2011-08-31 "First Circuit Court of Appeals Rules that Citizens Can Videotape Police" by Tiffany Kaiser
[http://www.dailytech.com/First+Circuit+Court+of+Appeals+Rules+that+Citizens+Can+Videotape+Police/article22587.htm]
The filming of government officials while on duty is protected by the First Amendment, said the Court
The First Circuit Court of Appeals reached a crucial decision last Friday allowing the public to videotape police officers while they're on the clock.
The decision comes after a string of incidents where individuals have videotaped police officers and were arrested. Police officers across the United States believed citizens didn't have the right to videotape them as they conducted official duties, but issues like police brutality put the issue up for debate.
One instance where a citizen was arrested for videotaping an officer was when Khaliah Fitchette, a law-abiding teenager from New Jersey, boarded a bus in Newark. Two police officers boarded the bus as well to remove a drunken man. Fitchette began taping the police officers because of how they were handling the man, and a police officer instructed her to stop recording them. When Fitchette refused, she was arrested and placed in the back of a cop car for two hours while the officers took her phone to delete the video. Fitchette was then released, but she and her mother then filed suit against the Newark Police Department with the New Jersey chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
Another example involves Simon Glik, a passerby on the Boston Common. He used his cell phone to tape police officers when the Boston police were punching a man. Citizens surrounding the scene were saying, "You're hurting him." Glik never interfered with the police officers' actions, but recorded the entire incident. The police officers ended up charging Glik with violating a wiretap statute that prohibits secret recording, even though the police officers admitted that they knew Glik was recording them. He was also charged with disturbing the peace and aiding the escape of a prisoner.
While all charges against Glik were dropped due to lack of merit, he still decided to join forces with the ACLU and file a civil rights suit to prevent a similar incident from occurring with others.
On Friday, August 26, 2011, the First Circuit Court of Appeals, which is New England's highest federal court just below the U.S. Supreme Court, ruled that citizens are allowed to videotape law officials while they conduct official duties.
The city's attorneys made the argument that police officers should have been exempt from a civil rights lawsuit in the first place in this case because the law is unclear as to whether there's a "constitutionally protected right to videotape police" conducting their daily duties in public.
"The filming of government officials engaged in their duties in a public place, including police officers performing their responsibilities, fits comfortably within these principles [of protected First Amendment activity].," said the Court. "Gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest in protecting and promoting the free discussion of governmental affairs."
The Court added that the police officers should have understood this all along, and that videotaping public officials is not limited to the press.
"Moreover, changes in technology and society have made the lines between private citizen and journalist exceedingly difficult to draw," the Court continued. "The proliferation of electronic devices with video-recording capability means that many of our images of current events come from bystanders with a ready cell phone or digital camera rather than a traditional film crew, and news stories are now just as likely to be broken by a blogger at her computer as a reporter at a major newspaper. Such developments make clear why the news-gathering protections of the First Amendment cannot turn on professional credentials or status."
The Court concluded that police officers are to expect to deal with certain "burdens" as citizens practice First Amendment rights, but that there needs to be a healthy balance between police officers being videotaped while acting irresponsibly and the harassment of officers with recording devices while they're conducting their duties responsibly.
2011-08-31 "ACLU sues Baltimore police for deleting videos off cell phone" by Eric W. Dolan
[http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/08/31/aclu-sues-baltimore-police-for-deleting-videos-off-cell-phone/]
The American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland (ACLU) on Wednesday filed a lawsuit against the Baltimore City Police Department on behalf a man whose personal videos were deleted after he filmed officers subduing and arresting a woman.
“Police officers doing their jobs in a public place are accountable to the public they serve, and camera phones have become an important accountability tool,” said ACLU Legal Director Deborah Jeon. “It is antithetical to a democracy for the government to tell its citizens that they do not have the right to record what government officials say or do or how they behave in public.”
The lawsuit alleges Christopher Sharp was detained and harangued by police officers after he recorded the arrest.
He handed over his phone to officers after being told to surrender it as "evidence." Once the cell phone was in the officer's possession, they deleted the video of the arrest and all other videos contain on the cell phone.
"I’m heartbroken over the videos I lost of my son and I doing things together,” Sharp said. “The videos were keepsakes of memories like his soccer and basketball games, times at the beach and the Howard County fair. It kills me that the police acted as if it was okay for them to could just wipe out some of my fondest memories."
"I used to trust police, but now I don’t anymore, because of how wrongly the police acted here, and because it seemed like this was just routine procedure for them."
During the 2010 incident at Pimlico Race Course in Baltimore, a 22-year-old woman allegedly punched another person in the face, and then punched a police officer and resisted arrest. She was charged with three counts of second-degree assault and one count of resisting arrest.
Although the video of the incident was deleted from Sharp's phone, another bystander recorded the arrest and uploaded it to YouTube. In the video, officers can be heard shouting, "They're taking pictures" and other officer later says, "It's illegal to record anybody's voice or anything else in the state of Maryland."
Maryland’s wiretap law prevents citizens from recording audio if subjects have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their communications.
Watch ACLU of Maryland's interview of Christopher Sharp below:
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
2011-08-30 "Study shows one in four kids going hungry in Solano county" by Sarah Rohrs from "Vallejo Times-Herald" newspaper
[http://www.timesheraldonline.com/ci_18786279]
At Vallejo's Amador Street Hope Center, volunteers handing out free food try not to send parents and children away empty-handed. But sometimes, they have no choice.
Nearly seven or eight new people show up twice a week when the center opens to hand out food boxes to families with children -- just one indication of the county's growing rate of hunger.
Nearly one in four Solano County children under 18 struggles with hunger, according to a new study released by Feeding America and Food Bank of Contra Costa and Solano.
Hunger is "a problem in our community," Solano County Health and Social Services Director Patrick Duterte said.
"There are times when people have money during the month but at some point their money may run out," Duterte added.
The study, "Map the Meal Gap: Child Food Insecurity 2011," indicates children go hungry in every county in the nation.
Far more children are hungry than adults, the report concluded.
In Solano County, nearly one in four, or 22.4 percent, of the county's children under 18 struggle with hunger.
However, the rate among the county's general population is 15.9 percent, according to the report.
Food Bank spokeswoman Lisa Sherrill said the report's conclusions are not surprising.
However, what is somewhat alarming is that about half the hungry children in Solano County are in families who are 185 percent of the poverty line.
This means that parents of these children earn too much money to qualify for most federal nutrition programs, including the school lunch program, she said.
However, the families still can't afford to feed their families adequately, Sherrill said.
The economy that pushed legions of people into unemployment is the primary cause behind the high rate of hunger among children, authors of the report said.
The food bank has made similar observations.
"From the clients we've talked to we've heard that a lot of them are unemployed or unable to find work or they are just not able to make enough," Sherrill said.
"They are in a bind to have enough food to feed their families," Sherrill said.
For instance, a set of parents from Contra Costa County contacted the food bank on Friday afternoon after they had spent their money fixing the family car, Sherrill said.
After paying off the car repairs, the mother and father panicked when they found they had no money left to feed their children during the weekend, she said.
The food bank was able to give them enough food for a few days so the children wouldn't go hungry, Sherrill added.
At the Amador Street Hope Center, food pantry director Mary Wall said some families who need help in Vallejo have one or two children while others have six or seven.
The pantry gives out more than 60 boxes of food per week. Families are allowed to come in once a month, but are referred to other agencies if they need help and can't get it at the pantry, she said.
Due to low donations and supplies from the food bank, the pantry, sometimes, runs out of food, Wall said.
Meanwhile, Solano County officials are encouraging families who need help with food to contact their offices to see if they qualify for CalFresh (formerly known as food stamps) benefits.
Residents can go into one of three county offices or go online to www.benefitscalwin.org.
County offices are at the following locations:
* 365 Tuolumne St., Vallejo. (707) 553-5000.
* 275 Beck Ave., Fairfield. (707) 784-8050.
* 354 Parker St., Vacaville. (707) 469-4500.
[http://www.timesheraldonline.com/ci_18786279]
At Vallejo's Amador Street Hope Center, volunteers handing out free food try not to send parents and children away empty-handed. But sometimes, they have no choice.
Nearly seven or eight new people show up twice a week when the center opens to hand out food boxes to families with children -- just one indication of the county's growing rate of hunger.
Nearly one in four Solano County children under 18 struggles with hunger, according to a new study released by Feeding America and Food Bank of Contra Costa and Solano.
Hunger is "a problem in our community," Solano County Health and Social Services Director Patrick Duterte said.
"There are times when people have money during the month but at some point their money may run out," Duterte added.
The study, "Map the Meal Gap: Child Food Insecurity 2011," indicates children go hungry in every county in the nation.
Far more children are hungry than adults, the report concluded.
In Solano County, nearly one in four, or 22.4 percent, of the county's children under 18 struggle with hunger.
However, the rate among the county's general population is 15.9 percent, according to the report.
Food Bank spokeswoman Lisa Sherrill said the report's conclusions are not surprising.
However, what is somewhat alarming is that about half the hungry children in Solano County are in families who are 185 percent of the poverty line.
This means that parents of these children earn too much money to qualify for most federal nutrition programs, including the school lunch program, she said.
However, the families still can't afford to feed their families adequately, Sherrill said.
The economy that pushed legions of people into unemployment is the primary cause behind the high rate of hunger among children, authors of the report said.
The food bank has made similar observations.
"From the clients we've talked to we've heard that a lot of them are unemployed or unable to find work or they are just not able to make enough," Sherrill said.
"They are in a bind to have enough food to feed their families," Sherrill said.
For instance, a set of parents from Contra Costa County contacted the food bank on Friday afternoon after they had spent their money fixing the family car, Sherrill said.
After paying off the car repairs, the mother and father panicked when they found they had no money left to feed their children during the weekend, she said.
The food bank was able to give them enough food for a few days so the children wouldn't go hungry, Sherrill added.
At the Amador Street Hope Center, food pantry director Mary Wall said some families who need help in Vallejo have one or two children while others have six or seven.
The pantry gives out more than 60 boxes of food per week. Families are allowed to come in once a month, but are referred to other agencies if they need help and can't get it at the pantry, she said.
Due to low donations and supplies from the food bank, the pantry, sometimes, runs out of food, Wall said.
Meanwhile, Solano County officials are encouraging families who need help with food to contact their offices to see if they qualify for CalFresh (formerly known as food stamps) benefits.
Residents can go into one of three county offices or go online to www.benefitscalwin.org.
County offices are at the following locations:
* 365 Tuolumne St., Vallejo. (707) 553-5000.
* 275 Beck Ave., Fairfield. (707) 784-8050.
* 354 Parker St., Vacaville. (707) 469-4500.
Sunday, August 28, 2011
2011-08-28 "S.F.'s progressive course at stake in election" by Rich DeLeon from "San Francisco Chronicle" newspaper
[http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-08-28/opinion/29934385_1_mayoral-election-mayoral-race-ranked-choice-voting]
Rich DeLeon is professor emeritus of political science at San Francisco State University. He is author of "Left Coast City - Progressive Politics in San Francisco, 1975-1991." His new book on San Francisco politics will be published by the University Press of Kansas in fall of 2012.
---
San Francisco voters, as usual, have a lot on their plates. On Nov. 8, they will select a new mayor, district attorney and sheriff, and they will decide on eight ballot measures. In the mayoral race, in particular, the burden of choice will be heavier than in most past elections. Voters must choose from a crowded field of 16 candidates, 10 of whom are current or former officeholders and most of whom are serious, well-funded contenders.
Under the city's ranked-choice voting system, the voters will need to do more political homework much earlier than in the past, because this election will be a one-day sale without the option of a later runoff election simplifying choice, for good or ill, by whittling the 16 down to two. And as the voters survey the candidates to decide how to rank and vote for up to three, they will also need to consider two rival charter amendments that address the central focus of recent campaign debates, namely, how to control San Francisco's accelerating public pension obligations and rising health care costs to secure the city's financial future.
All of that is a lot for the voters to ponder and weigh. But if we place this mayoral election in a bigger picture frame, there are even deeper and more important issues at stake.
This election, as I see it, is about choosing how San Francisco will be governed as a progressive city through economic hard times. It is about making the transition from a strident politics of ideology to a more traditional politics of interest and identity. And it is about the capacity of local government to take care of business and the capacity of business to take care of San Francisco.
By a progressive city, I mean one that is democratic, just, green and growing. That combination is rare in the annals of American urban politics. Given the constraints of federalism and capitalism, a progressive city is hard to achieve and even harder to sustain. San Francisco could prove to be the exception.
San Francisco's citizens are diverse, well informed and highly politically active. Their role in making public policy extends to land use, development and other important issues - there is no sandbox here. Further, experiments in local self-governance are common. Recently, for example, San Francisco became the first major U.S. city to use ranked-choice voting for city elections. The city also adopted public financing for election campaigns. This year, both innovations are being used for the first time in a mayoral race. Democracy is alive and well in San Francisco.
Impatient with federal government inaction, San Franciscans have moved ahead to advance the cause of social justice on their own turf. The city's labor standards policies, for example, now include equal benefits for domestic partners, a high citywide minimum wage, mandated paid sick leave, and a landmark health care program for uninsured residents. The city also continues its fight for marriage equality, protects and helps undocumented immigrants, and guarantees budgets for programs serving children's needs.
Yet income inequalities persist, blue-collar jobs and affordable family housing are in short supply, and the city's African American and child populations are shrinking. It is sadly ironic that San Francisco has some of the nation's most advanced social justice programs while the population of poor people, workers and children who might benefit from them slowly disappears.
Goaded by federal neglect, San Francisco and other cities have taken the initiative in coping with climate change and protecting the environment. The city now runs the nation's top-rated recycling program, imposes local curbs on greenhouse gas emissions and has ambitious targets for the use of renewable energy. By recent reports, San Francisco is now North America's greenest city.
San Francisco's local economy is starting to boom again, this time as an emerging center of biotech research, clean and green technologies and digital social media. Unlike most U.S. cities, however, San Francisco's main problem has not been how to generate economic growth but rather how to control it. The city's growth-control policies were forged in the troughs of business cycles after waves of capital investment. Such planning by the rearview mirror can be risky and ineffectual.
The city's Downtown Plan, for example, was well designed as a surge protector to limit the damage of future high-rise office construction. But it did little to protect neighborhoods from the dot-com boom that followed years later. The most recent growth burst, therefore, is raising old fears and some hackles even as it creates jobs and needed city revenues.
In sum, San Francisco is a progressive city, but one with problems to solve and challenges to meet if its people want it to remain one.
A pivotal event in moving the city this far and this fast was the election in 2000 of a "progressive supermajority" to the Board of Supervisors. Politics as usual was suspended over the next 10 years as the supervisors collided (and occasionally collaborated) with two mayors in steering the city to the left. Now the Class of 2000 is history, Gavin Newsom has left for Sacramento, and the transition to a new political era has begun.
The legacy of reform achieved by those leaders, however, was not the work of morning glories. Their progressive initiatives were hardwired by policy into the programs and routines of the city's bureaucracy. The city's administrators and planners will keep San Francisco progressive for a very long time simply by doing their jobs. An even deeper entrenchment of progressivism can be seen in the blossoming of "San Francisco values" in local political discourse. Bill O'Reilly minted the term to target San Francisco as the viral source of left-wing extremism infecting all living Democrats and liberals.
In San Francisco itself, however, politicians happily adopted the term as their own simply by inverting O'Reilly's invective and projecting only positives from the negatives. The same values many conservatives despise - marriage equality, women's choice, immigrant rights - are precisely those most San Franciscans cherish in their local political culture. Thanks to institutional and cultural inertia, the sky will not fall on progressives in January 2012, no matter who takes office as mayor.
