Some say that one of the new council members-elect will be challenged for eligibility to accept office. The issue raised is whether the candidate qualifies, based on the one year residency requirement. If a challenge is filed, voters can thank our Town Attorney Martin Brannan. In his Response to Motion to Expedite, in the action brought against the Town and Mike Jewitt by Candidate John Prutch, Brannan has already adjudicated the issue:
“Challenges concerning alleged procedural violations of the election process must be brought prior to the actual election. Sherman v. City of Tempe, 202Ariz. 339, 342, ¶ 9, 45 P.3d 336, 339 (2002); citing Tilson v. Mofford, 153 Ariz. 468, 470, 737 P.2d 1367, 1369 (1987) (holding that “[p]rocedures leading up to an election cannot be questioned after the people have voted, but … must be challenged before the election is held”)(citing Kerby v. Griffin, 48Ariz. 434, 444-46, 62 P.2d 1131, 1135-36 (1936)).”
A court action has been brought to contest the election of council members. Last week’s court hearing in Phoenix resulted in a change in venue. That is, the hearing is reset for 8:30 am Monday April 16 in the Superior Court in Parker at 1316 Kofa Avenue. This is another chance to join your neighbors to observe the proceedings from the public seats. Your tax dollars are paying for most of the cost of this contest. The action brought by candidate for Town Council John Prutch will likely be decided quickly to preserve the integrity of the election. At issue is having Mr. Prutch placed onthe ballot for the May 15 general election in a timely manner. Grave concerns exist as to the handling of the entire election process by the Town of Quartzsite leadership.
The FBI is investigating Quartzsite leadership regarding
corruption in the entire system.
Now today, the Quartzsite Magistrate Court clerk reports that the computer hard disk drive “burned”. Technicians are trying to restore the data from the hard disk drive. Surprisingly, there is said to be no backup copy of the data.
Meanwhile, the judge is away all this week at a judges’ conference. Since Tuesday, at least one defendant was told he cannot see his own court file until the Judge returns on Tuesday March 6.
Video copyright Moore Photo Imaging, S.W. Desert News – Thank you!
Minute marker
HIGHLIGHTS February 14 2012 Council Meeting
2:45
Taft explains a weekend equipment disappearance of taxpayer owned equipment for use on private property. The backhoe was apparently used to make repairs to the Eatery property. Eatery employee Jerry Lukkasson is a candidate for mayor, but does not currently hold any office. He was invoiced for the equipment use, not the restaurant, per Taft. Taft does not deny that the Town is competing with private enterprise, just charging more for it.
5:55
The Town’s budget for legal expenses is bust. Current Quartzsite Town Manager Taft glosses over the heavy legal expenses incurred for the town mismanagement:“Our legal department budget has currently expensed up to 97 percent of its budget. As a result of legal actions taken and defended by the Town of Quartzsite. Thus far, no judgements have been set or paid by the Town. So the expense of legal fees have been proactively effected. “ Taft will surely be asked what she meant by “proactively”.
35:20
I.G.A. Election. [Note that the Town apparently is already well committed to this election. Procedures have already been underway for weeks. The County has already held training sessions for poll clerks and printed ballots and planned the election, prior to this late agreement.]
Ed Foster has filed a COMPLAINT with the Town of Quartzsite alleging election law violation by opposing candidate Jerry Lukkasson. It is about signs on Main Street. Supporters of Foster for mayor in the March 13 Primary Election have properly placed signs in the public right of way at various prominent locations. The signs are the typical lightweight temporary signs which pop up for any election. One chosen location is directly in front of a restaurant where Lukkasson works. Foster claims that the restaurant then positioned illegal commercial signs closely and right in front of the campaign signs. The portable signs promote the café. They are movable at will, tall, and typically taken in at night. With the commercial signs in place, passing traffic cannot see the campaign signs, say several witnesses. Photos support those claims.
The circumstances may describe a crime. Foster’s complaint is supported by Arizona Revised Statute 16-1019A. Political signs; printed materials; tampering; classification
It is a class 2 misdemeanor for any person to knowingly remove, alter, deface or cover any political sign of any candidate for public office …
Additionally, Foster claims that the signs for the restaurant appear to violate a Town ordinance prohibiting commercial signs in the public right of way. Today, 3 police vehicles were in the parking lot of the restaurant for a lengthy period. Current Chief Gilbert, Sgt. Garcia, and another officer were probably inside. They apparently took no notice or interest in any violation just outside the building, where a photographer was busy near the signs. No citation or arrest is known to have occurred.
January 27. This just in: “- resolve to be honest at all events; and if in your own judment you cannot
be an honest lawyer, resolve to be honest without being a lawyer.” Abraham Lincoln
January 24. Today’s council meeting business was preceded by an unusual and rambling statement by current Town Attorney Martin Brannan. During the announcements and reports segment, he quoted Theodore Roosevelt, then took a swing at this blogger, politically speaking.
The basis of Brannan’s criticism toward me seems to have stemmed from 3 (possibly unwelcome) Open Meeting Law violation complaints, submitted yesterday by me and my wife to the Arizona Attorney General. Those complaints were submitted accurately.
1. Brannan made a false statement: “Doug Gilford published yesterday that today’s meeting is illegal because the notice of the agenda announcing the meeting was posted 23 hours and 24 minutes before the meeting and not a full 24 hours before the meeting. He is wrong.” In actuality, the notice was not posted until at least 10:35 am. That is what was published. One of 3 possibilites exist. Brannan apparently did not “go figure”, or was incapable of figuring, or is a liar.
2. But that was not the only or greatest issue… Brannan began the Town’s defense for this late website posting. He referred to technical difficulties which prevented posting of the notice [online]. If that is true, there was still obviously plenty of time to overcome technical difficulties.
