PDA

View Full Version : California City Attacks Free Speech, Property Rights




UpholdtheConstitution
09-28-2013, 10:12 PM
Greetings,

On September 17, Colton city council members moved forward on 'political sign reform' against advice of it's city attorney that to do so would result in violations of the Constitution. At least one member spoke against the measure on the grounds that by doing so the city would cross the line in making it possible for local government to regulate how many potted plants a resident owns, but changed her opinion after a local business owner, who was instrumental in her election, spoke in favor of the measure.

It is not officially law yet: a second reading will be held this Tuesday,on October 1st at 6pm. The Mayor and at least 3 cm's seem to be on the fence and may be persuaded to vote against it. As I am not able to attend (work) I would like to invite anyone and everyone in the area who values the Constitution to come out and speak against this measure.


Here is the video of the meeting on the 17th. Scroll down on right and click on
"Public Hearing Item 8" to view the discussion.

http://colton.12milesout.com/MeetingVideo.aspx?VideoId=11086a1e-5a49-4bb7-8aa0-a403f3d2cb61
(http://Greetings, On September 17, Colton city council members moved forward on 'political sign reform' against advice of it's city attorney that to do so would result in violations of the Constitution. At least one member spoke against the measure on the grounds that by doing so the city would cross the line in making it possible for local government to regulate how many potted plants a resident owns, but changed her opinion after a local business owner, who was instrumental in her election, spoke in favor of the measure. It is not officially law yet: a second reading will be held this Tuesday,on October 1st at 6pm. The Mayor and at least 3 cm's seem to be on the fence and may be persuaded to vote against it. As I am not able to attend (work) I would like to invite anyone and everyone in the area who values the Constitution to come out and speak against this measure.Here is the video of the meeting on the 17th. Scroll down on right and click on "Public Hearing Item 8"to view the discussion.http://colton.12milesout.com/MeetingVideo.aspx?VideoId=11086a1e-5a49-4bb7-8aa0-a403f3d2cb61Colton City council meetings are held at:650 N. La Cadena Drive Colton, CA 92324 Ph: (909) 370-5060 Please spread the word! Thanks Tom)

Colton City council meetings are held at:

650 N. La Cadena Drive
Colton, CA 92324
Ph: (909) 370-5060 (tel:%28909%29%20370-5060)

Please spread the word!

Thanks

Keith and stuff
09-28-2013, 10:29 PM
Welcome to the forum. Good luck with this! It might work better in the CA section of the forum so feel free to copy and paste your post to that section of the forum. Just remember, you live in CA. IMO, CA, NJ and NY are beyond lost :(

Christian Liberty
09-28-2013, 11:32 PM
Welcome to the forum. Good luck with this! It might work better in the CA section of the forum so feel free to copy and paste your post to that section of the forum. Just remember, you live in CA. IMO, CA, NJ and NY are beyond lost :(

America is beyond lost period. Although I agree with you on NYS being particularly bad, along with CA and NJ.

Keith and stuff
09-28-2013, 11:36 PM
America is beyond lost period. Although I agree with you on NYS being particularly bad, along with CA and NJ.
I disagree that the entire USA is lost. For example, NH + the likely Free State Project participants moving there means there is a good chance it isn't lost. And if NH is saved, other states might be able to be saved ;)

But yeah, NYS is likely lost, sadly, forever :(

ClydeCoulter
09-29-2013, 01:00 AM
In the Hearing Item 8 video,:

The lawyer lady keeps warning them on the constitutionality.

Seems like the mayors pet project.

The older guy thinks that it's okay since no one has challenged the constitutionality of it before when it was 100 day...like it's okay to violate the constitution if no one complains. :(

pull teeth for a motion, pull teeth for a 2nd, pull teeth for objections...none....pass...You may now discuss the attorney's advice to the council in public...wow! "Wake me up when it's time to go home".

The attorney keeps warning them that political signs are covered by free speech...

"It's for your safety"

End of watching Video (when business man says it's okay to limit the sq feet because at least you can whisper so you have free speech (my re-wording not his))

People just need to show up and say, "Hell no, it's my property". I didn't hear any strong case for what they are doing, the lawyer even suggested that they just regulate the city's right-of-way.

Sounds like pitchforks, and maybe some tar and feathers, are needed if they go ahead with this.

ClydeCoulter
09-29-2013, 09:18 AM
Bump for people in the area showing up!

Cleaner44
09-29-2013, 09:28 AM
We need really good lawyers to sue for every possible dollar. Let the tyrants enact their unconstitutional laws and them make them pay. These petty fools are setting themselves up.

UpholdtheConstitution
09-29-2013, 11:26 PM
Welcome to the forum. Good luck with this! It might work better in the CA section of the forum so feel free to copy and paste your post to that section of the forum. Just remember, you live in CA. IMO, CA, NJ and NY are beyond lost :( Thank you! Re-posted in CA section.

UpholdtheConstitution
09-29-2013, 11:48 PM
In the Hearing Item 8 video,:

The lawyer lady keeps warning them on the constitutionality.

Seems like the mayors pet project.

Thanks for watching! Actually he is the Mayor-Pro-Tem, meaning when the lady Mayor can't show up to a ribbon cutting he fills in. He is the business owner's number #1 man on the dais (more below).

[QUOTE=ClydeCoulter;5246914]The attorney keeps warning them that political signs are covered by free speech
...

"It's for your safety" All the 'evidence' they have 'entered into the record' amounts to hearsay. I have had large political signs in my yard for years and has ever been injured by them.At one time years ago a corner downtown was prime real estate for political candidates to post there signs in a fashion that block a drivers view of oncoming cross traffic. That has been remedied as the attorney mentioned. I think they would have a hard time in court proving their actions were in the interest of public safety. Incidentally the council-member who motioned to table the item is a deputy sheriff. I contacted Oathkeepers about making an appearance via there website and got a "due to high volume.." message but there may still be time for them to respond.


End of watching Video (when business man says it's okay to limit the sq feet because at least you can whisper so you have free speech (my re-wording not his))
This is actually a textbook example of corruption by a special interest (not that Colton doesn't have a history of corruption. In the 1990's 5 elected officials went to prison for bribery) (http://articles.latimes.com/2002/feb/10/local/me-colton10). The business owner has spent the last 5 years helping get his close friends and associates elected to be his personal puppets. He now controls a majority vote. He is pushing this 'reform' to make it harder for small independent candidates to knock them out. Hence the decrease in time allowed to post signs from 100 days to the (originally proposed) 30 days: An independent candidate with a spouse and maybe 1 or 2 supporters helping him or her doesn't stand a chance in getting enough signs up in the time his crew of 30-40 paid lackeys can.

UpholdtheConstitution
09-29-2013, 11:49 PM
We need really good lawyers to sue for every possible dollar. Let the tyrants enact their unconstitutional laws and them make them pay. These petty fools are setting themselves up.
I found this nifty list of Constitutional rights organizations and contacted as many as possible:

http://constitution.org/cs_organ.htm