Seriously. Flashback.
◼ Gallegos on Measure T: Video: 5 minutes : 55 seconds (make take several minutes to load)
Showing posts with label Measure T. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Measure T. Show all posts
Monday, November 18, 2013
Sunday, February 21, 2010
It's absurd
◼ http://www.votelocalcontrol.org/gallegos.htm
Talking to a friend from Boston, who started laughing hysterically at Gallegos incoherent ramblings at the link...
Then he read Sopocci-Belknap's site, and further hilarity ensued.
It must be something in the water, he said. If he only knew.
Talking to a friend from Boston, who started laughing hysterically at Gallegos incoherent ramblings at the link...
Then he read Sopocci-Belknap's site, and further hilarity ensued.
It must be something in the water, he said. If he only knew.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Crackpots and scams
Do we have more per capita than anywhere on earth?
☛TS Community currency gaining visibility
With the continuously bleak predictions for our nation's economy, a group of local consumers is urging the community to invest in itself through paper currency that can only be used in Humboldt County.
The Humboldt Exchange Community Currency Project, a volunteer-run group promoting the use of community currency in exchange for local services, produces the colorful bills, featuring local images created by local artists.
”The overall idea is not to displace U.S. currency, just to offer an alternative currency to meet people's needs,” said Jon Zaglin, the project's business outreach coordinator....
But can you pay for your pancake breakfast with it?
From the ☛ TS comments: TomTom Pssstttt...wanna buy the plates for making this Humboldt Home Grown fake money. All you need is a color printer and some Hemp toilet paper...
Let's get it straight - "The Humboldt Exchange Community Currency Project" is "Democracy Unlimited" (DUHC) is David Cobb Is Kaitlin Sopoci Belknap is _________ is ______________ is ______________ is ______________ - how many group names do these guys have anyways?
And how much did they pull in in the Measure T scam? Where's that check to reimburse the County for its REAL expenses that they were collecting money for?
☛TS Community currency gaining visibility
With the continuously bleak predictions for our nation's economy, a group of local consumers is urging the community to invest in itself through paper currency that can only be used in Humboldt County.
The Humboldt Exchange Community Currency Project, a volunteer-run group promoting the use of community currency in exchange for local services, produces the colorful bills, featuring local images created by local artists.
”The overall idea is not to displace U.S. currency, just to offer an alternative currency to meet people's needs,” said Jon Zaglin, the project's business outreach coordinator....
But can you pay for your pancake breakfast with it?
From the ☛ TS comments: TomTom Pssstttt...wanna buy the plates for making this Humboldt Home Grown fake money. All you need is a color printer and some Hemp toilet paper...
Let's get it straight - "The Humboldt Exchange Community Currency Project" is "Democracy Unlimited" (DUHC) is David Cobb Is Kaitlin Sopoci Belknap is _________ is ______________ is ______________ is ______________ - how many group names do these guys have anyways?
And how much did they pull in in the Measure T scam? Where's that check to reimburse the County for its REAL expenses that they were collecting money for?
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
Another voice weighs in
◼ County agrees to pay out $44k; no sign of financial support from Democracy Unlimited
...The integrity of Sopoci-Belknap and her DUHC “non-profit” is itself at question, however, in light of their promises that Measure T would survive challenges to its constitutionality, not to mention promises by DUHC to cover the entire cost. DUHC held a series of fundraising forums in Eureka and Arcata over the last few months to help “defend” Measure T, and also had a “Donate Now!” advertisement on their votelocalcontrol.org website next to their statement concerning the Measure T defeat. No funding, nor the “free legal help” pledged during the Measure T campaign, was ever forthcoming from Democracy Unlimited, their HCCR front group, or any other Measure T supporters, leaving county taxpayers with the bill during an economic crisis....
...The integrity of Sopoci-Belknap and her DUHC “non-profit” is itself at question, however, in light of their promises that Measure T would survive challenges to its constitutionality, not to mention promises by DUHC to cover the entire cost. DUHC held a series of fundraising forums in Eureka and Arcata over the last few months to help “defend” Measure T, and also had a “Donate Now!” advertisement on their votelocalcontrol.org website next to their statement concerning the Measure T defeat. No funding, nor the “free legal help” pledged during the Measure T campaign, was ever forthcoming from Democracy Unlimited, their HCCR front group, or any other Measure T supporters, leaving county taxpayers with the bill during an economic crisis....
Monday, December 01, 2008
Scams, money and Measure T
Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap has a My Word in today's TS. Without Measure T, the Country is going down the drain, dontcha know. She believes in government by the people, and damn the Constitution.
Read it if you can stomach it. ☛ TS The ongoing struggle for the right to self-government ((Cough))
But ask yourself, and her next time you see her - how much money has she raised with all the solicitations of money for Measure T? They're all over the internet, with a fast easy DONATE now button. So how much has she raised?
And HOW BIG IS THE CHECK SHE WROTE TO THE COUNTY OF HUMBOLDT TO COVER THE $100,000.00+ MEASURE T LITIGATION COSTS?
$50?
$100?
$1,000?
