Tags: term
Clear The Bench Colorado
October 1st, 2010Clear The Bench Colorado--Friday Morning
Dear friends,
If the three unjust justices - Michael Bender, Alex Martinez and Nancy Rice - stay on in the Supreme Court, they will continue the Mullarkey legacy of ignoring the Constitution. The rulings they promote are called a "progressive ideology", further destroying our rights as citizens of Colorado.
We have very precious few days left until the mail-in ballots drop on October 12.
CEW knows this... and they want to make sure they keep OUR money until after that date.
Big surprise: Colorado Ethics Watch (CEW, pronounced "sue" - because it's what they do) is at it again.
It has clearly been the intention of CEW, since we won our case, and they first filed a bogus filing on May 5, 2010, that it hopes to tie up our resources for as long as possible protecting the Colorado Supreme Court Justices.
On Monday, September 20, CEW filed for a "Enlargement of Time" in order to pay the attorney's fees they've owed us-literally tens of thousands of dollars - since the judge hearing their original "complaint" ordered them to pay up on July 21, 2010.
It's not like they don't have the money. It's not even like they have much math to do.
They are, quite simply, continuing to try and prevent the word from getting out - that quitting Chief Justice Mullarkey's gang of Constitution-shredders shouldn't have a "rubber stamp" to stay in office... FOR ANOTHER 10 YEAR TERM.
Unfortunately, campaigns like this don't run themselves. And more unfortunately, campaigns like this don't fund themselves.
We need your help. We need your generous donation of time, effort, and finances in order to win this campaign.
A decision has yet to be reached as to whether or not CEW will receive that "Enlargement of Time", but even then, we still need your help.
In the mean time (and it's hard to say when that decision will be made), we still have flyers to print, signs to produce (and distribute!) and the word to get out.
It is absolutely vital for the survival of our state that we take out the trash this election - this includes those who would rather use our Constitution for confetti than as the guiding principle for their judgements, the highest law of the state.
We must get the word out. And we need your help to do it...
In late August, we ran a statewide poll, and the results are clear and resounding: across absolutely every demographic (race, gender, party affiliation and location in the state) if the word gets out, 78% of voters will vote "NO" on these unjust justices.
This is, quite simply, the biggest no-brainer in Colorado politics this election.
We have ten more years of guaranteed bad judges with the remnant of the Mullarkey Majority in Michael Bender, Alex Martinez and Nancy Rice - or two years of (at worst) of an unknown quantity (which can't possibly get any worse).
However, even with the two years of unknown, we do know that:
1. It is simply impossible to be worse than 0-15 in upholding our Constitution;
2. There is the chance it might be "as bad", but we can vote them out in two years rather than ten; and
3. There is the even greater chance it could get better - and we might even get a judge good enough to not vote out in two years. In any case, any replacements will definitely get the message: the people are watching, and WILL hold them accountable to their oath to support the Constitution.
Regardless of who wins the Governor's race, we must Clear the Bench this year.
In order to do this, to get the word out, we need your help. Contribute today - and help spread the word.
To contribute, go online to http://www.clearthebenchcolorado.org/contribute/ or send checks to CTBC at P.O. Box 372388, Denver CO 80237
The math on this is so simple... two years versus ten years.
Getting the word out gets 78% or higher who say they will vote NO.
This is the biggest no-brainer, the biggest bang for your 2010-political-buck; and a powerful reminder of the issues at stake.
Contribute today, be part of the movement!
Be a citizen, not a subject. Exercise your right to tell these justices "NO!" to 10 more years of job security with no accountability to the people.
WE THE PEOPLE are here, we are watching and together we can (and will!) send a message to the Colorado Supreme Court - we're not going to take it anymore.
For liberty, for the preservation of our Constitution, for the prosperity of our people and our state- we must CLEAR THE BENCH, COLORADO!
For Freedom,
Sarah Anderson
Campaign Manager, Clear the Bench Colorado
P.S. Please contribute whatever you can today - it's crunch time for producing (and distributing) signs & flyers, which is EXACTLY why CEW is holding on to OUR money!
