Questions About State Sen. Maria Sachs’ Residency Pop Up In Campaign
BY BUDDY NEVINS
State Sen. Maria Sachs’ problems with where she lives have surfaced again.
This time it is a group connected to former Sen. Ellyn Bogdanoff that is reminding voters that Sachs didn’t live in her district for much of her Senate career.
Sachs beat Bogdanoff in 2012 and took over state Senate District 34. Boganoff is campaigning to regain her old seat.
The residency issue has dogged Sachs throughout her last two years in the Senate.
She made repeated claims she lived in her district. She actually living in a mansion outside District 34.
Her fabrications resulted in Legislative hearings.
The website here outlines Sachs’ falsehoods.
Floridians For Integrity In Government, whose registered agent is long-time Bogdanoff backer Todd Richardson, is behind the website and the YouTube video.
It’s the latest twist in the sizzling campaign for Northeast Broward and Palm Beach Senate District 34. Because it is perhaps the only state Senate seat in play, expect a multi-million dollars race.
Bogdanoff is a Fort Lauderdale Republican. Sachs is a Democrat living somewhere in Palm Beach County.
(Personal disclosure: My older son Aaron Nevins and Richardson are partners in some business ventures.)
September 5th, 2014 at 6:16 pm
I think it’s time we consider relaxing the residency rules, especially in large urban areas where the districts are fairly compact.
Perhaps the requirement could be that you have to reside in the same county in which the district is located. Let the voters decide if someone who lives a couple miles outside the district can better represent them than a candidate who lives inside the current district boundaries.
Too often the residency requirement is used not to improve the level of representation, but rather as a form of political gotcha.
September 5th, 2014 at 7:17 pm
Poppycock.
I’ve invested a huge amount of time, treasure, and sweat equity into holding Sachs accountable.
She lied about where she lived. And I caught her in that lie.
This isn’t a political gotcha, this is about honest representation.
For the record, I am a very liberal Democrat, but I call bullshit when I find it.
September 5th, 2014 at 10:07 pm
Relax the residency laws? A throwback to the rotten boroughs of 18th England!
September 6th, 2014 at 8:54 am
FROM BUDDY:
STATE ATTORNEY MIKE SATZ, WHY ARE THINGS ARE DIFFERENT IN CALIFORNIA……????
State Sen. Rod Wright’s Sentencing In Perjury Case Delayed, Again
September 3, 2014 10:06 AM
LOS ANGELES (AP) – A judge on Wednesday postponed the sentencing of California state Sen. Rod Wright for lying about his legal residence, as his defense completes paperwork seeking a new trial.
Superior Court Judge Kathleen Kennedy granted the defense request for the continuance and said it would be the last.
She rescheduled sentencing for Sept. 12.
Wright’s was the first of three unrelated cases against state lawmakers that cast a shadow over the Legislature.
Prosecutors want Wright to serve six months in jail or six months of home confinement. They also recommend that he serve 1,000 hours of community service and never again be allowed to hold public office.
Wright’s attorney, Winston Kevin McKesson, said Tuesday that his client did nothing intentionally wrong and deserves a new trial. If the conviction is upheld, he said Wright should be sentenced to nothing more than informal probation.
Prosecutors said in a court filing last month that Wright’s actions “can only worsen the already jaded public perception of politicians.”
Wright was convicted of perjury, voter fraud and filing a false statement of candidacy for lying about his legal residence in Los Angeles County. He had said he moved into an Inglewood property he owned so he could run in 2008 to represent the 25th Senate District, but jurors found that Wright actually lived outside the district.
The charges against Wright carry a maximum sentence of more than eight years in prison. Prosecutors said that with anything less than a half-year of confinement, “the perception will be that politicians are treated differently, due to connections or money, in the justice system.”
But McKesson, Wright’s attorney, said his client believed he was acting within the law and that jurors were confused between Wright’s legal residence within the district and his home outside it.
