NUMBER 13-06-087-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
MICHAEL MARTINEZ, Appellant,
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.
On appeal from the 214th District Court of Nueces County, Texas.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Yañez, Rodriguez, and Garza
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Yañez
A jury convicted appellant, Michael Martinez, of criminal mischief and sentenced him to two years' imprisonment. Appellant complains the trial court erroneously denied his motion for change of venue. We affirm. (1)
Discussion
Appellant contends he was denied his right to a fair trial due to the trial court's error in denying his motion for change of venue. A trial court's denial of a motion for change of venue is reviewed for abuse of discretion. (2) A trial court's decision concerning venue will not be disturbed so long as it was within the realm of reasonableness given the facts presented to the trial court. (3)
Article 31.03(a) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure provides
(a) A change of venue may be granted in any felony or misdemeanor case punishable by confinement on the written motion of the defendant, supported by his own affidavit and the affidavit of at least two credible persons, residents of the county where the prosecution is instituted. . . . (4)
At a pre-trial hearing, appellant presented his motion for change of venue to the court. Appellant's motion was supported by affidavits from two witnesses. However, the record does not reveal that the motion was supported by appellant's own affidavit as required by article 31.03. The omission of appellant's own affidavit renders the motion fatally defective. (5) When a motion is not in the proper form, a trial court does not abuse its discretion in denying it. (6) Thus, we conclude that appellant's motion for change of venue is defective, and the trial court did not err in denying it.
Conclusion
We overrule appellant's point of error and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
LINDA REYNA YAÑEZ, Justice
Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
Memorandum opinion delivered and filed this
the 14th day of June, 2007.
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
How can a jury find appellant guilty if he "pled guilty"?
Send this document to a colleague Close This Window
NUMBER 13-05-156-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
JONATHAN BRIDGES, Appellant,
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee.
On appeal from the 105th District Court of Nueces County, Texas.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Yañez, Rodriguez, and Garza
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Yañez
Appellant, Johnathan Bridges, pled guilty to the offense of possession of cocaine. A jury found appellant guilty and sentenced him to fifteen months' imprisonment. Appellant, through five issues, contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. We affirm. (1)
Standard of Review
To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant must show that trial counsel's performance was deficient and that a reasonable probability exists that the result of the proceeding would have been different but for the deficiency. (2) The first prong of the Strickland test requires that the appellant show that counsel's performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness. (3) Thus, the defendant must prove objectively, by a preponderance of the evidence, that trial counsel's representation fell below professional standards. (4) The second prong requires that the defendant show a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. (5) Under the first prong, however, a reviewing court must indulge in a strong presumption that counsel's conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance. (6) Any allegation of ineffectiveness must be firmly founded in the record, and the record must demonstrate affirmatively the alleged ineffectiveness. (7)
Discussion
Appellant asserts he received ineffective assistance of counsel as a result of counsel's failure to (1) file a motion to suppress evidence, (2) obtain rulings on appellant's pretrial motions, (3) obtain a ruling on counsel's motion to withdraw, and (4) set a hearing on appellant's motion for new trial. In his fifth issue, appellant asserts that his counsel's ineffectiveness is further evidenced by counsel's own admission to ineffective assistance of counsel.
We begin by addressing appellant's fifth issue, wherein appellant complains that his counsel was ineffective by his own alleged admission to that effect in a motion for new trial. In the motion, appellant's counsel stated: "The Defendant's basis for a new trial is that he was provided with ineffective assistance of counsel. Defense Counsel files this motion on his clients [sic] behalf in order to protect the Defendant's appellate rights and asks that New Counsel be appointed to represent Mr. Bridges on appeal." The State contends that appellant's counsel "filed the motion alleging ineffective assistance as a ground in order to preserve his client's rights, he made no general or specific admissions that he was, in fact, ineffective in his representation." We agree. Because the motion does not constitute an admission and has no significance to the present allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel, appellant's fifth issue is overruled.
In issues three and four, appellant asserts that his counsel was ineffective in his post-judgment conduct. Appellant contends that this ineffectiveness delayed the appointment of new counsel, and that this delay left appellant's newly appointed counsel with little time to prepare for a hearing on appellant's motion for new trial.
With regard to post-judgment conduct, this Court has held that when the record does not show that trial counsel withdrew or was replaced by new counsel after sentencing, there is a rebuttable presumption that trial counsel continued to effectively represent the accused during the time for filing a motion for new trial. (8) The facts presented to us do not rebut this presumption. There is no evidence to show that counsel had abandoned appellant, or that appellant was not counseled by his attorney regarding the merits of a motion for new trial. Furthermore, appellant admits in his brief that he was given a hearing on his motion for new trial, but that "since Appellant could not be brought back in time from the State Jail Facility the hearing was held and said motion died by operation of law." We thus find that appellant has not presented this Court with any evidence to show that his counsel was ineffective, nor has appellant shown how any alleged ineffectiveness could have conceivably harmed him since appellant missed his hearing through no fault of his counsel. In light of appellant's inability to satisfy both prongs of the Strickland test, issues three and four are overruled.
In issues one and two--failure to file a motion to suppress and obtain rulings on pretrial motions--appellant complains of matters that occurred before his plea of guilty. A defendant who knowingly and voluntarily pleads guilty without a plea bargain agreement waives all nonjurisdictional defects that occurred before the entry of the plea. (9) Ineffective assistance of counsel is a nonjurisdictional defect. (10) An attack upon a guilty plea based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel will succeed only if appellant shows that his attorney's alleged deficiencies caused his plea to be unknowing and involuntary. (11)
We first note that to prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance based on counsel's failure to file a motion to suppress, appellant has to prove that the trial court would have granted the motion. (12) Appellant has presented no evidence to satisfy this burden. Second, the failure to file pre-trial motions is not categorically deemed ineffective assistance of counsel because trial counsel may decide not to file pre-trial motions as part of his trial strategy. (13) Appellant has not rebutted this possibility with regard to his counsel's decision not to file a motion to suppress. Lastly, appellant makes no contention that any of his trial counsel's deficiencies rendered his plea unknowing or involuntary. There is no evidence that appellant would have pleaded not guilty had it not been for his counsel's alleged ineffectiveness. We find that the judgment of guilt was rendered independent of, and is not supported by, the alleged ineffective assistance of counsel claimed by appellant. Appellant has thus failed to satisfy both prongs of the Strickland test; accordingly, issues one and two are overruled.
Conclusion
We affirm the trial court's judgment.
LINDA REYNA YAÑEZ,
Justice
Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
Memorandum opinion delivered and filed
this the 14th day of June, 2007.
1. As this is a memorandum opinion and the parties are familiar with the facts, we will not recite them here except as necessary to explain the Court's decision and the basic reasons for it. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984).
3. Thompson v. State, 9 S.W.3d 808, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999).
4. Mitchell v. State, 68 S.W.3d 640, 642 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002).
5. See Strickland, 466 U.S. at 694; Thompson, 9 S.W.3d at 812.
6. Strickland, 466 U.S. at 689.
7. Thompson, 9 S.W.3d at 813.
8. Jones v. State, 39 S.W.3d 691, 693 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 2001, no pet.).
9. Monreal v. State, 99 S.W.3d 615, 619 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003).
10. Lyon v. State, 872 S.W.2d 732, 736 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994).
11. Santos v. State, 877 S.W.2d 15, 17 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1994, no pet.).
12. Jackson v. State, 973 S.W.2d 954, 957 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (per curiam).
13. See Hammond v. State, 942 S.W.2d 703, 710 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1997, no pet.).
NUMBER 13-05-156-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
JONATHAN BRIDGES, Appellant,
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee.
On appeal from the 105th District Court of Nueces County, Texas.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Yañez, Rodriguez, and Garza
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Yañez
Appellant, Johnathan Bridges, pled guilty to the offense of possession of cocaine. A jury found appellant guilty and sentenced him to fifteen months' imprisonment. Appellant, through five issues, contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. We affirm. (1)
Standard of Review
To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant must show that trial counsel's performance was deficient and that a reasonable probability exists that the result of the proceeding would have been different but for the deficiency. (2) The first prong of the Strickland test requires that the appellant show that counsel's performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness. (3) Thus, the defendant must prove objectively, by a preponderance of the evidence, that trial counsel's representation fell below professional standards. (4) The second prong requires that the defendant show a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. (5) Under the first prong, however, a reviewing court must indulge in a strong presumption that counsel's conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance. (6) Any allegation of ineffectiveness must be firmly founded in the record, and the record must demonstrate affirmatively the alleged ineffectiveness. (7)
Discussion
Appellant asserts he received ineffective assistance of counsel as a result of counsel's failure to (1) file a motion to suppress evidence, (2) obtain rulings on appellant's pretrial motions, (3) obtain a ruling on counsel's motion to withdraw, and (4) set a hearing on appellant's motion for new trial. In his fifth issue, appellant asserts that his counsel's ineffectiveness is further evidenced by counsel's own admission to ineffective assistance of counsel.
We begin by addressing appellant's fifth issue, wherein appellant complains that his counsel was ineffective by his own alleged admission to that effect in a motion for new trial. In the motion, appellant's counsel stated: "The Defendant's basis for a new trial is that he was provided with ineffective assistance of counsel. Defense Counsel files this motion on his clients [sic] behalf in order to protect the Defendant's appellate rights and asks that New Counsel be appointed to represent Mr. Bridges on appeal." The State contends that appellant's counsel "filed the motion alleging ineffective assistance as a ground in order to preserve his client's rights, he made no general or specific admissions that he was, in fact, ineffective in his representation." We agree. Because the motion does not constitute an admission and has no significance to the present allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel, appellant's fifth issue is overruled.