I'm sure I would've noticed if they had a Press Conference to present the check. Maybe she did it quietly.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Revelations! County DID work with Pro-Bono Bonifaz
All DUHC/Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap's protestations... all this noise - talk about lying by omission.
One of the big myths of the DUHC/Measure T has been outrage that the County had an offer of pro-bono assistance from 'an expert' named John Bonifaz, and refused it.
Well, turns out that is not true.
Testimony following today's 1:30 public comment time slot... County Counsel Wendy Chaitin, talking about the legal process surrounding Measure T: (I didn't catch it all , but this is the gist of what she said...)
When the Measure was challenged, the County was approched by DUHC, who offered the name of an attorney, and expert on Measure t and election law, offering pro-bono, or FREE legal advice (John Bonifaz). He was, however, not able to act as lead counsel, but could be a resource.
The County needed lead counsel, someone who was familiar with the workings of the (SF) District Court, who specialized in election law...
The Attorney the County hired had conversations with Bonifaz. Both acknowledged that it was going to be difficult for the county to prevail (in defending Measure T).
Bonifaz acknowledged that the attorney the Board hired presented a strong argument... Bonifaz reviewed everything, thought it was excellent work...
Judge Illston's decision showed that she had looked carefully at the Measure and fond it wanting on Constitutional grounds was very troubling... regarding PAC/action committees and Unions, gerneal First Amendment issues...
Illston's decision was based on many distinct grounds that it was likely Measure T would not be found to be Constitutional...
There was a 'severability' clause built into the Measure, so that if any portios of the Measure could survive those could stand. the Judge ruled she couldn't find anything in it that would survive....
***
The speakers who responded to Kaitlin/DUHC/Humboldt Coalition for Community Rights (can we just quit pretending that these are separate, and acknowledge that they are one and the same? You should've heard Cobb on the radio pretending he didn't know who people were as they called in - if you really want campaign reform around here you have to put a stop to all these phony 'groups.') - anyway, those who showed up in response to her call for help were interesting, too. And I do mean interesting.
***
Update:
TS coverage today Dozens voice support for Measure T fails to mention County Counsel Chaitin's comments. "There were 35 people expressing disappointment at the settlement of Measure T,” said David Cobb, a member of Democracy Unlimited and vocal proponent of the measure. “In my time here, that's the largest group of people I've seen speak during public comment on any issue that wasn't actually agendized.”
Fails to point out that at least 4 of the speakers work for/ARE 'Democracy Unlimited" (DUHC)/"Humboldt Coalition for Community Rights"/Humboldt County Independent Business Alliance (HumIBA)/Liberty Tree/who knows how many others.
Let's get this straight - DAVID COBB IS Democracy Unlimited. He is not a "member." He is it. He and Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap. He is not just a 'vocal proponent' - he is THE driving force. He and Kaitlin. Humboldt Coalition for Community Rights IS Democracy Unlimited, is Cobb, is Kaitlin.
And... "The Humboldt County Independent Business Alliance (HumIBA) is a project of Democracy Unlimited that serves as a coalition of ______" fill in the blank…) Pay no attention to the little man behind the curtain…
Funny how Cobb and Co. are so against corporations while they are trying to create their own alternative corporate reality. He has his own currency... trying to rewrite laws to suit his grand vision of the way things ought to be... A nice little reality where David Cobb is the Mayor, the Police Chief, the Judge, the Senator, the Newspaper Editor, the streetsweeper, the cafe owner... It's a WONDERFUL life, if you all would just pass his damn Measures and pay the bills.
But stop calling them "members" and stop pretending along with them that they have only a passing acquaintance with the related groups.
(If you really want a laugh, listen to Cobb's radio show, where the guests from Liberty Tree pretend not to know Kaitlin and Cobb...
One of the big myths of the DUHC/Measure T has been outrage that the County had an offer of pro-bono assistance from 'an expert' named John Bonifaz, and refused it.
Well, turns out that is not true.
Testimony following today's 1:30 public comment time slot... County Counsel Wendy Chaitin, talking about the legal process surrounding Measure T: (I didn't catch it all , but this is the gist of what she said...)
When the Measure was challenged, the County was approched by DUHC, who offered the name of an attorney, and expert on Measure t and election law, offering pro-bono, or FREE legal advice (John Bonifaz). He was, however, not able to act as lead counsel, but could be a resource.
The County needed lead counsel, someone who was familiar with the workings of the (SF) District Court, who specialized in election law...
The Attorney the County hired had conversations with Bonifaz. Both acknowledged that it was going to be difficult for the county to prevail (in defending Measure T).
Bonifaz acknowledged that the attorney the Board hired presented a strong argument... Bonifaz reviewed everything, thought it was excellent work...
Judge Illston's decision showed that she had looked carefully at the Measure and fond it wanting on Constitutional grounds was very troubling... regarding PAC/action committees and Unions, gerneal First Amendment issues...
Illston's decision was based on many distinct grounds that it was likely Measure T would not be found to be Constitutional...
There was a 'severability' clause built into the Measure, so that if any portios of the Measure could survive those could stand. the Judge ruled she couldn't find anything in it that would survive....
