Columns Old

This is just a placeholder.  I suppose I’ll have to resurrect the “private” posts…

http://aclu-co.org/our-work/litigation-legal-advocacy/ask-legal-help

Originally posted 7/19/11

http://aclu-co.org/case/quezada-v-mink

http://www.westword.com/related/to/Ted+Mink/

Westword Ted Mink link page.

Originally posted 7/19/11

The Rupert Murdoch/News Corp. phone hacking and bribery scandal is one of the biggest current news stories.  I love it, because it is about big time corruption.  It is always a learning experience to learn how it happened, why it happened, and, in particular, how the accused respond to the situation.

The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act covers the broad topic of intercepting communications and Section 79, in particular, has been in the news:

Section 79 of the Act says that directors can be prosecuted if an offence “is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to be attributable to any neglect on the part of a director.  (Link)

This is the knew or should have known part.  You are guilty if you knew.  If you didn’t know and, by virtue of your position you should have known, you are guilty.

This is an outstanding way to consider governance and responsibility.  It is an admirable standard.

Originally posted 7/18/11

Last night I watched part of the movie Mississippi Burning and it made me think.  It is about people who think they can do things their way (or any way they want).  It is about people who believe they can take the law into their own hands, people with an extremely limited view of the world, and people who do not respect others.  It is about people who need to be stopped.

The movie reminded me of things discussed here.  It reminded me of people I have dealt with in Jefferson County government.

To them I say “Prove me wrong.”  Correct it.

Originally posted 7/10/11

http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=51102ea2.db91b27.0.0&nid=17795#JD_30-28-124

“(II) Whenever a county zoning official authorized pursuant to section 30-28-114 has personal knowledge of any violation of this paragraph (b), he or she shall give written notice to the violator to correct the violation within ten days after the date of the notice.”

Originally posted 7/8/11

Scott Robson, Executive Director, Evergreen Parks and Recreation District (EPRD).

Here’s a little bit about him and here’s his hiring announcement.

Anyway, the reason I’m suspicious is that he doesn’t respect community rules.  He doesn’t value the law.  He doesn’t understand that it is not optional, and that no one–especially someone in a public capacity–can pick and choose what rules to enforce.  He doesn’t understand the concept that, you hope people will act with consideration and respect for others and, when they don’t, you have to enforce the rules.

Strange, he has an impressive educational background, but he doesn’t seem to have a ‘get it done’ attitude.  His is not an easy job, but it seems he could do it if he wanted to.

This community, Evergreen, Colorado, has a dog/dog leash problem.  Mr. Robson is a key manager of one of a park and recreation system.  He refuses to make the EPRD parks safe and clean with respect to dogs.  The simplest solution?  Hire a de facto ranger.  I would expect that an executive director with responsibilities relating to a $5 million budget could do that.

Here are the animal control regulations.  “Protect the health, welfare, and safety of…” they say.  Don’t blame it on them, I say.  If there’s a problem with enforcement fill the void.  What are you trying to prove?

Originally posted 5/8/11