In issues three and four, appellant asserts that his counsel was ineffective in his post-judgment conduct. Appellant contends that this ineffectiveness delayed the appointment of new counsel, and that this delay left appellant's newly appointed counsel with little time to prepare for a hearing on appellant's motion for new trial.
With regard to post-judgment conduct, this Court has held that when the record does not show that trial counsel withdrew or was replaced by new counsel after sentencing, there is a rebuttable presumption that trial counsel continued to effectively represent the accused during the time for filing a motion for new trial. (8) The facts presented to us do not rebut this presumption. There is no evidence to show that counsel had abandoned appellant, or that appellant was not counseled by his attorney regarding the merits of a motion for new trial. Furthermore, appellant admits in his brief that he was given a hearing on his motion for new trial, but that "since Appellant could not be brought back in time from the State Jail Facility the hearing was held and said motion died by operation of law." We thus find that appellant has not presented this Court with any evidence to show that his counsel was ineffective, nor has appellant shown how any alleged ineffectiveness could have conceivably harmed him since appellant missed his hearing through no fault of his counsel. In light of appellant's inability to satisfy both prongs of the Strickland test, issues three and four are overruled.
In issues one and two--failure to file a motion to suppress and obtain rulings on pretrial motions--appellant complains of matters that occurred before his plea of guilty. A defendant who knowingly and voluntarily pleads guilty without a plea bargain agreement waives all nonjurisdictional defects that occurred before the entry of the plea. (9) Ineffective assistance of counsel is a nonjurisdictional defect. (10) An attack upon a guilty plea based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel will succeed only if appellant shows that his attorney's alleged deficiencies caused his plea to be unknowing and involuntary. (11)
We first note that to prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance based on counsel's failure to file a motion to suppress, appellant has to prove that the trial court would have granted the motion. (12) Appellant has presented no evidence to satisfy this burden. Second, the failure to file pre-trial motions is not categorically deemed ineffective assistance of counsel because trial counsel may decide not to file pre-trial motions as part of his trial strategy. (13) Appellant has not rebutted this possibility with regard to his counsel's decision not to file a motion to suppress. Lastly, appellant makes no contention that any of his trial counsel's deficiencies rendered his plea unknowing or involuntary. There is no evidence that appellant would have pleaded not guilty had it not been for his counsel's alleged ineffectiveness. We find that the judgment of guilt was rendered independent of, and is not supported by, the alleged ineffective assistance of counsel claimed by appellant. Appellant has thus failed to satisfy both prongs of the Strickland test; accordingly, issues one and two are overruled.
Conclusion
We affirm the trial court's judgment.
LINDA REYNA YAÑEZ,
Justice
Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
Memorandum opinion delivered and filed
this the 14th day of June, 2007.
1. As this is a memorandum opinion and the parties are familiar with the facts, we will not recite them here except as necessary to explain the Court's decision and the basic reasons for it. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984).
3. Thompson v. State, 9 S.W.3d 808, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999).
4. Mitchell v. State, 68 S.W.3d 640, 642 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002).
5. See Strickland, 466 U.S. at 694; Thompson, 9 S.W.3d at 812.
6. Strickland, 466 U.S. at 689.
7. Thompson, 9 S.W.3d at 813.
8. Jones v. State, 39 S.W.3d 691, 693 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 2001, no pet.).
9. Monreal v. State, 99 S.W.3d 615, 619 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003).
10. Lyon v. State, 872 S.W.2d 732, 736 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994).
11. Santos v. State, 877 S.W.2d 15, 17 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1994, no pet.).
12. Jackson v. State, 973 S.W.2d 954, 957 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (per curiam).
13. See Hammond v. State, 942 S.W.2d 703, 710 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1997, no pet.).
Friday, June 08, 2007
Google Yourself Corpus Christi: When Carlos Valdez Confesses Error Does Not The Same Rule Apply?
Google Yourself Corpus Christi: When Carlos Valdez Confesses Error Does Not The Same Rule Apply?
And if they are "willing to overlook even obvious constitutional flaws and glaring illegalities when Prosecuting & reviewing death penalty cases."
WATT about all of the other cases?
How many "overlooks" of "constitutional flaws" or "glaring illegalities" have become tools of Cheating Prosecutors who have forgotten "Prosecutors, despite striking hard blows, must never lose sight of their ultimate obligation to do justice in every case.
How many Prosecutors deliberately commit the error of failing to file a reply brief in an Appeal Process because it deprives the appellant of exculpatory testimony, evidence, and confessions of error or witness tampering by the State Prosecuting Attorney?
----
CONFESSING ERROR
By EDWARD LAZARUS
----
First, in seeking the death penalty, prosecutors sometimes overlook glaring illegalities.
"courts, especially state courts, are too often willing to overlook even obvious constitutional flaws when reviewing death penalty cases."
And if they are "willing to overlook even obvious constitutional flaws and glaring illegalities when Prosecuting & reviewing death penalty cases."
WATT about all of the other cases?
How many "overlooks" of "constitutional flaws" or "glaring illegalities" have become tools of Cheating Prosecutors who have forgotten "Prosecutors, despite striking hard blows, must never lose sight of their ultimate obligation to do justice in every case.
How many Prosecutors deliberately commit the error of failing to file a reply brief in an Appeal Process because it deprives the appellant of exculpatory testimony, evidence, and confessions of error or witness tampering by the State Prosecuting Attorney?
----CONFESSING ERROR
By EDWARD LAZARUS
----
Friday, Jun. 16, 2000
Earlier this month, Vincent Saldano, one of the 468 inmates on Texas' death row, had his death sentence vacated. This development was duly reported in the press. But accounts of Saldano's good fortune uniformly failed to appreciate what makes his reprieve truly newsworthy and potentially a landmark.
Saving Saldano: Texas Confesses Error
![[Illustration]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_srgi8d5r51481SsPYzMHeMxhht2OpiZZOrPiEbKyONN2Pm6-IqWcJCNkfikb0uDouLwOztnPgOj-4FqNYZa8W_dmp0a8bI6aeVSoWI4Sa2y6SK_FCfc6aeiYE3pAC7D7FSxXKC1qF--A=s0-d) | |
Saldano was not freed from the prospect of execution by the actions of a court or even, as occasionally happens, by the clemency of a governor. His death sentence was erased because Texas, through its newly created office of the solicitor general, "confessed error" in his case -- that is, it admitted, despite defeating Saldano's initial appeals in court, that his death sentence was illegally obtained. Quite simply, this never happens, either in Texas or in the dozens of other states with active death penalty laws. It is thus worth pausing to consider the value and potential implications of Saldano's case as well as the notion of confessing error.
Saldano had received a death sentence in part due to profoundly troubling testimony by a state expert witness at the sentencing phase of his trial. The expert, a clinical psychologist named Walter Quijano, suggested that Saldano should be executed because, as an Hispanic, he posed a special risk of future dangerousness to society. To support this astonishing conclusion, the expert pointed out that Hispanics make up a disproportionately large amount of Texas' prison population.It does not take a tenured professor of constitutional law to realize that linking racial identity with a propensity for violence was not only bizarre but also a violation of the equal protection clause. Indeed, that it should take a confession of error by the state to correct this problem highlights at least two problems in the current administration of the death penalty. First, in seeking the death penalty, prosecutors sometimes overlook glaring illegalities. The same flaw identified in Saldano's case infects at least seven other Texas capital cases. Second (and perhaps even more distressing), courts, especially state courts, are too often willing to overlook even obvious constitutional flaws when reviewing death penalty cases. After all, before the state's confession of error, Saldano had lost all of his appeals.
Under these circumstances, one might think that confessions of error would be, if not commonplace, at least occasional. On average, the Solicitor General of the United States confesses error in two or three criminal cases every year -- even though it is a safe bet that federal prosecutions, conducted by better trained lawyers with greater supervision, are less likely to contain obvious legal errors than their state counterparts. As the Supreme Court recognized when endorsing the practice in 1942, "the public trust reposed in the law enforcement officers of the Government requires that they be quick to confess error, when, in their opinion, a miscarriage of justice may result from their remaining silent." But as a practical matter, states never confess error in death penalty cases (even though courts overturn roughly two-thirds of all death sentences as legally infirm) -- and some states candidly admit that their policy is never to confess error.
Mutual Distrust
Why? One crucial and usually overlooked factor is the deep antagonism that has grown up over time between state death penalty prosecutors and the death penalty abolitionist lawyers who seek to foil them in every case. The abolitionists, prosecutors know all too well, never concede that their clients deserve the death penalty or that the death penalty was legally imposed -- no matter how flimsy their arguments in a given case. Rather, they use every procedural and substantive trick in the book to delay executions.
There can be no denying that such abolitionist tactics have angered and frustrated state prosecutors. And one response to these understandable emotions has been for prosecutors to mirror the fight-to-the-bitter-end approach of their opponents.
The problem with this reciprocation, however, is simply that the ethical duties of prosecutors and defense attorneys are vastly different. Defense attorneys are duty-bound to scratch and claw to win for their clients. Prosecutors, by contrast, despite striking hard blows, must never lose sight of their ultimate obligation to do justice in every case.
That may sound trite and perhaps overly idealistic, but it has a practical side as well. Prosecutorial confessions of error -- knowing when to fold them, as it is known -- establish credibility. They create trust in the system, a sense that someone is being careful and exercising sound judgment, that extends far beyond any single case. And that can make a world of difference for someone like me, who is not morally opposed to the death penalty but skeptical of how it is imposed.