***
The speakers who responded to Kaitlin/DUHC/Humboldt Coalition for Community Rights (can we just quit pretending that these are separate, and acknowledge that they are one and the same? You should've heard Cobb on the radio pretending he didn't know who people were as they called in - if you really want campaign reform around here you have to put a stop to all these phony 'groups.') - anyway, those who showed up in response to her call for help were interesting, too. And I do mean interesting.
***
Update:
TS coverage today Dozens voice support for Measure T fails to mention County Counsel Chaitin's comments. "There were 35 people expressing disappointment at the settlement of Measure T,” said David Cobb, a member of Democracy Unlimited and vocal proponent of the measure. “In my time here, that's the largest group of people I've seen speak during public comment on any issue that wasn't actually agendized.”
Fails to point out that at least 4 of the speakers work for/ARE 'Democracy Unlimited" (DUHC)/"Humboldt Coalition for Community Rights"/Humboldt County Independent Business Alliance (HumIBA)/Liberty Tree/who knows how many others.
Let's get this straight - DAVID COBB IS Democracy Unlimited. He is not a "member." He is it. He and Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap. He is not just a 'vocal proponent' - he is THE driving force. He and Kaitlin. Humboldt Coalition for Community Rights IS Democracy Unlimited, is Cobb, is Kaitlin.
And... "The Humboldt County Independent Business Alliance (HumIBA) is a project of Democracy Unlimited that serves as a coalition of ______" fill in the blank…) Pay no attention to the little man behind the curtain…
Funny how Cobb and Co. are so against corporations while they are trying to create their own alternative corporate reality. He has his own currency... trying to rewrite laws to suit his grand vision of the way things ought to be... A nice little reality where David Cobb is the Mayor, the Police Chief, the Judge, the Senator, the Newspaper Editor, the streetsweeper, the cafe owner... It's a WONDERFUL life, if you all would just pass his damn Measures and pay the bills.
But stop calling them "members" and stop pretending along with them that they have only a passing acquaintance with the related groups.
(If you really want a laugh, listen to Cobb's radio show, where the guests from Liberty Tree pretend not to know Kaitlin and Cobb...
Monday, November 10, 2008
Measure T Down. No flames. Just Down. As it should be.
County, Pacific Legal Foundation reach Measure T settlement Measure T: 'Null and void'
The Pacific Legal Foundation announced Monday that it has agreed to a settlement with Humboldt County over the legality of Measure T.
Passed by county voters in 2006, Measure T aimed to ban political contributions from out-of-county corporations to local campaigns. But, the measure quickly came under fire from those who believed it to be unconstitutional.
...Reached Monday, Interim Humboldt County Counsel Wendy Chaitin said the county felt compelled to fight the case because it stemmed from a citizen-passed initiative, despite the fact that many worried from the beginning that the measure may not past constitutional muster.
”The county felt it was necessary to defend Measure T and they did,” Chaitin said. “But, there's a point where you have to balance the reasonable likelihood of winning the lawsuit versus what kind of effort and county funds -- basically taxpayer money -- you want to put toward that effort.”
Illston's initial ruling on the injunction, Chaitin said, plainly showed the proverbial writing was on the wall.
”It was clear from the preliminary injunction ruling that the U.S. District Court Judge Illston, in granting that preliminary injunction, was pretty strong and clear in her language that there were many distinct grounds on which she concluded that Measure T violated the Constitution, both on First and 14th Amendment grounds,” Chaitin said.
Under the terms of the proposed settlement, the county will have to pay $44,000 in Pacific Legal Foundation legal fees, but Chaitin said the total cost of the case for the county is closer to $100,000, not including county staff time.
heraldo has the press release from DUH C MEASURE T: Finished
Press release from the backers of Measure T:
HUMBOLDT COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CAVE TO CORPORATE PRESSURE:
AGREEMENT TO SETTLE OVER MEASURE T FILED IN FEDERAL COURT
Eric has a thread going.
And That POS Measure cost the county HOW MUCH? Kaitlin?
The Pacific Legal Foundation announced Monday that it has agreed to a settlement with Humboldt County over the legality of Measure T.
Passed by county voters in 2006, Measure T aimed to ban political contributions from out-of-county corporations to local campaigns. But, the measure quickly came under fire from those who believed it to be unconstitutional.
...Reached Monday, Interim Humboldt County Counsel Wendy Chaitin said the county felt compelled to fight the case because it stemmed from a citizen-passed initiative, despite the fact that many worried from the beginning that the measure may not past constitutional muster.
”The county felt it was necessary to defend Measure T and they did,” Chaitin said. “But, there's a point where you have to balance the reasonable likelihood of winning the lawsuit versus what kind of effort and county funds -- basically taxpayer money -- you want to put toward that effort.”
Illston's initial ruling on the injunction, Chaitin said, plainly showed the proverbial writing was on the wall.
”It was clear from the preliminary injunction ruling that the U.S. District Court Judge Illston, in granting that preliminary injunction, was pretty strong and clear in her language that there were many distinct grounds on which she concluded that Measure T violated the Constitution, both on First and 14th Amendment grounds,” Chaitin said.