Yet troubles and turbulence lie immediately ahead. In addition to concerns about pensions and health care costs, the city faces large projected budget deficits over the next three years and beyond. In solving these kinds of problems, the city can expect little help from the feds and even less from the state, requiring greater dependence on the local private sector for needed resources. The challenge progressives face under these conditions is finding ways to work with business while consolidating and defending their victories. The challenge business leaders face is adapting their legitimate quest for profit and growth to a settled local political culture rooted in San Francisco values.
After years of tumult, most San Franciscans would welcome some political peace and quiet along with greater civility in the making of public policy. But civility, like happiness, can be overrated, especially if it is a facade concealing backroom deals, avoidance of controversy and deafness to noisy suffering. Dragons be there. San Franciscans are conservative about being progressive.
[http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-08-28/opinion/29934385_1_mayoral-election-mayoral-race-ranked-choice-voting]
Rich DeLeon is professor emeritus of political science at San Francisco State University. He is author of "Left Coast City - Progressive Politics in San Francisco, 1975-1991." His new book on San Francisco politics will be published by the University Press of Kansas in fall of 2012.
---
San Francisco voters, as usual, have a lot on their plates. On Nov. 8, they will select a new mayor, district attorney and sheriff, and they will decide on eight ballot measures. In the mayoral race, in particular, the burden of choice will be heavier than in most past elections. Voters must choose from a crowded field of 16 candidates, 10 of whom are current or former officeholders and most of whom are serious, well-funded contenders.
Under the city's ranked-choice voting system, the voters will need to do more political homework much earlier than in the past, because this election will be a one-day sale without the option of a later runoff election simplifying choice, for good or ill, by whittling the 16 down to two. And as the voters survey the candidates to decide how to rank and vote for up to three, they will also need to consider two rival charter amendments that address the central focus of recent campaign debates, namely, how to control San Francisco's accelerating public pension obligations and rising health care costs to secure the city's financial future.
All of that is a lot for the voters to ponder and weigh. But if we place this mayoral election in a bigger picture frame, there are even deeper and more important issues at stake.
This election, as I see it, is about choosing how San Francisco will be governed as a progressive city through economic hard times. It is about making the transition from a strident politics of ideology to a more traditional politics of interest and identity. And it is about the capacity of local government to take care of business and the capacity of business to take care of San Francisco.
By a progressive city, I mean one that is democratic, just, green and growing. That combination is rare in the annals of American urban politics. Given the constraints of federalism and capitalism, a progressive city is hard to achieve and even harder to sustain. San Francisco could prove to be the exception.
San Francisco's citizens are diverse, well informed and highly politically active. Their role in making public policy extends to land use, development and other important issues - there is no sandbox here. Further, experiments in local self-governance are common. Recently, for example, San Francisco became the first major U.S. city to use ranked-choice voting for city elections. The city also adopted public financing for election campaigns. This year, both innovations are being used for the first time in a mayoral race. Democracy is alive and well in San Francisco.
Impatient with federal government inaction, San Franciscans have moved ahead to advance the cause of social justice on their own turf. The city's labor standards policies, for example, now include equal benefits for domestic partners, a high citywide minimum wage, mandated paid sick leave, and a landmark health care program for uninsured residents. The city also continues its fight for marriage equality, protects and helps undocumented immigrants, and guarantees budgets for programs serving children's needs.
Yet income inequalities persist, blue-collar jobs and affordable family housing are in short supply, and the city's African American and child populations are shrinking. It is sadly ironic that San Francisco has some of the nation's most advanced social justice programs while the population of poor people, workers and children who might benefit from them slowly disappears.
Goaded by federal neglect, San Francisco and other cities have taken the initiative in coping with climate change and protecting the environment. The city now runs the nation's top-rated recycling program, imposes local curbs on greenhouse gas emissions and has ambitious targets for the use of renewable energy. By recent reports, San Francisco is now North America's greenest city.
San Francisco's local economy is starting to boom again, this time as an emerging center of biotech research, clean and green technologies and digital social media. Unlike most U.S. cities, however, San Francisco's main problem has not been how to generate economic growth but rather how to control it. The city's growth-control policies were forged in the troughs of business cycles after waves of capital investment. Such planning by the rearview mirror can be risky and ineffectual.
The city's Downtown Plan, for example, was well designed as a surge protector to limit the damage of future high-rise office construction. But it did little to protect neighborhoods from the dot-com boom that followed years later. The most recent growth burst, therefore, is raising old fears and some hackles even as it creates jobs and needed city revenues.
In sum, San Francisco is a progressive city, but one with problems to solve and challenges to meet if its people want it to remain one.
A pivotal event in moving the city this far and this fast was the election in 2000 of a "progressive supermajority" to the Board of Supervisors. Politics as usual was suspended over the next 10 years as the supervisors collided (and occasionally collaborated) with two mayors in steering the city to the left. Now the Class of 2000 is history, Gavin Newsom has left for Sacramento, and the transition to a new political era has begun.
The legacy of reform achieved by those leaders, however, was not the work of morning glories. Their progressive initiatives were hardwired by policy into the programs and routines of the city's bureaucracy. The city's administrators and planners will keep San Francisco progressive for a very long time simply by doing their jobs. An even deeper entrenchment of progressivism can be seen in the blossoming of "San Francisco values" in local political discourse. Bill O'Reilly minted the term to target San Francisco as the viral source of left-wing extremism infecting all living Democrats and liberals.
In San Francisco itself, however, politicians happily adopted the term as their own simply by inverting O'Reilly's invective and projecting only positives from the negatives. The same values many conservatives despise - marriage equality, women's choice, immigrant rights - are precisely those most San Franciscans cherish in their local political culture. Thanks to institutional and cultural inertia, the sky will not fall on progressives in January 2012, no matter who takes office as mayor.
Yet troubles and turbulence lie immediately ahead. In addition to concerns about pensions and health care costs, the city faces large projected budget deficits over the next three years and beyond. In solving these kinds of problems, the city can expect little help from the feds and even less from the state, requiring greater dependence on the local private sector for needed resources. The challenge progressives face under these conditions is finding ways to work with business while consolidating and defending their victories. The challenge business leaders face is adapting their legitimate quest for profit and growth to a settled local political culture rooted in San Francisco values.
After years of tumult, most San Franciscans would welcome some political peace and quiet along with greater civility in the making of public policy. But civility, like happiness, can be overrated, especially if it is a facade concealing backroom deals, avoidance of controversy and deafness to noisy suffering. Dragons be there. San Franciscans are conservative about being progressive.
Saturday, August 27, 2011
2011-08-27 "Tea Party Express Bus Tour" by J.L. Sousa
NAPA, CA - Nicolas Holmes of Concord distributes signs before a planned march to the Napa Valley Expo on Saturday morning. The protest was against the Tea Party Express Reclaiming America bus tour, which kicked off its nationwide tour in Napa on Saturday. J.L. Sousa/Register
2011-08-27 "Tea Party Express rally falls short of early billings" by James Noonan from "Napa Valley Reguster" newspaper
[http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/tea-party-express-rally-falls-shorts-of-early-billings/article_f26775ca-d0e9-11e0-9559-001cc4c002e0.html]
SATURDAY - AUGUST 27, 2011 - NAPA, CA - Part of the crowd of roughly 600 people who attended the Tea Party Express Reclaiming America bus tour at the Napa Valley Expo, are seen during the singing of the National Anthem on Saturday morning. J.L. Sousa/Register
[A crowd of White American Nationalists gather to worship their idol of false patriotism...]
A day of political rallies
• 9:30 a.m. — Anti–tea party protesters begin to gather in the county parking lot at Coombs and Fourth streets.
• 10 a.m. — Napa Valley Expo begins filling up with people attending the Tea Party Express Rally. Anti–tea party protesters begin marching from Coombs Street toward the Expo with police on motorcycles acting as escorts.
• 10:20 a.m. — Roughly 200 protesters arrive at main gates of the Expo. Tea Party Express buses enter the grounds from Burnell Street.
• 10:30 a.m. — Anti–tea party demonstrators march toward Burnell Street, where they picket, chant and inflate a large rat. Tea party rally attendees continue to use main entrance.
• 11:15 a.m. — Pam Silleman, coordinator for the Napa Tea Party, kicks off a round of speakers inside the Napa Valley Expo. The crowd numbers around 600 tea party supporters.
• 11:45 a.m. — Protesters leave Burnell Street and return downtown.
• Noon — Former Senate candidate Sharron Angle takes the stage.
• 1:15 p.m. — Final speakers wrap up and Tea Party Express buses prepare for departure. Tea party crowd begins to disperse.
• 1:20 p.m. — More than 50 Green Party supporters, escorted by police, march to the Expo at Burnell Street.
• 1:40 p.m. — Tea Party Express buses exit onto Burnell Street, head east toward Nevada.
When it comes to a beverage of choice, it looks as though the Napa Valley still prefers wine over tea.
On Saturday, roughly 600 people gathered on the sprawling carnival grounds of the Napa Valley Expo for the so-called “super rally” that would kick off the Tea Party Express’ “Reclaiming America” bus tour.
The turnout was a far cry from the 4,000 to 5,000 people that representatives from Tea Party Express’ Sacramento office said they were expecting only days before the Napa rally.
Tea party supporters, who skewed older, were a mostly subdued group, seated picnic-like on lawn chairs and blankets for two hours of music and speeches.
Adding to the event’s dampened atmosphere was that no GOP presidential candidates appeared, despite reports that at least one would be attending. Also, the event was met with vocal protests from several hundred representatives of the Democratic and Green parties and progressive groups.
Despite the modest turnout, the day’s featured speakers and performers offered up high praise for the Napa rally.
“I think it’s going great,” said Howard Kaloogian, chairman of the Our Country Deserves Better political action committee. The committee — which was formed by a pair of former GOP consultants — bankrolls the Tea Party Express project.
Onstage, Kaloogian attempted to fire up the crowd early in the program by tearing into recent actions of Congress. “I have a news flash for Washington politicians,” he said. “You don’t create jobs. The American people create jobs.”
Kaloogian’s offstage comments, however, seemed to acknowledge that turnout fell short of expectations.
“The trick to a good rally is to have a small room,” he said, motioning toward a largely empty carnival lot. “We’ve got a pretty big room here.”
Asked about earlier crowd projections provided to both law enforcement and local media by representatives from the action committee’s Sacramento office, Kaloogian said only, “I don’t know who said that. We didn’t say that.”
As the rally played out inside the Expo’s gates, a crowd of about 200 people gathered on Burnell Street to protest the tea party event.
While the Expo’s powerful sound system ensured that the protesters didn’t drown out those speaking onstage, the demonstrators’ presence hardly went unnoticed.
“Those protesters are desperate. They know we are winning,” said Kaloogian, drawing a brief burst of excitement from an otherwise docile crowd. “They know all they can do is yell and shout, but we can shout louder because we have a message of substance.”
Outside the gates, several protesters noted that many of the tea party’s goals — including scaling back unemployment and improving the nation’s economy — are also shared by the progressive left, but that the two sides favored different methods.
Inside, however, onstage speakers were less delicate in addressing such ideological differences.
“It’s good to bring the ‘makers’ and the ‘takers’ together for a conversation,” said Joe Getty, co-host of the “Armstrong & Getty” radio show.
Some who attended the tea party event noted the smaller-than-expected turnout.
“It’s been good so far. I just wish there were more people that came out,” said John Miller of Sonoma, adding that he had been attending tea party events since 2009.
Only a few feet away, Dina Hanson of Napa — one of a handful of anti–tea party protesters who ventured through the Expo’s gates — had a different take on the tea party crowd.
“It’s quite a bit smaller than I thought it would be, which makes me happy,” she said.
Larry Gullicksen, who came from Concord with his wife, Judy, offered up one explanation for the small size of the Napa rally.
“Well, this is California,” he said, noting that the state is known for its liberal politics.
Regardless of the crowd’s size, almost all of those interviewed during Saturday’s rally expect that the tea party will have a significant effect on the 2012 elections, rejecting the notion that success in the 2010 election was a one-time phenomenon.
“It’s going to be tremendous,” said Judy Gullicksen, who predicted that the GOP would retake both the White House and the Senate next November.
Backstage, Amy Kremer, chair of the Tea Party Express project, said none of the Republican White House hopefuls would be able to defeat President Barack Obama in 2012 without the backing of the tea party.
Without the organization’s support, candidates would be unlikely to even appear on the November ballot, she added.
“I think the tea party is going to decided who the (GOP) nominee is,” Kremer said.
Former Senate candidate Sharron Angle also expected that the tea party would help the GOP pick up enough Senate seats to gain control of the upper house in Washington.
Angle drew national attention last year after tea party support vaulted her to the front of a crowded GOP U.S. senate primary field in Nevada, despite being shunned by Republican leadership. She was ultimately unsuccessful in her bid to unseat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
“This is the American mainstream,” Angle said before taking the stage. “We’re here to make an impact on Washington, D.C.”
After roughly two hours of entertainment from various speakers and performers, a pair of Tea Party Express buses packed up and headed toward their next stop in Sparks, Nev.
The tour is scheduled to make 28 more stops before pulling into Tampa, Fla. for the CNN-Tea Party Express candidate debate on Sept. 12.
Before leaving, representatives from the organization said they still felt as though the day’s mission had been accomplished.
“Tea Party Express gives energy to local groups. We help them generate more press and give some excitement to the local movement,” Kaloogian said. “They know they’re not alone.”
2011-08-28 "Conservatives upbeat at 2 Bay Area gatherings" by Joe Garofoli and Carla Marinucci from "San Francisco Chronicle"
[http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-08-28/bay-area/29937472_1_tea-party-express-andrew-breitbart-conservatives]
They've been dismissed as the inconsequential, angry, funny-hat-wearing political fringe. But conservatives and Tea Party activists at lively celebrations in the Bay Area say they're beginning to be recognized as something else as the 2012 elections loom: a mainstream movement.
With two big gatherings - a California Young Republican Federation convention in San Francisco on Friday and a Tea Party Express gathering in Napa on Saturday - it wasn't so lonely being a conservative in the Democratic bastion of the Bay Area.
"We're not afraid to come to the Bay Area, because the majority of the people in the Bay Area agree with us," said Sal Russo, the Sacramento GOP political consultant and father to the Tea Party Express movement, which kicked off its fifth cross-country bus tour Saturday.
Looking out on a field of hundreds of picnicking Tea Party activists at the Napa Valley Expo - many of them holding signs blasting bloated government, high taxes and skyrocketing debt - Russo said the armies of just regular people represent "the zeitgeist of the times."
The Napa site bloomed with signs, bumper stickers and buttons that reflected discontent with the country's direction: "My shovel is ready: where is my job?," "RU seeing RED yet?" and "Stop socialism."
Shaping presidential race
Once dismissed as "AstroTurf" - a term of derision meant to cast doubt on the grassroots claims of its adherents - the Tea Partiers have proved to be an enduring movement that reshaped Congress in the 2010 elections and already has been a force for both candidates and themes in the 2012 GOP presidential field, Russo said.
The Tea Party Express, for example, will for the first time sponsor a major presidential debate, a Sept. 12 event in Florida to be broadcast on CNN.
"It's not about social issues. It's just about how we don't want to spend more than we actually have," said Joyce Ellis, 57, of Walnut Creek, a former production manager and a member of the East Bay Tea Party Express. She said when she joined the movement, "I thought I'd be the only one. ... I saw I wasn't."
In San Francisco, where more than three times as many voters (30 percent) decline to state a party preference as register as Republicans (9 percent), a statewide convention of 300 California Young Republican Federation members gathered to hear a trio of conservative stars, UC Berkeley law Professor John Yoo, author Ann Coulter and blogger Andrew Breitbart.
