George Smyrnos, a deputy DA in Sacramento who lives in Grass Valley, is running against incumbent Tom Anderson for county superior court judge. It could wind up being one of the most negative local campaigns of the season.
In his campaign website, George lists his own experience under “About me,” though I never saw there where he went to law school. One’s education is important in judging people I’m going to vote for, especially a professional position such as a judge.
When I first moved here, I found the same information lacking in the DA’s race. I finally had to call the candidates and ask them — an upside of living in a small town.
According to the state bar, Smyrnos went to San Francisco Law School, which has “offered evening law classes to adults for over 100 years,” according to its website. I’d also like to know more details about his experience in Nevada County’s prosecutors office (as well as apparent two-year stints in the Sutter and Yuba DA’s office).
All told, I’m sure George is another upstanding California lawyer (we have many of them). Anderson worked his way through night law school at Golden Gate University while working at various jobs during the day, according to his Facebook page (which lists where he graduated from law school).
I prefer total transparency when candidates run for these offices. (Did you work for Apple Computer, for example, or was it just a distributor? Big difference.) I’d also like to see who’s supporting George — and that will be a matter of public record too as more and more campaign finance reports are filed.
But aside from the typical research I have to do to learn about any candidate who decides to run around here (Barry Pruett for clerk-recorder or Dai Meagher for treasurer in previous races, for example), here’s what got my attention: George also has a tab on his website dedicated to “About my opponent.”
It specifically targets Anderson. When you click on it you find two articles written by The Union editor/publisher Jeff Ackerman — not exactly a legal scholor.
One titled “Child molestors catch a break” was excoriated by retired Court Judge Al Dover for ignoring the realities of sentencing, as mandated by statutes. It ran in The Union (before the “paywall”) and you ought to read it. It is here and was the “talk of the town” (AKA “Town Talk”).
“Judges take an oath to follow the law that requires case by case application of Rules of Court and guidelines. The law of sentencing is not simple.”
“Cheap shots, political bullying and lack of education about how judges make decisions in difficult cases does not help a community make wise choices about their judges or court system,” Dover wrote.
“Unfortunately, that seems to be what I see when I read the paper more often that not these days.”
I see no reference of this rebuttal on George’s website.
My two cents is that George would be well advised to run on his record, rather than attack his opponents with The Union’s editor/publisher columns.
Voters will have to dig deeper and analyze the facts in this race — not depend on emotion.
And by the way, George, I don’t think Tom Anderson’s campaign will take any of this lying down. Have you ever heard of the expression “Do not feed the bears”?
This race is shaping up to be a doozy — another reminder of how partisan politics is threatening every corner of our society nowadays.
Filed under: Uncategorized
George should run on his record. If this even hints of “first blood” I won’t even consider George. Ackerman loves the taste of blood and prides himself on drawing it first. Ackerman was a major player in turning non-partisan races in this county into nasty races for nasty, mean, selfish people. If George has any honor he would be wise to keep Ackerman and his ilk at a distance and run on and perform on his record.
A lot of people vastly overestimate The Union editor/publisher’s influence in our community — and it’s usually the like-minded ones.
One of these days, more people will start “connecting the dots” when it comes to the real “power brokers” in our community. Simply put, they are the silent majority who are largely “middle of the road” and who vote. They realize that most of our local problems are nonpartisan, and they don’t like nasty campaigning.
The Union and its acerbic “commentary” no longer influences who gets elected to which office. The Bruce Conklin days are long gone. The internet is changing how we communicate in small towns.
Watch and see.
I love this little tidbit from candidate Smyrnos’s web site:
“Although I welcome any support that might be offered towards my candidacy, I encourage my supporters to refrain from making, on my behalf, any personal and negative comments about any judicial officer during the campaign. I’m running based on my experience, and I believe that serving as judge requires a demeanor that reflects impartiality and fairness to all.”
Then he links to a film clip of Judge Anderson, intending it to imply that Judge Anderson is somehow ‘soft’ on meth sentencing. But he never actually says it, he just implies it. And it is vague enough that he can even deny he implied it. He can just say, “if you interpreted it that way there must be something there”. Typical double-speak bullsh*t.
In fact all judge Anderson did was explain to the interviewer that California has a combination of a determinate sentencing and a mandatory sentencing system. Mandatory sentencing is like the “three strikes” law; three strikes and you’re out, the judge cannot change that.
