.
Feedback

County Office Candidate Admits He Has No Degree

Tone of the San Mateo County Supervisor Race turns from issues to qualifications.

Up until Friday, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors race had been very civil. Candidates were reaching out to potential constituents to talk about issues and focus on what could be done to improve the county as a whole.  

With less than a week until elections, the focus has since shifted to the academic qualifications of the candidates. A Patch reader who will remain anonmymous pointed out inconsistencies in Carlos Romero's 2008 campaign statements and his actual academic accomplishments. 

Both Menlo Park newspapers The Almanac and the Post reported that Romero had a bachelor's degree from Stanford University in articles about his bid for a position on the East Palo Alto City Council. However, Romero told Patch that he does not have an undergraduate degree. He said none of the campaign literature that he's published since 2008 ever claimed he does. 

Stanford University does not release degree verification paperwork to members of the public or media. It will only release that to the person who took classes at the academic institution.

Romero confirmed Tuesday that he left classes during his final year of undergrad to pursue an opportunity that would empower people of color to address issues of self determination.  

"I was working on field research in Mexico, doing independent study, to round out my honors thesis," he said, describing the extracurricular activities that introduced him to his calling. He had been working in East Palo Alto for about four years, working on urban development policy and community organizing. He was profoundly affected by his professors and the social movements that they had started. They inspired him to move forward into the experiential classroom. 

"I found much more relevance in the work that I had been doing in East Palo Alto for the past four and a half years," he said, noting that these years were fundamental in shaping who he is today. 

"What really counts is how you can affect the lives of your fellow human beings. If some folks want to say that I'm less complete of a person, if they want to be mired in their own academic self consciousness, let them do so. For me it was certainly not an impediment."

The confusion stems from a League of Women Voters candidate forum in which he said he has a degree from Stanford. He said that was a misstatement and encouraged voters to move forward. 

"For me this is an election about the issues," Romero said. "I don't want to stray because of someone's ad hominem attack."

Mr. Romero shares a full statement with Patch. We share it with you, so that you can make an informed decision in this election. 

 

Statement issued by Carlos Romero

Let me state for the record that I do not have a degree from Stanford even though I attended the University for over four years. It was not my intent to mislead anyone. I stand by my education at Stanford and Harvard as well as by my professional, legislative and political accomplishments.

I have not claimed in written statements or other materials in this race or in my 2008 race for East Palo Alto City Council that I earned a degree at Stanford. This includes my campaign materials, ballot statements and questionnaire responses. As for the 2008 video from my run for the East Palo Alto City Council in which I stated that I earned an undergraduate degree at Stanford, I make no excuses for what I said. It was just wrong, a momentary lapse of judgment by an inexperienced politician in a public forum and I apologize.

I spent over four years pursuing a degree in International Relations and Economics at Stanford, but because of my community organizing work in East Palo Alto, I put off the final course work. At that time in my young adult life, I found the incorporation of the City of East Palo Alto very compelling, a once in a lifetime opportunity to be involved in empowering a marginalized community of color. That experiential classroom rounded out my Stanford schooling.

My Harvard credentials are not under question, having studied at Harvard, first as a Fannie Mae Fellow in a 1-month program in the Kennedy School of Government. The second time, I was selected as a Harvard Loeb Fellow in the Graduate School of Design, a unique opportunity that provides a year of graduate study for ten mid-career professionals in fields related to the urban and natural environment. I studied urban planning, land use and transportation,national housing policy and advanced real estate finance and capital markets at Harvard and MIT.

I am committed to this race until the end and to the issues I have championed that are central to this county—our looming deficit, pension reform, my opposition to a new jail and the financial burden it will bring to taxpayers, the loss of city redevelopment agencies, among numerous others. My varied mix of education, experience, and skills, evidenced over a rich 29-year career rolling up myshirt sleeves to improve the lives of others, tells the real story of who I am and why I have chosen to run for this seat.

Thank you.

 

For more San Carlos news, follow us on Twitter, or "like" us on Facebook!

