|
Home of www.friendsofdeserthotsprings.com Desert Hot Springs Political Newspaper Updated: March 12, 2006 We ask the Important questions others are too afraid to ask! Website Hits 09/05-85,827, 10/05-178,482 11/05-174,413 12/05- 228,894 01/06- 380,232 02/06- 329,935 " POLITICIANS WILL ONLY START SEEING THE LIGHT WHEN THEY BEGIN TO FEEL THE HEAT" 03/12/06
A short drive from Desert Hot Springs will find you in the snow rather than only looking at it from afar. Here
at Freindsofdeserthotsprings we do more than just skim the surface.
To find this desert inter wonder (and actually touch it), here
are the directions with drive times.
03/11/06 The Desert Sun Saturday Print Addition
Desert Sun reports more on the Wrongfull Termination suit in Desert Hot Springs. Desert Sun states; "The trio contends Desert Hot Springs violated California labor law by retaliating against them for "disclosing information to a government or law enforcement agency when the employee believes a violation has been committed." "Interim City Manager John Soulliere declined to comment on the lawsuit Friday".
"All three provided information about Hanson's employment contracts with the city, his land deals, his compensation package and conflicts of interest involving Hanson and "certain council members and fraudulent employment filings by city employees," the lawsuit states." Scully and Ward contend that soon after their contact with those outside agencies, "Hanson and certain employees under his control engaged in a campaign of harassment thereby creating a hostile work environment."
03/11/06 revised
Desert Sun picks up on our story released yesterday - "Another Wrongful Termination suit in Desert Hot Springs", this time by former employees claiming they were fired for reporting corruption to the FBI and other enforcement agencies. From The Complaint that we reported first. "VII.37. The City, through Jerry Hanson, retaliated against Roy Hill [Kathy Ward, Laurie Scully] as a result of his communications with the Riverside Grand Jury, the Riverside District Attorney and the Federal Bureau of Investigation." Desert Sun Further Reports "And besides the city of Desert Hot Springs, the Feb.. 27 lawsuit also alleges that 25 others ...participated in the retaliation" against Hill, Ward and Scully.
Desert Sun Points Out...others now working at city hall may also be named in the suit. Was Jerry Hanson the only remaining vestige of the conditions that precipitated the lawsuit? Did Jerry Hanson act alone? Hill, Ward and Scully allege City Council Members are involved and that there were "fraudulent employment filings by City Employees." If Hill, Ward and Scully are correct, others who were hired by Jerry Hansen and/or remain in key positions at DHS will be named in the suit or will be material witnesses even if they are not named. Long time readers of this site can surmise this Author sympathizes with those bringing this action, having himself been fired as President of Citizens On Patrol for his whistle blowing activities. There seems to be plenty of examples to go around of retaliation. 03/10/06 FILED UNDER "NO GOOD DEED GOES (severely) UNPUNISHED" IN DHS Past fired DHS chief of police, Roy Hill, and fired (and/or demoted) DHS employees, Laurie Scully and Kathy Ward file a lawsuit against the city of DHS. They allege that they where retaliated against by being fired and demoted for reporting to the FBI, Riverside Grand Jury, and other agencies, violations of the law committed by former city manager, Jerry Hansen. In addition, they allege that they were also fired for exercising their first amendment free speech rights. Allegations of corrupt land deals, un ethical contracts massive wholesale violations of the labor law are reported. Also no reasons were given for the terminations. Below is pleadings filed 02/27/06. Click on image for larger image.