Death Penalty Politics
In addition, the reluctance of state prosecutors to confess error is a clear reflection of how politics affects the death penalty. Up until now, anyway, undoing a death sentence was akin to political suicide for an elected district attorney or state attorney general, or for any state official with ambitions for re-election or higher office. And yet the willingness of Texas' new solicitor general to confess error in the Saldano case suggests a possible turning point. With the current groundswell of death penalty opposition based on the possibility of executing an innocent person, elected officials may now find some advantage in approaching capital cases (even those where innocence is not an issue) with a greater degree of care and honesty.
case will start a broad trend. But there is reason to believe that the tide is indeed turning. On June 9, Texas Attorney General John Cornyn announced the results of an investigation into other death penalty cases involving testimony by state expert Walter Quijano. Cornyn acknowledged that Dr. Quijano had provided testimony in six other death penalty cases similar to his improper testimony in the Saldano case. Cornyn's staff has advised defense lawyers for the six inmates now on death row that his office will not oppose efforts to overturn their sentences based on Quijano's testimony. In response, a pessimist might note that Texas is appealing a ruling in another capital case that the defendant received inadequate counsel -- when, indisputably, his lawyer slept through much of the trial. But doing the right thing has a contagious quality to it. Or at least so we can hope. Edward Lazarus, a former federal prosecutor, is the legal correspondent for Talk Magazine and the author of Closed Chambers: The Rise, Fall, and Future of the Modern Supreme Court.Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Dear Officers of the Court, submitted for further investigation
In Re: State v Villa
Do a little research on Del Mar College's in house counsel, Sean Meredeth, DMC Auditorium, Ballet Nacional, little girls, Joe Alaniz, and the relationship with our DA
Why is this evidence not included in the current prosecution of Villa?
Why not drag the whole bunch down to the Courthouse?
Friends of the Prosecution or not, enough of the selective prosecutions. Plaisted, Applebee, and the one's who covered it up at Parkdale Baptist & St Joseph's here in the Jurisdiction of the Nueces County / 105th District Attorney. Zealously
Possible Brady Material?
Does this material not merit a Grand Jury Investigation?
Pervert in Auditorium
Is this in retaliation for the scrutiny of late? Why now?
__________________
To encourage full participation, promote mutual understanding and cultivate shared responsibility throughout our community. To support everyone to do their best thinking and express it, To enable community members to search for inclusive solutions and build sustainable agreements
This letter refers to an incident that took place in Richardson Auditorium after I was placed on administrative leave under the guise of false complaints which were never investigated. As I understand it the person identified in this letter is the individual who was made the acting auditorium manager. The sexual harrasment complaints made against this individual were never investigated or taken seriously. Nor was any action taken against this individual. I want to make it clear that I am not the individual in question and that in the almost twelve years I worked in the auditorium there were never any sexual harrasment claims made against me. In fact the only false complaints that were made against me can be traced back to my desire to enforce and maintain a safe and healthy environment in the Auditorium in spite of an administration and Regents who were constantly ignoring the problems and placing students health and safety in danger. Not only in Richardson Auditorium but just to name a few in the Business Building and Music Building. So when DMC boosters write in and talk about the students and how the administration and regents are doing all this corrupt stuff in the name of the students. I say Bullsh/t! Administrators run the DMC like their own private little Kingdom. It's administrators and faculty first and students second. I was there I witnessed it. Judge Westergren is on the payroll now and one thing I learned at Del Mar College is your either with them or against them. Either you ignore the corruption or you are enveloped by it or you fight it. I fought it and lost. I was just one guy against a lot of very powerful determined people. I have no regrets. I hear the same old party line about the students coming from Judge Westergren. Dont listen to what they say, watch what they do. By the way most people do not know that the Richardson Auditorium was operated until it was shut down for the "upgrade" without a Certificate of Occupancy. Try doing that with a private buisness unless your connected and see how far you get when the Buildings and Fire depts find out.
8:27 PM
--
Kenedeno & Associates
Do a little research on Del Mar College's in house counsel, Sean Meredeth, DMC Auditorium, Ballet Nacional, little girls, Joe Alaniz, and the relationship with our DA
Why is this evidence not included in the current prosecution of Villa?
Why not drag the whole bunch down to the Courthouse?
Friends of the Prosecution or not, enough of the selective prosecutions. Plaisted, Applebee, and the one's who covered it up at Parkdale Baptist & St Joseph's here in the Jurisdiction of the Nueces County / 105th District Attorney. Zealously
Possible Brady Material?
Does this material not merit a Grand Jury Investigation?
Pervert in Auditorium
Is this in retaliation for the scrutiny of late? Why now?
__________________
To encourage full participation, promote mutual understanding and cultivate shared responsibility throughout our community. To support everyone to do their best thinking and express it, To enable community members to search for inclusive solutions and build sustainable agreements
This letter refers to an incident that took place in Richardson Auditorium after I was placed on administrative leave under the guise of false complaints which were never investigated. As I understand it the person identified in this letter is the individual who was made the acting auditorium manager. The sexual harrasment complaints made against this individual were never investigated or taken seriously. Nor was any action taken against this individual. I want to make it clear that I am not the individual in question and that in the almost twelve years I worked in the auditorium there were never any sexual harrasment claims made against me. In fact the only false complaints that were made against me can be traced back to my desire to enforce and maintain a safe and healthy environment in the Auditorium in spite of an administration and Regents who were constantly ignoring the problems and placing students health and safety in danger. Not only in Richardson Auditorium but just to name a few in the Business Building and Music Building. So when DMC boosters write in and talk about the students and how the administration and regents are doing all this corrupt stuff in the name of the students. I say Bullsh/t! Administrators run the DMC like their own private little Kingdom. It's administrators and faculty first and students second. I was there I witnessed it. Judge Westergren is on the payroll now and one thing I learned at Del Mar College is your either with them or against them. Either you ignore the corruption or you are enveloped by it or you fight it. I fought it and lost. I was just one guy against a lot of very powerful determined people. I have no regrets. I hear the same old party line about the students coming from Judge Westergren. Dont listen to what they say, watch what they do. By the way most people do not know that the Richardson Auditorium was operated until it was shut down for the "upgrade" without a Certificate of Occupancy. Try doing that with a private buisness unless your connected and see how far you get when the Buildings and Fire depts find out.
8:27 PM
--
Kenedeno & Associates
__________________
To encourage full participation, promote mutual understanding and cultivate shared responsibility throughout our community. To support everyone to do their best thinking and express it, To enable community members to search for inclusive solutions and build sustainable agreements
To encourage full participation, promote mutual understanding and cultivate shared responsibility throughout our community. To support everyone to do their best thinking and express it, To enable community members to search for inclusive solutions and build sustainable agreements
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Man in jail over 6 months without formal charges
Man in jail over 6 months without formal charges
By Gloria Bigger-Cantu - A man who has been in the Kleberg County jail for six months without formal charges or an indictment returned back to Kleberg County Jail Monday after his bond reduction hearing. Meanwhile a county official wants everyone involved in this situation to be held accountable for keeping a man in jail for six months without being considered for an indictment.
Precinct 4 County Commissioner Romeo L. Lomas voiced concern the man is being housed and fed at the taxpayers’ expense.
He said someone dropped the ball because of missing paperwork, and the situation itself may be a violating the law.
The case involves Israel Morales, 35, who appeared before County Court at Law Judge Martin Chiuminatto Monday afternoon for a writ of habeas corpus hearing with his court appointed attorney Carlos Morin at his side.
Morales was arrested by the Kingsville Specialized Crimes & Narcotics Task Force with three other people in the parking lot of a convenience store on King St. near Highway 77 in the early morning of Oct. 3, 2006.
Morales was taken to the Kleberg County Law Enforcement Center just a block away.
Morales was magistrated by Precinct 1 interim Justice of the Peace Ron Lewis.
Law enforcement officials said Morales was being held on what is called an affidavit of complaint alleging possession of marijuana and engaging in organized criminal activity.
Lewis set a bond of $25,000 for the and a $40,000 bond for engaging in criminal activity. The three other people posted the bond and were released.
Jaime R. Garza, commander of the TASK force, said Tuesday the paperwork had been completed on Morales but the file had been misplaced and was lost. Garza said he had not filed the case with the District Attorney Ida Trevino.
“We have taken measures that this type of situation would not occur again,” Garza said.
At the hearing, Morin reported his client had been in jail over 90 days and was entitled to an affordable bond and he did not know what happened to the file. District Attorney Aida Trevino said the state would accept the bond reduction.
“This man has been in jail since Oct. 3, 2006?” Chiuminatto questioned the district attorney. Trevino replied she had not pulled the history of the defendant.
Morin then asked the judge for a personal recognizance bond. Morin explained Morales worked as an auto mechanic in Houston where he lived. Morales told the court he worked to support his family and mother.
“I have my obligation to work and I am a victim of this case and want to resolve this issue and have been asking questions why this has taken so long,” Morales said.
“Where do you live and if you were bonded out today would you get a job?” Trevino asked Morales. Morales replied that he lived in Houston and would return back there and work at his brother’s shop.
Trevino asked the inmate about his immigration status and he replied he had been a legal residence since 1988.
Chiuminatto agreed to lower the POM bond from $40,000 to $5,000 and engaging in organized criminal activity from $40,000 to $5,000. Morales was returned back to jail because he could not post bond and an INS issue that was not clarified in court.
