Fair Political Practices Commission Sets Hearing Date of September 19 for Los Cien Executive Director & Sonoma County Office of Education Past President Herman G. Hernandez
Mr. Hernandez has been non-transparent with his reportable financial interests and is now requesting additional taxpayer monies through the Measure I childcare tax on the November 2024 ballot
*Please note that this is part one of a series of articles.
Per KSRO, in May 2024:
Los Cien’s Executive Director Gets Award from Mexican Government
“The executive director of Los Cien, the North Bay’s largest Latino leadership organization, has received a prestigious award from the Mexican government. Last Thursday at Roseland’s Mitote Food Park, Herman G. Hernández was awarded the Ohtli Award for Los Cien’s work supporting Mexicans in the region. The Ohtli Award is the highest award given by the Mexican government outside Mexico. Vicente Sánchez Ventura, consul in charge of the Mexican Consulate in San Francisco, said, “With a clear focus on Latino empowerment, Hernández has shown his commitment to incorporating and elevating the voices of the marginalized communities, while creating bridges between the Latino, African American, Indigenous and LGBTQ+ communities.” Hernández was quick to share credit for the award saying “this honor is the collective effort of the entire Los Cien familia. I just happen to be the current executive director.”
Why was Mr. Hernandez given this award and what does he have any outside affiliation with the Mexican Government?
On April 14, 2023, I submitted a sworn complaint to the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) because Los Cien Executive Director & Sonoma County Office of Education Board Member Herman Hernandez failed to report financial interests for himself and his spouse, Ms. Ariana Diaz de Leon. There appeared to be an excessive amount of conflicts of interest by use of position to influence local agency decisions. The complaint was opened into case number 2023-00270.
This morning, September 9, 2024, I was sent the following email from Ms. Carlie Haug, Enforcement Chief Aide & Agenda Coordinator, Fair Political Practices Commission, Enforcement Division.
Subject: Fair Political Practices Commission Pre-Hearing Notification 2023-00270
“The Enforcement Division of the Fair Political Practices Commission (the “Division”) received your sworn complaint regarding the above-referenced matter. Since receipt, the Division opened a case, initiated an investigation, and came to a resolution. This resolution will be submitted for consideration by the Commission at its next regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday, September 19th, 2024, at 10 a.m. This meeting will be held at:
California Fair Political Practices Commission
1102 Q Street, Suite 3800
Sacramento, CA 95811
The agenda for this meeting, including links to the stipulated settlements agreed to by the parties or the proposed default decisions, can be found on our website at http://www.fppc.ca.gov/about-fppc/hearings-meetings-workshops/current-agenda.html. All meetings of the Commission are open to the public and all persons are permitted to attend, except as otherwise provided in California Government Code Section 11123(a).
Mainline penalty stipulations are considered by the Commission as part of the Enforcement Consent Calendar, which is typically found near the beginning of the monthly agenda. Streamline penalty stipulations are reported to the Commission as part of the General Items, Executive Staff Reports (Enforcement Division), which is typically found near the end of the monthly agenda.
Thank you for taking the time to bring this matter to our attention. If you have any questions regarding the case, the resolution, or the meeting, please contact Chance Felkins at cfelkins@fppc.ca.gov or 279-237-3766.”
I emailed Mr. Felkins to confirm the name of the individual referenced in the upcoming hearing.
Mr. Felkins responded as follows:
“Good morning Adina Flores,
Yes, 2023-00270 is the Herman Hernandez case. The stipulation will be on the FPPC September Meeting Agenda. The meeting is 9/19/2024 and the agenda is usually posted on the Monday a week before the meeting, which is today. On the agenda under Executive Staff Report you can find a copy of the stipulation if you click on the hyperlink of the case.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Best,
Chance Felkins”
The mission of the Enforcement Division of the Fair Political Practices Commission is to fairly, effectively, and efficiently enforce the provisions of the Political Reform Act.
A violation of the Act can be pursued in three ways:
1) Administrative proceedings by the Enforcement Division;
2) Criminal prosecution by a local district attorney or the state attorney general; or
3) Civil action by the public, certain government agencies or the Enforcement Division.
The vast majority of cases are handled through the administrative enforcement process.
The Enforcement Division analyzes and processes over 2,500 complaints and referrals per year about potential violations of the Act. Complaints and referrals are received from citizens, other government agencies, and the media. The Enforcement Division also investigates on its own initiative. A matter will be fully investigated if there is sufficient information to believe that a violation of the Act has occurred.
Administrative Enforcement Case Resolution is handled in the following manner:
A complaint can be resolved in several ways depending on the strength of the evidence, the particular facts, and the amount of public harm involved. If there is insufficient evidence to prosecute and no further information would be helpful or informative or the allegation has been disproven, a case may be closed with a no action closure letter. If there is insufficient evidence to prosecute but the person complained about appears to need information about the Act to ensure future compliance, a case may be closed with an advisory letter. If the seriousness of the offense and public harm are low, a warning letter may be issued identifying a violation of the Act but concluding a monetary fine is not warranted. Finally, if the case merits pursuit of a fine, the Enforcement Division will prosecute the violators and may seek penalties of up to $5,000 per violation, which must be approved by the Commissioners. There is an ethical wall between the Enforcement Division and the Commissioners for all open Enforcement complaints and cases.