With President Obama's approval rating dipping to around 44 percent nationally and a slew of fired-up GOP presidential candidates challenging him, even Bay Area conservatives are feeling a surge of confidence.
But first, as Breitbart said, "They need to meet each other."
"Wherever the liberal beast exists, there's a sense of fear among conservatives that they'll be outed. This is a unique moment for people to say, 'The hell with it.' The country is going to hell in a handbasket, and the progressive, silver-haired, ponytailed politics doesn't work," Breitbart said in an interview.
In both crowds, the mood was ebullient among conservatives.
"The movement is maturing," Amy Kremer, a former flight attendant who is chair of the Tea Party Express, said as she prepared to address the Napa crowd. Hundreds sat in lawn chairs, listening to country singers, rappers and comedians, all with a conservative bent.
Dems protest Tea Partiers
While Democrats have long railed against the Tea Party movement, she said, "we are the biggest threat to the Republican Party, because we want them to be conservative - and we will shine a light on them."
Still, Democrats are not surrendering any ground. On Saturday, dozens of lively protesters showed up in Napa, joined by a giant blow-up "Corporate Rat," chanting "Tax the Rich!" and wielding signs that said "Yes on good wine; no on bad tea!"
And in San Francisco at the Young Republicans gathering, UC Berkeley law Professor Yoo - who wrote legal memos authorizing waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques when he worked in the Justice Department of the George W. Bush administration - was the target of two dozen demonstrators calling him a "war criminal."
Inside, Yoo shrugged them off, calling them "my entourage."
"Any Republican that can survive in the Bay Area or Berkeley and even California ... are going to be the few, the proud - but they are going to be the best warriors for the conservative movement," he said.
One Young Republican, 27-year-old Alameda resident Andrea Newman, said she feels "optimistic in a way that I didn't four years ago. It's getting more comfortable to say 'I'm a conservative' in conversation."
"Obama has been great for us - a lot of young Republicans are finding each other," said Matthew Del Carlo, a 34-year-old native San Franciscan who directed the California Young Republican Federation convention in his native city.
Sally Zelikovsky, founder of Bay Area Tea Party Patriots, said she believes that the movement's message is summed up in her best-selling T-shirt: "Hope you like the change."
2011-08-11 "Tea Party Express ready to roll" from "Napa Valley Register"
[http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/tea-party-express-ready-to-roll/article_c804319e-c3e5-11e0-b714-001cc4c03286.html#ixzz1UhhiYGBB]
What’s being billed by organizers as a “Tea Party Super Rally” is headed to Napa later this month, and event organizers say a few White House hopefuls have already committed to appear.
The event — a kickoff rally for the nationwide Tea Party Express tour — is set to take place on Aug. 27, and has already generated RSVPs from a few GOP presidential candidates, said Pam Silleman, head of the Napa Tea Party.
Silleman wasn’t willing to reveal which candidates were making plans to attend the rally, saying it was up to the candidates themselves to announce whether they would be attending.
Tea party luminaries such as Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain would likely be among those most willing to commit to the Napa rally, although inquiries to their respective campaigns were not immediately returned.
Calls to Sal Russo, a GOP consultant and co-founder of Tea Party Express, were also not returned Wednesday.
While the names of the candidates will remain a mystery for now, Silleman was willing to report that the logistical aspects of the rally had largely fallen into place.
“It seems like it’s going to be quite a big rally,” she said. “It’ll be something Napa’s never seen before.”
Silleman previously said that attendance at the event could be measured in the tens of thousands.
Not everyone gathering in Napa that Saturday will do so to support the tea party movement. Members of the local Green Party have already announced plans for a counter rally that day.
According to Napa County Green Party spokesman Alex Shantz, the local chapter will be hosting what they are calling a “green tea party” at Veterans Memorial Park to protest the tea party’s presence in Napa.
“The purpose of this rally is to show our opposition to the tea party's far right-wing agenda while affirming positive Green Party values, such as grassroots democracy, social justice, respect for diversity, nonviolence, community-based economics and ecological wisdom,” Shantz said in a statement.
---
Tea party rally
• Aug. 27, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the Napa Valley Expo, 575 Third St.
• Busses are scheduled to arrive at 11 a.m. and depart for Reno, Nev. at 1 p.m.
• The event is free and open to the public.
2011-09-16 "Green Tea counter rally was great" by Erica Martenson and Alex Shantz of "Napa Valley Green Party"
[http://napavalleyregister.com/news/opinion/mailbag/green-tea-counter-rally-was-great/article_3eb2fa40-e0d9-11e0-83c7-001cc4c03286.html]
On Aug. 27, 2011, the Napa County Green Party (NCGP) held a counter rally, a “green tea party,” at Veterans Park in downtown Napa to demonstrate our opposition to the tea party and its far right-wing agenda, and to affirm positive Green Party values. In contrast to the tea party rally, which was being held that day, our counter-rally drew a culturally diverse group of both young people and adults primarily from the local community.
We wish to thank all who participated in the counter-rally and protest. In addition, we wish to thank the Napa Police Department, especially Patrol Captain Steve Potter, for helping in the planning and unfolding of the event to ensure its safety.
The counter rally included NCGP speakers Alex Shantz and Chris Malan, 2010 Green Party gubernatorial candidate Laura Wells, and Green Mayor of Fairfax Larry Bragman. Musical entertainment was provided by solo artists Aria and Metazen, and musical groups The Juliane Band and Digital Martyrs. The Napa Valley Dream Act Coalition, Healthcare for All, Institute for Conservation, Advocacy, Research and Education, Preserving the Integrity of Napa’s Agriculture, Movement for a Democratic Society, Students for a Democratic Society and Rescue Education California also participated, some speaking and all tabling at the event. Other groups that chose to join in were the International Socialist Organization and the Peace and Freedom Party of Contra Costa County.
The Green Party is based upon 10 key values, which guide all of our political positions and activities, and that guided this event. In keeping with the values of community-based economics and personal responsibility, canned food was collected for the Napa Food Bank. The counter rally was a zero-waste event with everything provided being compostable, an expression of ecological wisdom; and, a soapbox was made available to all participants during the protest, which was grassroots democracy in action. The Green Party is not a political party of rhetoric; it is a political party with clearly defined values and one that puts those values into action.
The Green Party, unlike its corporate-controlled Democratic and Republican counterparts, refuses to accept any corporate financing and can, therefore, truly represent the needs of struggling blue and white collar workers and the environment without conflicts. The Green Party seeks to ignite a grassroots movement that will spread from county to county to take back our democracy; those interested in joining us, email napacountygreenparty@gmail.com.
NAPA, CA - Nicolas Holmes of Concord distributes signs before a planned march to the Napa Valley Expo on Saturday morning. The protest was against the Tea Party Express Reclaiming America bus tour, which kicked off its nationwide tour in Napa on Saturday. J.L. Sousa/Register
2011-08-27 "Tea Party Express rally falls short of early billings" by James Noonan from "Napa Valley Reguster" newspaper
[http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/tea-party-express-rally-falls-shorts-of-early-billings/article_f26775ca-d0e9-11e0-9559-001cc4c002e0.html]
SATURDAY - AUGUST 27, 2011 - NAPA, CA - Part of the crowd of roughly 600 people who attended the Tea Party Express Reclaiming America bus tour at the Napa Valley Expo, are seen during the singing of the National Anthem on Saturday morning. J.L. Sousa/Register
[A crowd of White American Nationalists gather to worship their idol of false patriotism...]
A day of political rallies• 9:30 a.m. — Anti–tea party protesters begin to gather in the county parking lot at Coombs and Fourth streets.
• 10 a.m. — Napa Valley Expo begins filling up with people attending the Tea Party Express Rally. Anti–tea party protesters begin marching from Coombs Street toward the Expo with police on motorcycles acting as escorts.
• 10:20 a.m. — Roughly 200 protesters arrive at main gates of the Expo. Tea Party Express buses enter the grounds from Burnell Street.
• 10:30 a.m. — Anti–tea party demonstrators march toward Burnell Street, where they picket, chant and inflate a large rat. Tea party rally attendees continue to use main entrance.
• 11:15 a.m. — Pam Silleman, coordinator for the Napa Tea Party, kicks off a round of speakers inside the Napa Valley Expo. The crowd numbers around 600 tea party supporters.
• 11:45 a.m. — Protesters leave Burnell Street and return downtown.
• Noon — Former Senate candidate Sharron Angle takes the stage.
• 1:15 p.m. — Final speakers wrap up and Tea Party Express buses prepare for departure. Tea party crowd begins to disperse.
• 1:20 p.m. — More than 50 Green Party supporters, escorted by police, march to the Expo at Burnell Street.
• 1:40 p.m. — Tea Party Express buses exit onto Burnell Street, head east toward Nevada.
When it comes to a beverage of choice, it looks as though the Napa Valley still prefers wine over tea.
On Saturday, roughly 600 people gathered on the sprawling carnival grounds of the Napa Valley Expo for the so-called “super rally” that would kick off the Tea Party Express’ “Reclaiming America” bus tour.
The turnout was a far cry from the 4,000 to 5,000 people that representatives from Tea Party Express’ Sacramento office said they were expecting only days before the Napa rally.
Tea party supporters, who skewed older, were a mostly subdued group, seated picnic-like on lawn chairs and blankets for two hours of music and speeches.
Adding to the event’s dampened atmosphere was that no GOP presidential candidates appeared, despite reports that at least one would be attending. Also, the event was met with vocal protests from several hundred representatives of the Democratic and Green parties and progressive groups.
Despite the modest turnout, the day’s featured speakers and performers offered up high praise for the Napa rally.
“I think it’s going great,” said Howard Kaloogian, chairman of the Our Country Deserves Better political action committee. The committee — which was formed by a pair of former GOP consultants — bankrolls the Tea Party Express project.
Onstage, Kaloogian attempted to fire up the crowd early in the program by tearing into recent actions of Congress. “I have a news flash for Washington politicians,” he said. “You don’t create jobs. The American people create jobs.”
Kaloogian’s offstage comments, however, seemed to acknowledge that turnout fell short of expectations.
“The trick to a good rally is to have a small room,” he said, motioning toward a largely empty carnival lot. “We’ve got a pretty big room here.”
Asked about earlier crowd projections provided to both law enforcement and local media by representatives from the action committee’s Sacramento office, Kaloogian said only, “I don’t know who said that. We didn’t say that.”
As the rally played out inside the Expo’s gates, a crowd of about 200 people gathered on Burnell Street to protest the tea party event.
While the Expo’s powerful sound system ensured that the protesters didn’t drown out those speaking onstage, the demonstrators’ presence hardly went unnoticed.
“Those protesters are desperate. They know we are winning,” said Kaloogian, drawing a brief burst of excitement from an otherwise docile crowd. “They know all they can do is yell and shout, but we can shout louder because we have a message of substance.”
Outside the gates, several protesters noted that many of the tea party’s goals — including scaling back unemployment and improving the nation’s economy — are also shared by the progressive left, but that the two sides favored different methods.
Inside, however, onstage speakers were less delicate in addressing such ideological differences.
“It’s good to bring the ‘makers’ and the ‘takers’ together for a conversation,” said Joe Getty, co-host of the “Armstrong & Getty” radio show.
Some who attended the tea party event noted the smaller-than-expected turnout.
“It’s been good so far. I just wish there were more people that came out,” said John Miller of Sonoma, adding that he had been attending tea party events since 2009.
Only a few feet away, Dina Hanson of Napa — one of a handful of anti–tea party protesters who ventured through the Expo’s gates — had a different take on the tea party crowd.
“It’s quite a bit smaller than I thought it would be, which makes me happy,” she said.
Larry Gullicksen, who came from Concord with his wife, Judy, offered up one explanation for the small size of the Napa rally.
“Well, this is California,” he said, noting that the state is known for its liberal politics.
Regardless of the crowd’s size, almost all of those interviewed during Saturday’s rally expect that the tea party will have a significant effect on the 2012 elections, rejecting the notion that success in the 2010 election was a one-time phenomenon.
“It’s going to be tremendous,” said Judy Gullicksen, who predicted that the GOP would retake both the White House and the Senate next November.
Backstage, Amy Kremer, chair of the Tea Party Express project, said none of the Republican White House hopefuls would be able to defeat President Barack Obama in 2012 without the backing of the tea party.
Without the organization’s support, candidates would be unlikely to even appear on the November ballot, she added.
“I think the tea party is going to decided who the (GOP) nominee is,” Kremer said.
Former Senate candidate Sharron Angle also expected that the tea party would help the GOP pick up enough Senate seats to gain control of the upper house in Washington.
Angle drew national attention last year after tea party support vaulted her to the front of a crowded GOP U.S. senate primary field in Nevada, despite being shunned by Republican leadership. She was ultimately unsuccessful in her bid to unseat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
“This is the American mainstream,” Angle said before taking the stage. “We’re here to make an impact on Washington, D.C.”
After roughly two hours of entertainment from various speakers and performers, a pair of Tea Party Express buses packed up and headed toward their next stop in Sparks, Nev.
The tour is scheduled to make 28 more stops before pulling into Tampa, Fla. for the CNN-Tea Party Express candidate debate on Sept. 12.
Before leaving, representatives from the organization said they still felt as though the day’s mission had been accomplished.
“Tea Party Express gives energy to local groups. We help them generate more press and give some excitement to the local movement,” Kaloogian said. “They know they’re not alone.”
2011-08-28 "Conservatives upbeat at 2 Bay Area gatherings" by Joe Garofoli and Carla Marinucci from "San Francisco Chronicle"
[http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-08-28/bay-area/29937472_1_tea-party-express-andrew-breitbart-conservatives]
They've been dismissed as the inconsequential, angry, funny-hat-wearing political fringe. But conservatives and Tea Party activists at lively celebrations in the Bay Area say they're beginning to be recognized as something else as the 2012 elections loom: a mainstream movement.
With two big gatherings - a California Young Republican Federation convention in San Francisco on Friday and a Tea Party Express gathering in Napa on Saturday - it wasn't so lonely being a conservative in the Democratic bastion of the Bay Area.
"We're not afraid to come to the Bay Area, because the majority of the people in the Bay Area agree with us," said Sal Russo, the Sacramento GOP political consultant and father to the Tea Party Express movement, which kicked off its fifth cross-country bus tour Saturday.
Looking out on a field of hundreds of picnicking Tea Party activists at the Napa Valley Expo - many of them holding signs blasting bloated government, high taxes and skyrocketing debt - Russo said the armies of just regular people represent "the zeitgeist of the times."
The Napa site bloomed with signs, bumper stickers and buttons that reflected discontent with the country's direction: "My shovel is ready: where is my job?," "RU seeing RED yet?" and "Stop socialism."
Shaping presidential race
Once dismissed as "AstroTurf" - a term of derision meant to cast doubt on the grassroots claims of its adherents - the Tea Partiers have proved to be an enduring movement that reshaped Congress in the 2010 elections and already has been a force for both candidates and themes in the 2012 GOP presidential field, Russo said.
The Tea Party Express, for example, will for the first time sponsor a major presidential debate, a Sept. 12 event in Florida to be broadcast on CNN.
"It's not about social issues. It's just about how we don't want to spend more than we actually have," said Joyce Ellis, 57, of Walnut Creek, a former production manager and a member of the East Bay Tea Party Express. She said when she joined the movement, "I thought I'd be the only one. ... I saw I wasn't."
In San Francisco, where more than three times as many voters (30 percent) decline to state a party preference as register as Republicans (9 percent), a statewide convention of 300 California Young Republican Federation members gathered to hear a trio of conservative stars, UC Berkeley law Professor John Yoo, author Ann Coulter and blogger Andrew Breitbart.
