‘Occupy Wall Street’ for Dummies

The victim of class warfare on the right can't remember where he left the sign that reads "Occupy the Large Vacant Space Between My Ears," although the snazzy hat conveys roughly the same idea.

For those of you wondering what this “Occupy Wall Street” thing is all about, look no further than the prolific Richard Salzman, who has stepped away from whatever criminal activities he’s on to now to enlighten us.

He explains in a letter to the North Coast Journal that protesters “are using their First Amendment Rights to fight back at the class war that’s been waged for two generations or more by Wall Street bankers and corporate America against working Americans.”

So yay protesters! Because if you can just get all those bad corporations shut down, there will be a lot fewer working Americans to defend.

Thanks!!

Gallegos looks to use redistricting discussions to lock re-election prospects

Humboldt County Supervisors won’t be able to avoid wildly whacking the virtual political hornets’ nest Tuesday when they begin discussions on adjusting the supervisorial district boundaries as part of California Elections Code laws following the most recent census tally.

Don't hate me because I am beautiful. Please do cut me some slack on my fundamental lack of knowledge of the law, dismal management and leadership capabilities and breathtakingly giant lapses of morality.

The board is expected to appoint Sheriff Mike Downey, District Attorney Paul Gallegos, Assessor Mari Wilson and Registrar of Voters Carolyn Crnich to the newest committee to mull over ideas,  listen to outspoken members of the SoHum and NoHum public and bring a plan back to the board for a vote.

The supervisors have until November 1 to make the changes that reflect the county’s population growth, which has increased the most in Supervisor Ryan Sundberg’s 5th and Clif Clendenon’s 2nd districts.

As of now Community Development Diservices Director Kirk Girard isn’t directly involved and the Nov. 1 deadline looks easily doable.

As part of the redistricting discussions, insiders say Gallegos will use his position to try and float a plan to sell or cede all county lands to neighboring  Del Norte, Trinity and Mendocino counties except for Garberville, Redway, Arcata and a few pockets of houses in Eureka.

According to his braintrust Natalynne DeLapp and Richard Salzman, the plan would virtually assure Gallegos’ re-election for as long as very small-, small-, medium-, mediumish large-, large-, very large-,  massively large-, and off-the-fucking-hook-EPIC-scale marijuana production remains illegal.

Today in irony

King Richard assumes his rightful throne.

Straight faces, friends!

Richard Salzman, champion of most laws he hasn’t broken recently, is threatening legal action over the city of Arcata’s anti-panhandling ordinance.

Get some, Dicky! If you keep up the shameless self-promotion, one of these days someone out there might forget what a steaming pile of human waste you really are.

Out there, friend. Definitely not here.

February 14, 2011

Susan Ornelas, Mayor
Michael Winkler, Vice-Mayor
Shane Brinton, Council Member
Alexandra Stillman, Council Member
Mark Wheetley, Council Member
Randy Mendosa, City Manager
Nancy Diamond, Esq., City Attorney

City of Arcata
736 F Street
Arcata, CA 95521

Re: Unconstitutional Panhandling Ordinance enacted April 16, 2010, as Arcata Municipal Code [AMC] Sections 4280-4282.

Dear City Council, City Manager and City Attorney:

Please take notice that Mr. Richard Salzman, a resident of, and taxpayer within, the City of Arcata, has retained the undersigned to bring an action against the City of Arcata to declare its panhandling ordinance unconstitutional and to enjoin the City from any further enforcement of said ordinance. The purpose of this letter is to invite the City to amend its panhandling ordinance as set forth herein, and thereby avoid the expense, uncertainty and unpleasantness of contested litigation.

Specifically, Mr. Salzman contends that AMC Sections 4282B, 4282C, 4282D, 4282E, 4282F and 4282G are unconstitutional. The overall impact of these sections is to criminalize begging in most of the City where it would be fruitful to beg. Begging is a charitable solicitation. The First Amendment clearly protects charitable solicitations. No distinction of constitutional dimension exists between soliciting funds for oneself and for charity. The fact that a beggar keeps the money she receives does not strip the speech of First Amendment protection. A speaker’s rights are not lost merely because compensation is received; a speaker is no less a speaker because she is paid to speak.

To be lawful, the ordinance must serve a compelling interest that is narrowly drawn to achieve its end. The City’s compelling interest, if one exists, is well-served by the ordinance’s ban on aggressive panhandling, to which Mr. Salzman does not take exception. Mr. Salzman objects to the near-total ban on begging in public fora, the justification for which can be little more than avoiding “annoyance” to the public, hardly a compelling interest in First Amendment jurisprudence. Moreover, the ordinance’s ban on begging is not “narrowly tailored;” indeed, it is embarrassingly broad. To achieve the City’s goal of criminalizing the speech of a few beggars, the City has criminalized all solicitations for money. A girl scout cannot sell cookies on the City’s streets. Nor may any charity solicit money in most of the City. A beggar cannot even hold a sign up to ask for money; a more clearly content-based restriction on speech is difficult to imagine.

The City’s attempt to justify these draconian restrictions on speech under the so-called “captive audience rule” is unavailing. The City’s expansion of that concept to include almost all public space within the City perverts the intent of the rule and strikes at the very heart of discourse in a democratic society- the right to communicate with one’s fellow citizens on the public commons.

Other constitutional concerns are implicated in the City’s ordinance. The criminalization of solicitation implicates equal protection concerns, to wit, the ordinance targets the First Amendment rights of the City’s poorest and most downtrodden residents, while it remains legal to accost members of the public to ask the time of day, or to sign a petition. The complexity of the ordinance, with its crazy patch-work of places where it is illegal to beg, implicates notice and due process concerns. A reasonable citizen of the City lacks adequate notice as to where she may beg and where she may not beg. Likewise, the ordinance’s definition of “panhandling” leaves questions unanswered: Is a check or credit card transaction on the City’s streets illegal, or just a cash transaction? This renders the ordinance subject to challenge for vagueness.