Morin said he had been court appointed attorney on Dec. 21 and pointed to that date on a letter. He filed for application for a writ of habeas corpus on Jan. 12. Chiuminatto said that when Morales was arrested on Oct. 3 he stated “he would be his own lawyer.” Later that month on Oct. 25 Morales requested legal representation. Chiuminatto appointed an attorney for Morales on Oct. 31. He explained that court appointed attorneys are contacted in three ways: in his office, faxed papers or through letters. There is a pool of l7 attorneys who can accept court appointments. Many of them live in other counties. District Court 105 Judge Manuel Banales chooses the attorneys.
Lomas emphasized people like Morales and everyone else have rights because we live in this great country of America. Lomas questioned the time span when Morales was appointed an attorney.
The county commissioner brought documentation from Senate Bill 7 under the Texas Fair Defense Act that states the law “requires a court or the court’s designee authorized under Article 26.04 to appoint counsel for indigent defendants in the county…to appoint counsel immediately following the expiration of three working days after the date on the court or the courts’ designee receives the defendants request for appointment of counsel.”
Lomas became involved in this case because a mother of an inmate contacted him last week to inform him that a man was sitting in jail that had not been charged with any crime.
“Are we going to hold this man forever? Lomas stated. He said this was not the first time an incident like this had occurred and this type of situation needs to stop. He said other people should have taken notice of the man’s time in jail because they receive daily jail logs. Jail logs are sent to the offices of the District Attorney, County Attorney, County Clerk, and District Court 105 every day. He said pre-trial officers also visit with prisoners and could have related information to the courts.
“Once they land in jail a legal procedure needs to be followed if not we are violating the prisoners’ rights and then we could end up with a lawsuit,” Lomas said.
“If everybody in the legal system had been working together we would not have this problem,” Lomas said, “why are we having a prisoner here, feeding him and housing him without any charges filed. Kleberg County pays $57,000 to other counties to house prisoners, according to him.
“We are not following the correct procedure on this case and we need to do what is right because every prisoner is innocent until proven guilty.” Lomas said.
He added there was no excuse for this situation.
By Gloria Bigger-Cantu - A man who has been in the Kleberg County jail for six months without formal charges or an indictment returned back to Kleberg County Jail Monday after his bond reduction hearing. Meanwhile a county official wants everyone involved in this situation to be held accountable for keeping a man in jail for six months without being considered for an indictment.
Precinct 4 County Commissioner Romeo L. Lomas voiced concern the man is being housed and fed at the taxpayers’ expense.
He said someone dropped the ball because of missing paperwork, and the situation itself may be a violating the law.
The case involves Israel Morales, 35, who appeared before County Court at Law Judge Martin Chiuminatto Monday afternoon for a writ of habeas corpus hearing with his court appointed attorney Carlos Morin at his side.
Morales was arrested by the Kingsville Specialized Crimes & Narcotics Task Force with three other people in the parking lot of a convenience store on King St. near Highway 77 in the early morning of Oct. 3, 2006.
Morales was taken to the Kleberg County Law Enforcement Center just a block away.
Morales was magistrated by Precinct 1 interim Justice of the Peace Ron Lewis.
Law enforcement officials said Morales was being held on what is called an affidavit of complaint alleging possession of marijuana and engaging in organized criminal activity.
Lewis set a bond of $25,000 for the and a $40,000 bond for engaging in criminal activity. The three other people posted the bond and were released.
Jaime R. Garza, commander of the TASK force, said Tuesday the paperwork had been completed on Morales but the file had been misplaced and was lost. Garza said he had not filed the case with the District Attorney Ida Trevino.
“We have taken measures that this type of situation would not occur again,” Garza said.
At the hearing, Morin reported his client had been in jail over 90 days and was entitled to an affordable bond and he did not know what happened to the file. District Attorney Aida Trevino said the state would accept the bond reduction.
“This man has been in jail since Oct. 3, 2006?” Chiuminatto questioned the district attorney. Trevino replied she had not pulled the history of the defendant.
Morin then asked the judge for a personal recognizance bond. Morin explained Morales worked as an auto mechanic in Houston where he lived. Morales told the court he worked to support his family and mother.
“I have my obligation to work and I am a victim of this case and want to resolve this issue and have been asking questions why this has taken so long,” Morales said.
“Where do you live and if you were bonded out today would you get a job?” Trevino asked Morales. Morales replied that he lived in Houston and would return back there and work at his brother’s shop.
Trevino asked the inmate about his immigration status and he replied he had been a legal residence since 1988.
Chiuminatto agreed to lower the POM bond from $40,000 to $5,000 and engaging in organized criminal activity from $40,000 to $5,000. Morales was returned back to jail because he could not post bond and an INS issue that was not clarified in court.
Morin said he had been court appointed attorney on Dec. 21 and pointed to that date on a letter. He filed for application for a writ of habeas corpus on Jan. 12. Chiuminatto said that when Morales was arrested on Oct. 3 he stated “he would be his own lawyer.” Later that month on Oct. 25 Morales requested legal representation. Chiuminatto appointed an attorney for Morales on Oct. 31. He explained that court appointed attorneys are contacted in three ways: in his office, faxed papers or through letters. There is a pool of l7 attorneys who can accept court appointments. Many of them live in other counties. District Court 105 Judge Manuel Banales chooses the attorneys.
Lomas emphasized people like Morales and everyone else have rights because we live in this great country of America. Lomas questioned the time span when Morales was appointed an attorney.
The county commissioner brought documentation from Senate Bill 7 under the Texas Fair Defense Act that states the law “requires a court or the court’s designee authorized under Article 26.04 to appoint counsel for indigent defendants in the county…to appoint counsel immediately following the expiration of three working days after the date on the court or the courts’ designee receives the defendants request for appointment of counsel.”
Lomas became involved in this case because a mother of an inmate contacted him last week to inform him that a man was sitting in jail that had not been charged with any crime.
“Are we going to hold this man forever? Lomas stated. He said this was not the first time an incident like this had occurred and this type of situation needs to stop. He said other people should have taken notice of the man’s time in jail because they receive daily jail logs. Jail logs are sent to the offices of the District Attorney, County Attorney, County Clerk, and District Court 105 every day. He said pre-trial officers also visit with prisoners and could have related information to the courts.
“Once they land in jail a legal procedure needs to be followed if not we are violating the prisoners’ rights and then we could end up with a lawsuit,” Lomas said.
“If everybody in the legal system had been working together we would not have this problem,” Lomas said, “why are we having a prisoner here, feeding him and housing him without any charges filed. Kleberg County pays $57,000 to other counties to house prisoners, according to him.
“We are not following the correct procedure on this case and we need to do what is right because every prisoner is innocent until proven guilty.” Lomas said.
He added there was no excuse for this situation.
Friday, April 20, 2007
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Boss Hogg stuck in the Hazard County of Nueces De La Parra
PRINT THIS STORY | E-MAIL THIS STORY
County: Tell us more on courthouse
Commissioners hear idea to turn building into a legal center
By Beth Wilson Caller-Times
April 5, 2007
The 1914 Nueces County Courthouse may be priceless to preservationists, but local developers are putting an $11 million price tag on restoring its legal legacy.
County commissioners didn't offer the courthouse to Judson Partners, a group with a plan to turn it into a law center, but indicated Wednesday they were interested in hearing more from the state and other developers.
In a commissioners workshop meeting, developer Dan Judson presented his plan to buy the building and find the private funds to renovate it and bring in a law center that eventually would become affiliated with a law school.
County Judge Loyd Neal said he'd be interested in any deal that made financial and historical sense for the building that was the site that handled the county's business through much of the previous century.
"We have a long way to go from workshop to reality," he said. "If you make a good offer, we might sell you a courthouse, and I'm not sure I'd want a reversionary clause."
Commissioner Chuck Cazalas said any sale discussion would have to consider value of the land in addition to the building.
Neal said later that he has no estimate of the value of either the land or building and he's not sure the county would be able to sell the courthouse because a deed restriction was placed on the building when the county accepted grants from the Texas Historical Commission.
Judson said that if the county is willing to sell the building to his group, it is willing to put in about $200,000 for further studies to determine what would be the best use for the building that's been vacant since 1977.
Judson said Wednesday a law center or school would keep the legal history of the building intact and two restored courtrooms could be used in learning. He has spoken to some law schools in Texas but said it is too early to say which ones. He has not received confirmation of interest in establishing a branch campus or center here.
He said he's also interested in using the building for residential and office space. While he doesn't have firm costs for such projects, he said renovation and the land could be between $11 million and $15 million and would be entirely privately funded.
"We are crystal clear that you don't want to use taxpayer money," he said.
Commissioner Peggy Banales, whose precinct includes the courthouse near the Harbor Bridge, said she wants to restore the courthouse to "its grand ole' lady style," but confirmed the county didn't want to put any more taxpayer money into its restoration or renovation.
A $2.85 million renovation of the building's south wing exterior was completed last year.
Community donations and county funds provided the local match of $950,000, but in 2005, commissioners declined to put up $1.76 million to match state grant funds to continue renovation. Cost for complete restoration has been estimated as high as $30 million.
Any contract to sell the building likely will include a clause returning it to the county if it isn't completed. Neal said Wednesday he's not sure whether the court would ask for such a clause.
The building can't be demolished until 2025 because a deed restriction was placed on the building when the county accepted renovation grants from the Texas Historical Commission.
Judson said he expects the county, if the county proceeds, to go through a public process to approve the sale and a renovation project, including asking if other developers are interested in any courthouse reuse plans.
