on probation, trumps everything else, but she probably still makes the top two with all the money she has spent. Small chance for Kuo, if the shoplifting material has struck home.

  • My takeaway from the video–especially the version on Hayashi’s frack website–is that Hayashi is daydreaming and not paying attention throughout the entire editorial meeting. No wonder her perception on what happened is so far off from reality.

    Moreover, everything she says is nonsense. Shoplifting aside, she has no business voting on legislation. She has no idea what she’s supposed to be doing at her job.

    The fact she’s even attacking Wieckowski on his environmental record is stupid because its arguably his biggest strength. Not only did he author the first legislation regulating fracking in the nation, but he also influenced Tesla’s decision to build their factory in his district and Tesla may build their new battery factory in his district as well–and Tesla is the hottest company on the planet right now.

    I’m stunned that the Wieckowski campaign isn’t making a bigger deal about it as he has track record of environmentalism that is also pro business and created jobs. I’ve seen a couple online ads about Wieckowski voting on clean air laws, but these clean air ads are a fraction of the 20-30+ Bob Wieckowski ads I’ve been seeing online everyday for weeks. I can’t hide from his ads.

  • Marga

    If I hadn’t released the video myself, I would have been very curious about the release date. As it is, part of me wonders why the SFPD chose to send it when they did, but I think it was probably just coincidence.

  • Marga

    You need AdBlock Plus. I never see any ads.

  • Willis James

    Perhaps some folks in the SFPD are not PORAC members.

    Either way, the timing of when it exploded in the media was near perfect.

    I’d guess that 70+ percent of Dist. 10 voters saw it one or more times on the news.

    Like I said, if Hayashi sent out 6 mailers up to that point, the news coverage of the video probably outweighed most of the benefits she had gained thus far.

    Dovetailing with the prior negative mailers about the shoplifting, yet coming to the voters via their favorite ‘unbiased’ news stations.

    The CBS5 version of coverage was as though it was directed by Wiecowski’s campaign consultant. They ran it 5 times that day, and possibly on the morning news the next day.


    Doesn’t get much better than that.
    Compare that to the six “positive” mailers a voter might have received from Mary.

  • bbox231

    Both candidates have given electorate every reason to oust them. Take a close look at any of the also-rans. While they are all amateurs they have, at least, not yet subordinated the broader public interest to that of personal and/or special interests.. .

  • Guest

    Hayashi’s hit pieces and attack web sites on Wieckowski are as bad as any I’ve ever seen in 40 years of watching politics, just gutter stuff, not one ounce of truth in any of them. They are so bad – evil really – you get the sense Hayashi recruited her campaign team from Lompoc prison, no normal campaign consultants would cook up stuff this odious. Protecting rapists? Fracking in the bay area? I mean these mailers are just ludicrous at every level.
    Can’t wait for Hayashi’ political career to be over soon, I’ve seen some bad actors in politics, but she takes the cake. Looking at these mailers and web sites, and thinking about her “double life” as a serial shoplifter, it’s pretty clear to me this Hayashi lady is likely a sociopath.

  • bbox231

    Agreed – – – and why does WIeckowski feel so motivated to sling back? I mean – come on – take the high road. Out of the gates – Hayashi is a sunken ship. Stay focused on your own merits and contributions and let her sink in the sunset. BUT – Bob appears to be concerned about something else. He’s uncertain of himself and his record to the point that he TOO needs to slug it out in the mud. . . . .

    There’s something rotten in both camps.

    TIme for a change.

  • Guest

    The Wiekowski campaign only pointed out to voters Hayashi is on probation for grand theft. She was, of course, arrested for stealing designer clothes from Neiman Marcus. Not all voters know this, many don’t read the newspaper. Clearly Hayashi’s secret “double life” boosting clothes from out-of-town department stores – while in disguise – is information voters need to be informed about in an assembly race! I reject this view that it was somehow how “unfair” for the Wiekowski campaign to remind voters that Hayashi is on probation, and that she has been ordered by the courts to not come within 50 years yards of Neiman Marcus. The whole shoplifting incident -indicates Hayashi has a serious character problem, which is highly relevant to whether or not she is fit to serve as State Senator

  • bbox231

    No one said it was “unfair” – but it is tangential to the problems that plague our communities. If Bob were so confident of his own contributions and successes – there’s no need to sink to this level.

    I speculate that Bob doesn’t have that confidence because anyone familiar with his track record knows that it stinks as well . . .

    Even the Bay Area News Group called him out on more than one occasion for backtracking on promises made, subordinating the interests of communities throughout California to the special interests of municipal unions.


  • Marga

    Question for you, can you think of a single politician who, faced with an opponent with four times more money than them, did not attack their opponent?

    I didn’t think so.

    Should we thus conclude that there are no politicians that have any confidence on themselves, or should we rather think that when you are outspent, you are better off telling voters why they shouldn’t vote for your opponent?

  • bbox231

    Umm, Marga – I noticed you didn’t wait for an answer . . . .

    But – back on point.

    There’s being outspent economically and there is possessing the ability to outspend your opponent in, for example, credibility.

    And, by remaining focused on his public record of accomplishment, Bob could very easily have taken the high road. But for some reason, Bob elected NOT to focus on his record. . . .and, instead, focusses considerable effort and money slogging thru the mud.

