This shouldn't even be an issue, since Jeff has the right to free speech and he, as well as anyone, can reproduce, transmit, and otherwise publish PUBLIC comments, regardless of who made them. Period. Why is even taken seriously? It would be illegal for the Commission to stifle Jeff, so it is a non-starter.
Take a look at how this all rose to the surface and who was behind it all and tells you all you need to know! This is not County government at work for the people, it is nothing but political hacks using government to shut we the people up. Do not allow them to continue to step on our Constitutional rights by showing up, standing up and speaking up.
Sounds like they are setting the table for a great lawsuit to be filed on behalf of the county constituents who they are silencing........the First Amendment is truly under assault !
Government may not regulate free speech “because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content.”
The Supreme Court has interpreted free “speech” and “press” broadly to cover not only talking, writing, and printing, but also broadcasting, using the internet, and other forms of expression.
Likewise, the government may not punish profane, vulgar or scornful criticism simply because they are offensive, but only if they can cause acts of violence by the person to whom they are directed.
[Gooding v. Wilson 405 U.S. 518 (1972); Hess v. Indiana 414 U.S. 105 (1973); Lewis v. City of New Orleans 415 U.S. 130 (1974); Lucas v. Arkansas 416 U.S. 919 (1974); Kelly v. Ohio 416 U.S. 923 (1974); Karlan v. City of Cincinnati 416 U.S. 924 (1974): Rosen v. California416 U.S. 924 (1974), etc.]
In New York Times V. Sullivan 376 US 254 (1964) the New York Times published an ad seeking donations to defend Martin Luther King Jr, on perjury charges, with several factual inaccuracies. A case was lodged by Sullivan under Alabama libel law. The Supreme court, in a unanimous decision, ruled that when a statement concerns a public figure, it is not enough to show that it is false for the press to be liable for libel.
It must be made with reckless disregard of the truth. “Actual Malice” or there is no justification to limit freedom of speech.
New York Times Co v. United States 403 U.S.713(1971), known as the Pentagon Papers Case, established a principal that the government cannot prevent publication of information unless it can prove a “clear and present danger” of grave harm to national security.
Near v. Minnesota 283 U.S. 697 (1931), established the principle that the government cannot censor or prevent the publication of information…
Justice Hugo Black argued that “only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government”
Our elected Co comms refuse to RESPOND or LISTEN to citizens about issues.. The people should not be SILENCED. Shame on the bocc for even considering this. They could have treated the requesters the same as their constituents and chosen to ignore the request to ban the peoples choice. They informed us all they do not want to work with elected officials during one of the recent charter commission meetings, preferring to appoint them instead. That said it all. Wake up stand up .....
I really don’t understand why we need to be a judge or an attorney to get any recognition around here, or at least at CRC meetings? The democrat Stoffer sets an agenda item last minute, the elected official ex attorney takes the podium & pleads her case that she has been wronged in some manner and according to her so shall anyone else who communicates with Jeff Tozzer, also an elected official. The exjudge & Chair, Susan, immediately rules & says by-laws need to be immediately changed. So far this commission has had NUMEROUS meetings & much public input many more than what the commission prioritized. They have yet to accomplish one thing except to piss off We The People by trying to limit 1st Amendment rights. You can thank the chair of CRC, Susan, & Commissioner Stoffer for allowing Susan’s friend, Ms.Johnston, to mislead the Review Commission.
Clallam County Charter Review Commission Meeting - April 14th at 5:30pm
223 East 4th Street, Room 160, Port Angeles or video
…Dept of Community Development, Open Public Meetings Act, Strategy, Legal opinion requests, Water Committee, Outreach Committee, Coroner Committee, Bylaws/Rules Committee….
This shouldn't even be an issue, since Jeff has the right to free speech and he, as well as anyone, can reproduce, transmit, and otherwise publish PUBLIC comments, regardless of who made them. Period. Why is even taken seriously? It would be illegal for the Commission to stifle Jeff, so it is a non-starter.
I am not surprised, but I am extremely disappointed at the audacity of some of the people on the charter review board.
This leaves little credibility for the charter review commission. They were to enhance lives of citizens in Clallam County.
Which Commission Member would have the audacity to submit such a request?
Enhance not Diminish!
Why do dems want to silence everyone? Is it so they can keep stealing from taxpayers???