With President Obama's approval rating dipping to around 44 percent nationally and a slew of fired-up GOP presidential candidates challenging him, even Bay Area conservatives are feeling a surge of confidence.
But first, as Breitbart said, "They need to meet each other."
"Wherever the liberal beast exists, there's a sense of fear among conservatives that they'll be outed. This is a unique moment for people to say, 'The hell with it.' The country is going to hell in a handbasket, and the progressive, silver-haired, ponytailed politics doesn't work," Breitbart said in an interview.
In both crowds, the mood was ebullient among conservatives.
"The movement is maturing," Amy Kremer, a former flight attendant who is chair of the Tea Party Express, said as she prepared to address the Napa crowd. Hundreds sat in lawn chairs, listening to country singers, rappers and comedians, all with a conservative bent.
Dems protest Tea Partiers
While Democrats have long railed against the Tea Party movement, she said, "we are the biggest threat to the Republican Party, because we want them to be conservative - and we will shine a light on them."
Still, Democrats are not surrendering any ground. On Saturday, dozens of lively protesters showed up in Napa, joined by a giant blow-up "Corporate Rat," chanting "Tax the Rich!" and wielding signs that said "Yes on good wine; no on bad tea!"
And in San Francisco at the Young Republicans gathering, UC Berkeley law Professor Yoo - who wrote legal memos authorizing waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques when he worked in the Justice Department of the George W. Bush administration - was the target of two dozen demonstrators calling him a "war criminal."
Inside, Yoo shrugged them off, calling them "my entourage."
"Any Republican that can survive in the Bay Area or Berkeley and even California ... are going to be the few, the proud - but they are going to be the best warriors for the conservative movement," he said.
One Young Republican, 27-year-old Alameda resident Andrea Newman, said she feels "optimistic in a way that I didn't four years ago. It's getting more comfortable to say 'I'm a conservative' in conversation."
"Obama has been great for us - a lot of young Republicans are finding each other," said Matthew Del Carlo, a 34-year-old native San Franciscan who directed the California Young Republican Federation convention in his native city.
Sally Zelikovsky, founder of Bay Area Tea Party Patriots, said she believes that the movement's message is summed up in her best-selling T-shirt: "Hope you like the change."
2011-08-11 "Tea Party Express ready to roll" from "Napa Valley Register"
[http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/tea-party-express-ready-to-roll/article_c804319e-c3e5-11e0-b714-001cc4c03286.html#ixzz1UhhiYGBB]
What’s being billed by organizers as a “Tea Party Super Rally” is headed to Napa later this month, and event organizers say a few White House hopefuls have already committed to appear.
The event — a kickoff rally for the nationwide Tea Party Express tour — is set to take place on Aug. 27, and has already generated RSVPs from a few GOP presidential candidates, said Pam Silleman, head of the Napa Tea Party.
Silleman wasn’t willing to reveal which candidates were making plans to attend the rally, saying it was up to the candidates themselves to announce whether they would be attending.
Tea party luminaries such as Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain would likely be among those most willing to commit to the Napa rally, although inquiries to their respective campaigns were not immediately returned.
Calls to Sal Russo, a GOP consultant and co-founder of Tea Party Express, were also not returned Wednesday.
While the names of the candidates will remain a mystery for now, Silleman was willing to report that the logistical aspects of the rally had largely fallen into place.
“It seems like it’s going to be quite a big rally,” she said. “It’ll be something Napa’s never seen before.”
Silleman previously said that attendance at the event could be measured in the tens of thousands.
Not everyone gathering in Napa that Saturday will do so to support the tea party movement. Members of the local Green Party have already announced plans for a counter rally that day.
According to Napa County Green Party spokesman Alex Shantz, the local chapter will be hosting what they are calling a “green tea party” at Veterans Memorial Park to protest the tea party’s presence in Napa.
“The purpose of this rally is to show our opposition to the tea party's far right-wing agenda while affirming positive Green Party values, such as grassroots democracy, social justice, respect for diversity, nonviolence, community-based economics and ecological wisdom,” Shantz said in a statement.
---
Tea party rally
• Aug. 27, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the Napa Valley Expo, 575 Third St.
• Busses are scheduled to arrive at 11 a.m. and depart for Reno, Nev. at 1 p.m.
• The event is free and open to the public.
2011-09-16 "Green Tea counter rally was great" by Erica Martenson and Alex Shantz of "Napa Valley Green Party"
[http://napavalleyregister.com/news/opinion/mailbag/green-tea-counter-rally-was-great/article_3eb2fa40-e0d9-11e0-83c7-001cc4c03286.html]
On Aug. 27, 2011, the Napa County Green Party (NCGP) held a counter rally, a “green tea party,” at Veterans Park in downtown Napa to demonstrate our opposition to the tea party and its far right-wing agenda, and to affirm positive Green Party values. In contrast to the tea party rally, which was being held that day, our counter-rally drew a culturally diverse group of both young people and adults primarily from the local community.
We wish to thank all who participated in the counter-rally and protest. In addition, we wish to thank the Napa Police Department, especially Patrol Captain Steve Potter, for helping in the planning and unfolding of the event to ensure its safety.
The counter rally included NCGP speakers Alex Shantz and Chris Malan, 2010 Green Party gubernatorial candidate Laura Wells, and Green Mayor of Fairfax Larry Bragman. Musical entertainment was provided by solo artists Aria and Metazen, and musical groups The Juliane Band and Digital Martyrs. The Napa Valley Dream Act Coalition, Healthcare for All, Institute for Conservation, Advocacy, Research and Education, Preserving the Integrity of Napa’s Agriculture, Movement for a Democratic Society, Students for a Democratic Society and Rescue Education California also participated, some speaking and all tabling at the event. Other groups that chose to join in were the International Socialist Organization and the Peace and Freedom Party of Contra Costa County.
The Green Party is based upon 10 key values, which guide all of our political positions and activities, and that guided this event. In keeping with the values of community-based economics and personal responsibility, canned food was collected for the Napa Food Bank. The counter rally was a zero-waste event with everything provided being compostable, an expression of ecological wisdom; and, a soapbox was made available to all participants during the protest, which was grassroots democracy in action. The Green Party is not a political party of rhetoric; it is a political party with clearly defined values and one that puts those values into action.
The Green Party, unlike its corporate-controlled Democratic and Republican counterparts, refuses to accept any corporate financing and can, therefore, truly represent the needs of struggling blue and white collar workers and the environment without conflicts. The Green Party seeks to ignite a grassroots movement that will spread from county to county to take back our democracy; those interested in joining us, email napacountygreenparty@gmail.com.
Friday, August 26, 2011
2011-08-26 "Older students defend Vallejo Adult School, wish departing principal well" by Lanz Christian Bañes from "Vallejo Times-Herald" newspaper
[http://www.timesheraldonline.com/ci_18762408]
The Vallejo Adult School dominated the Vallejo school board meeting Wednesday, with many of its older students asking the board to preserve programming for senior citizens.
"This dog is still barking. ... I'm learning something new and not just watching my arteries harden," said Bruce Reed in a prepared statement about keeping classes for older citizens a viable option at the Adult School.
Senior citizens routinely defend the Vallejo Adult School, which has had its budget reduced by two-thirds in the last two years. The school board approved the Adult School's fee schedule, new graduation requirements and course offerings Wednesday night, but considered no cuts.
Part of the consternation Wednesday seemed to stem from the imminent departure of Principal Kay Hartley, who accepted a position at another adult school.
"We're sorry to hear that Principal Hartley is leaving," student Gordon Triemert told the board.
Hartley said the Vallejo Adult School was one of the few area adult schools that still offer programs for older adults.
"Their concern is an incoming administrator would look at the overall budget and say, 'This is something we don't need to pay for,' " said Hartley.
Superintendent Ramona Bishop praised Hartley for her work over the last few years as the district raided adult school programs.
"Seeing what Kay has done is truly miraculous. You have left this place better than you found it. ... and you're right ... what we're doing is criminal, truly criminal," said Bishop, answering an audience member's concern of the 67 percent reduction in the Vallejo Adult School's budget.
The Adult School has other funds besides those from the general fund propping it up, and the board on Wednesday improved a small increase in the school's fees.
Both board member Adrienne Waterman and Bishop assured Adult School students and teachers that they would find a good fit to replace Hartley. Board member Hazel Wilson, meanwhile, asked that members of the Adult School community be included in the interview panel for a new principal.
Hartley is expected to stay at the school through September.
The board also spent about an hour Wednesday learning more about the legalities of the expulsion process.
The district's expulsions made up 40 percent of all Solano County's expulsions during the 2009-2010 school year. Most were African American students.
"You as a board have the final ... authority to expel," said Dora Dome, an Oakland-based lawyer who gave the presentation.
Board President Raymond Victor Mommsen expressed concern about students lacking appropriate legal counsel during the hearings. Waterman said she wanted to know more about the district's intervention plans to head off expulsions.
The board also reviewed the district's site safety supervisors' new uniforms, now black with orange "site safety" stitched on the back for easier identification. The supervisors spent five days in training in early August preparing for the school year.
"Our main vision is student safety, nothing else. ... We will be visible. We will be on the sites. If anyone needs us, just look for 'site safety,' " district operations manager George Tisby said.
[http://www.timesheraldonline.com/ci_18762408]
The Vallejo Adult School dominated the Vallejo school board meeting Wednesday, with many of its older students asking the board to preserve programming for senior citizens.
"This dog is still barking. ... I'm learning something new and not just watching my arteries harden," said Bruce Reed in a prepared statement about keeping classes for older citizens a viable option at the Adult School.
Senior citizens routinely defend the Vallejo Adult School, which has had its budget reduced by two-thirds in the last two years. The school board approved the Adult School's fee schedule, new graduation requirements and course offerings Wednesday night, but considered no cuts.
Part of the consternation Wednesday seemed to stem from the imminent departure of Principal Kay Hartley, who accepted a position at another adult school.
"We're sorry to hear that Principal Hartley is leaving," student Gordon Triemert told the board.
Hartley said the Vallejo Adult School was one of the few area adult schools that still offer programs for older adults.
"Their concern is an incoming administrator would look at the overall budget and say, 'This is something we don't need to pay for,' " said Hartley.
Superintendent Ramona Bishop praised Hartley for her work over the last few years as the district raided adult school programs.
"Seeing what Kay has done is truly miraculous. You have left this place better than you found it. ... and you're right ... what we're doing is criminal, truly criminal," said Bishop, answering an audience member's concern of the 67 percent reduction in the Vallejo Adult School's budget.
The Adult School has other funds besides those from the general fund propping it up, and the board on Wednesday improved a small increase in the school's fees.
Both board member Adrienne Waterman and Bishop assured Adult School students and teachers that they would find a good fit to replace Hartley. Board member Hazel Wilson, meanwhile, asked that members of the Adult School community be included in the interview panel for a new principal.
Hartley is expected to stay at the school through September.
The board also spent about an hour Wednesday learning more about the legalities of the expulsion process.
The district's expulsions made up 40 percent of all Solano County's expulsions during the 2009-2010 school year. Most were African American students.
"You as a board have the final ... authority to expel," said Dora Dome, an Oakland-based lawyer who gave the presentation.
Board President Raymond Victor Mommsen expressed concern about students lacking appropriate legal counsel during the hearings. Waterman said she wanted to know more about the district's intervention plans to head off expulsions.
The board also reviewed the district's site safety supervisors' new uniforms, now black with orange "site safety" stitched on the back for easier identification. The supervisors spent five days in training in early August preparing for the school year.
"Our main vision is student safety, nothing else. ... We will be visible. We will be on the sites. If anyone needs us, just look for 'site safety,' " district operations manager George Tisby said.
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
2011-08-23 "Rise of the Planet of the Apes: Gorilla uprising is not just monkey business", a Northbay MDS/SDS movie review
Northbay MDS / SDS is an alliance of students, labor and community members who are organizing to expand democracy in the U$A
---
Tom Walker goes bananas for the Planet of the Apes series’ return to its radical roots
It’s not every week Hollywood releases a film praising revolution. Rise of the Planet of the Apes, though, places itself firmly on the side of a downtrodden chimp—and sees him lead a powerful ape uprising.
There was reportedly pressure not to release the film in Britain after the recent riots. It is easy to see why.
“Rise” is an attempt to give a fresh start—a “reboot”—for the Planet of the Apes film series.
The main human character is Will (James Franco), a scientist at a big pharmaceutical firm working on a cure for Alzheimer’s. Will’s own father suffers from the disease.
While doing animal tests, he stumbles on a drug that dramatically increases apes’ intelligence.
His boss, Jacobs, pushes for ever more dangerous—and profitable—experiments with the medicine. “You make history,” he tells Will. “I make money.”
But it all starts to go wrong when the first super-intelligent chimp suddenly goes berserk, bursting into a company board meeting. Security guards shoot her dead, and the testing programme is shut down.
One chimp survives the ordeal: her baby, Caesar. Will smuggles him home, and it quickly becomes obvious that he has inherited his mother’s intelligence genes.
This is a film of three parts. It spends its first half an hour or so playing at family drama as Caesar grows up and comes of age.
This part is sometimes dull, though certainly convincing. Caesar is played by actor Andy Serkis through
cutting-edge motion-capture. It’s the same computer graphics technology used in Avatar, but now blended seamlessly with real footage.
Oppressed
Part two is like a classic prison flick showing the harsh treatment of life inside, in this case at an “ape sanctuary”.
This is a sharp education for Caesar, as he is cast out of the comfortable world of humanity and into the cells of the oppressed apes.
It is also the political heart of the film, as Caesar figures out how to organise and lead the other primates.
The voiceless chimp uses hand gestures to tell an orangutan what he’s learned. “Apes alone, weak,” he signs, snapping a stick. Then he grasps a bundle of sticks and shows it won’t break: “Apes together, strong.”
The final and best part, though, is the uprising itself. The turning point is a brilliant reversal of the original’s classic line, “Get your stinking paws off me you damn dirty ape!”
The first Planet of the Apes was released in 1968, the great year of rebellion. It reflected the anger of the civil rights movement, and the fear of nuclear annihilation.
Rise is loosely based on the fourth film of the original series, Conquest of the Planet of the Apes—which in turn was based on the then-recent Watts riots in 1965 Los Angeles.
Producing a film that paralleled that uprising was an intensely political act. The six days of looting and fire-starting sparked by police racism had, as ever, been widely condemned as “criminality”.
Rebellion
It was said that in some cinemas Conquest’s soundtrack could hardly be heard above the sound of audiences cheering.
Unlike the 2001 Tim Burton “re-imagining”, which shied away from politics, this film has taken up that mantle.
It manages to capture something of this year’s spirit of resistance, from the Arab Spring to the strikes and protests sweeping much of the world.
Time magazine says that in its finale, Rise of the Planet of the Apes becomes “a Marxist view of the oppressed masses edging towards revolution”. But there’s no “edging” involved—this is a full-scale gorilla uprising.
It wouldn’t be fair to give away the ending. But if you want to see “the feds” get a bloody good hiding, see this film.
Northbay MDS / SDS is an alliance of students, labor and community members who are organizing to expand democracy in the U$A
---
Tom Walker goes bananas for the Planet of the Apes series’ return to its radical roots
It’s not every week Hollywood releases a film praising revolution. Rise of the Planet of the Apes, though, places itself firmly on the side of a downtrodden chimp—and sees him lead a powerful ape uprising.
There was reportedly pressure not to release the film in Britain after the recent riots. It is easy to see why.
“Rise” is an attempt to give a fresh start—a “reboot”—for the Planet of the Apes film series.
The main human character is Will (James Franco), a scientist at a big pharmaceutical firm working on a cure for Alzheimer’s. Will’s own father suffers from the disease.