page 1 and 2
page 3 and 4
page 5 and 6
page 7 and 8
page 9 and 10
3/10/06 MSHCP supporters extend its death by a few more months at least and maybe even a few more years if it is approved CVAG MSWD backers agree to extend deadline for opponents to sue by an additional 90 days to help negotiate a deal (almost) everyone can live with. If this was such a great deal as CVAG MSHCP proponents have claimed they would not have to give an extension to try to save their plan from obvious legal destruction through litigation in the courts? In this author's opinion, even the parties compromise and the CVAG MSHCP is passed, the CVAG MSHCP is going to eventually die in the courts because it is constitutionally illegal per recent precedent setting case law. The CVAG MSHCP violates 3 very basic constitutional principles per recent precedent setting Oregon Supreme court ruling. The US supreme court is also currently very pro land owner rights friendly also so the CVAG MSHCP will die somewhere in it journey to the supreme court and the backers (quietly) know this. The 3 major constitutional principles the CVAG MSHCP violate are as follows; 1) The Plan does not treat everyone (land owners) equal under the law. Does "All men are created equal" ring a bell. 2) All governments must pay to govern. Therefore, if a government governs that certain land be made economically unusable , the same government must reimburse the land owner for his loss thru the govern actions. Currently, the MSHCP is under funded therefore can not reimburse land owners for their governed economic loss's , therefore the CVAG MSHCP is a un funded governmental mandate, therefore it is constitutionally illegal. 3) A legislative body (such as a city council) cant give its authority to legislate to another governmental agency Courts ruled that these plans such as the CVAG MSHCP effectively remove the legislative body from being able to legislating future projects
03/08/06 (late night)
Hmmmmm....Do we detect a method to handling a city manager vacancy
and working to fill the position. Seems King City, now without
OUR city manager knows how to find a good one. Read the article
from King City... 03/08/06 Bill Effinger apologizes (kinda) for being a doubter. That's OK. We all doubt sometimes. At least he has the honor to re-evaluate his position when need be. We respect him for that. Sometimes it is best to just support the new city manager, give her a chance and see what happens. There are no guarantees in life. It cost us nothing to hope for the best for DHS.
03/08/06 THATS THE SPIRIT WE NEED!! With the realization that it is (pretty much) a done deal regarding Marie Ann Gallant becoming DHS city manager starting this May first, others in the community have also come on board, and given their wisdom and support. Russ Betts "Open letter to Gallant" (no more progress robbing blunders) Article Bill Effinger's (We need to focus on Development) Article Desert Sun Article (Gallant signs contract, has glass half full mentality)
03/07/06 Will Ann Marie Gallant give her resignation to King City officials today so she can take the city manager's position at DHS? Gallant has a 60 day resignation clause per Effinger. Does our current "acting" city manager have another 60 days to hire more of his personal unqualified friends to solidify his personal power base (just like Jerry Hansen)? Will we have to endure at least another 60 days of illegal dumping and dust from developers? Looks like it! Don't put your masks away just yet 03/05/06
See today's Desert Sun Article by Cindy Uken here. Conventional
political wisdom in Desert Hot Springs goes, if Mary Stephens
is for it, it's a bad idea or it was someone else's idea first.
When it comes to the city manager, conventional wisdom goes, if
Mary is against Ann Marie, Ann Marie must be OK. Dr. Allen Lawrence has it right on the money with his wisdom in his article today. Click here for the link. A portion of his article is here below Lady,
the vote is over. The only question which remains is are you,
Mrs. Stephens and Mrs. Parks, going to support the choice
made by your fellow City Council members or are you going to work,
actively or passively, to sabotage their choice. Are you going
to continue to run your own personal agendas or are you going
to do what is good for Desert Hot Springs. We need a
City Manager NOW . Mrs. Stephens for one who was so set against
hiring a professional search firm in the past, you had your chance
to vote for this a long time ago and you didn't, why not? If I
have followed this confusing situation is it not true that Ann
Marie Gallant is the only candidate who stood all of the tests,
She had no scandal about her. She did not remove her self from
the consideration of the for this position, she is highly qualified
and the only reason she is leaving King City is because we could
not get our act together to make a decision after she first applied
many months ago.
03/04/06 Updated
3 to 2 is not always preferred but is really OK in a Democratic Republic To all my friends who think it is such a bad idea that city manager candidate Ann Marie Gallant got hired on with only a 3 to 2 vote instead of a 4 to 1 vote. We must remember that Jerry Hansen was hired and his multiple contracts where approved by a 4 to 1 vote or better vote. Is that what we want to return to? I rest my case. Link to Desert Sun Valley voice thinks the 3-2 vote is a bad idea Link to Bill Effinger who thinks the 3 -2 vote is a bad idea Link to Gary Bosworth is Ok with the 3-2 vote Max Liebermann reflects about "the power of one" in this article. Though we must have missed his point. All we can say is that in a pure Democracy the 51% or above (majority) often repress the 49% or less minority. But in a Democratic Republic (that we currently are governed under), the additional "republic" balances help protect the rights of the 1% and above minority hence forth; "The power of one"
Picture of Jerry Hansen writing his own contract. Each contract was approved by a 4 to 1 or better vote. This is proof to Bill Effinger and other nay say ers that a 4 to 1 vote is not always more desirable.