To contribute, go online to http://www.clearthebenchcolorado.org/contribute/or send checks to CTBC at P.O. Box 372388, Denver CO 80237
Matt Crabtree? Mayor Jim Woodward?
October 25th, 2009Link: http://www.EyeOnEnglewood.com
A Halloween yard decoration witch crackles at my knees. “It only takes a few little beggars to spoil the stew!"… I am meeting up with Matt Crabtree on his early morning campaign rounds in Englewood.
“So Matt, with only seven percent of the vote in at Nancy Doty’s office, I thought I’d track you through the leaves and see what good you might offer for the people of Englewood.”
Matthew Crabtree’s open face begins to shine in the chilly open morning sun.
“I hope I can bring some.” He nods and smiles.
“What have people been saying to you on the campaign trail?”
“Well, it’s definitely been interesting,” he admits. “I put my contact number on my door hangers during the very first weekend, I got some hate calls where people would say to me, ‘I know you’re a right-wing conspiracy nut and I hope you lose!’ Then, they would hang up anonymously without even given me a chance to respond. That was unnerving.”
“Are you a right-wing… whatever nut?” I ask.
“No.” He says emphatically. “Actually, if you look at the political parties, I align with my opponent, Woodward, but political parties should not be the issue in a municipal election. Non-partisanship input should be heard on the issues.”
“Okay, let’s start with the only issue Englewood put on the ballot this election. Term issues. Isn’t City Council hoping for a third term? If you get in, wouldn’t that issue also work to your advantage?”
“I was sitting in the audience the night the City voted to add that to the ballot. I almost laughed when I saw the Council vote yes on it. Personally, I believe that adding another four years to their terms is just a third-world prank of dictators.”
“Wow. Third world? Why?”
“Well, it doesn’t help any political geography when there is no change over. Our country’s presidents don’t even get any more than two terms in office. It only reflects our Council’s small-minded attempt to maintain control. So no, even for my benefit. I just don’t believe a third term is a good idea.”
“You’ve done well for being the underdog, Matt. I certainly see a lot of your signs all over, Matt, and I saw your bio in the Englewood Citizen. It looked authentic and focused. Good for you. Anything you wish to add to that?”
“Well, I think all three of us, Rick Gillit, Doug Cohn, and myself are running on similar issues. And we need to get all three of us into Council to make the change over.
“Accessible government, will re-instill trust. A cut in budget spending in the right areas will bring about true value for taxes. I want to bring in more businesses to Englewood and work with people to achieve a better community.”
“Right now the Council has sat on their hands too long. They put requests from residents and businesses into a holding pattern.
“None of them have received any training from the City on the code, or how their roles interact with Colorado law. They have no idea how to research their own code or come up with creative and timely direction, so everyone suffers.
“It’s one thing not to require legal knowledge when you get elected. It’s just not acceptable to continue in that ignorance year after year. They have a job to do. It’s not just a social board. We can’t afford to have them remain ignorant year after year.”
“Hey, must be trick-or-treat in Englewood!” I laugh.
Matt clears his throat. “I’ve watched people actually cry in front of Council, begging for relief, and Council sits there enjoying the power they hold over them. That’s their response. The Mayor did not even know his own job description two months ago when a resident was asking for relief. The City Attorney had to cut into the Mayor’s response, and correct him… ouch!”
I agree. A Mayor should know his City code and his own job description. But, my feet are beginning to hurt and Matt still has ground to cover, so I ask, “Anything else?”
“Well, I think it’s backwards for Englewood to cut out the people’s parades, theater events, social items like fireworks, festivals and concerts as a means to cutting the budget.
“Those kinds of events create community. Great signage creates an interesting community. Community creates tax revenues. I want to be pro-active, not a small-minded micro-manager of someone else’s business.
I say, “Oh, did you hear that Mayor Woodward has some flyer out there telling people to call him before they vote for Matthew Crabtree?”
“Ha-ha, Yes I did. Someone I know in District One took him up on that offer, and called. ‘You know what Jim said?… He said the Appellate Court had overstepped its authority in Englewood and that is why Englewood lost the signage war on Broadway!”
“You gotta be kidding.”
“No. I’m not. City Council, in my way of thinking, should be servants of the law. Not the other way around. The present Council thinks they can do anything they want just because they are “Home Rule".