While doing animal tests, he stumbles on a drug that dramatically increases apes’ intelligence.
His boss, Jacobs, pushes for ever more dangerous—and profitable—experiments with the medicine. “You make history,” he tells Will. “I make money.”
But it all starts to go wrong when the first super-intelligent chimp suddenly goes berserk, bursting into a company board meeting. Security guards shoot her dead, and the testing programme is shut down.
One chimp survives the ordeal: her baby, Caesar. Will smuggles him home, and it quickly becomes obvious that he has inherited his mother’s intelligence genes.
This is a film of three parts. It spends its first half an hour or so playing at family drama as Caesar grows up and comes of age.
This part is sometimes dull, though certainly convincing. Caesar is played by actor Andy Serkis through
cutting-edge motion-capture. It’s the same computer graphics technology used in Avatar, but now blended seamlessly with real footage.
Oppressed
Part two is like a classic prison flick showing the harsh treatment of life inside, in this case at an “ape sanctuary”.
This is a sharp education for Caesar, as he is cast out of the comfortable world of humanity and into the cells of the oppressed apes.
It is also the political heart of the film, as Caesar figures out how to organise and lead the other primates.
The voiceless chimp uses hand gestures to tell an orangutan what he’s learned. “Apes alone, weak,” he signs, snapping a stick. Then he grasps a bundle of sticks and shows it won’t break: “Apes together, strong.”
The final and best part, though, is the uprising itself. The turning point is a brilliant reversal of the original’s classic line, “Get your stinking paws off me you damn dirty ape!”
The first Planet of the Apes was released in 1968, the great year of rebellion. It reflected the anger of the civil rights movement, and the fear of nuclear annihilation.
Rise is loosely based on the fourth film of the original series, Conquest of the Planet of the Apes—which in turn was based on the then-recent Watts riots in 1965 Los Angeles.
Producing a film that paralleled that uprising was an intensely political act. The six days of looting and fire-starting sparked by police racism had, as ever, been widely condemned as “criminality”.
Rebellion
It was said that in some cinemas Conquest’s soundtrack could hardly be heard above the sound of audiences cheering.
Unlike the 2001 Tim Burton “re-imagining”, which shied away from politics, this film has taken up that mantle.
It manages to capture something of this year’s spirit of resistance, from the Arab Spring to the strikes and protests sweeping much of the world.
Time magazine says that in its finale, Rise of the Planet of the Apes becomes “a Marxist view of the oppressed masses edging towards revolution”. But there’s no “edging” involved—this is a full-scale gorilla uprising.
It wouldn’t be fair to give away the ending. But if you want to see “the feds” get a bloody good hiding, see this film.
Monday, August 22, 2011
2011-08-22 "Solano supervisors ban marijuana shops in unincorporated areas" by Melissa Murphy from "The Vacaville Reporter" newspaper
The Solano County Board of Supervisors is moving forward to ban medical marijuana dispensaries in unincorporated areas of the county.
Supervisors last month denied a request from a dispensary owner to amend zoning codes to allow dispensaries. They asked staff to bring back potential ordinance changes that would, in essence, ban medical marijuana dispensaries.
On Tuesday, supervisors will consider adopting an interim urgency ordinance that imposes a 45-day moratorium on any business or facility that cultivates, sells and distributes medical marijuana in unincorporated Solano County. They will also decide whether to hold a public hearing Oct. 4 to consider an extension of the urgency ordinance.
Staff explained in a report to the board that an increase in the number of cities and counties in the region have adopted ordinances prohibiting such dispensaries, which places increased pressure to locate those facilities in Solano County.
There have been strong signals, according to staff, from the federal government that it will take aggressive action against local agencies that abet the commercial distribution of medical marijuana, because it violates federal marijuana laws.
Still, the county's zoning ordinance says that dispensaries are permissible in the Neighborhood Commercial and Business and Professional Office zoning districts.
Additionally, there is a pending business license application for a facility that may have part of its operation involved in the distribution of medical marijuana.
"Staff does not want to be in a position of having to act on the application until the exact nature of the use is known, nor do we want to act prematurely on the application in light of the board's recent direction to come back with an ordinance banning medical marijuana facilities," the report's authors wrote.
County staff admit that there are challenges in navigating between the state and federal laws and standards.
"Staff believes it is prudent and appropriate to establish a moratorium until the county assesses the best approach to address the board's direction and comply with federal and state law," the report noted.
At the end of the 45-day moratorium, staff will inform the board about the status of the analysis and either recommend ordinance changes or identify areas where further study is needed.
If the board chooses to extend the initial 45-day moratorium, the maximum extension allowed is an added 10 months and 15 days.
The Solano County Board of Supervisors meets at 9 a.m. Tuesday in the County Government Center, 675 Texas St., Fairfield.
The Solano County Board of Supervisors is moving forward to ban medical marijuana dispensaries in unincorporated areas of the county.
Supervisors last month denied a request from a dispensary owner to amend zoning codes to allow dispensaries. They asked staff to bring back potential ordinance changes that would, in essence, ban medical marijuana dispensaries.
On Tuesday, supervisors will consider adopting an interim urgency ordinance that imposes a 45-day moratorium on any business or facility that cultivates, sells and distributes medical marijuana in unincorporated Solano County. They will also decide whether to hold a public hearing Oct. 4 to consider an extension of the urgency ordinance.
Staff explained in a report to the board that an increase in the number of cities and counties in the region have adopted ordinances prohibiting such dispensaries, which places increased pressure to locate those facilities in Solano County.
There have been strong signals, according to staff, from the federal government that it will take aggressive action against local agencies that abet the commercial distribution of medical marijuana, because it violates federal marijuana laws.
Still, the county's zoning ordinance says that dispensaries are permissible in the Neighborhood Commercial and Business and Professional Office zoning districts.
Additionally, there is a pending business license application for a facility that may have part of its operation involved in the distribution of medical marijuana.
"Staff does not want to be in a position of having to act on the application until the exact nature of the use is known, nor do we want to act prematurely on the application in light of the board's recent direction to come back with an ordinance banning medical marijuana facilities," the report's authors wrote.
County staff admit that there are challenges in navigating between the state and federal laws and standards.
"Staff believes it is prudent and appropriate to establish a moratorium until the county assesses the best approach to address the board's direction and comply with federal and state law," the report noted.
At the end of the 45-day moratorium, staff will inform the board about the status of the analysis and either recommend ordinance changes or identify areas where further study is needed.
If the board chooses to extend the initial 45-day moratorium, the maximum extension allowed is an added 10 months and 15 days.
The Solano County Board of Supervisors meets at 9 a.m. Tuesday in the County Government Center, 675 Texas St., Fairfield.
Friday, August 19, 2011
2011-08-19 "Like BART Protests, Internal Documents Reveal UC Has Spied on Student Fee Hike Demonstrations" by Eric Lee
[http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/site/node/9279]
Eric is a 21- year-old recent graduate of UC Davis who has been active in student anti-austerity protests for the past three years. He is a native of Santa Rosa. He can be reached at ca.ericlee@gmail.com.
---
BART actions to inhibit free speech activity isn't new to University of California students who earlier this year uncovered internal documents showing officials has conspired to monitor and control constitutionally-protected fee hike protests at UC Davis.
High-ranking University of California, Davis administrators including Chancellor Linda Katehi, several vice chancellors, more than 30 staff members, and campus police were involved, according to internal documents uncovered by students involved in the demonstrations.
Students and community members are particularly disturbed in light of similar Bay Area Rapid Transit police transgressions on the freedom to communicate.
We feel threatened that public institutions like UC Davis and BART are actively pursuing policies that treat students and passengers respectively like criminals. In the throes of the current economic meltdown, it is perhaps more valid to question the criminality of dishonest actions taken against those who are trying to fight for a better life. It is a telling sign that decision makers in these institutions feel the need to incriminate others in order to avoid public pressure for their own, sometimes violent, actions.
The documents, obtained through the state public records act, reveal high-ranking administrators, staff members, and leaders of the campus police department formed a network called the “Activism Response Team” to keep close tabs on student activists, including monitoring student Facebook activity, infiltrating protests and attempting to obtain information about “anticipated student actions," and individuals involved in the protests.
In one case, an undercover campus police officer marched with students in plain clothes and refused to identify herself as a member of the UCD police department. UCD has apologized, calling it a "mistake."
Students, faculty, staff, and the Sacramento and Yolo Chapters of the American Civil Liberties Union are extremely concerned about the deepening abuse of police power in publicly used spaces—both public transit terminals and college campuses.
Students take offense at these incursions in light of the political merit of campus protests against tuition hikes: undergraduate tuition at the University of California has increased by more than 40 percent since 2009 and 300 percent since 2001 as essential services have been cut, class sizes reduced, and lower proportions of in-state students admitted.
We students worry about the precedent that is being set by a law enforcement apparatus that is using the pulpit of “security” to restrict our rights as citizens of the United States and as human beings. Time and time again history has shown that the false cry of “security” can only be used to roll back the hard-fought advances of a democratic society.
If we wish to learn from history, we must not sit idly as the pillars of democracy begin to erode and tremble in the wake of a polarizing and precarious reality.
People, including students at a major university and commuters using public transportation, have the right to dissent without being "monitored" by a secret team of administrators and undercover police or having their right to communication impinged upon.
If police or administrators wish to observe in a public fashion protests then that is their right. But it ought not to be done in manner more befitting a totalitarian regime than an open public university.
[http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/site/node/9279]
Eric is a 21- year-old recent graduate of UC Davis who has been active in student anti-austerity protests for the past three years. He is a native of Santa Rosa. He can be reached at ca.ericlee@gmail.com.
---
BART actions to inhibit free speech activity isn't new to University of California students who earlier this year uncovered internal documents showing officials has conspired to monitor and control constitutionally-protected fee hike protests at UC Davis.
High-ranking University of California, Davis administrators including Chancellor Linda Katehi, several vice chancellors, more than 30 staff members, and campus police were involved, according to internal documents uncovered by students involved in the demonstrations.
Students and community members are particularly disturbed in light of similar Bay Area Rapid Transit police transgressions on the freedom to communicate.
We feel threatened that public institutions like UC Davis and BART are actively pursuing policies that treat students and passengers respectively like criminals. In the throes of the current economic meltdown, it is perhaps more valid to question the criminality of dishonest actions taken against those who are trying to fight for a better life. It is a telling sign that decision makers in these institutions feel the need to incriminate others in order to avoid public pressure for their own, sometimes violent, actions.
The documents, obtained through the state public records act, reveal high-ranking administrators, staff members, and leaders of the campus police department formed a network called the “Activism Response Team” to keep close tabs on student activists, including monitoring student Facebook activity, infiltrating protests and attempting to obtain information about “anticipated student actions," and individuals involved in the protests.
In one case, an undercover campus police officer marched with students in plain clothes and refused to identify herself as a member of the UCD police department. UCD has apologized, calling it a "mistake."
Students, faculty, staff, and the Sacramento and Yolo Chapters of the American Civil Liberties Union are extremely concerned about the deepening abuse of police power in publicly used spaces—both public transit terminals and college campuses.
Students take offense at these incursions in light of the political merit of campus protests against tuition hikes: undergraduate tuition at the University of California has increased by more than 40 percent since 2009 and 300 percent since 2001 as essential services have been cut, class sizes reduced, and lower proportions of in-state students admitted.
We students worry about the precedent that is being set by a law enforcement apparatus that is using the pulpit of “security” to restrict our rights as citizens of the United States and as human beings. Time and time again history has shown that the false cry of “security” can only be used to roll back the hard-fought advances of a democratic society.
If we wish to learn from history, we must not sit idly as the pillars of democracy begin to erode and tremble in the wake of a polarizing and precarious reality.
People, including students at a major university and commuters using public transportation, have the right to dissent without being "monitored" by a secret team of administrators and undercover police or having their right to communication impinged upon.
If police or administrators wish to observe in a public fashion protests then that is their right. But it ought not to be done in manner more befitting a totalitarian regime than an open public university.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
2011-08-18 "Pot Farmer Joins Farm Bureau: A farm bureau known for its wine crops is among the first in the country to put out the welcome mat to a pot grower" by Joe Rosato Jr.
[http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Pot-Farmer-Joins-Farm-Bureau-127976198.html]
The Napa Valley is legendary for its rolling vineyards and wine grapes, guided by some of the world’s greenest thumbs.
Crane Carter owns one of those green thumbs. Only he doesn’t grow grapes with it. He grows marijuana.
Carter scampered through the backyard of his St. Helena home, offering a tour of twelve leafy pot plants spilling from their planter boxes. His medicinal bumper crop is legal in the eyes of California under Prop 215.
"This is what they call pink panther here," he said, gingerly tugging on a young green bud. "It’s a few weeks out."
Most marijuana growers prefer to farm from the shadows, but Carter is out there openly advocating for the sale and taxation of medical weed. He founded the Napa Valley Marijuana Growers and dreams of the region becoming as famous for cannabis as it is for cabernet.
"I think we do have a taxable commodity here," Carter said in his rapid-fire speaking style. "It will allow these outside growers to come to the surface and be part of our community.”"
Carter himself has emerged from the pot farming underbelly in bold fashion. Recently, the prestigious Napa County Farm Bureau accepted him as a member. He’s believed one of the first declared marijuana farmer in the country to join such a legitimate body.
"It’s a wonderful feeling to be accepted in that group," he said, pushing back the brim of his floppy wide-brimmed hat. "We don’t have to hide -- we don’t and we won’t."
For the record: another grower, Northstone Organics [http://travel.usatoday.com/destinations/2010-10-07-mendocino-marijuana-tourism_N.htm], has also been accepted as a member of the Farm Bureau in Mendicino County [http://www.mendofb.org/business_members.php].
Carter’s membership folds him into the ranks of the region’s seasoned wine grape growers, dairy farmers and olive producers. While his green message is sure to rankle some members, others believe his mission isn’t so far out.
"We’re looking at agriculture and what agriculture encompasses," said wine grape manager Eric Pooler. "That’s changing, so we’re just kind of flowing with the times."
Pooler was part of the Farm Bureau committee that heard Carter’s pitch and ultimately chose him as a member. Pooler said the decision wasn’t an endorsement of medicinal marijuana – rather the acknowledgement of a legitimate agricultural crop.
"In terms of people who don’t agree with that, I can understand their viewpoints," said Pooler. "But he’s working within the bounds of the law and that’s what we’re looking at."
Carter hopes to use his new pulpit to establish marijuana-growing guidelines for the region – including sustainable techniques that eliminate pollution and pesticides. In the meantime, he peddles t-shirts bearing the logo of his homegrown organization. He also plans to sell his upcoming crop to medical marijuana dispensaries in the Bay Area
A life-long Napa Valley resident, Carter said he bristles whenever he hears someone declare Mendocino or Humboldt County as the “Napa Valley of marijuana growing.” That distinction, he believes, should remain in the Napa Valley.
"They’re not on top of three international airports," he said. "They don’t have the accommodations and what we have for the wine industry already."
Whether the world famous wine-region will ever see pot plants growing alongside chardonnay vineyards is probably a far-off vision. But it’s a vision Carter will be out there preaching, one green bud at a time.
[http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Pot-Farmer-Joins-Farm-Bureau-127976198.html]
The Napa Valley is legendary for its rolling vineyards and wine grapes, guided by some of the world’s greenest thumbs.
Crane Carter owns one of those green thumbs. Only he doesn’t grow grapes with it. He grows marijuana.
Carter scampered through the backyard of his St. Helena home, offering a tour of twelve leafy pot plants spilling from their planter boxes. His medicinal bumper crop is legal in the eyes of California under Prop 215.