03/03/06 RESPONCE TO EFFINGER'S CALL FOR COMMUNISM/DICTATORSHIP IN DHS In the Democratic Republic our forefathers gave us as our current form of government in this great nation, the representatives are elected by a majority of the people. The representatives can be elected by 51% to 100% of the people. The representatives then pass laws by the same margins. This form of government has worked well to prevent our republic type democracy from sinking and decaying into a dictatorship as many non republic democracy's tend to do per history books. Anyone including Bill Effinger who declares that we should pass legislation (locally or otherwise) that requires our government to pass laws by a minimum of a 80% (4 to 1) or above majority is risking destroying our republic type government Effinger's proposal of a 80% rule would never work well in a true Republic such as the USA. Effinger's 80% rule works well only under most brutal repressive dictatorships. The last thing we need is a 80% rule. How could we have elected a president (Bush or Kerry) with the 80% rule? How could we get anything passed thru the US or CA congress with a 80% rule? How often does the US supreme Court rule with a 80% majority? Of course, Effinger's proposal would not work in our current democratic republic. His proposal has worked well in Iraq' government before the USA invasion though! read Bill Effinger's pro communism column here Maybe it is a good time now for Effinger to read the Federalist papers by our fore fathers to get a handle on how our Republic is supposed to work. The last thing we need is forced socialism, communism and dictatorships in DHS. We had that already under Jerry Hansen's and Matt Weyuker's rule and it did not turn out that well for us. Lets not go back to that sad DHS past.
03/03/06 IS COUNCIL WOMAN MARY STEPHENS SEEING THE LIGHT AFTER SHE FELT THE HEAT? Did Mary Stephens loosing her mayoral bid help her see the light? Since Stephens lost her Mayoral bid, she has changed her mind and now wants the Mayoral seat rotated among the other council members. Stephen's apifiny begs the question; Would Stephens have changed her mind if she was the current elected Mayor of DHS? Even our current elected mayor Alex Bias even OK with Stephens's proposition. Councilmen Gary Bosworth and Hank Hohenstein have not warmed up to the idea reflecting on the fact that DHS voters rejected this proposition in the past. Also, since Mary Stephens lost in a (now we learn) 3 to 2 vote, her city manager candidate choice, she has seen the light again and wants to change the city charter to only allow the hiring of a new city manager by a 4 to 1 or better vote. Again, this begs the question; Would Stephens have changed her mind if she had her choice as city manager approved on a 3 to 2 vote? Both of Mary Stephens's proposals are legitimate and for good reason should be discussed. Unfortunately for us (and Stephens), it is Stephens's timing, her past contrary positions and the recent events that make her proposals look more self serving than for the real benefit of the people of DHS.
Of course, Bill Effinger is for Mary Stephens's proposals in his column today. They do have their merits that Effinger obviously mentions in his column. We must remember that past Council member Will Pieper lost his council seat partially due to the citizens anger about Pieper changing his vote against the past city manager (Jerry Hansen's) contract to show "council unification". Also, with the 4 to 1 vote requirement, we may have waited a much longer time to have elected our current city manager candidate due to the current opposing elements. Do we want to create pressure to force council members to vote against their conscience just to (as Rodney King would say) "Just get along"? Their are (sometimes unforeseen) moral implications to all of these proposals. If Effinger discusses the pros of the proposals, we also must look at and discuss the cons also and look at the long DHS history before jumping into these changes. This author believes (with our founding fathers) that disagreement in a legislative body is very healthy for our democratic republic and should be encouraged, not stifled. We say what happened in the past to DHS government when everyone got along because they thought they had too. Lets not jump too soon on approving these proposals.
03/02/06 LETS FORGET AND NOT CRY (FOR NOW) OVER THE SPILLED MILK
We thank Bill Effinger for (somewhat) clearing up the vote particulars on our DHS future city manager, Ann Marie Gallant. See Effinger's article here. Even though Effinger states the obvious in his article, we all must realize that the alternative to Gallant as our city manager could be much, much worse. All of us (including Effinger) must stop crying over the spilled milk! It is painfully obvious that we sure cant afford the existing acting city manager to remain any longer and we sure don't want the other city manager candidate if he has ties to the same local developer Councilwoman Mary Stephen was criticized for worked for in the past. So, we say to Effinger, (at least for now) if we get lemons, lets make some lemon aid. From what we have read, Gallant has worked miracles in the past. So unless proven otherwise, lets stop crying over the spilled milk and go forward and make a good faith effort to make this selection work for DHS. Lemon aid anyone?
03/01/06 PM10 VIOLATIONS CONTINUE TO BE IGNORED IN DHS. More picture of wind fence missing for months now between Aqua Dulce subdivision and the mobil home park south of its border. We informed the city numerous times of this PM10 violation. To this day, the fence remains missing. Mobil home residents have suffered from sever dust conditions for months now. Click on images for larger images.