“Determinate sentencing encompasses sentencing guidelines, mandatory minimum sentences, and enhanced sentences for certain crimes. Sentencing guidelines allow judges to consider the individual circumstances of the case when determining a sentence, whereas mandatory minimum and enhanced-sentence statutes leave little or no discretion to judges in setting the terms of a sentence.”
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Determinate+Sentence
If that is not “making [a]….personal and negative comment” I don’t know what is.
This is a negative comment by implication.
The campaign finance reports will be revealing as the election unfolds.
On another matter, we could find out as early as this month if Judge McManus’ intended resignation from the courts has been accepted by state court officials. I am betting that it will be.
If it does, it would be relevant for the community to ask (again) why there is still a recall campaign against her. Yubanet has linked to the official recall document with the signatures of people who signed it; and they should be asked as much and held accountable.
They also should be asked about the cost of an election to recall a judge whose resignation already has been accepted. That comes right out of the taxpayers’ pockets.
These two judge races will require a lot of scrutiny by the voters, digging deeper for the motives of the candidates and their supporters.
What really annoys me is that it this politicizing of the judges races (my own two cents) is distracting our community from an important (and real) economic issue: The fate of the downtown Nevada City courthouse.
JP wrote: “Yubanet has linked to the official recall document with the signatures of people who signed it; and they should be asked as much and held accountable.”
I looked at the document. Alot of the addresses are in the same few areas. I know a couple of people on there and I’m pretty sure they ‘mindlessly signed something’. With the exceptions of the Rebane’s, for the most part, it looks like the standard petition drive; hit a couple of neighborhoods and friends. You could stand in front of SPD for a couple of hours and get the same result.
woops! sorry, hit the wrong button and didn’t finish my thought.
Soo!….who needs to be accountable are not the signers, but the originators/perpetrators of the petition.
This morning I breathed a sigh of relief. The Union finally printed a front page story about the Nisenan. I do not know Mr. Ackerman, but I have met Mr. Rosacker, the author of the article, whose outstanding reporting gives a concise yet detailed account of the struggle and pride of Nevada County’s First Peoples. I commend the Mr. Ackerman and Mr. Rosacker for a great service to our community.
Thanks to you as well Jeff. You ran articles and photos in your blog about the Nisenan early on and referred back to them from time to time to keep the story in people’s minds.
Today is a new beginning, and a good one.
Thank you.
http://www.theunion.com/article/20120303/NEWS/120309908/1066&ParentProfile=1053
First, for those that don’t know, The Union has a 24hr access charge of one dollar. One can catch up on the news and vote on theunion.com content at the same time. Kudos to Rosacker for covering this important topic.
I would love to see a new balance in this county’s identity that gives respectful and legitimate weight to our true Nisenan heritage. We would all be the better for it.
Jeff,
I’ve always heard the bear story a bit differently. The bears aren’t dangerous when you’re feeding them; it’s when you STOP feeding them, they become ferocious. LOL
Judith, the article was a very pleasant surprise to me this morning as well. I wasn’t suprised in the least that Don Ryberg had no comment.
Thank you Jon,
But I wish to be clear. While I reside in Nevada County, I am of Mountain Maidu Noyitakayu heritage. My roots are in Lassen and Plumas Counties. My hope is that the Tsi-Akim will turn their considerable talents and efforts into preserving and celebrating our own beautiful ancestral homelands in the High Sierra. The Three Contiguous Valleys, the Indian, the American and the Genesee, rely on our vigilance and unity in order to prevent damaging encroachment and environmental degradation of that in which we see evidence of our Creator’s finest work.
In this 21st Century am honored to stand with the Nisenan during their own struggle for their traditional homelands, but this is not the place where my bones will rest with those of my beloved family and our revered ancients.
The love I bear for my family and our home place is the reason I understand the Nisenan and have been willing, for as long as it takes, to forsake a carefree life in our lovely little foothills town, to stand with them, and others who, against the odds, strive for Truth, Justice and the American way for all, including America’s First Peoples.
This is a good day.
I agree the Tsi Akim should return what is not theirs to the Nisenan and return to and represent their own homeland. An apology to this community and to the Nisenan would be a nice gesture, too.
Yes Judith…The article is wonderful, and so is the Union’s dedication to so many informative and inspiring stories during the 58 years we’ve been subscribers…and our parents before us.
Thanks Bonnie,
The Union has not yet covered our neighborhood association’s concern over Bill Litchfield’s proposed 100 apartment complex at the former HEW.