"This is what they call pink panther here," he said, gingerly tugging on a young green bud. "It’s a few weeks out."
Most marijuana growers prefer to farm from the shadows, but Carter is out there openly advocating for the sale and taxation of medical weed. He founded the Napa Valley Marijuana Growers and dreams of the region becoming as famous for cannabis as it is for cabernet.
"I think we do have a taxable commodity here," Carter said in his rapid-fire speaking style. "It will allow these outside growers to come to the surface and be part of our community.”"
Carter himself has emerged from the pot farming underbelly in bold fashion. Recently, the prestigious Napa County Farm Bureau accepted him as a member. He’s believed one of the first declared marijuana farmer in the country to join such a legitimate body.
"It’s a wonderful feeling to be accepted in that group," he said, pushing back the brim of his floppy wide-brimmed hat. "We don’t have to hide -- we don’t and we won’t."
For the record: another grower, Northstone Organics [http://travel.usatoday.com/destinations/2010-10-07-mendocino-marijuana-tourism_N.htm], has also been accepted as a member of the Farm Bureau in Mendicino County [http://www.mendofb.org/business_members.php].
Carter’s membership folds him into the ranks of the region’s seasoned wine grape growers, dairy farmers and olive producers. While his green message is sure to rankle some members, others believe his mission isn’t so far out.
"We’re looking at agriculture and what agriculture encompasses," said wine grape manager Eric Pooler. "That’s changing, so we’re just kind of flowing with the times."
Pooler was part of the Farm Bureau committee that heard Carter’s pitch and ultimately chose him as a member. Pooler said the decision wasn’t an endorsement of medicinal marijuana – rather the acknowledgement of a legitimate agricultural crop.
"In terms of people who don’t agree with that, I can understand their viewpoints," said Pooler. "But he’s working within the bounds of the law and that’s what we’re looking at."
Carter hopes to use his new pulpit to establish marijuana-growing guidelines for the region – including sustainable techniques that eliminate pollution and pesticides. In the meantime, he peddles t-shirts bearing the logo of his homegrown organization. He also plans to sell his upcoming crop to medical marijuana dispensaries in the Bay Area
A life-long Napa Valley resident, Carter said he bristles whenever he hears someone declare Mendocino or Humboldt County as the “Napa Valley of marijuana growing.” That distinction, he believes, should remain in the Napa Valley.
"They’re not on top of three international airports," he said. "They don’t have the accommodations and what we have for the wine industry already."
Whether the world famous wine-region will ever see pot plants growing alongside chardonnay vineyards is probably a far-off vision. But it’s a vision Carter will be out there preaching, one green bud at a time.
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
2011-08-17 "Vallejo still among top U.S. cities with home foreclosures" by Rachel Raskin-Zrihen from "Vallejo Times-Herald" newspaper
[http://www.timesheraldonline.com/ci_18697677]
Solano County has had among the country's highest foreclosure rates since the housing crises began about five years ago, and still hasn't shaken that dubious distinction.
Last month, one of every 140 housing units here faced foreclosure, making this the fourth hardest hit area in the country, after Las Vegas, Stockton and Modesto, according to RealtyTrac's July report.
This compares to the statewide foreclosure rate showing one of out of every 239 homes is in some stage of foreclosure -- a 4 percent increase over last month, but a 16 percent drop from last year. Nationally, the foreclosure rate has fallen 4 percent since June and 35 percent since last year.
Statewide, the Vallejo area ranked third worst for foreclosures, after Stockton and Modesto.
Foreclosures in the Vallejo-Fairfield metro area jumped by a third since last month, while most other areas either dropped or rose only slightly, RealtyTrac spokesman Daren Blomquist said this week.
Blomquist said highs and lows in monthly foreclosure rates are not rare, though they're most common in the areas hardest hit by the crisis.
"The Vallejo area has for the past few years, been consistently in the top 10 worst of the 211 areas we track, though not always in the top five, like this," Blomquist said.
The Vallejo-Fairfield area was 10th worst nationally for foreclosures for all of 2010, he said. It was 11th worst in 2009 and seventh worst the year before that.
Statewide, as foreclosures started rising in October 2006, Solano County ranked second only to Stanislaus County, according to RealtyTrac.
In July, as bad as Vallejo's foreclosure rate was, it was better than the second-ranked Stockton area, in San Joaquin County, where foreclosures were up 57 percent in July. Though like Solano, that figure was down from a year ago, one in every 124 homes in the Stockton area were in foreclosure last month. Two areas in Florida also had big increases in foreclosures last month, Blomquist said.
Foreclosures were up 39 percent in San Francisco County last month over June, placing it 28th nationally. They were up 17 percent in Contra Costa County and 15 percent in Alameda County.
"We're seeing something of a roller coaster pattern in Solano County, with a dramatic up month followed by a deep drop," Blomquist said. "Other markets are also seeing surges and declines. I wouldn't be surprised to see a reversal in the area next month."
Blomquist said he attributes the situation in part to the mortgage industry trying to regain its footing after being caught in the so-called "robo-signing" debacle.
"I honestly think it's a situation where the fractured foreclosure process right now, with lenders accused of sloppy paperwork and adjustments they're making, I think this has contributed to the volatile pattern," he said. "Other outside influences, like investigations by attorneys general trying to create consistency in foreclosure procedures and state and federal foreclosure prevention programs, also are making an impact."
Blomquist said that while the worst of the foreclosure crisis is behind us, any kind of normalcy is years away.
"We estimate no normalcy in foreclosure levels until 2014 because of the backlog of inventory and the lack of big improvement in economic conditions," he said. "Even so, we have seen in Solano County and elsewhere that we're past the peak and the numbers should start to come down."
At a glance -
In Solano County last month, more than 4,600 homes were in some stage of foreclosure and those that sold, went for an average of nearly $200,500. Just more than 1,000 homes here received foreclosure notices in July.
By city:
* Vallejo -- 418
* Fairfield -- 231
* Vacaville -- 197
* Suisun City -- 91
* Benicia -- 74
* Dixon -- 42
* Rio Vista -- 23
[http://www.timesheraldonline.com/ci_18697677]
Solano County has had among the country's highest foreclosure rates since the housing crises began about five years ago, and still hasn't shaken that dubious distinction.
Last month, one of every 140 housing units here faced foreclosure, making this the fourth hardest hit area in the country, after Las Vegas, Stockton and Modesto, according to RealtyTrac's July report.
This compares to the statewide foreclosure rate showing one of out of every 239 homes is in some stage of foreclosure -- a 4 percent increase over last month, but a 16 percent drop from last year. Nationally, the foreclosure rate has fallen 4 percent since June and 35 percent since last year.
Statewide, the Vallejo area ranked third worst for foreclosures, after Stockton and Modesto.
Foreclosures in the Vallejo-Fairfield metro area jumped by a third since last month, while most other areas either dropped or rose only slightly, RealtyTrac spokesman Daren Blomquist said this week.
Blomquist said highs and lows in monthly foreclosure rates are not rare, though they're most common in the areas hardest hit by the crisis.
"The Vallejo area has for the past few years, been consistently in the top 10 worst of the 211 areas we track, though not always in the top five, like this," Blomquist said.
The Vallejo-Fairfield area was 10th worst nationally for foreclosures for all of 2010, he said. It was 11th worst in 2009 and seventh worst the year before that.
Statewide, as foreclosures started rising in October 2006, Solano County ranked second only to Stanislaus County, according to RealtyTrac.
In July, as bad as Vallejo's foreclosure rate was, it was better than the second-ranked Stockton area, in San Joaquin County, where foreclosures were up 57 percent in July. Though like Solano, that figure was down from a year ago, one in every 124 homes in the Stockton area were in foreclosure last month. Two areas in Florida also had big increases in foreclosures last month, Blomquist said.
Foreclosures were up 39 percent in San Francisco County last month over June, placing it 28th nationally. They were up 17 percent in Contra Costa County and 15 percent in Alameda County.
"We're seeing something of a roller coaster pattern in Solano County, with a dramatic up month followed by a deep drop," Blomquist said. "Other markets are also seeing surges and declines. I wouldn't be surprised to see a reversal in the area next month."
Blomquist said he attributes the situation in part to the mortgage industry trying to regain its footing after being caught in the so-called "robo-signing" debacle.
"I honestly think it's a situation where the fractured foreclosure process right now, with lenders accused of sloppy paperwork and adjustments they're making, I think this has contributed to the volatile pattern," he said. "Other outside influences, like investigations by attorneys general trying to create consistency in foreclosure procedures and state and federal foreclosure prevention programs, also are making an impact."
Blomquist said that while the worst of the foreclosure crisis is behind us, any kind of normalcy is years away.
"We estimate no normalcy in foreclosure levels until 2014 because of the backlog of inventory and the lack of big improvement in economic conditions," he said. "Even so, we have seen in Solano County and elsewhere that we're past the peak and the numbers should start to come down."
At a glance -
In Solano County last month, more than 4,600 homes were in some stage of foreclosure and those that sold, went for an average of nearly $200,500. Just more than 1,000 homes here received foreclosure notices in July.
By city:
* Vallejo -- 418
* Fairfield -- 231
* Vacaville -- 197
* Suisun City -- 91
* Benicia -- 74
* Dixon -- 42
* Rio Vista -- 23
Monday, August 15, 2011
2011-08-15 "Solano jail braces for an influx of inmates from state prison" by Catherine Bowen from "The Vacaville Reporter" newspaper
In a move some call long overdue and others say should never happen, the state is set to send waves of prison inmates flooding into county jails and communities as early as this fall, leaving local authorities bracing for the storm.
With the wheels set into motion earlier this year by Gov. Jerry Brown's election, Assembly Bill 109 was proposed as a solution to the constant struggle against chronic prison overcrowding.
Solano County Sheriff Gary Stanton said prison overcrowding is not new, and a major push was made when two inmates sued the state because prisoners were not receiving adequate medical and mental health care. The courts agreed, and ordered the state to remedy the problem.
"What AB 109 does is transitions responsibility for 38,000 inmates to local control, to counties," Stanton said.
By Oct. 1, Solano County will likely see the start of the nearly 700 inmates to be introduced to the area over the next three years, Stanton said. Of these inmates, all categorized by the state as "low-risk offenders,"
356 are slated to be released into Post-release Community Supervision, "a softer and gentler way of saying parolees," he added. Another 280 will be diverted from prison to a stop over in Solano County Jail.
In order for this to be done, the state identified what are referred to as "non-, non-, nons-," Stanton said -- that is, "non-sex offense, non-significant, non-violent criminal offenders."
"The state is keeping the worst of the worst,"
Stanton said. "And when they term out, when they finish their terms of confinement, they will be released to adult parole services."
However, these individuals, rather than being monitored by the state, will be under the closer supervision of county law enforcement, Stanton said.
He said if the parolees violate terms of their release, rather than being sent back to state prison, they will be sent to county jail. Stanton said the jail's regular population is expected to increase by an average of 55 because of new parole violators.
Stanton said a significant number are going to have to be released back into the community because the county simply lacks the bed space for them. With 200 available beds, the issue comes down to staffing and budget constraints.
"Every inmate coming to us from state prison ... they're all going to be assessed to determine their level of criminal sophistication, their level of potential success in out-of-custody placement, their level for violence, and then we'll decide who stays in and who goes out," Stanton said. "The reality is I can't house all of them. There's no room."
These individuals, he went on to say, will have to be put in an "alternative to custody" situation that uses GPS monitoring.
"We're going to dump as many as we can into out-of-custody programs -- if we think they'll be successful," Stanton said. "If in the assessment we don't think they'll be successful, they're going to stay in custody."
Initially set to kick in last month, AB 109 implementation has been postponed to Oct. 1, giving local law enforcement a little more time to brace for the impact.
Despite the delay, Stanton said the move comes at a bad time.
"Now that we're all down from two years of budget reductions, we get hit with this, the timing could not have been worse for us," he said.
Stanton said that if the state fails to follow through or makes further reductions the community will feel the impact. The state has allotted $3.8 million to Solano County for the first year, or an estimated $7,800 per inmate per year.
"That is likely to be insufficient to even provide supervision for them. There's no money there to put them into programs. And they should go in programs," Stanton said, citing such things as drug and alcohol classes, GED and vocational training programs as ways to help reduce the likelihood of reoffending.
"The reality of it is, I'm going to have to hire officers to watch these people and so is Probation," he said. "We're going to have to use the first pass of that funding for that. If there's anything left over, then we'll look and see what we can do for programming."
Stanton said he is expecting some initial bumps along the way but is optimistic for the future.
"What we're looking at is probably a very difficult first year, and then in the second and third years it should get a little better and then in about the fourth year I think we can probably turn the corner," he said. "We know we can't do any worse than the state did with it, they set the bar pretty low."
"It won't be perfect, we will make mistakes, but this is one of those situations where we can't say no," Stanton said. "It's now statutory and we now get it whether we want it or not. We have to make the best out of it, and we're going to make the best out of it we can."
In a move some call long overdue and others say should never happen, the state is set to send waves of prison inmates flooding into county jails and communities as early as this fall, leaving local authorities bracing for the storm.
With the wheels set into motion earlier this year by Gov. Jerry Brown's election, Assembly Bill 109 was proposed as a solution to the constant struggle against chronic prison overcrowding.
Solano County Sheriff Gary Stanton said prison overcrowding is not new, and a major push was made when two inmates sued the state because prisoners were not receiving adequate medical and mental health care. The courts agreed, and ordered the state to remedy the problem.
"What AB 109 does is transitions responsibility for 38,000 inmates to local control, to counties," Stanton said.
By Oct. 1, Solano County will likely see the start of the nearly 700 inmates to be introduced to the area over the next three years, Stanton said. Of these inmates, all categorized by the state as "low-risk offenders,"
356 are slated to be released into Post-release Community Supervision, "a softer and gentler way of saying parolees," he added. Another 280 will be diverted from prison to a stop over in Solano County Jail.
In order for this to be done, the state identified what are referred to as "non-, non-, nons-," Stanton said -- that is, "non-sex offense, non-significant, non-violent criminal offenders."
"The state is keeping the worst of the worst,"
Stanton said. "And when they term out, when they finish their terms of confinement, they will be released to adult parole services."
However, these individuals, rather than being monitored by the state, will be under the closer supervision of county law enforcement, Stanton said.
He said if the parolees violate terms of their release, rather than being sent back to state prison, they will be sent to county jail. Stanton said the jail's regular population is expected to increase by an average of 55 because of new parole violators.
Stanton said a significant number are going to have to be released back into the community because the county simply lacks the bed space for them. With 200 available beds, the issue comes down to staffing and budget constraints.
"Every inmate coming to us from state prison ... they're all going to be assessed to determine their level of criminal sophistication, their level of potential success in out-of-custody placement, their level for violence, and then we'll decide who stays in and who goes out," Stanton said. "The reality is I can't house all of them. There's no room."
These individuals, he went on to say, will have to be put in an "alternative to custody" situation that uses GPS monitoring.
"We're going to dump as many as we can into out-of-custody programs -- if we think they'll be successful," Stanton said. "If in the assessment we don't think they'll be successful, they're going to stay in custody."
Initially set to kick in last month, AB 109 implementation has been postponed to Oct. 1, giving local law enforcement a little more time to brace for the impact.
Despite the delay, Stanton said the move comes at a bad time.
"Now that we're all down from two years of budget reductions, we get hit with this, the timing could not have been worse for us," he said.
Stanton said that if the state fails to follow through or makes further reductions the community will feel the impact. The state has allotted $3.8 million to Solano County for the first year, or an estimated $7,800 per inmate per year.