September 6th, 2014 at 11:48 am
Floridan your suggestion suggests that you do not understand the reason why elected officials should live, reside, co-habitat, or any other wording you might want to use in the district they represent.
September 6th, 2014 at 12:24 pm
Satz won’t screw with Maria Sachs he learned from refusing eggletion early release, he doesn’t want judy stern running someone against him.
September 6th, 2014 at 12:29 pm
Below you will find a list every single voter in the history of Florida that cast their ballot based on the issue of where the candidate resided:
That’s all of them!
This is such inside baseball bullshit.
The only real value is to knock the candidate off message to deal with the charge.
FROM BUDDY:
The issue isn’t that she lived outside her district per se. The issue is she lied…repeatedly.
September 6th, 2014 at 6:39 pm
It’s a very simple concept, to ensure the makeup of the legislature is truly representative of the people it serves, the members should come from the district they serve. In fact, we all agreed and voted for this to be in the Constitution! Counties do not have the same interest in the Legislature. To argue that people who live in Weston understand issues that impact people on Fort Lauderdale beach because they live in Broward county is a farce. Conversely, if all of our representatives lived on the beach, why would they care about the everglades and flooding.
But the area this would have the worst impact, and the hands down reason this is the worst idea ever, is because it would decimate the ability of minorities to elect representatives from their communities.
September 6th, 2014 at 6:54 pm
Not only has she lie, she has lies on a swore document. That is purgery. Mr Satz, are you really that scared of Judy?
September 6th, 2014 at 7:08 pm
@Sam
Now it’s my turn to be disappointed and surprised…
I’d have thought you valued honesty.
September 7th, 2014 at 11:46 am
If politicians lie about where they live…it isn’t that much of a stretch to assume that they’ll lie about other more critical issues! And we’ve seen that again and again!
In Lauderdale Lakes, you have a sitting commissioner who uses aliases (eric haynes=eric wimberley) to avoid child support payments and past due fines, and who lies about his place of residence (a friend’s garage)! The truth matters!
September 7th, 2014 at 11:54 am
Let me make it clear, my suggesting about relaxing residency requirements would not change the districts from which the votes would come — it would still be up to the voters within the district as to who should represent them.
I doubt that voters in Weston would vote for a resident of Hillsboro Beach to represent them, unless that candidate could convince the voters that he or she would be better able to act on their behalf. Out of district candidates would have that hurdle to surmount.
There is no real likelihood that a minority candidate running in a district that has a minority majority would not fair well against an outsider.
If you want to keep residency requirements, why not strengthen them to mandate a candidate must be a legal resident within the district at the time they file for office? And standardize the requirement so that they apply to candidates for all offices (right now, for instance, the rules are different for county and state officials).
Finally, if you look at the legislation that purports to define residency, you will see that it is a potpourri of over a dozen factors that can be considered — a perfect recipe for political mischief.
Look, I prefer that elected officials be close to the people they represent, but in today’s world with instantaneous communications and small urban districts, I just think we ought to consider possible alternatives.
September 7th, 2014 at 12:44 pm
I mean are we going to beat this dead horse forever. Clearly the residence in question she had her son there, so what. She can produce a lease. Did she stay there 365 probably not. That being stated some of you think Sen.sachs is going to jail forever. Do you think if she was a Republican alot of you would be addressing this much concern? Let this be a lesson to you Maria get your house in order. Other than that keep up the good work…..
September 7th, 2014 at 2:31 pm
@12 – A better approach might be to attack the problem of small urban districts. Broward County currently has 31 incorporated communities, many of which have populations well below 100,000. This creates non-uniform laws, duplicative city infrastructure, and far, far too many elected politicians.