You have been here long enough to know what that would do to Nevada Street traffic.
We supported the preservation of your old grammar school, NCE.
Now it is time for someone to stand up for us.
So far, Mr. Beason doesn’t seem to understand our position.
We would like to get Sue’s take on all of this.
Judith, we’ll be getting together with you. Should be able next week. I’m looking forward to it.
Bonnie,
I look forward to it.
You have so many interesting stories about Nevada County.
History is wonderful.
Best,
Judith
I read with interest some posted comments. Why is linking to other web sites negative? Jeff Ackerman’s column is an opinion only. It represents his thoughts on a matter of interest to the community. And, the link to Judge Anderson’s site, If Judge Anderson thought was a sentence that was considered negative. He should not have dispensed it. In the real world, Judges have a tremendous amount of leeway in ruling and decisions. In reference to “three strikes” how many time are underlying felonies stricken (pretending that they don’t exists) to thwart the will of the voters. The link to Judge Anderson’s record is factual, if you perceive it as negative, maybe there is something wrong with the Judge’s philosophy. I am an attorney (not a DA or PD) and I have concerns about Judge Anderson’s rulings, sentencing, and operation of the courts. As the Presiding Judge, he is responsible for the operations of the court, including the Judge McManus fiasco. Everyone is entitled to a “fair” trial. This includes, the defendant, but it also includes the People of the State of California. If you think Judge Anderson’s sentencing philosophy is sound then by all means vote for him. However, citizens are entitled to be protected from criminals. Jail and prison sentences, in fact, deter criminal activity. I just find that Judge Anderson always sentences at the lower terms of virtually every case. He frequently ignores the input of the Probation Department and the District Attorney. (These people represent you – The Public.) I personally was outraged at the child molester’s sentencing. These people need to be jailed, treated, and not released until absolutely safe to do so. Molesters are predisposed to repeatedly offend.
Thanks lawyer “Mike.” Next time please sign your full name. It also will give your response more credibility.
Mike ?, If you watched the video on the union site and listened to Judge Anderson you would of heard him explain about rules for sentencing and how a straight 2 year sentence in prison might have the person released without any supervision where as putting them under structured scrutiny from our police and probation that sometimes this is a better path. Recidivism is the biggest issue when it comes to slowing down the crime rate. By sending everyone to jail which is a “school” to teach more crime is not always the answer. If your a Judge and always give maximum sentence because your background for 26 years is District Attorney prosecution side of the fence isn’t always the answer. Educating young offenders and rehab if needed sometimes is what a case needs. Being back seat drivers does not make the driver better. Nevada County Superior Court Judge Tom Anderson is as tough on crime as all the other Judges we have at this point and his record is proof of that. A molester case was in his court and so the plural you use is invalid. We don’t know the specifics of that case that is the courts job and many people were involved in that case. Micro managing Judges is a slippery slope.
Jeff,
To clarify, George Smyrnos does list his education under the “About Me” section of his website – as you can see, it is the first sentence.
http://www.smyrnosforjudge.com/about/aboutme/
As the daughter and a strong supporter of my father George Smyrnos, I am confident that his experience and record will be available and thoroughly vetted in the upcoming weeks and months. Transparency is important in this, as in every, local election. I understand that his campaign staff is working to increase his online presence to help provide more information to the public.
I appreciate your contributions to the local discourse in this very important race and look forward to being part of the conversation.
Thanks for adding that Jennifer!
I looked at the George Smyrnos election site and I am more interested in what he thinks than where he went to school. I wonder if he realizes that the US incarceration population population went from 500,000 in 1980 to 2.3 million in 2006 according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States
Mr. Smyrnos appears to be basing his campaign on increasing this number dramatically based on the outmoded idea that punishment will bring about reform. Why does he thinks this works, when it hasn’t? Could increasing incarceration be equivalent to sweeping dirt under the carpet? How does he propose to pay for his plan?
To be sure, I am not advocating a relaxed approach to crime any more than the CDC would advocates a relaxed approach to epidemics. Indeed punishing people with disease is no better than releasing them to infect others. If addressing crime remains a choice between punishment and permissiveness there will be more and more crime. Judges must get out of these two boxes and try theory based approaches to ending crime. I wonder what Mr. Smyrnos thinks about this.
Gregory,
I’m also helping elect George Smyrnos. As a former prosecutor in Virginia, I am proud to call him my father-in-law. I know he cares very much about Nevada County. I think he would be a wonderful judge.