"That is likely to be insufficient to even provide supervision for them. There's no money there to put them into programs. And they should go in programs," Stanton said, citing such things as drug and alcohol classes, GED and vocational training programs as ways to help reduce the likelihood of reoffending.
"The reality of it is, I'm going to have to hire officers to watch these people and so is Probation," he said. "We're going to have to use the first pass of that funding for that. If there's anything left over, then we'll look and see what we can do for programming."
Stanton said he is expecting some initial bumps along the way but is optimistic for the future.
"What we're looking at is probably a very difficult first year, and then in the second and third years it should get a little better and then in about the fourth year I think we can probably turn the corner," he said. "We know we can't do any worse than the state did with it, they set the bar pretty low."
"It won't be perfect, we will make mistakes, but this is one of those situations where we can't say no," Stanton said. "It's now statutory and we now get it whether we want it or not. We have to make the best out of it, and we're going to make the best out of it we can."
Friday, August 12, 2011
2011-08-12 "Vallejo's dropout figures improve, but they remain Solano's highest" by Lanz Christian Bañes from "Vallejo Times-Herald"
[http://www.timesheraldonline.com/ci_18667525]
Breaking a several-year trend, the Vallejo City Unified School District's high dropout rate improved in the 2009-2010 academic year.
According to data released Thursday by the California Department of Education, about 41 percent of Vallejo high school students dropped out during the four-year period ending with the 2009-2010 school year. The same data set also shows about a 50 percent graduation rate.
The dropout and graduation rates for a given period do not necessarily add up to 100 percent because some students neither drop out nor graduate, for example taking the high school equivalency exam.
Because this is the first year the state is using a new system to count students, the education department warns against exactly comparing this year's released statistics with those of previous years. A different formula was used in previous years.
Regardless, it is still notable that the four-year Vallejo dropout rate in the 2008-2009 school year was 49 percent. The district still reports the highest dropout rate among the seven Solano County public school districts, which have about a combined 25 percent dropout rate, including Vallejo.
By comparison, the Solano County Office of Education's schools and programs and the Vacaville Unified School District have the next highest rates, at about 25 percent and 18 percent, respectively. Travis Unified School District and Benicia Unified School District have the lowest at 5 percent and about 10 percent, respectively.
Benicia had about a 5 percent dropout rate in the 2009-2009 school year.
The latest statistics peg the state at an 18 percent dropout rate and a 74 percent graduation rate.
In Vallejo, most of the recorded dropouts are among Latino and African-American students. Nearly half the students of both races dropped out in 2009-2010.
Dropouts are also a problem among district minorities with smaller populations. About 63 percent of American Indians and 46 percent of white students dropped out in 2009-2011. Only 11 American Indian students were represented in the statistics, along with 163 white students of the total 1,500 or so counted students.
Vallejo's dropout rate had been steadily increasing since the 2003-2004 school year, when the rate nearly doubled to 30 percent from 16 percent in the preceding year.
In the 1991-1992 school year, the district posted a four-year dropout rate of less than 7 percent.
By the numbers:
Solano County dropout and graduation rates, 2009-2010 -
* Vallejo -- 41.1 percent dropout, 49.6 graduation
* County Office of Education -- 24.6 percent dropout, 70.4 percent graduation
* Vacaville -- 18.2 percent dropout, 77.7 percent graduation
* Fairfield-Suisun -- 17.5 percent dropout, 79.1 percent graduation
* Dixon -- 14.3 percent dropout, 81.8 percent graduation
* Benicia -- 9.8 percent dropout, 89 percent graduation
* Travis -- 5 percent dropout, 92.3 percent graduation
* Solano County total -- 24.6 percent dropout, 70.4 percent graduation
* California total -- 18.2 dropout, 74.4 percent graduation
[http://www.timesheraldonline.com/ci_18667525]
Breaking a several-year trend, the Vallejo City Unified School District's high dropout rate improved in the 2009-2010 academic year.
According to data released Thursday by the California Department of Education, about 41 percent of Vallejo high school students dropped out during the four-year period ending with the 2009-2010 school year. The same data set also shows about a 50 percent graduation rate.
The dropout and graduation rates for a given period do not necessarily add up to 100 percent because some students neither drop out nor graduate, for example taking the high school equivalency exam.
Because this is the first year the state is using a new system to count students, the education department warns against exactly comparing this year's released statistics with those of previous years. A different formula was used in previous years.
Regardless, it is still notable that the four-year Vallejo dropout rate in the 2008-2009 school year was 49 percent. The district still reports the highest dropout rate among the seven Solano County public school districts, which have about a combined 25 percent dropout rate, including Vallejo.
By comparison, the Solano County Office of Education's schools and programs and the Vacaville Unified School District have the next highest rates, at about 25 percent and 18 percent, respectively. Travis Unified School District and Benicia Unified School District have the lowest at 5 percent and about 10 percent, respectively.
Benicia had about a 5 percent dropout rate in the 2009-2009 school year.
The latest statistics peg the state at an 18 percent dropout rate and a 74 percent graduation rate.
In Vallejo, most of the recorded dropouts are among Latino and African-American students. Nearly half the students of both races dropped out in 2009-2010.
Dropouts are also a problem among district minorities with smaller populations. About 63 percent of American Indians and 46 percent of white students dropped out in 2009-2011. Only 11 American Indian students were represented in the statistics, along with 163 white students of the total 1,500 or so counted students.
Vallejo's dropout rate had been steadily increasing since the 2003-2004 school year, when the rate nearly doubled to 30 percent from 16 percent in the preceding year.
In the 1991-1992 school year, the district posted a four-year dropout rate of less than 7 percent.
By the numbers:
Solano County dropout and graduation rates, 2009-2010 -
* Vallejo -- 41.1 percent dropout, 49.6 graduation
* County Office of Education -- 24.6 percent dropout, 70.4 percent graduation
* Vacaville -- 18.2 percent dropout, 77.7 percent graduation
* Fairfield-Suisun -- 17.5 percent dropout, 79.1 percent graduation
* Dixon -- 14.3 percent dropout, 81.8 percent graduation
* Benicia -- 9.8 percent dropout, 89 percent graduation
* Travis -- 5 percent dropout, 92.3 percent graduation
* Solano County total -- 24.6 percent dropout, 70.4 percent graduation
* California total -- 18.2 dropout, 74.4 percent graduation
Thursday, August 11, 2011
2011-08-11 "Tea Party Express ready to roll" by JAMES NOONAN
[http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/tea-party-express-ready-to-roll/article_c804319e-c3e5-11e0-b714-001cc4c03286.html#ixzz1UhhiYGBB]
What’s being billed by organizers as a “Tea Party Super Rally” is headed to Napa later this month, and event organizers say a few White House hopefuls have already committed to appear.
The event — a kickoff rally for the nationwide Tea Party Express tour — is set to take place on Aug. 27, and has already generated RSVPs from a few GOP presidential candidates, said Pam Silleman, head of the Napa Tea Party.
Silleman wasn’t willing to reveal which candidates were making plans to attend the rally, saying it was up to the candidates themselves to announce whether they would be attending.
Tea party luminaries such as Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain would likely be among those most willing to commit to the Napa rally, although inquiries to their respective campaigns were not immediately returned.
Calls to Sal Russo, a GOP consultant and co-founder of Tea Party Express, were also not returned Wednesday.
While the names of the candidates will remain a mystery for now, Silleman was willing to report that the logistical aspects of the rally had largely fallen into place.
“It seems like it’s going to be quite a big rally,” she said. “It’ll be something Napa’s never seen before.”
Silleman previously said that attendance at the event could be measured in the tens of thousands.
Not everyone gathering in Napa that Saturday will do so to support the tea party movement. Members of the local Green Party have already announced plans for a counter rally that day.
According to Napa County Green Party spokesman Alex Shantz, the local chapter will be hosting what they are calling a “green tea party” at Veterans Memorial Park to protest the tea party’s presence in Napa.
“The purpose of this rally is to show our opposition to the tea party's far right-wing agenda while affirming positive Green Party values, such as grassroots democracy, social justice, respect for diversity, nonviolence, community-based economics and ecological wisdom,” Shantz said in a statement.
[http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/tea-party-express-ready-to-roll/article_c804319e-c3e5-11e0-b714-001cc4c03286.html#ixzz1UhhiYGBB]
What’s being billed by organizers as a “Tea Party Super Rally” is headed to Napa later this month, and event organizers say a few White House hopefuls have already committed to appear.
The event — a kickoff rally for the nationwide Tea Party Express tour — is set to take place on Aug. 27, and has already generated RSVPs from a few GOP presidential candidates, said Pam Silleman, head of the Napa Tea Party.
Silleman wasn’t willing to reveal which candidates were making plans to attend the rally, saying it was up to the candidates themselves to announce whether they would be attending.
Tea party luminaries such as Michele Bachmann and Herman Cain would likely be among those most willing to commit to the Napa rally, although inquiries to their respective campaigns were not immediately returned.
Calls to Sal Russo, a GOP consultant and co-founder of Tea Party Express, were also not returned Wednesday.
While the names of the candidates will remain a mystery for now, Silleman was willing to report that the logistical aspects of the rally had largely fallen into place.
“It seems like it’s going to be quite a big rally,” she said. “It’ll be something Napa’s never seen before.”
Silleman previously said that attendance at the event could be measured in the tens of thousands.
Not everyone gathering in Napa that Saturday will do so to support the tea party movement. Members of the local Green Party have already announced plans for a counter rally that day.
According to Napa County Green Party spokesman Alex Shantz, the local chapter will be hosting what they are calling a “green tea party” at Veterans Memorial Park to protest the tea party’s presence in Napa.
“The purpose of this rally is to show our opposition to the tea party's far right-wing agenda while affirming positive Green Party values, such as grassroots democracy, social justice, respect for diversity, nonviolence, community-based economics and ecological wisdom,” Shantz said in a statement.
Friday, August 5, 2011
2011-08-05 photograph of "Coffee Not Cops" action at 16th & Mission st. in San Francisco
2011-08-05 communique passed out during propaganda action at 16th & Mission st. in San Francisco
[http://www.bayofrage.com/from-the-bay/free-transit-for-everyone/]
two simple demands
* COPS OFF THE TRAINS AND BUSES
* FREE TRANSIT FOR EVERYONE
We can’t afford to pay the fare, and we have other shit to spend our money on even if we could. We jump the turnstiles, board through the back door, and buy transfers on the street.
We have places to go: jobs to get to, lines to wait in at the food stamp office, parole officers to see, charges to beat, streets to sweep, lonely parents to see. We need a ride because our legs can’t take us that far anymore, or because we just didn’t want to walk on the street wearing a skirt and heels, or because we’re black and brown and know the cops don’t need any more reason to fuck with us.
We sit on this overcrowded piece of shit day after day with our heads down, not talking to anyone. A message telling us to snitch on taggers plays on repeat. Pictures of cops and jail cells above our heads advertise one thing: give us your money, sit down, shut up, keep moving.
I.
The transit system does not exist for us. We have a real need for free movement: a desire to get where we need to go, to see our sweeties, and take care of our business. But none of this is the purpose of the BART or the MUNI systems. The train lines exist to maintain an economic system within which we are simply statistics – bodies to be exploited, managed, moved, separated.
For some of us, the train lines exist solely to bring us to our miserable jobs on time; to deliver us as human resources to the bosses that steal our labor. For others, the system is designed to keep us in our neighborhoods – to keep us in line and ‘where we belong.’ For all of us, the system is in place to keep us moving stagnantly in circles, dying a little more each day. Around every turn, the ceaseless movement of the transit system exists to maintain the economic and racial order of capitalism and white supremacy. At every stop, the collection of fares enforces the racial and class divisions of this dying system.
II.
Last month, police killed two people on the trains in as many weeks. On July 3rd, BART police responded to a report of a ‘wobbly drunk’. Within 15 seconds of arrival, they shot and killed Charles Hill on the Civic Center platform. On July 16th, SFPD fired ten shots at Kenneth Harding after he ran from them during a fare inspection, shooting him through the throat and leaving him to die on the streets of Bayview. By now this story is all too familiar. We all remember the first hours of 2009, when a BART officer shot Oscar Grant in the back, while he was handcuffed and facedown on the Fruitvale BART platform. History repeats itself: the cops keep killing on these trains.
III.
It is worth noting that it costs more to enforce the fares than it costs to run the trains all together. Were it not for the cost of enforcement (the machines, the ticket readers, the fare inspectors, the accountants, the transit cops) the trains would be almost free. We pay in order to maintain these police apparatuses, and the police apparatuses exist to make sure we pay. This endless system of fares and fare-enforcement all points to one real purpose: control.
You’ve probably already heard the news: we are living through a crisis. The media and the politicians repeat it daily: the economy is falling apart. Whether they call it austerity or budget repair, management or restructuring, it always means the same exact thing: they’re going to make us pay for their self-imploding system. We will have less and less, so that they can continue to have more and more. Austerity means that food will rot on shelves while we starve, that houses will sit empty while we die on the streets, that the trains will keep running, and if we can’t pay the fare we are as good as dead.
IV.
Obviously we don’t believe in their system anymore. The politicians don’t give us hope because we know that they cannot offer us anything. It should be totally clear that there is no solution – no solution within capitalism. As long as houses are owned by banks and food is owned by grocery stores, we will continue to starve and to be thrown onto the streets. As long as the laws of property and ownership govern our lives, we cannot determine them for ourselves. At this point, no reform can solve the disaster.
This means that any action to improve our lives must come from us. In each instance we are faced with the same enemies: profit, control, police. The real answer to austerity is to immediately destroy each of these. If we want food, we simply need to take it. If we want houses, we need to take them as well. If we want to move freely – without fares or fear of death – we need to take direct action to eliminate fares and the police. If we want free trains, we simply need to make them free.
STOP PAYING FARES: board through the back door, jump the turnstiles. Keep one clipper card to swipe if you see the inspectors board. If you get caught, buy a transfer on the next bus and send it in with your ticket.
NO CONTROL: spray paint the cameras, smash the ticket machines, break the card readers, black-out the snitch-lines.
HAVE EACH OTHER’S BACKS: open the back door or emergency exit, share your transfer, and never snitch!
GET TOGETHER: Drivers, riders, poor people, unemployed people, those of us that are targeted and harassed by cops – we need to meet up, to make plans together, to fight together to get rid of the transit police and make public transit free.
2011-08-05 communique passed out during propaganda action at 16th & Mission st. in San Francisco
[http://www.bayofrage.com/from-the-bay/free-transit-for-everyone/]
two simple demands
* COPS OFF THE TRAINS AND BUSES
* FREE TRANSIT FOR EVERYONE
We can’t afford to pay the fare, and we have other shit to spend our money on even if we could. We jump the turnstiles, board through the back door, and buy transfers on the street.
We have places to go: jobs to get to, lines to wait in at the food stamp office, parole officers to see, charges to beat, streets to sweep, lonely parents to see. We need a ride because our legs can’t take us that far anymore, or because we just didn’t want to walk on the street wearing a skirt and heels, or because we’re black and brown and know the cops don’t need any more reason to fuck with us.
We sit on this overcrowded piece of shit day after day with our heads down, not talking to anyone. A message telling us to snitch on taggers plays on repeat. Pictures of cops and jail cells above our heads advertise one thing: give us your money, sit down, shut up, keep moving.
I.
The transit system does not exist for us. We have a real need for free movement: a desire to get where we need to go, to see our sweeties, and take care of our business. But none of this is the purpose of the BART or the MUNI systems. The train lines exist to maintain an economic system within which we are simply statistics – bodies to be exploited, managed, moved, separated.