Under the terms of the proposed settlement, the county will have to pay $44,000 in Pacific Legal Foundation legal fees, but Chaitin said the total cost of the case for the county is closer to $100,000, not including county staff time.
heraldo has the press release from DUH C MEASURE T: Finished
Press release from the backers of Measure T:
HUMBOLDT COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CAVE TO CORPORATE PRESSURE:
AGREEMENT TO SETTLE OVER MEASURE T FILED IN FEDERAL COURT
Eric has a thread going.
And That POS Measure cost the county HOW MUCH? Kaitlin?
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Here's a question
the big money Foundations get their money from Corporations.
If your group is funded by those big Foundations, you are supported by (laundered) Corporate money.
Right?
If your group is funded by those big Foundations, you are supported by (laundered) Corporate money.
Right?
The Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap/David Cobb/Demockery Unlimited family tree...
....developing....
How many names do these people have?
How many names do these people have?
Ohhh, They CHANGED it!
Remember Demockery Unlimited was asking for money to defend Measure T and generously directed you to Pacific Legal Foundation's page?
Well they've fixed it - now their link goes to another little "group" - so-o-o-o let's start looking at who is who in this little game....
First - here's the new link: (and you gotta LOVE all these feel good euphemistic Orwellian group names! There oughtta be a contest for the one that's so completely the opposite of what it claims to be... but I digress...) Network for Good.ORG!!!!
Democracy Unlimited - Make a Donation!
We invite you to join us as we educate, agitate, organize and strategize to build a grassroots movement for democracy and against corporate rule! Democracy Unlimited is possible because of donations from people like you. We don’t accept any corporate or government funding. We appreciate as much generosity as you can afford...Thank you!
I want to make a one-time donation
I want to make a recurring donation
-Select-
Monthly
Quarterly
Yearly
Subscribe to our email newsletter!
Yes I’d like to opt-in for email communications to stay informed.
Name on Card*
Type of Card*
-Select-
Visa
MasterCard
American Express
Card Number*
Expiration Date*
Your donation is to our nonprofit partner Network for Good's Donor Advised Fund, which then grants 97% of the funds to us unless you'd prefer to add a tax-deductible 3% grant to Network for Good, in which case 100% of your donation amount will be granted to us.
Add a grant of 3% to Network for Good so that 100% of my donation goes to this organization.
Deduct a grant of 3% for Network for Good.
Additional Information
Democracy Unlimited Workshops
Would like you to receive information about hosting a Democracy Unlimited workshop in your community?
Yes! Send me information about hosting a workshop.
Democracy Unlimited of Humboldt County has partnered with Network for Good to securely process your online credit card donation via the Network for Good Donor Advised Fund. This transaction will appear on your credit card statement as "Network for Good".
I think it is time I did a little digging. You oughtta SEE the google results!
You're gonna be surprised how many requests for money they have out there.
Two questions - what is defending Measure T costing the County? $50,000? More? Less?
And, just how much has David Cobb/Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap/DUHC/Humboldt Coalition for Community Rights donated to the County to date?
Well they've fixed it - now their link goes to another little "group" - so-o-o-o let's start looking at who is who in this little game....
First - here's the new link: (and you gotta LOVE all these feel good euphemistic Orwellian group names! There oughtta be a contest for the one that's so completely the opposite of what it claims to be... but I digress...) Network for Good.ORG!!!!
Democracy Unlimited - Make a Donation!
We invite you to join us as we educate, agitate, organize and strategize to build a grassroots movement for democracy and against corporate rule! Democracy Unlimited is possible because of donations from people like you. We don’t accept any corporate or government funding. We appreciate as much generosity as you can afford...Thank you!
I want to make a one-time donation
I want to make a recurring donation
-Select-
Monthly
Quarterly
Yearly
Subscribe to our email newsletter!
Yes I’d like to opt-in for email communications to stay informed.
Name on Card*
Type of Card*
-Select-
Visa
MasterCard
American Express
Card Number*
Expiration Date*
Your donation is to our nonprofit partner Network for Good's Donor Advised Fund, which then grants 97% of the funds to us unless you'd prefer to add a tax-deductible 3% grant to Network for Good, in which case 100% of your donation amount will be granted to us.
Add a grant of 3% to Network for Good so that 100% of my donation goes to this organization.
Deduct a grant of 3% for Network for Good.
Additional Information
Democracy Unlimited Workshops
Would like you to receive information about hosting a Democracy Unlimited workshop in your community?
Yes! Send me information about hosting a workshop.
Democracy Unlimited of Humboldt County has partnered with Network for Good to securely process your online credit card donation via the Network for Good Donor Advised Fund. This transaction will appear on your credit card statement as "Network for Good".
I think it is time I did a little digging. You oughtta SEE the google results!
You're gonna be surprised how many requests for money they have out there.
Two questions - what is defending Measure T costing the County? $50,000? More? Less?
And, just how much has David Cobb/Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap/DUHC/Humboldt Coalition for Community Rights donated to the County to date?
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Good news - Federal judge puts injunction on Measure T
Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap says the judge has ruled against the People of Humboldt County. To which we could add - "AND IN FAVOR OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Kaitlin!"