    The idea that constituency didn’t know about Hayashi’s confusion over concepts of “yours” and “mine” is a straw man at best. After all, anyone that wasn’t aware of her entanglements with the law and inability to concoct a consistent story, also likely doesn’t know there’s an election going on – so, how about you and I focusing our thoughts on those that are semi-in-touch with reality, shall we?

    Hayashi has demonstrated her lack of respect for the law and personal property.

    Wieckowski has demonstrated his lack of respect for municipalities all over California (and their residents) when he opted to throw municipal bankruptcy under the bus as a last resort for those very small number of communities who are forced into such a dire situation. So dedicated to the safety unions he is that taxpayers and their cities can be damned.

    Hayashi because she has no other choice, Bob (I speculate) because he does not WANT scrutiny of his public record are BOTH opting for the least common denominator.

    Bottom line – they are both mud slingers who do not want to focus on the record.

    Neither has the interests of the community center stage in their actions or in their self promotion.

    It’s time for a change.

  • RRSenileColumnist

    This here race is pathetic–a race to the bottom. A shoplifter vs a clueless time-server beholden to Big Labor. It’s a stretch to consider either one to be fit for public office!

  • Marga

    I didn’t have to wait. But if I’m wrong, by all means let me know.

    Unfortunately, there is no reason to believe that voters in SD10 knew about Mary Hayashi’s shoplifting conviction, and many reasons to believe otherwise. She had the money to put her name before voters, and while voters might have vaguely remembered something negative about her, without someone reminding them of what it was, they most likely wouldn’t have remembered. Reminding voters was the smartest thing to do.

    Reminding voters of Hayashi’s conviction is not mud slinging.

    Now, I take it you don’t like his position on municipal bankruptcies. If you think this is an issue that will play with voters, nothing stops you from campaigning against him on it.

  • bbox231

    Oh no – please – let’s not make this into a personal issue at all. You are absolutely correct – I disagree with Bobbie’s position on municipal BK.

    BUT when it comes to this candidate that’s way down the list of concerns. Unlike most – I’ve been watching this individual since he occupied a seat on our City Council and IMHO he’s as slippery as they come.

    But don’t take my word for it.

    Even the local media states that Bob Wieckowski “..can’t be trusted to keep his word”.


    Reminding voters of Hayashi’s conviction is the most pedestrian of reasons to vote for Bob. The question is – Why isn’t Bob leaning on his own successes as opposed to leaning on the failures of his opponents?

    The answer is – because his successes have – as a rule – not been aligned with the public interest.

  • Marga

    The problem with BANG editorials is that the ONLY criteria for endorsing a candidate is often his or her stance on public employee pensions. Sometimes they go into other related financial topics, but the main focus is that one. So if a candidate is not in favor of major public employee pension reform, BANG doesn’t like them.

    The Chron, which doesn’t have those hang ups, gave Weickowski one of the most amazing endorsements ever.

    And the answer to your question is, again, that Bob wants to win, and thus he will put in voter’s mind what is most likely for them to remember and affect how they vote, and that is Hayashi’s conviction. Indeed, if that wasn’t the case you wouldn’t be objecting to his doing it.AFter all, you don’t want him to win so you don’t want him to do things that will make him win.

  • bbox231


    That’s about as confused and uninformed a response as one of Bobbie’s many rambling obfuscations.

    If you had been paying attention – You would know that BANG ALSO endorsed Wieckowski for the 10th District race . . .

  • Marga

    They supported him, explicitly, by default. But they don’t like him ’cause of the pension issue, same reason why you don’t like him 🙂

  • bbox231

    Why is it that local politicos and their supporters so often confuse personal affinity with respect (or lack thereof ) for a candidate and his/her decisions/actions?

    I have no idea whether I “like” Bob or not.

    I DO have zero respect for his priorities which clearly subordinate community needs of the many to the organizational needs of a few public service employees.

    I also cant respect someone who has achieved so little in their career that they must focus on the mis-steps of their opponents as opposed to their own successes when communicating their value proposition as a candidate for office.
    So, in the end, I don’t trust or respect Hayashi (for reasons which should be self-evident to anyone with an ounce of critical thought) AND I can’t trust or respect Bob.
    It’s time for a change.
    P.S. – The list of reasons to not trust or respect Bobbie goes well beyond these more recent headlines.

  • Marga

    Given that this is a discussion about Bob, the legislator, not Bob, the father/lover/boss/friend/dancer/cook, I use the word “like” to mean, “like him as a legislator”.

  • bbox231

    Off topic – Both he and Hayashi have demonstrated reasons they are not to be trusted.
    It’s time for a change.

  • Marga

    The topic was whether Wieckowski should or should have not reminded voters of Hayashi’s shoplifting. The fact that you want him to lose is relevant as to your opinion on this 🙂

  • bbox231

    No –
    The TOPIC or point of the original post was that BOTH Hayashi *and* Bob do not deserve to win this election.
    Your feeble attempt to make this appear to be a personal motive is lame.

  • Willis James

    Ooops, my apology to PORAC.
    All the money they put into this race was against Mary Hayashi, not for her.

    In total, they spent $75,000 to defeat Mary.

    Sorry for my earlier blunder suggesting otherwise.