More pictures 1) untreated abandoned loose dirt construction road to the east entrance of Paradise Springs subdivision to the north termination of Sonora Drive. This road ia a major dust contributor and is out of PM10 compliance for months now. To this day, the developer and the city has ignored this violation. These conditions cause considerable dust to existing residential developments (including Rancho Del Oro) south of Paradise Springs Click on images for larger images.
Pictures of illegal dumping from Paradise Springs subdivision to open desert area next to said construction road. This illegal dump still remains with additional debris added. To this day, the developer and the city has ignored this despicable violation. The debris and non compacted infill dirt needs to be doug up and filtered through a grate to remove the buried construction debris. Then the dump area grade needs to be restored to its original grade. Click on images for larger images.
03/01/06 Desert Sun article on Gallant here Correction to DS article, Mary Stephens last night said Gallant was approved by a 3 to 2 vote (not 4-1 per DS) with Yvonne Parks and herself voting no. Also, council sources reported last night that Gallant's city manager job a King City was already listed as vacant per the city manager's directory at the League of Cities prior to Gallant telling King City council about taking the DHS position. (9:30AM according to DHS City Manager's office, vote was 4-1 with Stephens against, we will continue to follow thru on vote discrepancy)
02/28/06 8PM Articles on Gallant
Upbeat PDF article we found on Gallant 1/25/06 Gallant State of City Address
02/28/06 BIG PROBLEM SOLVED
City Council select new city manager tonight. Ann Marie Gallant is our new city manager. Another name we don't know how to pronounce. Is it Gallant, Gallant or Gallant. We wish her good will & success. She is scheduled to take the helm of DHS in about a month. We respectfully ask that the current acting city manager does not continue to hire anymore people than is absolutely necessary. It is instead better to wait and allow the new city manager to fill these key positions with qualified people.
02/28/06 The writer at this Link who is a big MSHCP supporter, also believes that two wrongs makes a right.
more on God Molech sacrifices here This author disagrees. We believe that no matter what the motive, two wrongs equal (not a right) but two wrongs. How unfortunate some souls are so quick and willing to lay their morals on the alter table of their own self interest. 02/28/06 MORE ON MSHCP BULLY'S Desert Sun Supports Bill to stop the Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan County Supervisor School Yard Bully's. See our two story's dated 02/23/06 below and today's Desert Sun 02/28/06 Mission Springs Water District (MSWD) kills DHS award winning water. Ever since past Water District Manager Joe Bocanegra took over the helm of the MSWD, a good portion of the district employees immediately left (the MSWD sinking ship). Some award winning employees who did not leave were quickly fired also. 1) New employees did not know how to take water samples. (You are supposed to let the stagnate water run out of the tap for a while before taking the sample. To not do this is to get a false sample. This is the month old stagnate water left at the pipe to the tap). 2) Samples came back from the lab with much higher bacteria content. 3) This forced MSWD to (heavily) chlorinate the supply. (Previously there was no need to chlorinate MSWD award winning water). 4) Unfortunately their is (unnecessarily) way too much chlorine present in our water. The only good tasting water in DHS is found in the bottles on the shelves of Stater Bros and Vons. We suspect (but could not prove) that the previous MSWD manager fired and other wised forced most of the past MSWD employees to quit so he could hire friends and family members. We could not verify this action by the manager as fact because our request to verify same under the Freedom Of Information Act was ignored while our current city manager was employed at the district. So, currently, DHS water now tastes worse than my heavily chlorinated pool water. Before (in the good old days) it use to taste as good as the water I drank while hiking the 12,000 foot glacier lakes in the High Sierras.
In this author's opinion, loosing out on our water awards is really a shame and could have been easily prevented.
02/25/06 Bill Effenger wants you to drink the Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Kool-Aid. Don't do it!