Mr. Salzman would prefer to resolve this matter without litigation, and to that end, invites the City and its attorneys to meet with the undersigned to work toward resolution of the issues raised herein.

Respectfully,

Peter E. Martin

Paul Gallegos finds new cliff to throw his political career off of

Gallegos switches to a professional management team for his 2014 campaign.

After several famous missteps, our district attorney’s handlers have lit upon one way to keep Paul Gallegos from plaigiarizing: They do all the writing themselves.

It works something like this. First, local gadfly and famously crazy person Elizabeth Conner suggests a “VERY ROUGH OUTLINE, PLEASE EDIT AND REFINE,” and then knocks out a basic thank-you letter to volunteers, supporters and staff:

Although the final election results are not yet known for certain, I want to thank all my campaign volunteers, supporters and staff for their hard work and belief in the concept that everyone is equal before the law and that both the accused and accusers have rights.

Because conceivably there are people out there who don’t believe in these things. Conner gets a little hung up when trying to put into words exactly why people supported Paul:

Most of all, thank you to those who voted for me and expressed your confidence in me and our team [OR A VALUE].

A value like love or puppies or good fashion sense, perhaps.

But let’s not fret over details, because as Richard Salzman notes when he sends the draft to Gallegos:

Remember that this is just the BEFORE, final results letter and that Evenson is going to work with you on a Guest Editorial / My Word, to follow the final results.  But getting this out now will make it easier for me to raise money.

So the county’s most prominent attorney will have someone on hand to help with the big words then as well.

It looks like Team Gags thought of everything. What could possibly go wrong?

Enter Michele Shoshani, Paul’s secretary at the District Attorney’s Office.

Because while this tax-funded county employee was distributing a campaign letter to local media from work, during work hours, using work equipment, in violation of several FPPC regulations, she went ahead and left all the previous drafts attached, from concept to finished product.

You just can’t get good help these days, can you?

Fortunately, Kevin Hoover posted the whole damn thing on the Arcata Eye website.

Hurry on over there and get yourself a laugh.

Photo credit: Whoever’s facebook page we ganked these off of.

How many times can Gags’ campaign lie about a job that never even existed?

Paull Gallegos and Natalynne DeLapp share a quiet moment of dishonesty.

Hoo-wee this is getting fun!

Not to be left out, Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos’ ridiculously hot “campaign manager” has now officially joined the rest of the campaign staff in lying about Paul’s impressively spotty work history.

And how’s that working out for her? Really not all that well.

Maybe that’s what you get when you pay some ditzy eye candy a shitload of donated money to pretend to manage a campaign that’s being fucked up just fine, thank you, by one of Humboldt County’s most notoriously disreputable douchebags. Because, you know. What could possibly go wrong with that?

At this point, seemingly everything.

Let’s review.

And here’s where it gets even funnier! Gallegos’ “campaign manager” Natalynne DeLappdance, from her post under the bus,  sends a poorly written e-mail to the blogosphere’s own Capdiamont stating the mistake was hers, not Gags’.

To wit:

I take full responsibility for the language that was written on the website. Yes, it did in fact say Paul worked as a DDA in LA, but that was my mistake and misunderstanding, not Paul’s. Paul did not misrepresent himself, I made a mistake. When I became aware of my error, I fixed the record.

And about the Times-Standard story?

Paul has never claimed to have worked for the LA Co. DA’s office check the Times Standard article yourself….

So we did.

In an article that appeared in the May 22 Times-Standard, Greenson wrote:

After law school, Gallegos said, he spent some time as a deputy district attorney in Los Angeles before venturing out to start a private practice.

Seems pretty clear to us.

Maybe English isn’t her first language.

Or maybe integrity just isn’t her thing.

Regardless, Natalynne, thanks for thinking of us in your e-mail. Being called blatantly dishonest by a person of your moral caliber is something not unlike high praise.

Hugs!!

[Capdiamont: Thanks again, friend!]

Dare to dream, Eureka!!

We're fucked.

Brace yourselves, Eurekans, because word from the prog pond is that a certain former city councilman is planning to do us the great favor of running for mayor of our fair city.

Yippee kai yay and shit, yes?

Because when we look at the challenges facing Eureka, the first thought that springs to mind is, you know, what we need is the manager of a marijuana dispensary in Arcata to get in here and really turn things around for us.

Just what the pot doctor ordered!!

Uh, yeah. That pot doctor.

And all this time we thought giving us Paul Gallegos and his infamous fraud case was the stupidest thing Ken Miller would ever do.

By the way–that lawsuit. Remember it? The one that was repeatedly laughed out of court because it was all rhetoric and no substance?

Those are roughly the same terms we would use to describe Chris Kerrigan.

“You tend to feed the one that pays you.”

cregslistFile that one under quote of the day.

This refreshingly candid remark was made by a spokesman for the anti-development Citizens for Real Economic Growth, which paid a San Francisco college professor $2,500 to feed Eureka residents pages of apocalyptic misrepresentations about the Marina Center proposal.

Turns out the prof has a history of opposing Home Depots, so CREG knew well in advance what it was buying.

CBRE, the consulting firm hired by Security National, reached very different conclusions, which were double-checked by independent consultants hired by the city of Eureka. And, the Times-Standard reports, the city’s consultants “largely came to the same conclusions” as CBRE.

So why haven’t the suppositions of the hand-picked tool from CREG’s list been verified or even reviewed? Maybe Glass, Miller, Salzman and Ogden have to pony up more cash if they want a second helping of that shit.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 53 other followers