Commissioners took no action to approve Judson's plan but authorized county staff to confer with the Texas Historical Commission, which must approve any changes in the building as a condition of accepting state grant funds.
"We will certainly consider this further under the advice of our county attorney and others," Neal said.
The county must notify the state of any changes, including transfer of the building, said Stan Graves, director of the commission's Historic Courthouse Preservation Program. He said the commission prefers historic courthouses remain county-owned, used for government and open to the public.
"The specific idea of using the facility as a law school has a certain appeal in that it would allow the courtrooms, judge's chambers and other major spaces to remain in the use originally intended," he said in a written statement. "Such a proposal would be preferable to something that would change the original structure and intent of the building."
Contact Beth Wilson at 886-3748 or HYPERLINK mailto:wilsonb@caller.com wilsonb@caller.com
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
plans to establish a law school in Corpus Christi,
PRINT THIS STORY | E-MAIL THIS STORY
New ideas for the old Nueces Courthouse
One developer's idea: Make it a law school
By Beth Wilson Caller-Times
April 3, 2007
The site of many historic courtroom battles could become a training ground for lawyers and judges of the future under a local developer's plans to turn the old Nueces County Courthouse, which was completed in 1914, into a law school.
Dan Judson, of Judson Partners, said the idea is just conceptual, and future studies would determine the best use for the building that has been vacant since 1977.
<A TARGET="_blank" HREF="http://adsremote.scripps.com/event.ng/Type=click&FlightID=2033826&AdID=2041321&TargetID=2016958&Targets=2028094,2009209,2001053,2003385,2017031,2004033,2016958,2009540,2008590,2006392,2023725,2024418,2027983,2025492&RawValues=&Redirect=http:%2f%2fwww.advertisersite.com"><IMG SRC="http://images.scripps.com/1x1.gif" WIDTH=120 HEIGHT=600 BORDER=0></A>
"We know the county doesn't have the funds or any real desire to do this," he said. "We're looking at it as a purely private venture. We buy the building and we fix it up."
Judson has not formalized plans to establish a law school in Corpus Christi, nor has he gotten a commitment from an existing school to open a campus here.
Commissioners will consider Judson's plan during a presentation Wednesday.
Commissioner Peggy Banales put the item on the commissioners' agenda.
Judson, owner of Ocean Drive Marina, has presented reuse plans to the city for Memorial Coliseum, including such ideas as an indoor market and restaurant and placing the Columbus ships under its green roof.
The city recently announced its plans with another developer to bring an amusement park to the bayfront site had fallen through.
If the county is interested in selling the building, Judson said his group and investors would determine what should be in the building and bring in the money to make that happen. He estimates renovations could cost between $9 million and $11 million.
The old courthouse, near the Harbor Bridge, received a $2.85 million exterior renovation of its south wing last year.
"The courthouse is a very beloved building by a lot of people, but in so being beloved, there are still issues we need to be aware of," she said. "And we don't want to use taxpayer money, if we can help it, to do what we need to do."
Banales said she'd like to see the courthouse keep its historical credibility and be useable. That could then stimulate economic growth for the downtown area, which is in her precinct, she said.
County Judge Loyd Neal said the county has been committed to spending money on the fairgrounds complex in Robstown and will have to consider other capital needs, like repairs to the jail and the occupied courthouse, as it goes into the next budget cycle.
"I've said all along I have no desire to put any more taxpayer dollars into the (1914) courthouse," he said.
The building can't be demolished until 2025 because of a deed restriction placed on the building when the county accepted grants from the Texas Historical Commission. The commission also prohibits any exterior changes, and would likely be involved in any reuse plans.
Commissioner Chuck Cazalas agreed that taxpayers shouldn't foot the bill for restoration, and said the county should find a private sector partner for the project.
"If it turns from an eyesore into an asset for the community, than I would be 100 percent behind it," he said.
Commissioners Oscar Ortiz and Betty Jean Longoria said they are open to ideas for the old building, and may consider putting in some county funds.
"Right now as it's sitting there, it's just deteriorating, so we need to at least be open to any suggestions," Ortiz said.
Community donations and county funds provided the local match of $950,000 for the $2.85 million renovation that was completed last year.
In 2005, commissioners declined to put up $1.76 million to match state grant funds to continue renovation. Cost for complete restoration has been estimated atas much as $30 million.
The latest plan called for turning the building into a science and technology museum, but funding for the idea never materialized.
Contact Beth Wilson at 886-3748 or HYPERLINK mailto:wilsonb@caller.com wilsonb@caller.com
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
prisoners for profit courtesy of the delays
OPPRESSION FOR PROFIT?
Panelists kick around the prison-industrial complex
by Victor A. Patton
"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." —Article 13, U.S. Constitution
Nearly 1 million African Americans are incarcerated in prisons and jails in the United States, according to recent Justice Department statistics. Tukufu Kalonji considers that an emergency—although, he concedes, few others do.
"As you can see by the turnout here today, there are not a whole lot of people worried about us," said Kalonji, referring to the rows of empty chairs at an Aug. 9 forum at the Malcolm X library in Encanto. "Many people don't believe they can do anything about it. Other people don't know or just don't care."
The forum, titled "The Black Community and the Prison Industrial Complex: Critical Issues and Struggles for Strategies," questioned the growing number of African Americans locked up, as well as the ever-expanding corporate interest in seeking prison labor as an alternative workforce.
The panel of 10 African Americans from various professions agreed that what they call the "prison-industrial complex" emphasizes incarceration, then exploits inmates for profit—inmates who are paid a few cents per hour, without any meaningful effort toward rehabilitation. That a majority of those incarcerated are poor, African American and Latino leads some to believe the system strongly resembles chattel slavery.
"At the same time while these corporations say that they are investing in education, they are also heavily in the incarceration of [Blacks], Latinos, poor Whites and anyone else who falls victim to this trap," said panelist Jaja Malik Atenra of the Sirius Research Group.
While the panelists agreed on the dire need for organized confrontation of a worsening incarceration/exploitation prison system, their solutions were wide and varied, ranging from grassroots activism to more eccentric approaches. One participant suggested asking the United Nations to level charges against the U.S. for crimes against humanity. Another even suggested that African Americans own and operate their own prisons.
Other panelists, such as Minister Masada of the organization My Brothers Keeper, suggested action at the legislative level, amending California's three-strikes law to include language requiring a third-strike crime to be, at a minimum, a violent felony. "No one should be spending life in prison for stealing a beer," said Masada, who also advocated for a nationwide boycott of companies who benefit from prison labor. "America has more prisoners than any other country, and California even has more prisoners than some countries," said Masada. "We need to have a national organization for prisoners, and we need to build relationships with lawyers and young people in law school."
Many of the businesses that profit from prison construction and inmate labor were identified by name during the discussion, some names very familiar. According to Kalonji, the two main private prison industries are Correctional Corporations of America (CCA) and Wackenhut Corporation. "Fifty-one percent of [CCA's] founding monies [was from] Kentucky Fried Chicken," said Kalonji, who also fingered K-mart, Dell Computer, Starbuck's Coffee, Victoria's Secret, Microsoft and JC Penny as corporations who use inmate labor for products and industries.
While education, health and social programs all suffered deep cutbacks in this year's state budget, California's prison industry, said one panelist, continues to grow. "There have been no cuts to the prison system—they're spending more, while cutting health and education," said Dr. Richard Butcher of Caregivers Medical group, adding that fewer dollars for education today will surely mean more African Americans in prison in the future.
According to Department of Justice statistics, 2,033,331 people nationwide were incarcerated in federal and state prisons and county jails in 2002. Of those incarcerated, about 887,700 were African American (818,900 men, 68,800 women). In California, a total of 159,390 people are currently incarcerated. Of that number, Hispanics, Blacks and Whites each comprise about a third of the total prison population, according to the California Department of Corrections.
While some African American pundits have expressed concern about the disproportionately high numbers of incarcerated Blacks, with the exception of UC Santa Cruz professor Angela Davis, none have mounted any sizable opposition to the issues of systemic bias or corporate exploitation of inmate labor. Most conservatives—including African Americans—believe that increasing the number of prisons in the nation is necessary and that it's responsible for a decade-long decline of crime rates.
"[The high number of Blacks in prison] is generally interpreted as evidence that African American people are arrested out of proportion to their numbers in society, since they constitute only 13 percent of the population," wrote conservative John McWhorter, an African American UC Berkeley professor in his book Losing the Race: Self Sabotage in African American America. "However, the figures must be seen in light of the fact that as sad as it is, nationwide African Americans commit not 13 percent, but 42 percent of the violent crimes in the country. In other words, contrary to the idea that African Americans are arrested disproportionately, their proportion of the prison population neatly reflects the rate at which they commit crimes," writes McWhorter.
Angela Davis, however, sees prisons more as a modern-day plantation, where expanding corporate interests vie for control, playing on a society that ignores the actual socio-economic conditions responsible for why people commit crimes.
"Prisons thus perform a feat of magic. Or rather the people who continually vote in new prison bonds and tacitly assent to a proliferating network of prisons and jails have been tricked into believing in the magic of imprisonment," Davis wrote in a Colorlines Magazine article. "But prisons do not disappear problems, they disappear human beings. And the practice of disappearing vast numbers of people from poor, immigrant, and racially marginalized communities has literally become big business."
"There's a legacy going back to slavery," said panelist Atenra, who argued that large numbers of African Americans in prison can be traced back to being disenfranchised as an ethnic group, beginning with slavery and continuing today. He also pointed out that convict leasing agreements between private entrepreneurs and states first appeared with the abolition of legal slavery. Subsequently, Southern states passed the notorious "black codes," which placed severe restrictions on freed slaves and effectively guaranteed a steady flow of inmate labor to exploit.
