When Tom Scocca applied to Santa Clara County Sheriff Laurie Smith three years ago for a permit to carry a concealed firearm, he thought he had all the right stuff.

Not only was he a former police officer and sheriff’s deputy working as a security manager at a major Silicon Valley tech company, he owned an investigative firm and was already licensed to openly carry a loaded gun.

But the sheriff turned him down.

Now that denial is the basis of a federal lawsuit in which Scocca alleges that Smith issues concealed-weapons permits in an arbitrary and capricious way.

He may have a shot. A review by this newspaper of the list of people with such permits indicates that some who appear to have less reason than Scocca to carry a concealed weapon have had no problem getting a permit from Smith.

And although state law requires that permit holders must be “a resident of the county or a city” where the permits are issued — or at least spend a substantial amount of time in a principal place of employment or business in that city or county — the Sheriff’s Office refused to explain how Smith defines who is a “resident.”

In fact, some of those who currently hold permits don’t appear to fit the ordinary definition of that word, including the scion of the Eggo frozen-waffle fortune who lives in Russia and the 86-year-old patriarch of Bechtel, the international engineering and construction firm. He lives in San Francisco.

But sheriff departments in Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo and Santa Cruz counties said it’s clear to them — and that applicants aren’t allowed to “venue shop” for permits.

“You don’t get to pick and choose which county you live in,” Alameda County Sheriff Greg Ahern said of his policy. “It has to be your primary residence, and we validate that in our background check for every applicant.”

San Mateo County Sheriff Gregory Munks agreed, saying, “I expect that people in my county who I issue CCW permits live in the county as their primary residence.”

The list of 49 “civilian” permit holders released to this newspaper includes 13 people who donated to Smith’s campaigns over the years, either personally or through companies connected to them. Also on the list are people whose permits have continually been renewed, even though the original reason for getting the permit appears to no longer apply.

Scocca said he was perplexed because several others on the list are just like him — people with law enforcement backgrounds who are now doing security work.

“California law says she has the right to say no,” said Scocca, 53, who was recently promoted to director of global investigations at the Silicon Valley firm. But “the 14th Amendment demands everyone be treated equally. When she has issued to people who are similarly situated to me, then she is not complying with the totality of the law.”

County numbers vary

Compared with sheriffs in most surrounding counties, however, Smith is a permit tightwad. In San Mateo County, which has 40 percent fewer people than Santa Clara County, at least 142 permits have been issued. There are 186 permit holders in Contra Costa County, 140 in Alameda County and 27 in tiny Santa Cruz County. The lists are public record.

By far the strictest county in the Bay Area is San Francisco County, where Michael Hennessey said he has issued only six concealed-weapons permits in his 32 years as sheriff — and none of those is still valid. San Francisco police said they have one permit issued — to a judge who has received threats.

Police chiefs in Santa Clara County also said they issue few, if any, permits.

Sheriffs or police chiefs, who under California law have the discretion to issue the permits, often have a dilemma: Either they’re accused of handing them out like candy, or being too miserly with them — which can lead to allegations of favoritism.

Smith declined to comment for this story because Scocca’s case will soon go before U.S. District Court Judge Edward Chen in San Francisco. A hearing is set for January.

Deputy County Counsel Cheryl Stevens said Smith stopped issuing permits in the early months of this year. Smith, Stevens said, wanted to review the county’s policy in light of related state and federal court cases.

Two gun advocacy groups have signed on to the case as co-plaintiffs, vowing to take it to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary. The plaintiffs contend that the permitting process is run like an “exclusive club” that denies others equal treatment.

Legal challenges

Adam Winkler, a UCLA law professor, said Scocca’s case was part of the next battlefield in the war over the right to bear arms. “All across the country, people are challenging concealed-carry laws as a way of trying to stimulate a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on their constitutionality,” he said.

Pro-gun politicians are also pushing the issue. Last month, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a measure that would make a permit to carry a concealed firearm from one state valid in any state that allows the practice.

In court documents, Santa Clara County attorneys argue that Scocca’s request for a gun permit is not about vindicating his civil rights, but merely an attempt to help him market himself professionally. The county maintains that the state gives Smith the discretion to deny Scocca’s application. And in this case, the court documents say, seeking a concealed-weapons permit to conduct undercover surveillance at his workplace does not meet the sheriff’s criteria to “defend himself, his home or his property.”

In addition to the 49 civilian permit holders on the list that the Sheriff’s Office provided the newspaper, 64 other permits have been issued to judges, prosecutors and current or reserve law enforcement officers. Smith’s office has a policy of withholding those names to protect their privacy, even though four other Bay Area sheriffs provided those details.

According to the state penal code, applicants must be residents in the county or city that issues the permit, or spend a substantial amount of time at their job or business there. But it’s up to the sheriff or police chief who issues the permits to decide what determines residency, said Steve Lindley, chief of the state’s Bureau of Firearms.

One permit holder, Bart Dorsa, who is a grandson of Eggo frozen-waffle inventor Frank Dorsa Sr., lives in Moscow, his father, Frank Dorsa Jr., told this newspaper. In fact, he’s lived there since 2003, according to Bart Dorsa’s own words in an August TV report from a Russian news channel that shows the filmmaker and visual artist in Moscow pedaling a large, fire-spewing metallic “duckmobile.”