About six Broward cities have over 100,000 population and about nine have over 50,000 but under 100,000. That leaves sixteen incorporated communities with populations of less than 50,000. All sixteen of those should be immediately dissolved and their territory should be added to that of adjacent communities that already have over 50,000 residents. Upon completing that process, any city having less than 100,000 population should also be dissolved and its territory given to adjacent communities. This will ensure that every city in Broward has at least 100,000 residents and will cut the number of cities down to about 10 – a much more reasonable number.
September 7th, 2014 at 6:07 pm
BUDDY AND CHAZ,
THIS IS A POLITICAL COLUMN
IF SHE DOES NOT GET INDICTED NONE OF THIS MATTERS JACK
September 7th, 2014 at 6:15 pm
Sachs really lives in the Weston of palm beach and is running to represent the beach! Her lack of connection to our beach community hit a new low when she got on board with Judy stern and the Panthers to rob her constituents of tourist development tax money generated in her district.
We are losing our property and Sachs wants to hand our beach restoration funding to her real neighbors out west.
September 8th, 2014 at 3:40 pm
Email sent to Mrs. Sachs and copied to Inspector General and Media on Friday.
Dear Mrs. Sachs,
I am writing to request a detailed copy of your government issued credit card if one is provided by the taxpayers of Florida, pursuant to the Public Records Act, Chapter 119 of the Florida Statutes. I am only interested in having more information available to the public, to let the public draw its own conclusion to your residency. You or your staff should be easily able to generate a PDF and email me the document.
If you refuse to provide this information, Chapter 119 requires you advise me in writing and indicate the applicable exemption to the Public Records Act. Also, please state with particularity the reasons for your decision, as required by Section 119.07(2)(a). If the exemption you are claiming only applies to a portion of the records, please delete that portion and provide photocopies of the remainder of the records, according to Section 119.07(2)(a).
I agree to pay the actual cost of duplication as defined in Section 119.07(1)(a). However, if you anticipate that in order to satisfy this request, “extensive use” of information technology resources or extensive clerical or supervisory assistance as defined in Section 119.07(1)(b) will be required, please provide a written estimate and justification.
I request these records be available emailed to me by 9/17/2014. If you have any questions or need more information in order to expedite this request, please call me at 954-815-2402.
Sincerely,
September 8th, 2014 at 3:40 pm
Email sent to Mrs. Sachs and copied to Inspector General and Media on Friday.
Dear Mrs. Sachs,
I am writing to request a detailed copy of your sun pass if one is provided by the taxpayers of Florida, pursuant to the Public Records Act, Chapter 119 of the Florida Statutes. This record usually includes tolls and times. I am only interested in having more information available to the public, to let the public draw its own conclusion to your residency. You or your staff should be easily able to generate a PDF and email me the document.
If you refuse to provide this information, Chapter 119 requires you advise me in writing and indicate the applicable exemption to the Public Records Act. Also, please state with particularity the reasons for your decision, as required by Section 119.07(2)(a). If the exemption you are claiming only applies to a portion of the records, please delete that portion and provide photocopies of the remainder of the records, according to Section 119.07(2)(a).
I agree to pay the actual cost of duplication as defined in Section 119.07(1)(a). However, if you anticipate that in order to satisfy this request, “extensive use” of information technology resources or extensive clerical or supervisory assistance as defined in Section 119.07(1)(b) will be required, please provide a written estimate and justification.
I request these records be available emailed to me by 9/17/2014. If you have any questions or need more information in order to expedite this request, please call me at 954-815-2402.
Sincerely,
Andrew Ladanowski
September 8th, 2014 at 3:42 pm
Email sent to Mrs. Sachs and copied to Inspector General and Media on Friday.