You have a very valid point that is probably best directed at the legislature. I will not speak for my father-in-law, who will have an opportunity to address your question at upcoming events. I will say from experience that prosecutors and judges seek to fairly enforce the law, including sentencing provisions, and any prosecutor or judge will say that they defer to the state legislature to carefully draft the best policies. Our oath to support the laws of our state is not taken lightly; indeed, our democracy requires that we enforce the laws that a majority of our citizens have supported. It is a difficult issue that requires balancing interests of public safety.
You might be interested in attending the candidate forum hosted by the League of Women Voters on April 30 7-9 PM at the Eric W. Rood Administrative Center in Nevada City.
Rob Dean
Update: Tom Anderson filed his official declaration of candidacy at the Rood Center today.
I heard George Smyrnos on KNCO this morning. More negative campaigning — attacking Tom Anderson’s decisions. I starting to wonder if he has much going for himself.
Smyrnos quotes Ackerman’s shamefully negative and uninformed diatribe about his “opponent” on his website and then contradicts himself on his home page.
” I encourage my supporters to refrain from making, on my behalf, any personal and negative comments about any judicial officer during the campaign.” Does he think featuring these negative comments is acceptable because Ackerman was not speaking on his behalf?
Smyrnos has opened the door to a very negative campaign and I encourage him to show, as he puts it, ” a demeanor that reflects impartiality and fairness to all”
In distinguishing between candidates for judge, it is quite appropriate to consider the different sentencing philosophies of the candidates. This is perhaps the most important factor in distinguishing candidates for county judgeships, other than legal experience and credentials. A candidate who points out differences in their sentencing philosophies as compared to other candidates is in no way “negative campaigning” – it is campaigning on the issues that are relevant. Negative campaigning would be claiming one candidate had lied about their background, claimed military honors they were not really entitled to, committed fraud, was an unreformed alcoholic, or some other claim that is either false, unrelated to the office, or intended to cast aspersions based on a false light.
In this case, the only negative campaigning I perceive is from those who are trying to claim Smyrnos is engaging in negative campaigining by his pointing out relevant philosophical differences in criminal sentencing between him and his opponent.
This is an excellent post.
I’m not sure where this thread is going. Or, where it’s coming from.
I would say that there was a case that was controversial over a career. I would hope that everyone involved would ‘keep their eye on the ball’ and not get philosophically misdirected. Let’s look at the data.
Actually, negative campaigning is merely the opposite of waging a positive campaign–highlighting one’s accomplishments and plans for the future, for example. Negative campaign doesn’t have to be a lie, merely, attacking your opponent by slinging mud and being malicious–concentrating on negativity, not what’s good about your candidacy.
This excerpt from Mr. Smrynos’s cite provided by a link in a previous comment is a good example of negative campaigning, particularly the final two paragraphs.
Excerpt from Jeff Ackerman: Child molesters catch a break in Nevada County
…a 64-year-old man was also sentenced to probation (and “time served” for the 16 months he spent in county jail) after pleading no contest to molesting a young girl for several years, beginning when she was under 10 years old.
Elected Judge Tom Anderson could have sentenced him to 16 years in prison, but the victim and her family asked the court for leniency and the defendant said he was sorry, which is something you say when you bump into someone at a supermarket, but really sounds lame after sexually assaulting a little girl over several years.
“Sorry I screwed up your life.”
“Sorry I stole your childhood.”
“Sorry I gave you nightmares.”
“Sorry I violated your trust.”
“Sorry you’re at therapy instead playing in the school yard.”
“You probably deserve state prison,” Anderson told the predator. “This is a very generous sentence. But this sentence is not for you, this is for those around you.”
In referring to “those around you” the judge was likely not referring to the other young girls who may also be suffering abuse and afraid to speak up, or to the predators who may be wondering what might happen if they get caught. Or to the 124 registered sex offenders who call Nevada County home.
And frankly, being a survivor myself, I hardly think that using this young girls story, repeating every vile, lurid detail, most probably without her consent in her hometown newspaper AND as a club to bludgeon a political opponent can ever be viewed as “pro crime victim”. It shows a shocking lack of empathy or integrity or basic decency toward a 12 year old living, breathing, school aged child. Just my opinion but as an expert witness I deserve to have one. Mr. Ackerman, Mr. Pruett? Um, not so much…