Rent Increase Survey

Have you submitted your latest rent increase data to the rent increase survey?

The SunCal Slate & Alameda Election Interference

by Dennis Green

The Alameda Election Freak Show has taken yet another turn. After sponsoring flashy mailers dissing candidates it doesn’t like — DeHaan, Johnson and Matarrese — and various telephone push-polls, etc., SunCal, the Orange County developer we kicked to the curb in March by defeating Measure B, 85% to 15%, is still at it. This time, they are telling a disgraced and discredited Desert Hot Springs former city councilman to wade in.

One Henry J. Hohenstein, from Desert Hot Springs, writes a letter to Jon Spangler, a former advisor to SunCal, telling us that he just happens to take an interest in California local governments, and came across the fact that Ann Marie Gallant is serving as our Interim City Manager, and what a horrible person she is, what wreckage she did to Desert Hot Springs when she served there. Spangler posted Hohenstein’s letter in an online blog.

And what do you know….another reader of that blog was skeptical, and she posted the following:

“Okay, I couldn’t resist. Here’s the skinny on Henry J. Hohenstein of Desert Hot Springs. I can see why he and Ann Marie Gallant might not see eye to eye:

And if you click on that link, you discover that Mr. Hohenstein has been convicted of conflict of interest in his dealings with real estate developers. In fact, if you look deeper, as others have done, you get this:


Henry Hohenstein was a member of the Desert Hot Springs City Council from December 2003 through December 2007. He violated the conflict of interest provisions of the Political Reform Act in December 2004 and February 2005, by making and participating in making six governmental decisions which had a reasonably foreseeable material financial effect on his interest in real property. By failing to disqualify himself from these governmental decisions, he committed six violations of Government Code section 87100. Following an administrative hearing in Los Angeles, Administrative Law Judge Humberto Flores issued a proposed decision finding that six violations occurred, and imposing an administrative penalty of $18,000. The Enforcement Division filed an opening brief requesting that the Commission accept the proposed decision in its entirety. Mr. Hohenstein did not file a written response to that request by the agreed-upon filing date of August 7, 2009. $18,000 fine.”

Spangler was also sent, and then posted, another scurrilous slam on Gallant from yet another Desert Hot Springs civic leader, so one begins to realize that only SunCal could be the perpetrator of all these attacks. They are, after all, running a TV ad attacking all three candidates they don’t like, and benefiting those who are less likely, because of their history of opposition, to favor SunCal’s lawsuits against the City of Alameda and their attempts to renew their contract to develop Alameda Point.

After much research and study, I coined the term “SunCal Slate” to describe a group of candidates — Lena Tam, Marie Gilmore and Rob Bonta — who, if elected would be favored by SunCal, considering their past history, but who are also disqualified from office by their gross mismanagement of Alameda Hospital, two of whom, Tam and Bonta, having served on the Health Care District Board.

These latest revelations from Desert Hot Springs simply confirm what we already know, that SunCal is still lurking on the sidelines, attempting to interfere with Alameda’s election, and dangerous enough to be wary of, and to influence our votes to exactly the candidates they oppose.

6 comments to The SunCal Slate & Alameda Election Interference

  • Barb

    Well Dennis, I think you have just pointed out the key difference between Action Alameda and the Island: One allows guest authors to cite uncorroborated smears by those who have an obvious axe to grind without any corroboration or validation by outside sources. Action Alameda consistently links to legitimate news sources, or court documents to provide independent authority for its content. The Island does not. It allows guest authors such as Spangler, to write prejudicial, inaccurate, blasphemous spittle and lends thereto the previous authority of that forum. Unfortunately when one spits into the wind, one should check wind directions first. Or your face could be covered with returned spittle. That is what happened there. And Michele generally tried to do a good job. But delegating one’s authority to someone like Spangler, requires some real fact checking before allowing it to be published. She failed to do so. Her credibility/authority goes down with allowing Spangler to write unchecked garbage on her forum. Might as well let Quick, White/Black and Do/Don’t write the Island. But they have already their own forums that cater to their own special audience. Too bad. I was really disappointed.

  • Barb, some of this appeared first on Blogging Bayport, the Do-Do’s site, but she and Michele are usually in cahoots, and everything you say applies to both. I’ve seen Spangler try these tricks before, in a letter to the Journal which I called him on, only to be called “spurillous” by Richard Hausman. A coterie of these folks, supporters of SunCal, just keeps hanging around, claiming that SunCal is long gone and repeating their lies. By now, Jon should be living under Bay Farm Bridge!

  • Vania

    I have suggested that the candidates who received the $250 checks from Argent Mangement LLC, which used the non-existent address, and which were contained in the “Good Luck” note from the non-existent person, file complaints with the Fair Political Practices Commission, since it is a violation of California law to make campaign contributions under a false identity.

    If the candidates don’t file such a complaint, any member of the public can.

  • I’m getting more and more nauseated at all this SunCal chicanery and the vileness of Tam, Bonta and Gilmore. Shame on them all.

    I am sad that Michele over at The Island has used such poor judgment and apparently abandoned her journalistic training. Sad for all of us when ethics go out the door.

    So, once more, with feeling: Let’s not let the unethical, lying scum win.

  • Miss Information

    I agree with Vania but how will we know if the candidates file a complaint?

    I suggest as citizens we should file also since the campaign contribution checks sent from Argent a violation of California law as they are making campaign contributions under a false identity.

    Perhaps if we bombard the FPPC office with the complaints they will pay attention.

  • […] it coming from donors outside of Alameda.There is also another source of spending that the Citizens have seen and taken notice of recently during the campaign: interference from outside Alameda concerns, by […]