"When you have dominated a group of people... controlled them psychologically and physically, and then all of a sudden you set them free, they're not in the mindset, or have the means, to fend for themselves, to do for themselves. This is what we're seeing from the end of slavery after the Civil War, all the way up to 1954 with Brown vs. the Board of Education…. There was institutional racism, policies that kept us in that place, [along with] poor education or no education," he added.
While most of the panelists viewed the incarceration problem through a socio-historical lens, others in the audience viewed the issue specifically as one of economics, the political pathos of poverty in America.
"I know race is a big deal, but it is about class…it's poor people that are in prison—people with no economic or political voice," said Modesta Brown of the California Coalition for Women Prisoners. "We need to identify [the prison-industrial complex] as the money maker that it is. Right now, they are building prisons before they even have the prisoners to fill them. If we can identify it as being a dysfunctional system, then we can do something about it."
Even though Kalonji said that he was somewhat disappointed with Saturday's relatively meager turnout of about 37 people, he aims to create a larger organization to address the prison-industrial complex, among other criminal justice-related issues. He offered one more possible solution:
"I don't believe that we can't make change. The established order operates as it does, in terms of unethical and inequitable treatment of us, because we allow it. We need to take responsibility and demand better treatment."
© 2003-2006 Southland Publishing, All Rights Reserved
Panelists kick around the prison-industrial complex
by Victor A. Patton
"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." —Article 13, U.S. Constitution
Nearly 1 million African Americans are incarcerated in prisons and jails in the United States, according to recent Justice Department statistics. Tukufu Kalonji considers that an emergency—although, he concedes, few others do.
"As you can see by the turnout here today, there are not a whole lot of people worried about us," said Kalonji, referring to the rows of empty chairs at an Aug. 9 forum at the Malcolm X library in Encanto. "Many people don't believe they can do anything about it. Other people don't know or just don't care."
The forum, titled "The Black Community and the Prison Industrial Complex: Critical Issues and Struggles for Strategies," questioned the growing number of African Americans locked up, as well as the ever-expanding corporate interest in seeking prison labor as an alternative workforce.
The panel of 10 African Americans from various professions agreed that what they call the "prison-industrial complex" emphasizes incarceration, then exploits inmates for profit—inmates who are paid a few cents per hour, without any meaningful effort toward rehabilitation. That a majority of those incarcerated are poor, African American and Latino leads some to believe the system strongly resembles chattel slavery.
"At the same time while these corporations say that they are investing in education, they are also heavily in the incarceration of [Blacks], Latinos, poor Whites and anyone else who falls victim to this trap," said panelist Jaja Malik Atenra of the Sirius Research Group.
While the panelists agreed on the dire need for organized confrontation of a worsening incarceration/exploitation prison system, their solutions were wide and varied, ranging from grassroots activism to more eccentric approaches. One participant suggested asking the United Nations to level charges against the U.S. for crimes against humanity. Another even suggested that African Americans own and operate their own prisons.
Other panelists, such as Minister Masada of the organization My Brothers Keeper, suggested action at the legislative level, amending California's three-strikes law to include language requiring a third-strike crime to be, at a minimum, a violent felony. "No one should be spending life in prison for stealing a beer," said Masada, who also advocated for a nationwide boycott of companies who benefit from prison labor. "America has more prisoners than any other country, and California even has more prisoners than some countries," said Masada. "We need to have a national organization for prisoners, and we need to build relationships with lawyers and young people in law school."
Many of the businesses that profit from prison construction and inmate labor were identified by name during the discussion, some names very familiar. According to Kalonji, the two main private prison industries are Correctional Corporations of America (CCA) and Wackenhut Corporation. "Fifty-one percent of [CCA's] founding monies [was from] Kentucky Fried Chicken," said Kalonji, who also fingered K-mart, Dell Computer, Starbuck's Coffee, Victoria's Secret, Microsoft and JC Penny as corporations who use inmate labor for products and industries.
While education, health and social programs all suffered deep cutbacks in this year's state budget, California's prison industry, said one panelist, continues to grow. "There have been no cuts to the prison system—they're spending more, while cutting health and education," said Dr. Richard Butcher of Caregivers Medical group, adding that fewer dollars for education today will surely mean more African Americans in prison in the future.
According to Department of Justice statistics, 2,033,331 people nationwide were incarcerated in federal and state prisons and county jails in 2002. Of those incarcerated, about 887,700 were African American (818,900 men, 68,800 women). In California, a total of 159,390 people are currently incarcerated. Of that number, Hispanics, Blacks and Whites each comprise about a third of the total prison population, according to the California Department of Corrections.
While some African American pundits have expressed concern about the disproportionately high numbers of incarcerated Blacks, with the exception of UC Santa Cruz professor Angela Davis, none have mounted any sizable opposition to the issues of systemic bias or corporate exploitation of inmate labor. Most conservatives—including African Americans—believe that increasing the number of prisons in the nation is necessary and that it's responsible for a decade-long decline of crime rates.
"[The high number of Blacks in prison] is generally interpreted as evidence that African American people are arrested out of proportion to their numbers in society, since they constitute only 13 percent of the population," wrote conservative John McWhorter, an African American UC Berkeley professor in his book Losing the Race: Self Sabotage in African American America. "However, the figures must be seen in light of the fact that as sad as it is, nationwide African Americans commit not 13 percent, but 42 percent of the violent crimes in the country. In other words, contrary to the idea that African Americans are arrested disproportionately, their proportion of the prison population neatly reflects the rate at which they commit crimes," writes McWhorter.
Angela Davis, however, sees prisons more as a modern-day plantation, where expanding corporate interests vie for control, playing on a society that ignores the actual socio-economic conditions responsible for why people commit crimes.
"Prisons thus perform a feat of magic. Or rather the people who continually vote in new prison bonds and tacitly assent to a proliferating network of prisons and jails have been tricked into believing in the magic of imprisonment," Davis wrote in a Colorlines Magazine article. "But prisons do not disappear problems, they disappear human beings. And the practice of disappearing vast numbers of people from poor, immigrant, and racially marginalized communities has literally become big business."
"There's a legacy going back to slavery," said panelist Atenra, who argued that large numbers of African Americans in prison can be traced back to being disenfranchised as an ethnic group, beginning with slavery and continuing today. He also pointed out that convict leasing agreements between private entrepreneurs and states first appeared with the abolition of legal slavery. Subsequently, Southern states passed the notorious "black codes," which placed severe restrictions on freed slaves and effectively guaranteed a steady flow of inmate labor to exploit.
"When you have dominated a group of people... controlled them psychologically and physically, and then all of a sudden you set them free, they're not in the mindset, or have the means, to fend for themselves, to do for themselves. This is what we're seeing from the end of slavery after the Civil War, all the way up to 1954 with Brown vs. the Board of Education…. There was institutional racism, policies that kept us in that place, [along with] poor education or no education," he added.
While most of the panelists viewed the incarceration problem through a socio-historical lens, others in the audience viewed the issue specifically as one of economics, the political pathos of poverty in America.
"I know race is a big deal, but it is about class…it's poor people that are in prison—people with no economic or political voice," said Modesta Brown of the California Coalition for Women Prisoners. "We need to identify [the prison-industrial complex] as the money maker that it is. Right now, they are building prisons before they even have the prisoners to fill them. If we can identify it as being a dysfunctional system, then we can do something about it."
Even though Kalonji said that he was somewhat disappointed with Saturday's relatively meager turnout of about 37 people, he aims to create a larger organization to address the prison-industrial complex, among other criminal justice-related issues. He offered one more possible solution:
"I don't believe that we can't make change. The established order operates as it does, in terms of unethical and inequitable treatment of us, because we allow it. We need to take responsibility and demand better treatment."
© 2003-2006 Southland Publishing, All Rights Reserved
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
LULAC Resolution for Release of Ramsey Muniz
LULAC Resolution for Release of Ramsey Muniz
Posted on Saturday, July 29 @ 16:47:02 MDT by editor
Resolution
SUPPORT FOR THE RELEASE OF RAMSEY MUNIZ
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz is a native of Corpus Christi, Texas; and
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz contributed to the Chicano Movement during the 1970s as a leader fighting for justice and equality for all Mexican Americans throughout the United States; and
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz was a great Texas gubernatorial candidate for La Raza Unida Party – a political party established and developed solely by Mexican Americans; and
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz efforts and contribution are recognized and fully noted as part of our Mexican-American history; and
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz is serving a term of life without parole and was assigned to remain imprisoned in Leavenworth, Kansas, and now sits in the USP Florence High Penitentiary in Colorado; and
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz is serving a life sentence under the three strike rule which we feel is unconstitutional and inhumane; and
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz, now 64 years old, who was housed in the United States Medical Center in Springfield, Missouri, as a result of complication from a life- threatening surgery performed in August of 2005 and who has not fully recovered form his medical needs; and
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz is in need of further surgery and returning him to the penitentiary could worsen his already fragile condition; and
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz has been a model prisoner for the past 11 years who was to be housed near his family in Three Rivers, Texas, as ordered by Federal Judge Paul Brown;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the League of United Latin American Citizens Council 1 build support and unity to staunchly advocate and seek the immediate humanitarian release of Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz from prison.
Adopted this 1st day of July 2006.