Take a look at how this all rose to the surface and who was behind it all and tells you all you need to know! This is not County government at work for the people, it is nothing but political hacks using government to shut we the people up. Do not allow them to continue to step on our Constitutional rights by showing up, standing up and speaking up.
Sounds like they are setting the table for a great lawsuit to be filed on behalf of the county constituents who they are silencing........the First Amendment is truly under assault !
I'll be there tonight, ready to speak!
I’ll be there
What a total waste of everyone's time.
My comment for tonight's meeting:
Government may not regulate free speech “because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content.”
The Supreme Court has interpreted free “speech” and “press” broadly to cover not only talking, writing, and printing, but also broadcasting, using the internet, and other forms of expression.
Likewise, the government may not punish profane, vulgar or scornful criticism simply because they are offensive, but only if they can cause acts of violence by the person to whom they are directed.
[Gooding v. Wilson 405 U.S. 518 (1972); Hess v. Indiana 414 U.S. 105 (1973); Lewis v. City of New Orleans 415 U.S. 130 (1974); Lucas v. Arkansas 416 U.S. 919 (1974); Kelly v. Ohio 416 U.S. 923 (1974); Karlan v. City of Cincinnati 416 U.S. 924 (1974): Rosen v. California416 U.S. 924 (1974), etc.]
In New York Times V. Sullivan 376 US 254 (1964) the New York Times published an ad seeking donations to defend Martin Luther King Jr, on perjury charges, with several factual inaccuracies. A case was lodged by Sullivan under Alabama libel law. The Supreme court, in a unanimous decision, ruled that when a statement concerns a public figure, it is not enough to show that it is false for the press to be liable for libel.
It must be made with reckless disregard of the truth. “Actual Malice” or there is no justification to limit freedom of speech.
New York Times Co v. United States 403 U.S.713(1971), known as the Pentagon Papers Case, established a principal that the government cannot prevent publication of information unless it can prove a “clear and present danger” of grave harm to national security.
Near v. Minnesota 283 U.S. 697 (1931), established the principle that the government cannot censor or prevent the publication of information…
Justice Hugo Black argued that “only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government”
Our elected Co comms refuse to RESPOND or LISTEN to citizens about issues.. The people should not be SILENCED. Shame on the bocc for even considering this. They could have treated the requesters the same as their constituents and chosen to ignore the request to ban the peoples choice. They informed us all they do not want to work with elected officials during one of the recent charter commission meetings, preferring to appoint them instead. That said it all. Wake up stand up .....
I really don’t understand why we need to be a judge or an attorney to get any recognition around here, or at least at CRC meetings? The democrat Stoffer sets an agenda item last minute, the elected official ex attorney takes the podium & pleads her case that she has been wronged in some manner and according to her so shall anyone else who communicates with Jeff Tozzer, also an elected official. The exjudge & Chair, Susan, immediately rules & says by-laws need to be immediately changed. So far this commission has had NUMEROUS meetings & much public input many more than what the commission prioritized. They have yet to accomplish one thing except to piss off We The People by trying to limit 1st Amendment rights. You can thank the chair of CRC, Susan, & Commissioner Stoffer for allowing Susan’s friend, Ms.Johnston, to mislead the Review Commission.
Clallam County Charter Review Commission Meeting - April 14th at 5:30pm
223 East 4th Street, Room 160, Port Angeles or video
…Dept of Community Development, Open Public Meetings Act, Strategy, Legal opinion requests, Water Committee, Outreach Committee, Coroner Committee, Bylaws/Rules Committee….
In person or virtual https://clallamcowa.portal.civicclerk.com/event/3098/files
Zoom https://us06web.zoom.us/j/83692664344 meeting ID: 836 9266 4344 passcode: 12345
Public comments with subject line “CRC” to the Clerk loni.gores@clallamcountywa.gov or Phone: 360-417-2256
Email the CRC Commissioners directly at the bottom of the following link https://www.clallamcountywa.gov/210/Charter-Review-Commission-CRC
They are following a national trend set by D.C.
Locally too Eyman, Glen Morgan.
CAN A COUNTY BE DIVIDED INTO CITY VS RURAL?
CALL PACIFIC JUSTICE .
IS IT TI,E FOR A GRAND JURY YET?