Dorsa first received a permit in 1995 and, over the years, has written in his applications that he dealt in precious metals and carries large sums of cash; he also wrote that he needed a gun when scouting remote locations for his films.

Dr. Gary Zoellner, an orthopedic surgeon who had been a reserve deputy, had a permit for eight years until 2009. But he’s been in Yuma, Ariz., for the past seven years, according to his office manager there.

Repeated attempts to reach Dorsa and Zoellner were unsuccessful.

Living in fear

The newspaper’s review shows that each of the civilian permit holders — 10 are in their 70s and 80s, nine of whom have maintained permits for years — cite threats to themselves, their families, or fear of being assaulted when transporting guns or valuables. They include Cisco CEO John Chambers, who says in his applications that he’s worried about “negative responses” from laid-off employees, and retired AT&T executive Frank Fiorina, husband of former HP CEO Carly Fiorina. His application said his wife has received threats over the years and is still in the public eye.

But the newspaper also found that some of the permit holders’ reasons for wanting permits appear to be outdated, or seem to be dubious attempts to hold onto permits, which for civilians are valid for two years and then must be renewed.

One permit holder is former county Supervisor Don Gage. The veteran politician has had a permit to carry a concealed weapon since 1991, when he was elected Gilroy’s mayor.

Over the years, he’s continued to state on his application that he needs a permit because of threats against his life, the result of “my hard stance against gangs, substance abuse and crime.”

Yet even his staunchest supporters might be hard-pressed to find danger in his current part-time job: He’s a board member of the Santa Clara Valley Water District.

Gage disagreed, saying the board received threats just last month in the midst of a controversy over its decision to add fluoride to drinking water. And in a tough economy, he added, people also “get upset” about rising water rates.

“There’s a lot of crazy people out there,” Gage said. “I think I have a valid reason because I’m in the public all the time. When I’m a private citizen again, it’s something I probably wouldn’t have a need for.”

Donors get permits

An analysis by this newspaper of campaign contributions to Smith since 2004 shows that the sheriff has received thousands of dollars from current permit holders and their relatives, or companies they own or work for — although Stevens, the deputy county counsel, insists there is no connection.

For example, there are two contributions totaling $1,000 to Smith’s 2010 re-election campaign on behalf of two family-run carwashes owned by Bart Dorsa’s parents.

Two people on the 14-member Sheriff’s Advisory Board, which raises money for extra equipment and training for the Sheriff’s Office, also have permits and gave money to Smith’s campaign.

Jim Rees, CEO of Boccardo Management Group, is one. But he told a reporter that his permit, first issued in 2004, had nothing to do with either the $340 he gave her campaign in 2005 or his work on the advisory board.

“There is no quid pro quo,” Rees said.

Another advisory board member, Gregg Dietz, an owner of an investigative firm who first received a permit in the 1980s, contributed $140 to Smith’s campaign in 2005. And an employee of Dietz contributed $500 the same year, records show.

Dietz also denied receiving special treatment from Smith.

Property records also show that another advisory board member with a gun permit, mortgage lender James Campagna, helped Smith and her husband purchase their $850,000 San Jose home in 2005. Campagna and an associate also purchased a Lake Tahoe vacation home from Smith and her husband in 2000, records show. Campagna received his permit in 1998, just before Smith was elected to her first term as sheriff.

Campagna declined to comment.

Bechtel’s permit

Another Smith campaign contributor is Stephen Bechtel Jr., chairman emeritus of San Francisco-based Bechtel. He first received his permit in 1983 — well before Smith was first elected sheriff in 1998 — and his permit has been renewed every two years since by two other sheriffs, as well as Smith.

Over the years, Bechtel’s application file notes, he and his family have been threatened on numerous occasions. The file includes one application that says that after the Patty Hearst kidnapping in 1974 by the Symbionese Liberation Army, authorities learned that the militant group had a precise drawing of Bechtel’s home and was planning to kidnap family members.

Bechtel gave $500 to Smith last year, as did at least four other Bechtel family members and a president of Bechtel’s foundation, for a total of $3,000.

Bechtel, who lives in San Francisco, could not be reached for comment. But his son Gary, a San Martin resident, told a reporter that for decades his parents have owned a Morgan Hill ranch that he often visits.

Jim Weyermann, until recently the president and CEO of the San Jose Giants baseball team, also contributed to Smith’s re-election, records show. He contributed $250 in April 2010 and received a permit two months later. But he said there was no connection, pointing out that he has donated money to many other candidates over the years.

In his application, he said he is the “subject of threats from disgruntled patrons and employees, who have shown sharp-edged weapons on several occasions.”

Another permit holder, Alex Kaldis, who owned the now-closed Cozy Family Restaurant in San Jose, donated $350 last year to Smith’s re-election campaign. And in 2006, records show, Smith paid Kaldis $3,000 for food and catering to hold her victory party at his restaurant on The Alameda. He received his first permit in 2008, when he listed concerns about transporting cash and threats from disgruntled employees.

Asked whether there is any correlation between the permits and campaign donations, Stevens, the deputy county counsel, said in an email: “We do not maintain that information or consider that information when the sheriff approves the permit.”

Many permit holders, Stevens wrote, had applied for permits long before Smith was first elected, and they have been renewed “because they continue to meet” the requirements.

“There’s no quid pro quo?” Scocca said. “You can’t help but wonder.”

Mercury News researcher Diana Stickler contributed to this report. Contact Tracy Seipel at 408-275-0140.