Rosa Rosales
LULAC National President
http://www.lulac.org/advocacy/resolutions/2006/R28.html
Caller.com
http://www.caller.com/ccct/local_news/article/0,1641,CCCT_811_4818001,00.html
Local LULAC issues favored
Support for soldiers, Ramsey Muniz passes
By Anthony Martinez Beven Caller-Times
July 2, 2006
Both local LULAC chapters reveled in support shown Saturday by the national organization for two resolutions tied to Corpus Christi.
Delegates at the national League of United Latin American Citizens convention passed without dissent a resolution calling for the release of Ramsey Muniz, a former area lawyer and candidate for governor in the early 1970s.
Muniz, 64, is serving a life sentence in federal prison after three drug-related felony convictions during a 17-year period. Arguing his health is failing and adequate health care services are lacking, LULAC approved a call for his release during the national convention in Milwaukee. The convention ended Saturday.
LULAC Council 1, based in Corpus Christi, had been leading the initiative, and chapters across Texas have passed a similar statewide resolution.
"For the state of Texas, I was very happy. For the national level, I was very surprised because 1,000 members voted unanimously for the humanitarian release of Ramsey," said Gambi Gamboa, Council 1 civil rights chairman.
The organization wants to see, for humanitarian reasons, that he gets let out and spends the last few years with his family, Gamboa said from Milwaukee. He said the national council is requesting the U.S. Justice Department intervene and help facilitate the release of Muniz.
Another resolution passed that seeks community support, particularly among employers, for soldiers coming back from the war in Iraq.
Nancy Vera, president of LULAC Council 4444, said national support for the resolution highlights that though LULAC is a Hispanic civil rights organization, it stands behind the United States.
"We hold true our traditions and our heritage, there's no question of our loyalty to the United States," Vera said. "This is our home. This where we were born, many of us."
Vera said Council 4444 is working closely with the local chapter of Blue Star Mothers, a national group of moms whose sons and daughters are soldiers in Iraq and other places who offer support to families whose children have been killed in the war.
A third resolution regarding the boycott of Telemundo television network and its advertisers after TV personality Johnny Canales claims he was discriminated against for his Mexican origin was tabled, said Gonzalo Tamez, Council 4444 vice president and a convention delegate.
Joe Ortiz, district director for area LULAC chapters, recently said discrimination prompted Canales' music show to be canceled earlier this year.
"Because it's under negotiation they think they are going to be able to come to some kind of agreement," said Tamez, who attended the convention on behalf of Council 4444. However, if negotiations fail, LULAC may consider a national resolution in favor of Canales, he said.
Contact Anthony Martinez Beven at 886-3792 or bevena@ caller.com
Copyright 2006, Caller.com. All Rights Reserved.
Posted on Saturday, July 29 @ 16:47:02 MDT by editor
Resolution
SUPPORT FOR THE RELEASE OF RAMSEY MUNIZ
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz is a native of Corpus Christi, Texas; and
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz contributed to the Chicano Movement during the 1970s as a leader fighting for justice and equality for all Mexican Americans throughout the United States; and
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz was a great Texas gubernatorial candidate for La Raza Unida Party – a political party established and developed solely by Mexican Americans; and
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz efforts and contribution are recognized and fully noted as part of our Mexican-American history; and
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz is serving a term of life without parole and was assigned to remain imprisoned in Leavenworth, Kansas, and now sits in the USP Florence High Penitentiary in Colorado; and
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz is serving a life sentence under the three strike rule which we feel is unconstitutional and inhumane; and
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz, now 64 years old, who was housed in the United States Medical Center in Springfield, Missouri, as a result of complication from a life- threatening surgery performed in August of 2005 and who has not fully recovered form his medical needs; and
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz is in need of further surgery and returning him to the penitentiary could worsen his already fragile condition; and
Whereas, Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz has been a model prisoner for the past 11 years who was to be housed near his family in Three Rivers, Texas, as ordered by Federal Judge Paul Brown;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the League of United Latin American Citizens Council 1 build support and unity to staunchly advocate and seek the immediate humanitarian release of Mr. Ramiro R. Muniz from prison.
Adopted this 1st day of July 2006.
Rosa Rosales
LULAC National President
http://www.lulac.org/advocacy/resolutions/2006/R28.html
Caller.com
http://www.caller.com/ccct/local_news/article/0,1641,CCCT_811_4818001,00.html
Local LULAC issues favored
Support for soldiers, Ramsey Muniz passes
By Anthony Martinez Beven Caller-Times
July 2, 2006
Both local LULAC chapters reveled in support shown Saturday by the national organization for two resolutions tied to Corpus Christi.
Delegates at the national League of United Latin American Citizens convention passed without dissent a resolution calling for the release of Ramsey Muniz, a former area lawyer and candidate for governor in the early 1970s.
Muniz, 64, is serving a life sentence in federal prison after three drug-related felony convictions during a 17-year period. Arguing his health is failing and adequate health care services are lacking, LULAC approved a call for his release during the national convention in Milwaukee. The convention ended Saturday.
LULAC Council 1, based in Corpus Christi, had been leading the initiative, and chapters across Texas have passed a similar statewide resolution.
"For the state of Texas, I was very happy. For the national level, I was very surprised because 1,000 members voted unanimously for the humanitarian release of Ramsey," said Gambi Gamboa, Council 1 civil rights chairman.
The organization wants to see, for humanitarian reasons, that he gets let out and spends the last few years with his family, Gamboa said from Milwaukee. He said the national council is requesting the U.S. Justice Department intervene and help facilitate the release of Muniz.
Another resolution passed that seeks community support, particularly among employers, for soldiers coming back from the war in Iraq.
Nancy Vera, president of LULAC Council 4444, said national support for the resolution highlights that though LULAC is a Hispanic civil rights organization, it stands behind the United States.
"We hold true our traditions and our heritage, there's no question of our loyalty to the United States," Vera said. "This is our home. This where we were born, many of us."
Vera said Council 4444 is working closely with the local chapter of Blue Star Mothers, a national group of moms whose sons and daughters are soldiers in Iraq and other places who offer support to families whose children have been killed in the war.
A third resolution regarding the boycott of Telemundo television network and its advertisers after TV personality Johnny Canales claims he was discriminated against for his Mexican origin was tabled, said Gonzalo Tamez, Council 4444 vice president and a convention delegate.
Joe Ortiz, district director for area LULAC chapters, recently said discrimination prompted Canales' music show to be canceled earlier this year.
"Because it's under negotiation they think they are going to be able to come to some kind of agreement," said Tamez, who attended the convention on behalf of Council 4444. However, if negotiations fail, LULAC may consider a national resolution in favor of Canales, he said.
Contact Anthony Martinez Beven at 886-3792 or bevena@ caller.com
Copyright 2006, Caller.com. All Rights Reserved.
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
This is for Carl Lewis and the deadbeats he ruled in favor of
90 DAY NOTICE FOR SECTION 8 TENANCIES
On 6/13/05 the California Supreme Court ruled in the case of Wasatch Property Management v. Degrate that a landlord who terminates a tenancy agreement with a tenan3 who is on the Section 8 program where the eviction is not for cause (i.e. rules violations etc.) is required to give that tenant a 90 days’ notice to quit.
On 6/13/05 the California Supreme Court ruled in the case of Wasatch Property Management v. Degrate that a landlord who terminates a tenancy agreement with a tenan3 who is on the Section 8 program where the eviction is not for cause (i.e. rules violations etc.) is required to give that tenant a 90 days’ notice to quit.
This is for Carl Lewis and the deadbeats he ruled in favor of
90 DAY NOTICE FOR SECTION 8 TENANCIES
On 6/13/05 the California Supreme Court ruled in the case of Wasatch Property Management v. Degrate that a landlord who terminates a tenancy agreement with a tenan3 who is on the Section 8 program where the eviction is not for cause (i.e. rules violations etc.) is required to give that tenant a 90 days’ notice to quit.
On 6/13/05 the California Supreme Court ruled in the case of Wasatch Property Management v. Degrate that a landlord who terminates a tenancy agreement with a tenan3 who is on the Section 8 program where the eviction is not for cause (i.e. rules violations etc.) is required to give that tenant a 90 days’ notice to quit.
Saturday, June 03, 2006
We Know, We're From Here
Dear Air America & John Kelley,
Team Kenedeno & Associates
(E Advocacy Architecture)
Specializing in South Texas Social Structure.
"Engaging the average citizen in the formulation of Public Policy" is our mission @ Team Kenedeno. The Net is a powerful force for change -- and a dynamic tool for citizen education and action. Read the latest research on citizen participation online, the stories and experiences of coalitions, corporate clients, and others working in the cyber trenches, and discover the potential to become an active participant in online democracy.
Hear @ TEAM KENEDENO we are building the VOTE “back together again”.
We have earned our place.
If you insist, we will earn it again.
It is representative of how every South Texan should speak up. You might call it anger I call it passion. Passion is WATT you felt on TALK RADIO this Friday Morning. If you weren’t there YOU should have been. I am sure a transcript will be readily provided upon request.
FYI: Judge JAG was TARDY. Callers could have called in when the BELL RANG. But then again Maybe JAG had a legitimate reason for his unexplained TARDY. Remember the Sandra WATTS Jury “message sending” fiasco. Did this guy end up in JAGS court and allowed “push and pull” alliances to unite and rendezvous at the RADIO Station,…… TARDY?
Where is Ganschow when he is needed?
CCISD’s finest in Security / Attendance in the Broomfield Style.
The caller was attempting to ENGAGE the AVERAGE CITIZEN by making a simple statement addressing the acknowledgment that the JUDGE of the Truancy Court was Tardy. WHY did the host not address the impromptness and allow JAG to respond?