If you must commit financial suicide, drink Bill Effenger's MSHCP Kool-Aid Here 1) MSHCP does not allow for any development of the designated land. There is absolutely no guarantee that the plan will allow lost land to become a "Park" per Effenger's assertion. Effenger's assertions of turning the MSHCP area into a wonderful park with trails is no more than pure speculation. At maximum only 10% or less of the area can be developed as a park. Even if there was the remote chance that MSHCP allowed trails, who wants to walk miles and miles in 140 degree heat (for 6 months/year) from the sun and light colored blinding sand and rock trails to DHS Spa's miles away anyway. Effenger's assertion that this is a "opportunity" is unrealistic at best and a disaster at worse. No shade trees will be allowed because they tamper with the area. The area will remain completely natural. The MSHCP most likely will remain worthless area closed to everyone except for the species that the computer model says may exist. I never saw Effenger visiting any area were his Mercedies was not allowed. 2) MSHCP will destroy most of DHS financial future by destroying the few areas of developable DHS retail land. The MSHCP will deny DHS the sales tax revenue needed to control crime, fix streets and provide even the most basic public safety to its citizens. 3) MSHCP has not even been field verified that its area actually contains any of the "Multi Species Habitat" 4) MSHCP is unconstitutional and morally wrong. It effectively takes land from property owners without compensation. See Russ Bett's commentary here. The plan if passed will eventually be made null and void per the Supreme Court that is now pro land owner. See recent ruling anti MSHCP ruling by even the liberal Oregon Supreme Court. See Russ Bett's commentary here. Oregon Supreme court ruling links; No change on measure 37 ruling Oregon Supreme Court upholds (affirms) 37 ruling Measure 37 required the government either to "pay to govern," if it wished to enforce a particular land use regulation, or to refrain from enforcing the regulation in some manner. (please note that our MSHCP is not full funded or even attempts to purchase land in the designated habitat area) Article I, section 20, provides: "No law shall be passed granting to any citizen or class of citizens privileges, or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens."
In the trial court's view, the foregoing provisions of Measure 37 required the government either to "pay to govern," if it wished to enforce a particular land use regulation, or to refrain from enforcing the regulation in some manner. Based on that reading of the measure, the court held that the measure so eviscerated the legislature's plenary power to regulate land use that the fact "that a later legislature could decide to repeal [the measure's] condition on enforcement [did] not make it permissible."
"[p]lenary power in the legislature, for all purposes of civil government, is the rule, and a prohibition to exercise a particular power is an exception. It, therefore, is competent for the legislature to enact any law not forbidden by the constitution or delegated to the federal government or prohibited by the constitution of the United States." ( We see citizens passing a ballot measure against the MSHCP. If this measure is not upheld in the CA supreme court or the Ninth District court, It will be upheld in the currently configured US Supreme court. The Oregon Supreme court will be precedent case law. Our conclusion is that the MSHCP will be DOA or will eventually by killed later on. Bad unconstitutional laws like the MSHCP will not stand for long;) URGE YOUR REPRESENTATIVES TO NOT APPROVE THE MSHCP! MSHCP IS A DIEING LAME HORSE THAT NEEDS TO BE PUT OUT OF ITS MEASURE, NOT PROLONGED IN AGONY! DONT KISS THE MSHCP PIG
02/23/06 CA Senator Jim Batten submits legislation to make extortion, blackmail and bribery of local cities by Roy Wilson, other county supervisors and any other MSHCP bully into a felony. FOR
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Kim Glassman
Battin Introduces Legislation to End Threats Bill in response to public threats made by Riverside County Supervisors SACRAMENTO - Today, Senator Jim Battin (R- La Quinta) introduced SB 1308 in response to how some members of the Riverside County Board of Supervisors have blatantly tried to coerce and pressure desert cities to vote the way they demand or suffer future retribution. The bill is prompted by a series of public statements made by Supervisor Roy Wilson and others who threatened to withhold transportation funding or take other punitive measures if cities did not approve the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). “I am deeply concerned by some of the Riverside County Supervisors heavy handed treatment of the MSHCP, and the threats they have made to local cities. It is unacceptable to threaten elected officials like this. If anyone tried the same type of intimidation with a state legislator, they could be charged with a felony.” Battin said. “All elected officials should have this protection.” California Penal Code Sections 85 and 86 are the state’s bribery and extortion laws. State law specifically prohibits any type of “quid pro quo” on legislation - it is illegal for one legislator to vote a certain way on a bill in exchange for the promise of a vote from another legislator. This activity constitutes a felony, punishable by 2 to 4 years in prison. Similarly, it is specifically against the law to threaten a California State Legislator with retaliation in an attempt to “influence a member in giving or withholding his vote” on an issue. However, local elected officials are not included in these laws. SB 1308 would expand the state’s bribery and extortion laws to include