☛ The Journal Fed Judge Issues Injunction against Measure T
The proponents of the Measure were disappointed by the ruling, but unfazed. “The court is wrong - and this isn’t the first time,” said Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap, spokesperson for the Humboldt Coalition for Community Rights (HCCR). “Measure T follows in the footsteps of the suffragists, the abolitionists and Civil Rights activists who fought against Supreme Court decisions that upheld unjust laws. The majority of Humboldt citizens believe corporations have too much power in our society, especially in elections. Our democracy is deteriorating. We have an obligation to stand up for what’s right, even if the courts are not currently with us.”
☛ the Court Ruling
☛ TS Federal judge puts injunction on Measure T
A U.S. District Court judge has issued an injunction against the 2006 ballot Measure T, saying it likely violates the First and 14th amendments.
The Humboldt County ballot measure put a ban on political contributions by corporations that are not exclusively local. Mercer Fraser Co. and O&M industries, both based locally but with some of its workforce out of the area, challenged Measure T. Democracy Unlimited, the primary sponsor of the initiative, is defending the measure, saying only natural persons possess civil and political rights, unlike corporations, which are creations of state law.
Judge Susan Illston ruled Monday in San Francisco that Measure T may burden corporations' First Amendment right to make political expenditures and campaign contributions, and doesn't allow corporations to form segregated funds. But even if it did, Illston wrote, it may still be unconstitutional because it regulates non-local corporations more stringently than non-local incorporated unions.
Measure T also likely violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, Illston wrote, because it burdens corporations' right to engage in political expression, but is not narrowly tailored.
Court blocks Measure T
☛ ER Judge rules for Injunction on Measure T
☛ ER A step for freedom
☛ FredBreaking news!
SoHum Parlance: Measure T injunction
I'm thinking "Democracy Unlimited" is actually a good name for Kaitlin's group since she seems to believe in the tyranny of the majority as opposed to the Constitution and the Rule of Law. The Constitution is an impediment to the "Democracy Unlimited" folks, which is one reason why her use of the Suffragette example is so offensive.
Now, Kaitlin - how much is this costing us again?
Related documents: (I am adding these as quick links in the sidebar, too)
☛ The Complaint
☛ Case Summary
☛ The Decision
☛ (POS) Measure T
☛ The Journal Fed Judge Issues Injunction against Measure T
The proponents of the Measure were disappointed by the ruling, but unfazed. “The court is wrong - and this isn’t the first time,” said Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap, spokesperson for the Humboldt Coalition for Community Rights (HCCR). “Measure T follows in the footsteps of the suffragists, the abolitionists and Civil Rights activists who fought against Supreme Court decisions that upheld unjust laws. The majority of Humboldt citizens believe corporations have too much power in our society, especially in elections. Our democracy is deteriorating. We have an obligation to stand up for what’s right, even if the courts are not currently with us.”
☛ the Court Ruling
☛ TS Federal judge puts injunction on Measure T
A U.S. District Court judge has issued an injunction against the 2006 ballot Measure T, saying it likely violates the First and 14th amendments.
The Humboldt County ballot measure put a ban on political contributions by corporations that are not exclusively local. Mercer Fraser Co. and O&M industries, both based locally but with some of its workforce out of the area, challenged Measure T. Democracy Unlimited, the primary sponsor of the initiative, is defending the measure, saying only natural persons possess civil and political rights, unlike corporations, which are creations of state law.
Judge Susan Illston ruled Monday in San Francisco that Measure T may burden corporations' First Amendment right to make political expenditures and campaign contributions, and doesn't allow corporations to form segregated funds. But even if it did, Illston wrote, it may still be unconstitutional because it regulates non-local corporations more stringently than non-local incorporated unions.
Measure T also likely violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, Illston wrote, because it burdens corporations' right to engage in political expression, but is not narrowly tailored.
Court blocks Measure T
☛ ER Judge rules for Injunction on Measure T
☛ ER A step for freedom
☛ FredBreaking news!
SoHum Parlance: Measure T injunction
I'm thinking "Democracy Unlimited" is actually a good name for Kaitlin's group since she seems to believe in the tyranny of the majority as opposed to the Constitution and the Rule of Law. The Constitution is an impediment to the "Democracy Unlimited" folks, which is one reason why her use of the Suffragette example is so offensive.
Now, Kaitlin - how much is this costing us again?
Related documents: (I am adding these as quick links in the sidebar, too)
☛ The Complaint
☛ Case Summary
☛ The Decision
☛ (POS) Measure T
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
In the UNBELIEVABLE! Dept.
PRESS RELEASE: Redwood ACLU Calls For Support Of Lawsuit Against Measure T
...“The proponents of Measure T and especially the Humboldt Coalition for Community Rights by their Co-Chair Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap, are renewing the same tactics used in the 2006 election to stifle any dissent regarding the constitutionality of linkMeasure T,” said Redwood ACLU vice chair Greg Allen. “An examination of statements made by Sopoci-Belknap at the Democracy Unlimited website again attacks those with differing legal opinions. This policy has been continued by the HCCR in a letter signed by Sopoci-Belknap, herself a candidate for public office, to direct all candidates for public office in Humboldt County, including her own opponent, to support Measure T even if it is held unconstitutional by the district court.”...
