Friday, October 31, 2014

Endorsement Conservative Party FOR Ted Novelli, District 3 Board of Supervisors - By Philip Young

Endorsement Ted Novelli Board of Supervisors District 3 Oct 30 2014
P. C. Young   -   Director NE California Conservative Party
Endorsement Conservative Party FOR Ted Novelli, District 3 Board of Supervisors.
      When we vote November 4th we will be voting for credible, fiscally responsible representation. We vote for someone who shares our views and values. We vote for someone has both experience and proven ability to articulate position. We vote for someone who is genuine and not someone who used our vote to further an agenda that was hidden from us until they are elected.
        Ted Novelli has relevant experience, assured fiscal responsibility and requisite successes to garner an endorsement for Board of Supervisors District 3 from Conservative Party California.
         Unfortunately, Lynn Morgan has demonstrated duplicity, represents a move towards less local control, greater federal involvement more regulation and restrictions she represents outside interests and has been disingenuous.
      In any local community we desire someone who is part of the community, knows the people, the issues and has that sense and perspective of what is needed and how to accomplish their objectives.  This is perhaps one of the absolutely essential for effective local representation, if we combine this with fiscal responsibility.
             For Amador County, we find a region which is limited in developed resources and slow, if not limited, in growth, where we have a rural, rustic region steeped in history and surrounded by the natural beauty of magnificent forests and pristine rivers. The allure of the Sierra Nevada range is as close as an open door or window.
       
       Yet, we face a threat. The imminent threat of Federal encroachment, the irreversible encasement from EPA regulations and Federal Hegemony of our resources; innocently presented to us in the form of Wild and Scenic paradoxical and enticing language of sustainability; intended to ensnare our water resources in the federal bureaucracy of endangered species and biological opinions.
      The Water rights which so long have provided local residents access and use of the local resources so necessary for our living and well being; once captured by the Wild and Scenic will lock the local community all but out from the resources we enjoy and have access to.
  
      Ted Novelli understands the threat contained within W&S designation. It will drastically impact our local water rights. For that reason Ted makes the statement: “I oppose the designation of Wild and Scenic river.”
       Lynn Morgan states her support for W&S, yet its essence is to undermine local water rights, secures only a Federal Hegemony over all aspects of our river and any associated waters. One simply needs to read the language. Such language intends to inculcate environmentalist’s clause for sustainability. This is the ultimate in outside interests.
      
     “I absolutely support Wild and Scenic…what’s more important is retaining our water rights” stated Lynn Morgan UCC Oct 13 2014.

          Yet, written in the fine print of Wild and Scenic is a consignment to Federal Hegemony. It will mean whenever the Federal Government should declare its interest in this local body of water, local water rights will be conceded, and we will lose the very rights Lynn Morgan Touts as so essential.
          If we examine the record for consistency in word and deed, we immediately see a disingenuous inclination.  Lynn Morgan declares her support for the Gravity Supply Line yet never spoke of our supported GSL during her four years as Chairman of UCC.
        “Lynn never spoke in favor of  the Gravity Supply Line (GSL) in all her 4 years as chairman of UCC  to either the Board of Supervisors or the Amador Water Agency.  I know, because when it was on the agendas, I was present to speak for it at those meetings.”
          From the frequent platitudes of Lynn Morgan’s speeches, to the specious rhetoric of improved, new and consensus, there is less real content, measures and means necessary to satisfy a voter's due diligence to ascertain whether the candidate is qualified and has the substantive personality and tools required to perform their responsibilities.
           Ted Novelli, on the other hand, has ample experience, demonstrated successes and power of personal conviction, credibility and simply knows the depth and breadth of our Community to warrant a strong vote of confidence.


Philip Young
Director NE California
Conservative Party
Pine Grove Oct 30 2014

"No Casino In Plymouth" Update

Good Morning All,
Our lawsuit is going very well. Please see below.
Our motion in court in February was ultimately successful, and we believe that success will continue as we proceed with the case.
Our next fundraising event will be a Crab Feed at the beautiful Helwig Winery on January 31, 2015.

