|Former Assemblymember Mary Hayashi speaking at a candidate’s forum for the 10th State Senate District Wednesday evening at the Fremont City Council chambers. PHOTO/Steve Tavares|
STATE SENATE | 10TH DISTRICT | State Senate candidate Mary Hayashi said talk of California’s demise through unfunded public employee pension liabilities is unfounded. “There is no problem,” Hayashi said of the state’s promises made to state employee pensions. The comments came at a forum in Fremont for candidates eyeing the open 10th State Senate District seat.
Responding to a question on pension reform, Hayashi asked why the same level of criticism is not lodged against banks for their role in the state’s fiscal problems. “The reason for that: It’s called scapegoating,” she said. “There is no problem.” She added the state’s pension system, CalPERS, “does well.” Instead, she said, the discussion should be about equal pay for women and “How much teachers are paid and are they secure.”
Conversely, Peter Kuo, the lone Republican in the race, said the state needs to keep its promises to state workers, but acknowledges pensions are “out of whack” and could bankrupt California cities. “I don’t think it’s going to go away,” said Kuo.
Roman Reed, a Democrat like Hayashi and another candidate in the race, Assemblymember Bob Wieckowski who did not attend Wednesday evening’s forum, charged the media with fueling outrage against state workers. As a state senator, said Reed, “I couldn’t’ look my family in the eye if pensions are touched.”
Sacramento needs legislators willing to make difficult budget choices despite intense lobbying from their campaign donors, said former Assemblymember Audie Bock. “It’s not the only problem,” the former Green Party member running this June as an independent said of the pension issue. Counties are getting help from Sacramento, added Bock, but cities are not getting their fair share. In the meantime, issues like pensions are disproportionately affecting local municipalities, she said. “We are looking at the impoverishment of our cities at the state’s hands.”
Mary Hayashi will remain on 3 years probation until the middle of January, 2015.
She will be on probation for stealing $2,450 of merchandise during the June and November election.
If she were to win, she would be sworn into the California State Senate in December of 2014, while still on probation for theft.
Sworn into office in the same senate that now has 3 members on suspension for their crimes and convictions.
Won't that paint a good picture…
We throw out 3 senators for criminal activity and then we elect a new senator to replace them, even though she is still on probation for her own crimes.
To date, Mary continues to tell the public that her conviction was all because of a “unintentional” “absentminded” act on her part.
She has stated she never meant to steal the goods.
The SF Dist. Attorney has stated publicly that the crime for which she was charged and sentenced for, is a crime for which the law REQUIRES that “intent' must be proven, or else there is no law broken.
In other words, if Mary was capable of showing anything to the court or jury, that indicated her act was only a unintentional mistake, then she would have gone free and not been sentenced.
However, as the District Attorney Gascon indicated publicly, they had a ton of proof that Mary planned and carried out the theft.
One key issue that Mary has never explained, is why she brought a Neiman Marcus shopping bag with her, 35 miles from Hayward. The very same shopping bag that Mary hid the goods in.
Why did she sneak the bag into the dressing room? Why did she bring the bag into the store. She was NOT returning merchandise. She had not made a purchase earlier that day.
Mary had no excuse for the shopping bag. They had her on video. They observed her in the dressing area.
The SAW her place the stolen merchandise in the very shopping bag she brought into the store.
Then when leaving the store, she paid for some inexpensive items, but never paid for the $2,450 worth of good she hid in the shopping bag she had brought with her.
NO jury, NO judge would have ever believed Mary's absurd excuses.
That is why she took a plea deal.
But now, thinking the public will forget it all, she now tells the public it was all unintentional. Says she was distracted on her cell phone…. No more brain tumor.
The lady has been and continues to lie to the public about the entire affair. She is not a honest person.
She continues the cover up and hopes that by spending $690,000 she can make the public believe her lies.
She has never explained the police report, or the reason why she plead guilty for a crime that DOES NOT E XIST IN THE ABSENCE OF INTENT.
If there was no intent, then Mary is not guilty.
Her husband is a judge. They know the law, He would have told her there is no crime if there is no intent.
Yet they worked for and took a plea deal.
Now she expects folks to think she is innocent.
What liar… the lies go on and on and on with this woman.
Is Hayashi still on probation for stealing? Does anyone know?
How about reading the following on California pensions.
Now, MW, tell me, are you a baseball fan?
If so, what is your opinion about the career of Vern Law, of the Pittsburg Pirates?
Due to the fact that one of her close relatives is a judge, in other words a lawyer who was promoted to the judiciary, Mary Hayashi most likely spends a lot of time socializing with and at dinners and parties in which most of the attendees are members of the legal profession.