“I actually believe the Constitution is still alive, that Colorado statutes regulate Home Rule and that Englewood’s City Charter holds the limits for our code. If our codes come up against those laws, then they are wrong, and I hope to lighten up the load legally on our businesses and residents when I’m on council.
“Well, I hear you are making friends on the campaign trail. Keep going to those neighborhood parties and just enjoy the process buddy. I gotta go to work.”
Matt shakes my hand firmly. “Me too.” And shouts at my back, “Have a happy Halloween, Bill!”
Gothic Master
August 22nd, 2009Link: http://www.EyeOnEnglewood.com
If Steve Schalk and Jon Cook have their differences, these developers agree on one thing. With the present economy, and business lagging on Broadway, Englewood’s signs, banners and mural codes need an overhaul. Mr. Schalk (pronounced shock) is the owner of the Gothic Theater and also Moe’s Barbecue and Bowling Alley near Dartmouth. Cook's newly developed business at Yale and Broadway hosts Colore! Italian cuisine.
On Monday evening, Council was treated to an entourage of complaints from unreasonable sign codes to moms, dads and little kids about dogs rushing them and jumping them in parks. Apparently, the city has decided not to intervene in the parks between unleashed dogs and children by putting up fences. They cited expenses for this consensus. But, a father, also appearing as a professional educator, addressed the liabilities the City would incur if even one child was bitten, and they had not chosen to protect humanity above the beasts.
One mother reprimanded Councilwoman Wilson for physically turning her back while an honor student presented a video on unleashed dogs at last Council’s meeting. Wilson apologized and said she was only searching for something in her purse.
Between these complaints, was an attorney representing the medical marijuana industry warning them about their vote on a moratorium and offering his legal aid free of charge to develop appropriate ordinances.
Laurette Barrantine addressed council on their ethical abuse of Citizen seats on boards and commissions stating the conflict is not just one of finance, but of power and the appearances of undue influence. She tried to clear her own name as the Council had previously claimed she had held a seat on Code Enforcement herself during her term on Council. She stated that yes, at first, this was the case, until she recognized there were ethical issues, and resigned from the board. She challenged both the Mayor and also Jill Wilson to take the high road and accused them of defaulting to what City Attorney Brotzman informed them they could get away with.
Another interesting spokesperson was Laura Bartnick representing her household as a Small Group Home, and requesting the Mayor use his trump card to set the City’s reputation aright or else send her an official letter to specify as to what “full compliance” with the City's remaining two regulations would look like. Her boarding house won two and lost two which didn't get dismissed yet the implications of it are still unclear. Her comments included that the City has not been forthcoming with codes or communications over the two years she has been seeking their help. She related to me that the City’s intention has never been to grandfather in their home, and it has been an unending expensive game of chess or cat and mouse.
There is an old adage, “Just when I found the answers, they changed all the rules.”
During Mayor’s choice at the conclusion of a long evening, he responded that it was unfortunate, but because the City was a Manager Council run government form, that his hands were tied as to the municipal court findings, and he could not see how he could help the Bartnick household.
Attorney Brotzman leaned over and whispered loud enough for the audience to hear, “Yes, yes you can.” (Listen to Mayor at bottom of the page).
A spectator commented, “Does anyone know who the Mayor is here? Because it doesn’t seem like he knows who he is or what power he has.”
If Mayor Woodward gets re-elected this year, he will have served more than two terms on council and by the time he is finished he will have tucked 10 years under his belt.
Well, it was almost midnight and Cinderella and I were both about to turn into pumpkins, so I hit the road.
O Grandfather, Where Art Thou?
April 29th, 2009Link: http://englewoodstory.com
I will go so far as to say this: Everything in a City is grandfathered unless the City is able to prove some license to regulate it.
O, Where O Where doth such a license cometh from?
In Colorado municipalities, they come from Colorado Revised Statutes Title 31, Municipal Governments, michies Colorado free legal which limits powers and are given further boundaries through none other than the Supreme Law of the Land, our great United States Constitution.
These laws clearly state that someone's power, presumed authority or "will" cannot legally over-power or control what rights the law has handed to me already. The mass lynchings are illegal because they are not founded in deference, self-respect or law.