Case Summary
Complaint
Measure T
Op-Ed - Why we're challenging Measure T in court
Demockery Umlimited
Fred has discussion
...“The proponents of Measure T and especially the Humboldt Coalition for Community Rights by their Co-Chair Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap, are renewing the same tactics used in the 2006 election to stifle any dissent regarding the constitutionality of linkMeasure T,” said Redwood ACLU vice chair Greg Allen. “An examination of statements made by Sopoci-Belknap at the Democracy Unlimited website again attacks those with differing legal opinions. This policy has been continued by the HCCR in a letter signed by Sopoci-Belknap, herself a candidate for public office, to direct all candidates for public office in Humboldt County, including her own opponent, to support Measure T even if it is held unconstitutional by the district court.”...
Case Summary
Complaint
Measure T
Op-Ed - Why we're challenging Measure T in court
Demockery Umlimited
Fred has discussion
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Federal court denies request to restrain Measure T
☛ ER Federal court denies request to restrain Measure T
A federal court denied a request Monday by two companies suing Humboldt County over Measure T to have a temporary restraining order placed on the ordinance, except in one specific instance.
Both companies, Mercer-Fraser Co. and O & M Industries, tried to have the restraining order put into play so they could freely attend several political events this week and contribute to local candidates and measures....
...a preliminary injunction hearing is scheduled for Monday, which could determine whether Measure T is restrained until the U.S. District Court of Northern California makes a ruling on the law...
Both O & M Industries Vice President Rob McBeth and Mercer-Fraser Vice President Justin Zabel wrote in their declarations that their companies were invited to a private fundraising dinner with other local businesses, scheduled for sometime today, where they expected to contribute $500 each.
“The purpose of the meeting is to convene a round-table discussion concerning candidates in the various local election races anticipated to be the most receptive to the needs of small business and creation of local jobs,” both wrote in their declarations.
The court ruled that both companies can pledge to support a candidate at the event, but cannot give any funds as of yet, said Randy Riddle, an attorney representing Humboldt County in the lawsuit.
Both companies also want to contribute $1,000 to oppose two sales tax increases scheduled for the November ballot – Measure D for Eureka and Measure G for Arcata.
On behalf of Mercer-Fraser, Zabel wrote that the company also wants to spend a total of $1,000 on two of the three candidates running for the 2nd District Humboldt County Board of Supervisors seat. The three candidates are appointed incumbent Johanna Rodoni, Estelle Fennel and Clif Clendenen.
On behalf of O & M Industries, McBeth wrote that the company wants to contribute $500 toward the creation of a candidate mailer for both the Eureka and Arcata city council races, which would be sent out to absentee voters on Sept. 30.
The one request the federal court did approve involved a campaign event being hosted by the Friends of Johanna Rodoni at the Fortuna Veterans Memorial Building. Tickets to the event cost $25.
The court ruled that McBeth can attend and pay the ticket fee, but couldn’t participate in any auctions or other fundraising events there, Riddle said.
A federal court denied a request Monday by two companies suing Humboldt County over Measure T to have a temporary restraining order placed on the ordinance, except in one specific instance.
Both companies, Mercer-Fraser Co. and O & M Industries, tried to have the restraining order put into play so they could freely attend several political events this week and contribute to local candidates and measures....
...a preliminary injunction hearing is scheduled for Monday, which could determine whether Measure T is restrained until the U.S. District Court of Northern California makes a ruling on the law...
Both O & M Industries Vice President Rob McBeth and Mercer-Fraser Vice President Justin Zabel wrote in their declarations that their companies were invited to a private fundraising dinner with other local businesses, scheduled for sometime today, where they expected to contribute $500 each.
“The purpose of the meeting is to convene a round-table discussion concerning candidates in the various local election races anticipated to be the most receptive to the needs of small business and creation of local jobs,” both wrote in their declarations.
The court ruled that both companies can pledge to support a candidate at the event, but cannot give any funds as of yet, said Randy Riddle, an attorney representing Humboldt County in the lawsuit.
Both companies also want to contribute $1,000 to oppose two sales tax increases scheduled for the November ballot – Measure D for Eureka and Measure G for Arcata.
On behalf of Mercer-Fraser, Zabel wrote that the company also wants to spend a total of $1,000 on two of the three candidates running for the 2nd District Humboldt County Board of Supervisors seat. The three candidates are appointed incumbent Johanna Rodoni, Estelle Fennel and Clif Clendenen.
On behalf of O & M Industries, McBeth wrote that the company wants to contribute $500 toward the creation of a candidate mailer for both the Eureka and Arcata city council races, which would be sent out to absentee voters on Sept. 30.
The one request the federal court did approve involved a campaign event being hosted by the Friends of Johanna Rodoni at the Fortuna Veterans Memorial Building. Tickets to the event cost $25.
The court ruled that McBeth can attend and pay the ticket fee, but couldn’t participate in any auctions or other fundraising events there, Riddle said.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
a TRO on T delayed.
☛ ER Companies challenge Measure T in court over definition of ‘local’ business
Two companies challenging the constitutionality of a voter-approved county ordinance are asking the U.S. District Court for Northern California to issue a temporary restraining order that would allow them to contribute to supervisorial candidates’ campaigns in the upcoming election.