The FPPC may only act on complaints within its jurisdiction, meaning violations of the Act. The following is a list of violations that the FPPC regularly enforces:
Financial conflicts of interest
Laundered campaign contributions
Over-the-limit gifts and contributions
Improper use of campaign funds, including personal use
Campaign mass mailings at public expense
False, inadequate, or inaccurate reporting on statements of economic interests, campaign statements and reports
Non-filing or late filing of such statements and reports
Anonymous or cash contributions of $100 or more
Mr. Hernandez has served on the SCOE Board since 2014 but failed to disclose reportable financial interests throughout the years. Designated filers are legally required to publicly disclose sources of income, investments, interests in real property, loans, etc.
As reference, he claimed to have no reportable financial interests on his 2022 Form 700 submitted to the FPPC.
Mr. Hernandez has omitted the following sources of income throughout the years. Oddly, he removed the bulk of these positions from his LinkedIn profile after I reported him to the FPPC. I took screenshots as this appears to be common practice for elected officials:
Omissions for Mr. Hernandez
Executive Director, Los Cien
Consultant, Hernandez Consulting
(clients include 421 Group, cannabis consulting, etc.)
Public Affairs Representative at PG&E
Resource Development Manager at Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Sonoma County
The College Tee Project, Co-Founder
Youth Connections Program Manager at CAP Sonoma
Campaign Manager to Supervisor Lynda Hopkins
Field Director to State Senator Mike McGuire
Marketing Assistant to Zephyr Real Estate
Interact Liaison, Russian River Rotary Foundation
Omissions for Ms. Ariana Diaz de Leon
Patient and Community Engagement Manager, Santa Rosa Community Health
Program Director, Senior Community Impact Officer and Program Officer
In recent weeks, Research-Polls has been conducting a study on local issues in California. Their current focus is the Sonoma County Measure I, Sonoma County Child Care and Children’s Health Initiative and Sales Tax on the ballot for the November 5, 2024, General Election. Voters have received a text message from Research-Polls to take a survey about the looming measure.
The survey stated:
“Next, here is a list of people and organizations that may take positions on Measure I. Please indicate if you would generally trust each person or organization’s opinion on this issue, or if you would be suspicious of it. If you have never heard of the person or organization, or do not have an opinion, you can indicate that too.”
Los Cien was listed as one of the organizations advocating in support of the Measure. This was a peculiar polling inquiry, as I have not received anything similar in the past.
The proposed ordinance for Measure I states:
(a) Proceeds from the Tax shall be used exclusively to increase access to high-quality child care, preschool, and early education services to benefit low- and middle-income children and families in Sonoma County; to improve wages and compensation for child care providers and early educators who provide those services; to maintain and protect the availability and accessibility of local health and mental health care services that are specific to the unique needs of infants, toddlers and pediatric patients; and to support the efficient administration of Tax proceeds.
(b) Proceeds from the Tax shall be deposited into the County treasury in a special fund entitled the Sonoma County Child Care and Children's Health Fund (the "Fund"). Monies deposited into the Fund, together with any interest that accrues thereon, shall be governed by and subject to the requirements set forth in Section 12-61.
In each year, one hundred percent (100%) of revenue generated by the Tax, after providing for the costs to administer and operate the Tax pursuant to subdivision (e) of this section, together with any interest that accrues thereon, shall be 5 appropriated by the Board of Supervisors for the following purposes and consistent with the Sonoma County Child Care and Children's Health Program Plan and Budget (the "Plan"):
(1) Sixty percent (60%) of the annual revenue shall be allocated to the following:
(A) To increase the number of low- and middle-income children from birth through age five with access to safe, nurturing, affordable, and high-quality child care, preschool, and early education services across the county, with priority for children who (1) are homeless, (2) are from historically underserved communities, or (3) have other high priority needs as designated in the Plan.
(B) To improve the compensation and benefits of child care providers and early educator employees by providing rate increases, workforce development supports and enhancements.
(C) To develop, maintain, upgrade, and expand, as needed, early care and education facilities.
(D) For reasonable expenditures of the Administering Agency for the efficient administration of the Fund, including the obligations imposed by this Ordinance. The Administering Agency may reserve funds received in one or more fiscal years to address anticipated fluctuations in revenue in subsequent fiscal years.
(2) Forty percent (40%) of the annual revenue shall be allocated to the following:
(A) To assure the financial viability of the local children's health and mental health care safety net and its accessibility, including the expansion of specialized staff that provide perinatal, pediatric and pediatric subspecialty screening, assessment, referral and treatment of trauma, complex illnesses and conditions, and other health problems, without regard to insurance status or their ability to pay; and
(B) To explore, pilot and implement innovative programs that enable pediatric patients and their families to better access community-based, pediatric health care and mental health services, including perinatal mental health, and that enhance the effectiveness of such services.
Can the taxpayers trust Mr. Hernandez’s fiscal advocacy for new tax measures due to his lack of financial transparency? Will he personally receive funding as a consultant or beneficiary backing this measure? As referenced in the survey, are you ‘suspicious’ of Los Cien’s opinions on issues? What does Los Cien actually do for the Chicano/Latino community other than cram ‘Latinx’ down their throat?
Why was Mr. Hernandez employed with the Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Sonoma County (now Boys & Girls Club of Sonoma-Marin) as Resource Development Manager while over a dozen John Does were being silenced in an ongoing sexual assault case regarding Paul Dwayne Kilgore? Approximately $1M in legal fees have been spent to date according to a whistleblower who is currently in arbitration with the Club. Will our taxpayer monies be attributed in any way towards these ongoing legal fees?
California is the worst offender out of all US states when it comes to human trafficking violations, due in part to the fact that California is the most populous state in the country. Where is the funding coming from for this lucrative industry and who is involved? Stay tuned as I share more information regarding Mr. Hernandez’s involvement with the Active 20-30 Club.
John 3:4
”Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness.”
Related articles:
