The Spirit of the Brown Act (Entry # 801)
Not only is this the three year anniversery of this livejournal, but I happened to check how many entries had been made heretofor, and this will be the 801st. See more under Previously on Emosnail.
Yesterday's Impeachment
Yesterday the Senate was to consider my removal for the third time. Unfortunately, they failed to call the removal hearing in the spirit of the brown act and protections given by the ASUCD bylaws for accused individuals, so the removal hearing couldn't go though.
So it turns out the strongest charge against me was that Senator Kristen Birdsall thought it was suspicious and "against the spirit of the brown act" that when Elections Committee member Van Schoelandt pulled her into the ASUCD Conference room on the evening of the 12th the Court was there, along with the case plaintiff and defendant and Van Schoelandt, while meanwhile the Senate was meetings against the spirit of the brown act in a closed session that was not allowed by any of the provisions of the Brown Act OR any of the provisions of ASUCD standing rules.
It is in fact a pretty farcical charge. The fact of the matter is that, "in the spirit of the brown act" we were variously having open meeting and mostly sitting around informally. Numerous people freely stopped by, including President Caliph Assagai, Senator Ari Kalfayan, Commission Chair Gregory Russel, and Commission Chair Genna Carnes (who will recall commenting on how small the keys on my phone are .. they're pretty ridiculously small in fact). And then there's the time I walked down the hall and announced "hey if anyone else wants to join us in the conference room we have more chairs in there" to the people sitting on the floor. I don't know who was witness to that since I wasn't paying attention to whom I was near at the time. The fact is the only person excluded from the room at any point was Plaintiff Joe Harney, when we discussed matters related to his case.
And lets not forget that Kristen Birdsall and Chad Van Schoelandt burst into the room relatively unexpectedly for those of us in there. And while they were in there Caliph Assagai popped in and commented prophetically "well this looks shady." If it was a secret meeting, it was one really really badly kept secret. Fact is, it would have been "against the spirit of the brown act" for us to exclude these people, and we did not.
And while this was ongoing the Senate was meeting behind closed doors for undisclosed purposes, CLEARLY against the Brown Act (the proverbial crickets were chirping when I asked if any of the senators could explain under which allowable circumstance the Senate had met), so I don't see how you can even begin to challenge ME while you have that hanging over your head. Word of advise, it'll help your case if you bite the bullet, admit you were wrong about at least that, and formally make those minutes available to the public. The Elections Committee admitted when they were wrong. I once notified the media 2 days rather than 3 days before a hearing, and despite the fact that the media was in fact present, I had the integrity to admit I was wrong, declare a mistrial, and schedule a new hearing which was done correctly.
In summary: I am charged for violating the Brown Act by enforcing the Brown Act during a time when the Senate was in violation of the Brown Act.
Justice Dies In Silence - The Myth of Non-News
But actually most alarming of all is the fact that the Aggie decided it wasn't noteworthy to report that the head of one branch of govenment, the head of an important committee, and two other important officers were up for impeachment. A representative of the Aggie said that they couldn't confirm whether or not the Senate intended to remove us. Let there be no question, you don't call removal hearings if you don't intend to remove someone. You don't impeach a chief justice just to ask him questions. They didn't impeach Clinton because they wanted the juicy details of his illicit sex life. On top of this, Van Schoelandt had offered to Senator Birdsall that she schedule the matter under presentations and thus not hold any of us liable for removal -- Birdsall obliquely rejected this. As such, she has quite clearly reserved for herself the right to remove any of the persons she attempted to remove.
I mean, why make it needlessly contentious and hostile by notifying people that they are considering their removal if you are not in fact considering their removal. If we are not in fact being considered for removal, and Birdsall for some reason just loves impeachment hearings, I would ask that she officially waive her right to dismiss us pursuant of the upcoming removal hearing which will doubtlessly occur. I ask the media when she tells you she doesn't intend to remove us to ask if she waives her right to remove us. I believe this will cut through her equivication to the dark heart of the matter: she wishes to remove us without setting off bothersome warning flags first.
While we're on that subject, aside from the fact that none of us were conclusively notified, the notification that some of us got didn't even include our names nor any other information that Birdsall thoguht she could get away with not divulging. I would like to state that its my firm belief that the names of the accused are critical (they were all blind-CCed -- their EMAIL address didn't even appear on the inbox -- and I didn't get an email at all), and I would like to ask that all other Senators make a pledge to not endeavour to keep people in the dark until the last minute if you plan to try to remove them -- tell them what the basic nature of your charge is at the time you notify them of it. I've had to ask the Senate to consider the removal of justices who weren't coming to meetings before, and at the time I notified them I forwarded them all documents related to Court attendance keeping, and what I intended to say -- its really not that hard and furthermore keeps people from feeling like its personal.
The Governator is Watching
Justice Reed works in Governor Schwarzenegger's office. According to her, she was talking to him the other day, and mentioned she is on the ASUCD Supreme Court. To this he responded "ASUCD, they're the ones with the scandal right?"
omgwtf! I can't believe I heard that right. I suppose its not so shocking to hear that they read the paper from the nearest University over there (Sacremento being just 11 miles away). But yeah so, The Governator is watching. I submit that he probably reads this livejournal.* =D
See Also: 72% of respondants to Aggie poll disagree with Senate's recent action.
*I fear some readers are dense enough to believe I'm serious. I'm not. About him reading this livejournal I mean. The interchange with Justice Reed is true.
Random Fact of the Day
The name of the State of Idaho originated from a hoax?!?!
Picture of the Day
I saw a car in the Colleges parking lot with a boot on the wheel and a big notice on the front from TAPS. I didn't know they did that -- I'd have taken a picture for the wiki but like I said, my camera is kaput. Its in the corner by the domes if someone wants to photo it.
Previously on Emosnail
Three Years Ago Today: E.M.O.S.N.A.I.L. CREATED - After a Glam Rock party in which my bike, peacoat, pocketwatch, and gloves were stolen, I crash with a bunch of other people at Amie Gutierrez', meet Amy Zimmerman. Come home to my freezing apartment (heater was totally broken) and create this livejournal. I'm told the poloroid picture Amy took of me for her wall o' people is still there.
Two Years Ago Yesterday: Limp-Wristed Fist Shaking - Kristy and I make an expedition into Sacramento, arrive late for a party at the Loyola House. George Andrews, famous for "saying daffy things," gives me another funny quote. The next day Little Christie has her birthday and I get sick from eating most of a large pizza myself and then drinking. For her birthday this year we went to the bar at Sophia's, and Rob Roy and I had a much needed friendly chat. Most importantly though, this entry initiated a serious debate about the proper way to shake one's fist.
Two Years Ago Today: One Year - After one year I'd posted 332 entries (.91 / day). Since then I've really been slacking, with .64 per day since then for a total average of .73 per day. At this moment I've received 7.0 comments per entry and 1.221 comments to every comment I've made (4,606 / 5,625). Also, I pwn Professor Siverson. But most importantly this entry included the first "year ago today."
Year Ago Wednesday: Entertainment Council Tahoe Retreat - ASUCD Entertainment Council goes on a retreat to Tahoe. In the spirit of the Brown Act, I record our adventures in a thorough photo essay. AND
Year Ago Wednesday: Jesus Love Me, Not Ian Watson - Jesus himself tells the Bob Jones Institute that I'm cooler than them, and Aggie columnist Ian Watson gets butthurt over my aeroflot t-shirt. I write a letter to the editor in response to Watson, he makes some vague reference to it later, then plagiarizes my idea to talk shit on the "Ban Taco Bell" protestors, then gets fired for plagiarism.
Year Ago Today: Phone Post: Internet's Out - Despite living in a freaking freezer due to a broken heater (compare to two years previous), and lacking internet access, I make a phone post to commemorate the Emosnail livejournal birthday.
Related
Chairman Leathers' Account