county supervisors, city council members, and all other elected local officials so they are simply held to the same standards as state legislators. “These laws are important to ensure the credibility of, and trust in, our government, ” commented Battin. “We cannot tolerate any elected official using the color and power of their office to threaten another official or elected body. It is wrong, and I plan to put a stop to it.” Battin’s bill is in response to recent comments threatening Riverside County cities if they did not approve the MSHCP. In a February 5 th Desert Sun article, Supervisor Wilson threatened that he “would not be there” to support local property annexations if the Cities of Indio or Desert Hot Springs did not approve the plan. Supervisor Wilson went on to brag: “If that is being heavy handed, I stand guilty as charged.” On February 9 th , on KNEWS radio’s Marshall and Stone Show, Wilson confirmed the threat saying he told officials from Indio: “ But I can guarantee you that if you guys kill our ability to build roads and freeways [ Wilson’s ‘spin’ and not accurate ] in this valley... throughout this valley, I will reconsider my position and I will probably engage my fellow supervisors to fight any future annexation.” And the threats have been heard loud and clear by city officials. In a February 17 th Desert Sun article, Indio Mayor Gene Gilbert details the desperate situation Indio is in, saying “It is development suicide if we adopt it. If we don’t, we are going to get blackballed in some way.” Many other city officials have contacted Senator Battin outraged by the threats and asking for help. “City leaders are telling me they’ve been told they have to vote for this flawed plan, or the county is going to make them pay dearly on everything else,” said Battin. “It’s a terrible situation that demands to be fixed.” SB 1308 has been introduced in preliminary form and will be formally amended on March 16 th , when it will likely be referred to the Senate Committees on Public Safety and Local Government.
### State Bribery and Extortion Statutes The relevant state statutes are Penal Code Sections 85 and 86 and PC 518. PC 85: Prohibits the bribing of a Legislator, or attempts by “menace, deceit, suppression of truth, or any corrupt means, to influence a member in giving or withholding his vote…” is a felony punishable by 2, 3, or 4 years. Last amended: 1976. PC 86: Deals with vote swapping by the legislature, a form of bribery. Punishment is 2, 3 or 4 years, or a fine of between $2,000 and $10,000. Last amended: 2003, minor, technical amends. PC 518: This is the extortion statute, defined as obtaining property from another or an official act of a public officer, by a wrongful use of force or fear, or under color of official right. Last amended: 1939. SB 1308 will amend Penal Code Sections 85 and 86 to add city, county and local elected officials to the state bribery laws. 02/23/06 Cindy Uken at the Desert Sun has it right! No more Bullies!
SAY NO TO THE MSHCP BULLIES! Roy Wilson publicly tries to blackmail and extort DHS into sacrificing its resident's constitutional land rights on the alter of a hypothetical computer model of a habitat area. We need to remember that since Palm Desert, Rancho Mirage and the other south valley cities have already covered their retail habitat area over with asphalt and concrete (example; Costco, Home Depo, Lowes, etc), they now want all of our land for their habitat conservation plan. County supervisors wants DHS to sacrifice most of their future economic future to make up for the other cities not sacrificing theirs. DHS does not have to do it. We can stand up to the Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Bullies and say NO!. Remember that most of the habitat areas is in DHS and Indio. If these county supervisor and MSHCP bullies don't want to work with us and be reasonable they will not get their precious plan. Please note that the author of this article is not only a DHS resident but also a Sierra Club member (who originally joined 33 year ago) and spends his vacations backpacking the High Sierra's SAY NO TO THE MSHCP BULLIES!
Legal stuff here! Any statements from these letters should be verified prior to being relied upon as being factual. We believe that the information is true when we post it within these letters. Even so, the reader should question and investigate the information provided as to its truth fullness. Even though we feel that the information is true, no one should rely on any information provided until it is verified as correct. The views represented within these letters are not necessarily our opinion. Please Note: We will attempt to correct any information we find to be false. We will not publish any information about a public figure that we "believe" to be "False" or have "actual knowledge of being false". (See Sullivan vs New York Times) Please let us know if you find any additional information regarding any posted statements herein. The information posted here has had a very high probability of being factually correct. We have tried to be diligent in our postings as to avoid any "reckless disregard" for the information presented (expanded Sullivan Rule). The letters are provided a "Matter of Public Concern" therefore are "Common Law Privilege" (See Sullivan vs New York Times). These letters are posted as citizen opinions under the First Amendment Right. In 1974, Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc, 418 U.S. 323 there is no such thing as a false idea. Even obvious sarcasm is not liable per 1988 ruling in Hustler Magazine v. Falwell 485 U.S. 46. This forum of letters is a constitutional privilege of "neutral reporting" per Edwards v. National Audubon Society.
|
Copyright by Gabriel King and Friends of Desert Hot Springs