[Paragraph corrected:] The agenda is compiled on Thursdays before Tuesday meetings.That notice was created and signed Friday. The bulletin boards in town were posted last Friday. So too could the website have been updated on Friday. The notice did not make it onto the website until 3 days later. “Not getting around to it” is not a technical difficulty.
Video copyright Moore Photo Imaging, S.W. Desert News
3. The Town has used this “technical difficulties” excuse extensively for the past year. The writer made a complaint to the Town on its official complaint form last March 2011 about the deplorable condition of the website for the first 3 months of 2011. That complaint went unanswered.
4. Brannan did not deny that the public notice to announce today’s meeting was in fact posted late on the website.
5. As if Arizona Statutes are not important, the clerk did not correct the written time of posting on the notice. Even if technical difficulties existed, it should have been corrected [to “10:45”]. It states that the posting was made at 9:00 am. So, the notice creates yet another error and potential violation.
6. Additional evidence and information will now be submitted to the Attorney General to supplement the complaints. The Attorney General’s office will make the decision whether there were violations or not. Despite Brannan’s politically flavored statement, the Statutes are intended to be, and are indeed clear on Arizona Open Meeting Laws.
7. Readers are invited to report their own observations of the postings for this meeting.
Matthew Newman, Attorney of Parker, Arizona has refused to do business with the Town of Quartzsite. Apparently, the Town has requested Newman to represent a new defendant, as public defender, at the expense of the Town. This follows a motion yesterday by Michael Frame, Attorney and formerly the most called on public defender. He is critical of the town and indicates that he has not been paid. Please refer to yesterday’s headline, just below.
Attorney Matthew Newman expressed his viewpoint of the offer to go to work, in a court motion. Excerpts from the document:
“Upon information and belief, the current public defender [editor: Michael Frame] is not being paid for his services, and I cannot in good faith enter into any agreement with an administration as tainted as the current one.”
“It is also my belief that the current administration is specifically targeting certain individuals for prosecution for their political views.”
The Town of Quartzsite has failed to pay for the services of a certain public defender. The town provides a public defender, at the town’s expense, to criminal defendants who qualify.
Michael Frame, attorney and one of the public defenders used by the town, is still receiving cases regularly from Quartzsite Magistrate Court. He indicates that his bills for services for December and January to date are unpaid, and that the Town has refused to pay him. He has filed a motion this morning in court containing this claim. Other serious allegations are made in the motion as to Quartzsite Town Attorney Martin Brannan.
Julie Pieper in purchasing department, Finance Director Heidi Turner and finance assistant Peggy Ware. All have just been placed on “administrative leave” by Alex Taft, Quartzsite Town Manager. Most employees recently placed on leave have been terminated after a hearing. As reported on Facebook.com.
December 2011: News 13 spoke with Martin Brannan and he says he did follow some blogs online …
Martin Brannan, December 2011: “It’s a wordpress thing and I did follow it for awhile um I think that there’s nothing threatening on there but uh it’s kinda mean spirited.” [“wordpress” is a typical internet blog format]
Martin Brannan, June 2011: “I don’t read blogs”
=========
A comment by one reader of this blog: “Brannan can not factually make this statement unless he knows FOR A FACT who the Quartzsite Bagger ACTUALLY IS> ” ….. [Referring to this statement by Brannan: ]
“Despite reports to the contrary, the so-called Quartzsite Bagger is not the QuartzsiteTown Attorney or any other elected or appointed officer of the Town
of Quartzsite…”
Attorney and Public Defender Michael Frame has issued aCEASE AND DESIST LETTER to the Town of Quartzsite. Text of the letter, addressed to Alex Taft, Town Manager:
===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== =====
“From information and belief, certain Town of Quartzsite employee (s) have engaged in internet defamation, cyber bullying / intimidation, racist statements, offensive sexual comments of citizens and former town employees, anti-Semitic statements and other unprofessional, unethical and conduct unbecoming public employees.
I would write the Town Attorney, Martin Brannan with my legal concerns, but I suspect Mr. Brannan is the individual you employ who is victimizing my clients. My concerns I speak to herein are detailed in my Motion to Remove Mr. Brannan as prosecutor pending before the court.
Further, I suspect Mr. Brannan is using Town of Quartzsite resources to accomplish his malevolent goals. I demand that your employees cease and desist in the aforementioned offensive conduct.”
Quartzsite taxpayers will suffer the expense of a special prosecutor which Martin Brannan says will be hired. Brannan is contracted and being paid for the job of prosecuting cases in the Magistrate Court. The town has furnished an office for him and provided him new computer equipment. He now will have to spend a considerable amount of his paid time in explaining the many cases which he initiated, and then abandoned – to the succeeding special prosecutor. That “special” attorney, who must come from another community, will also be well paid for hours of legal work and lots of travel time – from the Town cash register.
Each million dollars lost to legal busy work and judgements averages $270 from each of the 3,700 children, parents, relatives and neighbors in Quartzsite.
======================
Brannan’s Press Release
“Despite reports to the contrary, the so-called Quartzsite Bagger is not the QuartzsiteTown Attorney or any other
elected or appointed officer of the Town of Quartzsite. The opinions
expressed on http://quartzsitebagger.wordpress.com do not represent the views
of any elected or appointed officer of the Town of Quartzsite. No elected or
appointed officer of the Town of Quartzsite profits in any way
from the sale of merchandise by Cafe Press related to the “Quartzsite Bagger”
blog.
“Notwithstanding this reality, in order for the Town Attorney
and other town officers to concentrate on the business of the town without the
distraction this “controversy” appears to have been designed to create, the
cases involving self-styled activists Ed Foster, Jennifer Jones, Michael Roth, Dana Stadler and Doug Gilford are being assigned to a special
prosecutor.”