It doesn't matter how much sweaty fervor is passionately invoked or what kind of bribe or slander occurs, if it ain't founded in law, it ain't no good.
Last week in the Englewood Council meeting when Bob McCaslin accidentally, or perhaps conveniently left out of the pre-written invocation, "Help us not to control..." I had to chuckle. Well, it just escaped. I didn't mean to be irreverent. But "arbitrary control" is exactly what this Council loves to do to this fair city by their own elected whims.
But just because they are elected and it is hard to get them unseated, doesn't mean that they have legal rights to presume license over all aspects of residential home lives.
Last week at Council, John Moore played the roll of Mayor and controlled the discussion on Hard Pavements himself. He kept wanting to know what would be "grandfathered" as if Council can simply ignore the City Ordinances and Savings Clauses and has utter authority over the private homes as well as licensed businesses. Near the end of the discussion Moore says, "So what are we choosing to grandfather then? Only gravel?"
Stand Up, people! Where is the Council's license to tell you where or how you can park on your own property?
Once an idea gets passed legislatively, then the full burden of proof rests on one defendant's shoulders, inconveniently cited and hauled to the Judge, to prove that the legislation is unfounded. Since it is the legal duty of the municipal judge to presume the law is reasonable, this individual must have a very strong mind with plenty of time available to find out where the missing links are and present them to the Judge or jury accordingly. If he doesn't have these resources, the illegal law can be established judicially, and then it is almost impossible to over-rule.
So the old maxim stands that all it takes for evil to win is for good men to do nothing.
If you choose not to trust your gut, or defend your right to serve, your right of easement, your immunities, your right to real estate, then you forfeit not only the right, but also the law that governs the right. And if you forfeit the law, you betray your fellow man who depends on that same law.
I was trying to stay one step ahead of myself but now I walk on my hands and don’t look back...
"Though the law itself be fair on its face and impartial in appearance, yet, if it is applied and administered by public authority with an evil eye and an unequal [118 U.S. 374] hand, so as practically to make unjust and illegal discriminations between persons in similar circumstances, material to their rights, the denial of equal justice is still within the prohibition of the Constitution. This principle of interpretation has been sanctioned by this court in Henderson v. Mayor of New York, 92 U.S. 259; Chy Lung v. Freeman, 92 U.S. 275; Ex parte Virginia, 100 U.S. 339; Neal v. Delaware, 103 U.S. 370, and Soon Hing v. Crowley, 113 U.S. 703. Soon Hing v. Crowley, 113 U.S. 703." See, Yick Wo v. Yick Wo v. Hopkins
Submitted April 14, 1886, Decided May 10, 1886,118 U.S. 356.
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
How do we know what rights we have fundamentally? Consider the Privileges or Immunities clause of the US Constitution. One author has then suggested normal people go to the laws of the District of Columbia to see what's fair there. Another suggests that whatever is fair in all the states is fair in your state.
"It is accordingly enacted by § 1977 of the Revised Statutes, that all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other." (See Above, Yick Wo)
I was really scared that Yick Wo, the laundry proprietor, would only protect those narrow civil rights laws specifically written, but when I went to read that case it was as clear as the blue Colorado skies that everyone in America has the right to make and enforce contracts, to sue, to be parties, to give evidence and to enjoy the full benefit and duties of all laws and policies and access to government and court, and to remain secure in their persons and property.
Neighbors must work hard to subdue your greed, subdue your bias, and subdue being lazy entitled ingrates. Seriously!
Whatever gets sold out for some selfish or shady benefit today, will come back to bite not only you and your white Englewood neighbors and your white grandchildren, but me and my household too because the rest of us have rights only equal to yours, and then your rights are only equal to mine. You need to stand up like responsible, dutiful adults now. I don't want to take the water slide down with you.
W
Question is: How Does One Hold a City Liable?
March 28th, 2009Link: http://www.englewoodcitizens.org/index.php
Bill Offrights
By Charter, the City Council is the only one which can fire a City Manager, or provide benefits and salary and raises to him. But at present, the Council is enamored with City Manager Sears.
XML Feeds