Members of the legal profession have far and away the highest rates of alcoholism and drug abuse of any major profession, and they often “indulge” at parties and their various other social occasions and get togethers, and their spouses and other family members also often become part of that culture of alcoholism and drug addiction.
(NOTE: Ask Bill and Nadia Lockyer if they know anything about any of the immediately above.)
So anytime Mary Hayashi says something that is unusually stupid even for her, ask her whether she is on drugs or whether when she did her “analysis” of the situation she was on drugs.
In fact related to the “standards” and habits of that sleazy mafia that likes to refer to itself as the “legal profession,” every now and then I will read an article stating that this or that child of a prominent lawyer, and with the child generally in his late teens or twenties, committed suicide. And if you read the rest of the article, it almost always says that the child had a history of drug addiction, and it also often says that the child was enrolled in law school or was thinking of attending law school or had dropped out of law school. So if you want your children to become drug addicts and your future grandchildren to be raised by drug addicts, spend the money to send your children to law school.
8:00, There was a pension problem long before the recession and economic collapse.
Only the media and politicians were able to ignore it
Long ago responsible financial planners were telling CalPERS that their assumed rate of return could not be met.
Even now, CalPERS own chief financial analyst has told the board of directors that they are using a assumed rate of return that will not be achieved.
Their own man is telling them that.
They ignore his advice for political reasons. They want to avoid the pain now.
The entire pension crisis began in 1999 when they passed SB400 which opened the pension flood gates.
It only got worse when all the cities jacked up their pensions without adding extra funds.
A guy with 29 years, 11 months of service, expecting a 60% pension after 30 years, INSTANTLY got a 81% pension one month later.
That extra 21% over 25 years gave him a bonus $365,000 in his pension life, while NO extra funds were deposited.
Sure, there was no pension problem before 1988,….
Oh yeah, because no one was saying it on the 6:00 news, so I guess it didn't exist.
Questions for Steven Tavares to ask Mary if he ever gets to interview her.
Mary, why did you bring a extra Neiman Marcus shopping bag with you, from Hayward to San Francisco?
You placed the stolen merchandise in the extra Neiman Marcus shopping bag and then left the store without paying.
Your lawyer Doug Rappaport said the following in the San Jose Mercury ..
“”Sometimes when somebody brings an empty bag into a store, that shows the intent to steal, but that's not the case here,”
So Mary, please explain why you brought that extra Neiman Marcus bag with you, all the way from Hayward… then carried it into the dressing room, and then placed the $2,450 of merchandise in that same bag, then leaving the store without paying for those goods…. even though you subsequently purchased some other inexpensive items before walking out the door, where you were arrested.?”
So Mary, that looks totally planned and intentional, yet you keep saying it wasn't.
Please give us the explanation your lawyer was going to give the court (before you took the plea deal for the crime).
We await the explanation… The voters want to be sure you are really telling the truth Mary.
What about that bag Mary? They have it on video. Its in the police report. The bag Mary.. the bag.
I wouldn't say there is no problem, but I agree with her in general. Where was the “pension problem” before the recession?
I take it that Mary was able to dance through yet another candidate's forum with not one question about her criminal background and “currently” being on three years probation for intentionally planning and stealing $2,450 worth of goods.
(emphasis on intentionally— because Mary continues with the myth that her crime was unintentional.”
Jan 9th, 2012
“I unintentionally walked out of a store with items I had not paid for.”
January 9th, 2012
“Of course, I intended to purchase what I had, but I didn’t”
January 9th, 2012
“There were a number of personal factors that led to the situation where I made this ABSENTMINDED error. My medical condition may have complicated the situation”
To this day, Mary continues to tell people, including reporters, that she was just distracted on her cell phone.
Said exactly that in a interview with Josh Richman.
According to the SF District Attny, Gascone, they had Mary dead to rights acting with full intent in the crime.
He further said, that without intent, the person is innocent.
Intention is one of the elements of the crime.
Mary and certainly her husband know the law. If she could show a jury even slight evidence of lack of intent, she would have been found not guilty.
But to this day, she continues to put forth the myth that her arrest for felony grand theft was purely a unintentional mistake.
With 3 sitting state senators now being suspended for crimes, does Mary think the people are ready to elect a criminal to replace them in the senate?
Why is She even considered serious candidate? This is surreal!!!
The whole group is a bunch of losers.
Pete Kuo is the best of the lot, and that's somewhat of a stretch.
Mary's “no problems” comment regarding pensions surprises me. She has an MBA and certainly understands budgeting and has read the many reports regarding the need for reform. Retiree medical costs are skyrocketing, as people live longer and draw from the system, fewer public sector employees to maintain the system. I guess one way of avoiding concerns and coming up with ways to address the issue is to pretend they do not exist. Even the unions understand the problem.