You know WATT Mr Kelly,
ü homework - a must study of Mike Wallace.
Shouldn’t he JAG a fine for the dead airtime?
This message is slated and designed…….
It is perfectly natural for Nueces County Judges to show up tardy.
Mr. Kelly states, “He didn’t have time to take any calls”.
This subtle tactic sent a one sided message and a severe blow to public defeatist sentiment.
Whether he realized it or not, that was a WATTS element mouthpiece.
Then all of the TAX Write Offs JOES try to sell us as charity.
There are a “few good men” in the bunch.
My regards Judge Greenwell, Randy Maldonado, Robert Zamora, Joe Flores, Juan Garcia and John La Rue.
There are some that need to be removed from status and position.
Mr. Hector Canales of the “TWO FER” clan
Barbie Girl’s partner
Mr. “Best Little Door House”, Cocoy sends his regards
And I thought I had seen a blue ghost?
That behavior is an embarrassment to the two boards; where do you “think” you sit so high?
And I know that is not why you “think” you sit so high.
Resign step down and go back to your “HOMETOWN”
This is MY Town.
How bout JUAN MORE!?!
Wednesday, May 17, 2006
Transparent and Electronic Documentation....
Why?
One example, and I will build from it;
Say right now, today we have attorneys who are good; but know one knows their name. They are NOT "in" with any machine or Cliqua, they possess a very little financial warchest but they possess an integrity of a Champion Defender and a record (pedigree) to prove it.
WATT if the track record of each attorney was electronically accessible?
After all, it is their "WORK PRODUCT" and OUR Public Information.
The support is very unspoken?
I wonder why?
The Transcripts could be transmitted to the web as the trials are over.
The 13th COA could recieve the Court Record immediately and the cost would only be incurred by the new IT upgrade.
Right now Nueces County is a leader in this technology. There are nano-technology collections of vast amounts of data only for an elite few to use for their own good. Ask around, ask the Judges about the Social Studies and the enormous amounts of personal information being exploited for many agendas other than HOMELAND SECURITY and the DRUG COURT.
So anyways, WATT if I am challenging an incumbent and I want to show the people why I am the best man for JOB. I can refer voters to my record and the opponent can refer the voters to his record as well.
What is the problem with each candidate referring the voters to browse their accomplishments?
This is a good thing!
Many other facets of this future courthouse to be in Nueces County.
One example, and I will build from it;
Say right now, today we have attorneys who are good; but know one knows their name. They are NOT "in" with any machine or Cliqua, they possess a very little financial warchest but they possess an integrity of a Champion Defender and a record (pedigree) to prove it.
WATT if the track record of each attorney was electronically accessible?
After all, it is their "WORK PRODUCT" and OUR Public Information.
The support is very unspoken?
I wonder why?
The Transcripts could be transmitted to the web as the trials are over.
The 13th COA could recieve the Court Record immediately and the cost would only be incurred by the new IT upgrade.
Right now Nueces County is a leader in this technology. There are nano-technology collections of vast amounts of data only for an elite few to use for their own good. Ask around, ask the Judges about the Social Studies and the enormous amounts of personal information being exploited for many agendas other than HOMELAND SECURITY and the DRUG COURT.
So anyways, WATT if I am challenging an incumbent and I want to show the people why I am the best man for JOB. I can refer voters to my record and the opponent can refer the voters to his record as well.
What is the problem with each candidate referring the voters to browse their accomplishments?
This is a good thing!
Many other facets of this future courthouse to be in Nueces County.
Friday, April 14, 2006
Good times may soon be here again for the pipeline and natural gas folks, thanks to Capelo’s HB 1931
Bad Bills: 5/23/2003
(full site text search)
Back to the Future
No More Piping Up
HB 1931 • Rep. Jaime Capelo • (D-Corpus Christi)
Texas pipeline operators and natural gas producers certainly have it rough these days. Under regulatory reforms passed last session, every time they want to build a new pipeline, companies actually have to tell the public about it. And, horror of horrors, citizens can even challenge the project in a public hearing. It was so much easier back in the good old days when operators could just snag land and build their pipeline without dealing with complaints from the Little People.
Well, good times may soon be here again for the pipeline and natural gas folks, thanks to Capelo’s HB 1931. This quaint industry handout repeals section 86.056 of the Natural Resources Code–that oh-so-pesky public notification requirement for new pipeline construction. This provision arose from a longstanding controversy over the Longhorn Pipeline project that so enraged South Austin residents, and was passed in 2001 as part of Railroad Commission of Texas Sunset legislation. It requires any company planning to build a new pipeline across three or more counties to inform affected communities through newspaper announcements at least 30 days, but no more than a year, before construction begins. The statute also gives affected citizens the right to request a hearing before the Railroad Commission to contest the building permit.
The pipeline and natural gas lobby claims that this is ultra-liberal over-regulation of industry that needlessly delays projects and costs too much money. They brought the bill to Capelo, who apparently saw a chance to help afflicted corporations such as Koch Pipeline Company, Copano Energy, Occidental Petroleum Corporation, Sunoco, Duke Energy, and El Paso Corporation–many of which do business in his district. Capelo aide Chris Payne said the public notification statute is unnecessary since the Railroad Commission already enforces vigorous pipeline safety standards. "There are safeguards in place," he said. "The public can always call the Railroad Commission and complain."
HB 1931 has so far sailed through the Legislature with little opposition. The House Regulated Industries Commit-tee unanimously approved the bill on April 3rd after just 10 minutes of public testimony from four industry lobbyists. Tom "Smitty" Smith of Public Citizen was the only person registered against the bill, but he couldn’t testify at the hearing because of a scheduling conflict. HB 1931 then passed the full House almost unnoticed. At press time, the bill was still pending in the Senate Natural Resources Committee, though passage is all but assured. That would be a shame, Smith says, because the bill is gutting hard-won regulatory reforms. Sadly, you get the sense he’s said that about too many bills this session.
(full site text search)
Back to the Future
No More Piping Up
HB 1931 • Rep. Jaime Capelo • (D-Corpus Christi)
Texas pipeline operators and natural gas producers certainly have it rough these days. Under regulatory reforms passed last session, every time they want to build a new pipeline, companies actually have to tell the public about it. And, horror of horrors, citizens can even challenge the project in a public hearing. It was so much easier back in the good old days when operators could just snag land and build their pipeline without dealing with complaints from the Little People.
Well, good times may soon be here again for the pipeline and natural gas folks, thanks to Capelo’s HB 1931. This quaint industry handout repeals section 86.056 of the Natural Resources Code–that oh-so-pesky public notification requirement for new pipeline construction. This provision arose from a longstanding controversy over the Longhorn Pipeline project that so enraged South Austin residents, and was passed in 2001 as part of Railroad Commission of Texas Sunset legislation. It requires any company planning to build a new pipeline across three or more counties to inform affected communities through newspaper announcements at least 30 days, but no more than a year, before construction begins. The statute also gives affected citizens the right to request a hearing before the Railroad Commission to contest the building permit.
The pipeline and natural gas lobby claims that this is ultra-liberal over-regulation of industry that needlessly delays projects and costs too much money. They brought the bill to Capelo, who apparently saw a chance to help afflicted corporations such as Koch Pipeline Company, Copano Energy, Occidental Petroleum Corporation, Sunoco, Duke Energy, and El Paso Corporation–many of which do business in his district. Capelo aide Chris Payne said the public notification statute is unnecessary since the Railroad Commission already enforces vigorous pipeline safety standards. "There are safeguards in place," he said. "The public can always call the Railroad Commission and complain."
HB 1931 has so far sailed through the Legislature with little opposition. The House Regulated Industries Commit-tee unanimously approved the bill on April 3rd after just 10 minutes of public testimony from four industry lobbyists. Tom "Smitty" Smith of Public Citizen was the only person registered against the bill, but he couldn’t testify at the hearing because of a scheduling conflict. HB 1931 then passed the full House almost unnoticed. At press time, the bill was still pending in the Senate Natural Resources Committee, though passage is all but assured. That would be a shame, Smith says, because the bill is gutting hard-won regulatory reforms. Sadly, you get the sense he’s said that about too many bills this session.
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
TWO FER THE VENDIDO!
TWO FER Q: Do you know, sir, whether or not you aided and -- you were aided and abetted by Rene Rodriguez in depriving Citgo of its honest service of its lawyer -- you, sir, whether you sold out -- you sold out to Rene Rodriguez?
A I did not.
Q You did not sell out. Have you ever heard the word in Spanish called "Vendido", V-E-N-D-I-D-O?
A Yes, I have.
Q And that's what you are, right, sir, a "Vendido"?
A No, I think that was -- the term was used for you and your family during the senatorial race.
Q Yes, sir. Yes, sir. That's what you are, right?
A No, that's not.
Q Yes, sir.
A I think that's one of the reasons why you're so upset.
Q I'm upset because I cannot stand a corrupt lawyer like you, sir.
MR. HARRIS: We're going to move to strike the sidebar.
A I did not.
Q You did not sell out. Have you ever heard the word in Spanish called "Vendido", V-E-N-D-I-D-O?
A Yes, I have.
Q And that's what you are, right, sir, a "Vendido"?
A No, I think that was -- the term was used for you and your family during the senatorial race.
Q Yes, sir. Yes, sir. That's what you are, right?
A No, that's not.
Q Yes, sir.
A I think that's one of the reasons why you're so upset.
Q I'm upset because I cannot stand a corrupt lawyer like you, sir.
MR. HARRIS: We're going to move to strike the sidebar.
Monday, March 06, 2006
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)