Mercer-Fraser Company and O & M Industries filed a lawsuit against the county in August over Measure T, an ordinance that prohibits “non-local corporations” from contributing to any election inside Humboldt County borders.
On Friday, a hearing to have a temporary restraining order (TRO) placed on the ordinance so that the two companies may contribute was continued until Monday.
So, they're asking for a stay until the matter is finally decided. And the County is fighting THAT?
Two companies challenging the constitutionality of a voter-approved county ordinance are asking the U.S. District Court for Northern California to issue a temporary restraining order that would allow them to contribute to supervisorial candidates’ campaigns in the upcoming election.
Mercer-Fraser Company and O & M Industries filed a lawsuit against the county in August over Measure T, an ordinance that prohibits “non-local corporations” from contributing to any election inside Humboldt County borders.
On Friday, a hearing to have a temporary restraining order (TRO) placed on the ordinance so that the two companies may contribute was continued until Monday.
So, they're asking for a stay until the matter is finally decided. And the County is fighting THAT?
Thursday, September 11, 2008
wtf?
So DUHC (Demockery Unlimited) has posted an ACTION ALERT! regarding Measure T! And whaddya KNOW! They are asking for MONEY, honey. And LOOK who they want you to send it to... it's the oddest thing.
What you can do:
Make a donation to support the people of Humboldt County in this lawsuit! Click here.
Crackin' me up.
Monday, September 08, 2008
OH GOODY!
News and Announcements from DUHC ("Democracy Unlimited of Humboldt County")
As you are aware, the right-wing (ooooh scary) Pacific Legal Foundation is suing Humboldt County in an effort to overturn (the Piece of Shit) Measure T, the local ordinance which prohibits non-local corporations from making political contributions in local elections.
We always knew this lawsuit would come. (We were dreading it, actually!)
It is merely another example of how corporate leaders try to claim the illegitimate doctrine of "corporate personhood" is to overturn democratically enacted laws which attempt to control their abuse. For a corporation to claim that their civil "rights" have been violated is so preposterous that only a lawyer could argue that idea with a straight face.
We are already working with renowned constitutional law expertJohn Bonifaz to defend Measure T in court. John has offered to assist the county at no charge!
Oh BOY! A pro-bono activist lawyer! Just like good old Joe Cotchett!
As you are aware, the right-wing (ooooh scary) Pacific Legal Foundation is suing Humboldt County in an effort to overturn (the Piece of Shit) Measure T, the local ordinance which prohibits non-local corporations from making political contributions in local elections.
We always knew this lawsuit would come. (We were dreading it, actually!)
It is merely another example of how corporate leaders try to claim the illegitimate doctrine of "corporate personhood" is to overturn democratically enacted laws which attempt to control their abuse. For a corporation to claim that their civil "rights" have been violated is so preposterous that only a lawyer could argue that idea with a straight face.
We are already working with renowned constitutional law expert
Oh BOY! A pro-bono activist lawyer! Just like good old Joe Cotchett!
Pretending to be real
☛ TS Measure T protects our rights A little Op-Ed in support of Measure T in the TS today. written by Jon Zaglin, who we are told in his little bio, resides in Eureka.
Jon Zaglin resides in Eureka? Not - Jon Zaglin of the Healthy Humboldt Coalition? Not Jon Zaiglin, the Local Projects Director for DUHC.org (Democracy Unlimited) the nutcases who brought us Measure T?
Fess up, dude.
Jon Zaglin resides in Eureka? Not - Jon Zaglin of the Healthy Humboldt Coalition? Not Jon Zaiglin, the Local Projects Director for DUHC.org (Democracy Unlimited) the nutcases who brought us Measure T?
Fess up, dude.
Wednesday, September 03, 2008
Passing the buck!
Backers of Measure T, the horse that Gallegos rode back into office are about to come face to face with the real Gallegos. He was to be their champion. The ENFORCER, "without fear or favor" "justice for all" "No matter how wealthy or sacrosanct" wasn't that it?
But now, faced with two violations (at least) of Measure T, and the ball squarely in Gallegos' court - well, there's the problem. It's not anywhere close. Looks like he's hiding from that ball, a hunter-seeker* with his name on it.
Today's ER reports Two bond campaigns received illegal contributions
Two school bond measures passed by voters in Fortuna and McKinleyville received campaign contributions that violated a county ordinance that restricts contributions.
That ordinance, Measure T, which voters approved 55 to 43 percent on June 6, 2006, restricts campaign contributions from corporations defined as “non-local.”
Both McKinleyville’s Measure C, which was on the June 3 ballot, and Fortuna’s Measure X from 2006 received contributions from a number of “non-local” corporations that totaled $25,500.
Gallegos' response?
CLASSIC. “I’ve been made aware of Measure C,” Gallegos said. “I haven’t had a chance to look at the underlying complaints.”
But GET THIS! Gallegos said that he may wait to see if the federal court decides to overturn the ordinance before taking any formal action as to not “waste time, effort and resources.”
REALLY? I mean, REALLY!
Gallegos said it would be a couple of months before he would have the opportunity to address the complaint, given that time-sensitive cases and those involving people in custody take priority.