For some of us, the train lines exist solely to bring us to our miserable jobs on time; to deliver us as human resources to the bosses that steal our labor. For others, the system is designed to keep us in our neighborhoods – to keep us in line and ‘where we belong.’ For all of us, the system is in place to keep us moving stagnantly in circles, dying a little more each day. Around every turn, the ceaseless movement of the transit system exists to maintain the economic and racial order of capitalism and white supremacy. At every stop, the collection of fares enforces the racial and class divisions of this dying system.
II.
Last month, police killed two people on the trains in as many weeks. On July 3rd, BART police responded to a report of a ‘wobbly drunk’. Within 15 seconds of arrival, they shot and killed Charles Hill on the Civic Center platform. On July 16th, SFPD fired ten shots at Kenneth Harding after he ran from them during a fare inspection, shooting him through the throat and leaving him to die on the streets of Bayview. By now this story is all too familiar. We all remember the first hours of 2009, when a BART officer shot Oscar Grant in the back, while he was handcuffed and facedown on the Fruitvale BART platform. History repeats itself: the cops keep killing on these trains.
III.
It is worth noting that it costs more to enforce the fares than it costs to run the trains all together. Were it not for the cost of enforcement (the machines, the ticket readers, the fare inspectors, the accountants, the transit cops) the trains would be almost free. We pay in order to maintain these police apparatuses, and the police apparatuses exist to make sure we pay. This endless system of fares and fare-enforcement all points to one real purpose: control.
You’ve probably already heard the news: we are living through a crisis. The media and the politicians repeat it daily: the economy is falling apart. Whether they call it austerity or budget repair, management or restructuring, it always means the same exact thing: they’re going to make us pay for their self-imploding system. We will have less and less, so that they can continue to have more and more. Austerity means that food will rot on shelves while we starve, that houses will sit empty while we die on the streets, that the trains will keep running, and if we can’t pay the fare we are as good as dead.
IV.
Obviously we don’t believe in their system anymore. The politicians don’t give us hope because we know that they cannot offer us anything. It should be totally clear that there is no solution – no solution within capitalism. As long as houses are owned by banks and food is owned by grocery stores, we will continue to starve and to be thrown onto the streets. As long as the laws of property and ownership govern our lives, we cannot determine them for ourselves. At this point, no reform can solve the disaster.
This means that any action to improve our lives must come from us. In each instance we are faced with the same enemies: profit, control, police. The real answer to austerity is to immediately destroy each of these. If we want food, we simply need to take it. If we want houses, we need to take them as well. If we want to move freely – without fares or fear of death – we need to take direct action to eliminate fares and the police. If we want free trains, we simply need to make them free.
STOP PAYING FARES: board through the back door, jump the turnstiles. Keep one clipper card to swipe if you see the inspectors board. If you get caught, buy a transfer on the next bus and send it in with your ticket.
NO CONTROL: spray paint the cameras, smash the ticket machines, break the card readers, black-out the snitch-lines.
HAVE EACH OTHER’S BACKS: open the back door or emergency exit, share your transfer, and never snitch!
GET TOGETHER: Drivers, riders, poor people, unemployed people, those of us that are targeted and harassed by cops – we need to meet up, to make plans together, to fight together to get rid of the transit police and make public transit free.
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
2011-08-02 "Garbage firm's efforts smell funny to Kopp" by Heather Knight, John Coté from "San Francisco Chronicle" newspaper
[http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-08-02/bay-area/29841194_1_criminal-investigation-supervisors-city-services]
Retired Judge Quentin Kopp sent a letter Monday asking District Attorney George Gascón to open a criminal investigation into efforts by Mayor Ed Lee's close friend Rose Pak to get help from the city's garbage hauling company in the drive to persuade Lee to run for a full term.
Officials at Recology acknowledged a senior executive at the company had directed subordinates to help gather signatures for the "Run, Ed, Run" campaign after multiple requests by Pak. Company officials maintain no laws were broken, although Recology policy had been violated.
Kopp asked Gascón to convene a criminal grand jury to probe "corrupt influencing and other felony or misdemeanor misconduct." Kopp said he was sending a similar letter to the U.S. attorney's office in San Francisco requesting a federal criminal investigation.
Kopp, a former city supervisor, has been a vocal supporter of efforts to open Recology's lucrative local garbage collection concession to competitive bidding.
Lee's spokeswoman, Christine Falvey, said the mayor has no involvement in the "Run, Ed, Run" campaign.
"Mayor Lee trusts the D.A. to determine what an appropriate course of action is, if any," she said.
2011-07-29 "SF Mayor Ed Lee's rivals seek probe of his backers; 5 candidates say 'Run, Ed, Run' group violated campaign laws" by John Coté fom "San Francisco Chronicle" newspaper
[http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-07-29/news/29827817_1_face-scrutiny-recology-mayoral-candidate]
The honeymoon is over for San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee.
Five rival candidates vying to replace him jointly called Thursday for an investigation into alleged campaign finance violations by Progress for All, a committee pushing for Lee to enter a mayor's race where he would likely become the front-runner.
The unprecedented show of unity by competitors comes as Lee's political supporters and his ties to them - particularly his longtime friend, political power broker Rose Pak - face increased scrutiny as the Aug. 12 deadline for him to enter the race approaches.
Pak has been a primary fundraiser and booster for Progress for All and its "Run, Ed, Run" campaign. On Thursday, the company that recently won a critical vote for the city's $112 million garbage-shipping contract acknowledged Pak had pressed a senior executive to provide workers to help her effort to get Lee to run for a full four-year term.
Two temporary Recology employees, at the encouragement of an unnamed company supervisor, gathered signatures urging Lee to run, while a separate petition was placed in one of the company's workrooms, which 86 employees signed, Recology officials said. Those efforts came after Pak had approached a senior executive on multiple occasions, requesting company help in urging Lee to run.
Against company policy
The campaign work violated Recology policy and the senior executive involved was disciplined after the incident came to light Tuesday, said Sam Singer, spokesman for the company.
Recology maintains no laws were broken, but Board of Supervisors President David Chiu, a mayoral candidate, said Pak's solicitations of a major city contractor on behalf of Progress for All were troubling.
"These specific revelations show that Progress for All has been engaged in an unethical and possibly illegal coordinated shakedown," Chiu said.
Some city officials have considered opening up Recology's separate and lucrative garbage collection contract to competitive bidding, and the city's ban on contractors giving to campaigns would prohibit both the mayor and members of the Board of Supervisors from receiving donations from top Recology executives.
When asked about the incident, Pak, a central figure at the Chinese Chamber of Commerce, initially said she didn't know what Recology was. She then denied coordinating with the mayor or discussing contracts or city business with Recology or any of a number of companies she has approached for help in the "Run, Ed, Run" effort.
"I never discussed anything," Pak said. "I didn't even know they had a contract" up for approval.
No involvement
Lee's spokeswoman, Christine Falvey, said the mayor has had "absolutely no involvement" with Progress for All and has not discussed Recology with Pak, who is a longtime friend he dines with regularly.
"They did not discuss the Recology contract or the timing of anything," Falvey said.
After repeatedly soliciting the company's help, Pak provided "Run, Ed, Run" signs and petitions to a senior Recology executive in June. The two temporary employees later picked up additional petitions at the Chinese Chamber of Commerce, Singer said. He declined to name the executive, saying it was a confidential personnel matter.
The two employees gathered signatures on their own time and were not paid for that, Singer said. The two workers handed in 60 signatures last month to the Chinese Chamber of Commerce, Recology officials said. The employees collected 57 more this month, but neither those, nor 86 signatures gathered in the workroom, were turned in.
"We want to bring our own error to light," Michael Sangiacomo, Recology's chief executive officer, said in a statement. "It's important our employees and the city know that we are nonpartisan in candidate races in San Francisco."
Legality questioned
Recology officials acknowledged the activity even as local Democratic Party Chairman Aaron Peskin filed a letter Thursday with the city's Ethics Commission, requesting a ruling on whether Progress for All "has been acting on behalf of Mayor Lee or at his urging," in violation of city election law.
Progress for All, officially formed as a group unaffiliated with any candidate, can receive unlimited amounts of money from donors, while individual candidates are barred from accepting money from corporations, unions, city contractors or any amount over $500.
"We have a campaign committee that is operating illegally in broad daylight," Peskin said by phone. "If this continues, it threatens to corrupt the entire election process."
Five mayoral candidates - Chiu, City Attorney Dennis Herrera, state Sen. Leland Yee, former Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier and venture capitalist Joanna Rees - quickly seized on Peskin's letter, calling the allegations "serious."
"As San Franciscans, we all strongly believe that this election must be contested on a level playing field," they said in a joint statement. "Throughout this campaign, the five of us have played by the rules and complied with all relevant campaign finance laws and regulations. We urge the commission to pursue these allegations and ensure that Progress for All and Run, Ed, Run are held to the same standard."
Herrera went further, saying: "The complaint letter makes clear that laws are being broken - it's simply unclear which laws."
Progress for All is "either an independent expenditure committee or a candidate committee," Herrera said. "But under the law, it can't exist as neither."
Stephen Kaufman, an attorney for Progress for All, acknowledged the situation was unique, given that Lee has not announced as a candidate, but maintains the committee is fully in compliance with the law.
"The facts are this: Ed Lee is not a candidate. He is not coordinating any activities with Progress for All," Kaufman said.
Enrique Pearce, a political consultant who has been running Progress for All's "Run, Ed, Run" campaign, said Peskin was "playing the part of a political hatchet man who doesn't know what he's talking about."
Chiu, though, said the call for an inquiry was only the first step in a harder look at Lee's supporters.
"Now the real questions begin," he said.
[http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-08-02/bay-area/29841194_1_criminal-investigation-supervisors-city-services]
Retired Judge Quentin Kopp sent a letter Monday asking District Attorney George Gascón to open a criminal investigation into efforts by Mayor Ed Lee's close friend Rose Pak to get help from the city's garbage hauling company in the drive to persuade Lee to run for a full term.
Officials at Recology acknowledged a senior executive at the company had directed subordinates to help gather signatures for the "Run, Ed, Run" campaign after multiple requests by Pak. Company officials maintain no laws were broken, although Recology policy had been violated.
Kopp asked Gascón to convene a criminal grand jury to probe "corrupt influencing and other felony or misdemeanor misconduct." Kopp said he was sending a similar letter to the U.S. attorney's office in San Francisco requesting a federal criminal investigation.
Kopp, a former city supervisor, has been a vocal supporter of efforts to open Recology's lucrative local garbage collection concession to competitive bidding.
Lee's spokeswoman, Christine Falvey, said the mayor has no involvement in the "Run, Ed, Run" campaign.
"Mayor Lee trusts the D.A. to determine what an appropriate course of action is, if any," she said.
2011-07-29 "SF Mayor Ed Lee's rivals seek probe of his backers; 5 candidates say 'Run, Ed, Run' group violated campaign laws" by John Coté fom "San Francisco Chronicle" newspaper
[http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-07-29/news/29827817_1_face-scrutiny-recology-mayoral-candidate]
The honeymoon is over for San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee.
Five rival candidates vying to replace him jointly called Thursday for an investigation into alleged campaign finance violations by Progress for All, a committee pushing for Lee to enter a mayor's race where he would likely become the front-runner.
The unprecedented show of unity by competitors comes as Lee's political supporters and his ties to them - particularly his longtime friend, political power broker Rose Pak - face increased scrutiny as the Aug. 12 deadline for him to enter the race approaches.
Pak has been a primary fundraiser and booster for Progress for All and its "Run, Ed, Run" campaign. On Thursday, the company that recently won a critical vote for the city's $112 million garbage-shipping contract acknowledged Pak had pressed a senior executive to provide workers to help her effort to get Lee to run for a full four-year term.
Two temporary Recology employees, at the encouragement of an unnamed company supervisor, gathered signatures urging Lee to run, while a separate petition was placed in one of the company's workrooms, which 86 employees signed, Recology officials said. Those efforts came after Pak had approached a senior executive on multiple occasions, requesting company help in urging Lee to run.
Against company policy
The campaign work violated Recology policy and the senior executive involved was disciplined after the incident came to light Tuesday, said Sam Singer, spokesman for the company.
Recology maintains no laws were broken, but Board of Supervisors President David Chiu, a mayoral candidate, said Pak's solicitations of a major city contractor on behalf of Progress for All were troubling.
"These specific revelations show that Progress for All has been engaged in an unethical and possibly illegal coordinated shakedown," Chiu said.
Some city officials have considered opening up Recology's separate and lucrative garbage collection contract to competitive bidding, and the city's ban on contractors giving to campaigns would prohibit both the mayor and members of the Board of Supervisors from receiving donations from top Recology executives.
When asked about the incident, Pak, a central figure at the Chinese Chamber of Commerce, initially said she didn't know what Recology was. She then denied coordinating with the mayor or discussing contracts or city business with Recology or any of a number of companies she has approached for help in the "Run, Ed, Run" effort.
"I never discussed anything," Pak said. "I didn't even know they had a contract" up for approval.
No involvement
Lee's spokeswoman, Christine Falvey, said the mayor has had "absolutely no involvement" with Progress for All and has not discussed Recology with Pak, who is a longtime friend he dines with regularly.
"They did not discuss the Recology contract or the timing of anything," Falvey said.
After repeatedly soliciting the company's help, Pak provided "Run, Ed, Run" signs and petitions to a senior Recology executive in June. The two temporary employees later picked up additional petitions at the Chinese Chamber of Commerce, Singer said. He declined to name the executive, saying it was a confidential personnel matter.
The two employees gathered signatures on their own time and were not paid for that, Singer said. The two workers handed in 60 signatures last month to the Chinese Chamber of Commerce, Recology officials said. The employees collected 57 more this month, but neither those, nor 86 signatures gathered in the workroom, were turned in.
"We want to bring our own error to light," Michael Sangiacomo, Recology's chief executive officer, said in a statement. "It's important our employees and the city know that we are nonpartisan in candidate races in San Francisco."
Legality questioned
Recology officials acknowledged the activity even as local Democratic Party Chairman Aaron Peskin filed a letter Thursday with the city's Ethics Commission, requesting a ruling on whether Progress for All "has been acting on behalf of Mayor Lee or at his urging," in violation of city election law.
Progress for All, officially formed as a group unaffiliated with any candidate, can receive unlimited amounts of money from donors, while individual candidates are barred from accepting money from corporations, unions, city contractors or any amount over $500.
"We have a campaign committee that is operating illegally in broad daylight," Peskin said by phone. "If this continues, it threatens to corrupt the entire election process."
Five mayoral candidates - Chiu, City Attorney Dennis Herrera, state Sen. Leland Yee, former Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier and venture capitalist Joanna Rees - quickly seized on Peskin's letter, calling the allegations "serious."
"As San Franciscans, we all strongly believe that this election must be contested on a level playing field," they said in a joint statement. "Throughout this campaign, the five of us have played by the rules and complied with all relevant campaign finance laws and regulations. We urge the commission to pursue these allegations and ensure that Progress for All and Run, Ed, Run are held to the same standard."
Herrera went further, saying: "The complaint letter makes clear that laws are being broken - it's simply unclear which laws."
Progress for All is "either an independent expenditure committee or a candidate committee," Herrera said. "But under the law, it can't exist as neither."
Stephen Kaufman, an attorney for Progress for All, acknowledged the situation was unique, given that Lee has not announced as a candidate, but maintains the committee is fully in compliance with the law.
"The facts are this: Ed Lee is not a candidate. He is not coordinating any activities with Progress for All," Kaufman said.
Enrique Pearce, a political consultant who has been running Progress for All's "Run, Ed, Run" campaign, said Peskin was "playing the part of a political hatchet man who doesn't know what he's talking about."
Chiu, though, said the call for an inquiry was only the first step in a harder look at Lee's supporters.
"Now the real questions begin," he said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