    

NO CASINO IN PLYMOUTH
Working to Preserve Rural Amador County
P.O. Box 82
Plymouth, California 95669

Status of the NCIP/CERA Lawsuit
BACKGROUND
As you are, no doubt, aware, in 2012 the Department of the Interior (DOI) issued a Record of Decision (ROD) allowing the lands of the proposed site for the Plymouth casino to be taken into trust for gaming purposes for the benefit of the “Ione Band”.  NCIP and its co- plaintiff, Citizens Equal Rights Alliance (CERA), as well as the County of Amador, filed lawsuits to prevent the property from being taken into trust for gaming purposes.  Although the County’s and NCIP/CERA’s suits have similarities, our case is more comprehensive.

In February NCIP/CERA filed an action called a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (MJP).  This motion asked Judge Nunley to void the ROD based on the first claim in our suit; that the DOI had not met the criteria established by the Supreme Court in its 2009 decision in Carcieri v. Salazar.  This decision limits the DOI’s authority to take land into trust to “recognized tribes under federal jurisdiction” in 1934.  Whether the band was recognized had already been decided in Federal District Court.  In an Order in 1992 and Final Order in 1996, Judge Karlton found the “Ione Band” was not then and had never previously been a federally recognized.  This federal court decision was not appealed and is now settled law. It is binding on the DOI and on the Ione Band – which had been permitted by Judge Nunley to intervene in our case and in the County’s case.

One of NCIP/CERA’s goals in filing for a MJP was to make Judge Nunley and other parties fully aware of Judge Karlton’s 1992 decision and to bring the case to as quick a conclusion as possible without limiting further action.   Judge Nunley denied our motion on technical grounds pertaining to the rules for filing a MJP. Specifically he concluded that, instead of the pleading in Judge Karlton’s case, our motion should be based on documents in the Administrative Record (AR). But Judge Nunley did not conclude that our motion did not have merit. In fact, he stated that the federal defendants and intervener “Ione Band” had failed to address the merits of our motion and ordered that we file a Motion for Summary Judgment (MSJ), which eliminates the technical procedural issues.

Although we disagree with Judge Nunley and would have preferred it if our MJP was granted, we succeeded in our goal of informing the parties of Judge Karlton’s decision.  In addition, our new MSJ expands on our arguments based on the Carcieri decision in the MJP. And, ironically, the AR includes all the important pleadings from Judge Karlton’s case that we used in the MJP.  If our MSJ is successful, it will resolve the entire case; the ROD will be void.  If not, we will appeal that decision as well as pursue the four other claims for relief in our original lawsuit. We filed the MSJ on October 14.

HEARING SCHEDULE
The Defendants have 60 days, until (approx. December 15, 2014) to file an opposition and cross motion.  We then have 60 days, until (approx. Feb. 15, 2015) to file an opposition and reply.  Their reply will be due on or about March 15 and the hearing date for our MSJ is scheduled for March 26, 2015.

In the meantime, some issues may be resolved in a hearing currently scheduled for Nov. 6, 2014 for the County of Amador’s case.  It is possible that Judge Nunley will continue the hearing on that case and combine it with the hearing on our motion.  Also, the defendants have previously asked for continuances and may do so again.  We will update you as necessary.  To further complicate issues, an attorney representing the Villa faction of the “Ione Band” has said that he will ask permission to intervene on their behalf. If the Villas move to intervene, a hearing on their motion may be set for December.

We will soon be posting all filings in our case and the County’s lawsuits, including any new motions as they are filed, on our website.  They can be dense, but interesting, reading. 

GOING FORWARD
Our arguments are strong and our representation is motivated and excellent.  We feel that our chances of prevailing are very good in the lower courts and would improve even more if the case is appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal. The issues in our case are so important that it could go as far as the Supreme Court.  Recent decisions such as the Carcieri case have made the Justices’ opinions on matters such as this clear and judges in lower courts generally keep that in mind.  However, our opponents have the resources of the Federal government and the deep pockets of the casino backers; we have our dedication and community support.  Experience in other areas has shown that the cost of legal action is far outweighed by the social costs, permanent loss of our rural lifestyle, costs to taxpayers both in loss of tax revenue and in additional uncompensated public expenses, and the costs of the many negative impacts to the community and local businesses due to competition with tax free tribal businesses. Of all of the issues facing our community, with the possible exception of water, this is the one that will affect our lives most significantly.

We ask your ongoing support as we continue the work to protect our community.
Your donations invested in this effort can be sent to the above address.
Thank you
NCIP and the Plymouth Community