A question of credibility
By John Horgan
Saturday, April 26th, 2008 at 7:32 am in Uncategorized.
Time doesn’t necessarily heal all wounds. Just ask San Mateo County’s two top cops, Greg Munks and Carlos Bolanos, the sheriff and undersheriff respectively. It’s been a year since they were caught and detained inside a brothel in the Las Vegas area. The explanation for their behavior has been, shall we say, less than adequate. In fact, it’s been downright lacking in any substance whatsoever. But the taxpayers, the people who pay the salaries of the two gentlemen in question, are supposed to accept this without a peep. It’s particularly galling when Munks continues to ask for more money for jails and other necessities for the County Sheriff’s Office. And that’s probably the most vexing problem: Munks has no credibility. His cachet, if he ever possessed any of that elusive commodity, is long gone. His essential silence on the circumstances involving his sojourn in that Nevada whorehouse (neither he nor his deputy was charged with a crime) has made his pleas for monetary assistance ring hollow. It’s too bad. The county deserves better.
[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]
April 27th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Compared to what Gavin Newsom did in _his_ first term as mayor of Baghdad-by-the-Bay… a politically-motivated suspension of state marriage law and an ugly affair with a friend’s wife… Munks looks like a slightly naughty altar boy. I don’t _think_ Munks will be re-elected, anyway…
April 28th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Tough to argue with your first comment. Still, the sheriff’s credibility is hurting. When he begs for more money for his department’s needs, frankly, a lot of us just turn off. As for his re-election, who is going to run against him? Maybe the police chief of San Mateo? She’s a high-profile individual with more than her share of clout right now. We shall see.
May 6th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
John - as a retired city employee in San Mateo County, I wrote to you a year ago stating that nothing will become of this. Thanks for continuing to remind the public of this disgrace. Anyone else would have been fired or, at least, suspended.
May 8th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Several follow-up stories since my last comment are discussing ethics charges against Munks.
In our Federal government, impeachment and trial by Congress _are_ a form of political judgment… the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the impeachment, trial and removal from office of a Federal judge despite his being found not guilty in Federal court for the same offense, ruling that Congress was judging his fitness for office rather than his guilt or innocence.
I believe California’s Constitution prescribes the ballot box (e.g., recall, judicial reconfirmation) to judge fitness for office. Without a presumption of evidence that Munks broke or intended to break an applicable law, an ethics hearing sounds more like a witch hunt… an attempt to smear Munks… than a legitimate use of government power.
May 11th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Still, even with an apparent lack of anything involving criminal behavior on the part of our two top law enforcement officials last year, their behavior certainly indicates a lack of mature judgement, perspective and street smarts. You can make a case that both of them are not competent to continue in their jobs. Their actions in Nevada bear out that contention.