I am told that paid petition circulators who don't live in Mountain View are required to use colored petition sections. I have not encountered these paid liars. Are they presenting colored (or white) petitions to sign?

Prameela Bartholomeusz says the 1913 recall of Judge Weller did not result in an "onslaught of whimsical recalls" However, the times haves changed. We currently have Twitter, Facebook and other sources available to rapidly convey information to large numbers of people. And unfortunately, much of the information goes unchallenged, and as in the case of Judge Persky, who is a fair and well-respected judge, the recall proponents have presented many half-truths and false information about Judge Persky. Judge Weller had a long-standing history of corruption, whereas Judge Persky does not.

The recall will have far-fetching ramifications that will affect mostly people of color and the poor. According to UC Law Dean Chemerinsky, the recall is an affront to judicial independence. He goes on to say, "If there is disagreement regarding a sentence, the ruling should be appealed, but the judge shouldn’t be removed."

Vote NO on the recall

Shalom Marquardt's post is misleading. First, Brock Turner did not just get a six-month jail sentence; he also received three years' probation, sex offender rehabilitation, and a devastating sentence as a registered sex offender, which will restrict where he may live, result in difficulty in finding employment, exclude him from most educational programs, restrict his travel, and other restrictions for the rest of his life--a terrible sentence for a young man.

The domestic violence case cited by Marquardt is also misleading. The case involved a young Black man. Judge Persky worked with another judge and the probation department to set a sentence that would allow the young man to stay in school while working full-time and also attending football practice. The goal was to prevent the young man from falling into the "school to prison" cycle that too often befalls young Black men. I find the sentence compassionate, and very positive.

As a reminder, Brock Turner was not convicted of rape, because DNA test results were negative. Instead, he was convicted of sexual assault. Both Turner and Emily Doe were intoxicated, with Emily Doe having a BAC three times the legal limit.

The recall proponents cherry-picked about five of Judge Persky’s cases in their attempt to discredit him. The Commission on Judicial Performance investigated all of the cases, and found no evidence of bias or wrongdoing.

I commented on one of the cases cited by Shalom Marquardt; however, I believe she may have meant another one of the five cases, which is as follows:

The defendant, (I.G.), of Pacific Island descent, was charged with domestic battery. The sentencing was the result of an agreement between the defense and the prosecution (2105). With the district attorney’s agreement, I.G. was allowed to go to Hawaii to be near stable family, and at the same time be distanced from the victim and attend college. I.G. did not play football on the college team. Because I.G. failed to comply with the conditions of the plea agreement, he received a felony charge. In March 2018, I.G. successfully completed his sentence.

Contrary to Marquardt’s claim, the defendant did not assault a woman months late; rather, he punched his father while living with his family in Washington.

THe investors trying to rig the market regarding apartments should have done their homework and did this before spending their money:

I realize that investors must make good decisions, so these are considerations regarding apartment investment.

First, the lifetime of a particular apartment building can range from 50 to 100 years. So when investing you must take that into consideration regarding your expected “break-even” predictions along with “ROI”

Second, you must compare the long term ROI history (greater than 20 years) with regards to your expectations of ROI. If they are not within 1 standard deviation of each other, you can consider your expectation difficult to be achieved at the start.

Third, you have to determine the “probability” of achieving he objective ROI. This cannot be determined by real estate agents or previous property owners. This requires significant historical analysis again based on a time frame of at least 20 years. This kind of investment is not liquid and is very difficult to dissolve.

Finally as a quantitative analytical tool as simple as is can be done without calculus, the typical approach is to take the percentage of probable achievement of ROI. That is your reliability coefficient. You then need to determine the “validity” coefficient. Typically in social sciences the simplest approach is to square the reliability coefficient. Finally, to get a reliable idea of the outcome of the investment, given there are a lot of variables in the long term investment markets, you typically will multiply the reliability coefficient to the validity coefficient to discount for problems you cannot predict.

Lets take an example say it is reasonable to expect a 5% ROI in a given market over 20+ years, but the probability you come up with is 95%. You must then square that to establish the validity of that prediction which comes to approximately 90%. Then you multiply the two to get the proportion of likelihoods that this investment will achieve the ROI which comes to 85%. What does this mean? It means you have 15 chances out of 100 that your investment will not achieve your ROI.

Lets take an example say it is reasonable to expect a 5% ROI in a given market over 20+ years, but the probability you come up with is 90%. You must then square that to establish the validity of that prediction which comes to approximately 81%. Then you multiply the two to get the proportion of likelihoods that this investment will achieve the ROI which comes to 73%. What does this mean? It means you have 27 chances out of 100 that your investment will not achieve your ROI.

Lets take an example say it is reasonable to expect a 5% ROI in a given market over 20+ years, but the probability you come up with is 85%. You must then square that to establish the validity of that prediction which comes to approximately 73%. Then you multiply the two to get the proportion of likelihoods that this investment will achieve the ROI which comes to 62%. What does this mean? It means you have 38 chances out of 100 that your investment will not achieve your ROI.

One last example. Lets take an example say it is reasonable to expect a 5% ROI in a given market over 20+ years, but the probability you come up with is 80%. You must then square that to establish the validity of that prediction which comes to approximately 64%. Then you multiply the two to get the proportion of likelihoods that this investment will achieve the ROI which comes to 52%. What does this mean? It means you have 48 chances out of 100 that your investment will not achieve your ROI.

If investors do not do their homework, they can find themselves in a No-Win situation very easily. But this problem is solely the responsibility of the investors, NOT THE CUSTOMERS OF ANY PARTICULAR APARTMENT.