Gallegos was not aware of the contributions to Measure X and said that it may take enforcement of the ordinance before companies not allowed to give money stop doing so.
“Maybe that puts the onus on us to pay attention to what’s going on (with both measures),” he said of the multiple violations. “Whether you agree with the end result or not, I have to enforce the code.”
In other words, he doesn't have a clue what to do, or what he is going to do. But it looks like he's going to pass the buck on this one. Too bad. He could add it to his list of sure losers.
As for not wasting time, effort and resources, uh... Paul. You're kidding right? Why start now?
Related:
☛ co.humboldt.ca.us/election/measure%20t.pdf
McK Press - On Measure T
☛ Measure T facing legal challenge (This is the one he's waiting on - the one with Mercer-Fraser and O&M Industries)
☛ ER Campaign contribution ordinance challenged
☛ Fred: Measure T Going To Court
☛ ER Striking a blow for free speech
Learn more about Measure T in a Pros and Cons Video, produced by Eileen McGee (51 mins)
Paul Gallegos, Humboldt County District Attorney (FREAKIN' HILARIOUS 6 min VIDEO!!!!)
Kaitlin-Sopoci-Belknap, Campaign Co-Manager for Measure T (19 mins)
John Bonifaz, Attorney and Founder of the National Voting Rights Institute (17 mins)
In a radio ad for Measure T, Gallegos says: "Hello, my name is Paul Gallegos, your District Attorney. Just three months after I was voted into office, Texas-based Maxxam Corporation tried to have me recalled, undermine the decision made by Humboldt County voters. Democracy only works when the power resides with the people. I'm urging you to vote Yes on Measure T for local control of our elections."
But now, faced with two violations (at least) of Measure T, and the ball squarely in Gallegos' court - well, there's the problem. It's not anywhere close. Looks like he's hiding from that ball, a hunter-seeker* with his name on it.
Today's ER reports Two bond campaigns received illegal contributions
Two school bond measures passed by voters in Fortuna and McKinleyville received campaign contributions that violated a county ordinance that restricts contributions.
That ordinance, Measure T, which voters approved 55 to 43 percent on June 6, 2006, restricts campaign contributions from corporations defined as “non-local.”
Both McKinleyville’s Measure C, which was on the June 3 ballot, and Fortuna’s Measure X from 2006 received contributions from a number of “non-local” corporations that totaled $25,500.
Gallegos' response?
CLASSIC. “I’ve been made aware of Measure C,” Gallegos said. “I haven’t had a chance to look at the underlying complaints.”
But GET THIS! Gallegos said that he may wait to see if the federal court decides to overturn the ordinance before taking any formal action as to not “waste time, effort and resources.”
REALLY? I mean, REALLY!
Gallegos said it would be a couple of months before he would have the opportunity to address the complaint, given that time-sensitive cases and those involving people in custody take priority.
Gallegos was not aware of the contributions to Measure X and said that it may take enforcement of the ordinance before companies not allowed to give money stop doing so.
“Maybe that puts the onus on us to pay attention to what’s going on (with both measures),” he said of the multiple violations. “Whether you agree with the end result or not, I have to enforce the code.”
In other words, he doesn't have a clue what to do, or what he is going to do. But it looks like he's going to pass the buck on this one. Too bad. He could add it to his list of sure losers.
As for not wasting time, effort and resources, uh... Paul. You're kidding right? Why start now?
Related:
☛ co.humboldt.ca.us/election/measure%20t.pdf
McK Press - On Measure T
☛ Measure T facing legal challenge (This is the one he's waiting on - the one with Mercer-Fraser and O&M Industries)
☛ ER Campaign contribution ordinance challenged
☛ Fred: Measure T Going To Court
☛ ER Striking a blow for free speech
Learn more about Measure T in a Pros and Cons Video, produced by Eileen McGee (51 mins)
Paul Gallegos, Humboldt County District Attorney (FREAKIN' HILARIOUS 6 min VIDEO!!!!)
Kaitlin-Sopoci-Belknap, Campaign Co-Manager for Measure T (19 mins)
John Bonifaz, Attorney and Founder of the National Voting Rights Institute (17 mins)In a radio ad for Measure T, Gallegos says: "Hello, my name is Paul Gallegos, your District Attorney. Just three months after I was voted into office, Texas-based Maxxam Corporation tried to have me recalled, undermine the decision made by Humboldt County voters. Democracy only works when the power resides with the people. I'm urging you to vote Yes on Measure T for local control of our elections."
Friday, August 29, 2008
Striking a blow for free speech
☛ ER Striking a blow for free speech
The Activist Community needs this Measure which hogties their targets, and prevents them from being able to fight back. Who will they get to try to defend the piece-of-shit Measure T? Despite their propaganda, telling the voters that their phony experts would defend it in court, it will most likely fall to County Counsel (or hired outside Counsel) - OR to Gallegos.
And THAT will be very entertaining.
The Activist Community needs this Measure which hogties their targets, and prevents them from being able to fight back. Who will they get to try to defend the piece-of-shit Measure T? Despite their propaganda, telling the voters that their phony experts would defend it in court, it will most likely fall to County Counsel (or hired outside Counsel) - OR to Gallegos.
And THAT will be very entertaining.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)