Dear Mrs. Sachs,
I am writing to request a detailed copy of your cell phone records and carrier which is provided by the taxpayers of Florida, pursuant to the Public Records Act, Chapter 119 of the Florida Statutes. This record usually includes the information of the city and time stamp where your were residing when receiving or initiating the call. You may redact the phone numbers that are being called or received as I do not want to infringe on your personal life, I am only interested in having more information available to the public, to let the public draw its own conclusion to your residency. I am fully aware that you probably have unlimited minutes on your phone and do not usually review this information. I hope your carrier will have at least one year of records. You or your staff should be easily able to generate a PDF file from the online report from your phone carrier and you may decide as a courtesy offered by me to redact phone numbers that you feel may be personal calls. Then scan and email me the document.
If you refuse to provide this information, Chapter 119 requires you advise me in writing and indicate the applicable exemption to the Public Records Act. Also, please state with particularity the reasons for your decision, as required by Section 119.07(2)(a). If the exemption you are claiming only applies to a portion of the records, please delete that portion and provide photocopies of the remainder of the records, according to Section 119.07(2)(a).
I agree to pay the actual cost of duplication as defined in Section 119.07(1)(a). However, if you anticipate that in order to satisfy this request, “extensive use” of information technology resources or extensive clerical or supervisory assistance as defined in Section 119.07(1)(b) will be required, please provide a written estimate and justification.
I request these records be available emailed to me by 9/17/2014. If you have any questions or need more information in order to expedite this request, please call me at 954-815-2402.
Sincerely,
Andrew Ladanowski
September 8th, 2014 at 3:45 pm
Now if someone wanted to be really good. For security purposes emails sent and received on some servers now log IP address’s and GPS coordinates when provided. If a reader want’s to ask the appropriate department for this information, that would be great!
September 8th, 2014 at 4:13 pm
Andrew;
Ask Maria about the gov’t credit Office Depot card. You know, the one she maxed out buying supplies that she used in her home.
September 8th, 2014 at 4:25 pm
Sam;
Apparently, that 4-hour boner of yours is stealing precious blood from your brain.
I’d have guessed not much, but that’s another story altogether.
If I’ve learned anything over the past decade of fighting corruption, it’s not to temper my efforts with the notion that “unless XYZ is indicted, then it doesn’t matter.”
You ***must not*** be speaking from experience… ’cause it does matter….
Imagine the shit down in Lauderdale Lakes if City Manager Jon Allen was allowed free reign.
That’s the fucked in fucked up, right there.
Imagine if Andrew or Charlotte didn’t climb up the School Board’s ass … hell, we’d be left with Abe Fromman … I joke … we’d be left with Addy Freeman looking out for our interests.
More fucked in fucked up.
Like the amazing US Supreme Court winner Fane Lozman, I do what I do with the hopes the SAO/FDLE/FBI takes notice and goes and does something about it.
But as I learned early on, those sorts of decisions are above my pay grade and out of my hands. Like Elgin Jones taught me, “Do your job and don’t worry about the outcome.”
You should thanks folks like Lane, Charlotte, Andrew, and maybe even me that we’re ignoring your “throw the towel in” attitude.
Finally, go easy on the Viagra… You just seemed to have a cardiac incident and we don’t want to find you floating face down in a Cialis bathtub.
September 8th, 2014 at 5:08 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOzV5WZsH2Q
FROM BUDDY:
Thanks. This is a good ad aimed at Sachs.
September 8th, 2014 at 6:19 pm
Andrew:
Sorry, but I think that you and many others have incorrect ideas of the perks that come with being a Legislator. There are no government issued credit cards, cell phones, or sun pass transponders given to Legislators. I have no knowledge as to whether some staff receive some or all of these, but not Legislators.
You may be confusing state credit cards with the credit cards that were issued by the Republican Party to Legislative Leaders and which received a great deal of press. I can tell you that when I was the Senate Democratic Leader, I did not have either a State or Democratic Party credit card.
September 9th, 2014 at 1:35 pm
Buddy,
Wasn’t your son also on Bogdanoff’s staff in the legislature? Maybe that should also be in your personal disclosure.
September 15th, 2014 at 8:10 am
Since when is a house with a taxable market value of $950K a “mansion”?