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from San Carlos Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Bob Winters June 18, 2013 at 08:51 am
Best of luck finding good homes, we already have two cats. You may want to consider this advertisingRead More technique: http://i41.tinypic.com/2s17tk0.jpg
Michael G. Stogner June 15, 2013 at 05:07 pm
Marl Olbert said this right after refusing to second Matt Grocott's motion for 2 week delay of vote.Read More I wasn't here at the time but i talked to various people who were. It's my understanding that when Mr. Maltbie was hired into this position he was offered a significantly below market salary. both in terms of compensation and provision I think part because he has never been a city manager before. and he had to prove himself. you can make a argument that that wasn't fair. if you think the person is capable for doing the job not necessarily the fact that they don't have the experience. it happens all over the place it happened to me personally it's just a part of the accepted process but another part of the accepted process is that if the person proves themselves you have to keep faith with them and if you don't you're actually sending a message You're saying that you can't trust us and i totally think that Mr. Maltbie is worth the pay, but besides that i think it is a issue of integrity and maintaining the integrity of the negotiation process and the hiring process that's why I'm going to vote yes for it.
Michael G. Stogner June 15, 2013 at 05:08 pm
I would like to know who those various people were who gave Mark Olbert that understanding.
Michael G. Stogner June 17, 2013 at 04:54 pm
Council member Mark Olbert one who refused to second Mr. Grocott's motion made an interestingRead More statement. "I wasn't here at the time but i talked to various people who were. It's my understanding that when Mr. Maltbie was hired into this position he was offered a significantly below market salary." I know for a fact that he didn't talk to Matt Grocott who was there. That leaves 3 potentials, 2 of them are deceased and the 3rd was Andy Klein who did not attend that meeting so he didn't vote. I would like to know who the "various people who were" are.
Marc Parent June 11, 2013 at 07:50 am
San Carlos just spent 10 Million after lawsuit from the "Bay Keepers", more activistsRead More wanting more money?
Holly Bell June 8, 2013 at 01:23 pm
Unbelievable!! Many voters are watching this issue closely and will remember this vote. Evidently,Read More these commissioners believe that resident's have no voice in city decision-making. Someone please name those commissioners who disregarded the loud-and-clear preference of the people. Time to clean house.
Bob Farkas June 8, 2013 at 02:01 pm
The two commissioners who voted for turf were John Seiling and Ray Merala. It was Ray's lastRead More meeting as a commissioner since he has termed out after 9+ years of service. I think they felt that the needs of the elite CYSO program should take precedence over neighbors and others who use the park. Youth sports seems a principal influencer at Parks and Rec. as they are the largest organized user of the facilities. I agree with many other opponents of this project that we all need to support adequate fields for youth sports. I just think these needs have to be in balance with those of the rest of the community. It was very disappointing that, although it is field availability which is purportedly driving this initiative, there was no available recent data to demonstrate the problem or an analysis of how much of the problem would be addressed by this measure. To a businessman like me, this seems a very unprofessional approach.
Concerned Taxpayer June 8, 2013 at 07:08 pm
This is purely a NIMBY issue. Lets just all be honest about that. The folks who live across fromRead More Highlands Park were the loudest opponents there and were citing all kinds of crazy issues when they should have just been honest and said,"I really don't want to look at more people and cars at the public park that is across the street from me and was there when I moved in." That is essentially the true gripe. NIMBY!!! A very weak argument and unelectable dishonest. Unless you can create more land we have to extend the use at existing parks and fields. This is very logical. We live in California and having to use astro turf stinks but we also live where there is no more available land to utilize. The commissions punted this to the council pure and simple. Well we already know who will vote against it. I am curious who will vote for it?????
Bill June 5, 2013 at 02:53 pm
This post makes zero sense. Bike lanes are a visual reminder to drivers that they must share theRead More road with riders. For every cyclist who is not observing the rules of traffic, I will show you 100 texting drivers. Removing bike lanes is not the answer.