Monday, October 19, 2009

Judge John Vandenorth Order 8Sept09_VOID4FRAUD

Fraud On The Court By An Officer Of The Court - Disqualification Of Judges
Options Posted as NO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ON FRAUD OR MURDER
MN 62cv09-1163 « Sharon4anderson’s Weblog
Logout Search Menu New Civil Search Back
Location : All MNCIS Sites – Case SearchHelp
Register of Actions www.mncourts.gov Sharons_Medicare_Ramsey Co.#670295 Aff6 Apr07indit Coleman 20 Lantry Stalking19 Apr07
Case No. 62-CV-09-1163 Related Case: WritProA06-1150 30Jun06 Answer/Cross/1/2MillionClaim v.CitySt.Paul
Delinquent Real Property Taxes for 2008 EastSideRevies DelTaxesI_73pgs pg.53Forfeiture Cars etc.42 USC 3631 MS555DeclaratoryJudgmentAct§
§
§
§
§
§
Case Type:Administrative File
Date Filed:02/12/2009
Location:Ramsey Civil
Judicial Officer:VanDeNorth, John B., Jr.

john.vandenorth@courts.state.mn.us

Party Information LeadAttorneys jean.@stepan@co.ramsey.mn.us




The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your
'>
Bob Hurt
View profile
More options Oct 16, 11:43 am
From: "Bob Hurt" ...@bobhurt.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:43:15 -0400
Local: Fri, Oct 16 2009 11:43 am
Subject: Fraud On The Court By An Officer Of The Court - Disqualification Of Judges
Reply Reply to author Forward Print Individual message Show original Report this message Find messages by this author

Roger sent me this:

Fraud On The Court By An Officer Of The Court - Disqualification Of Judges

Contents

1. Who is an <> "officer of the court"?. 1

2. What is <> "fraud on the court"?. 1

3. How does <> "fraud upon the court" affect court proceedings?. 2

4. What <> causes the "Disqualification of Judges?". 2

1. Who is an "officer of the court"?

A judge is an officer of the court, as well as are all attorneys. A state
judge is a state judicial officer, paid by the State to act impartially and
lawfully. A federal judge is a federal judicial officer, paid by the federal
government to act impartially and lawfully. State and federal attorneys fall
into the same general category and must meet the same requirements. A judge
is not the court. People v. Zajic, 88 Ill.App.3d 477, 410 N.E.2d 626 (1980).

2. What is "fraud on the court"? People v. Zajic,88Ill.App.3d - Google Search

Whenever any officer of the court commits fraud during a proceeding in the
court, he/she is engaged in "fraud upon the court". In Bulloch v. United
States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985), the court stated "Fraud upon
the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is
not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or
perjury. ... It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or
influence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial
function --- thus where the impartial functions of the court have been
directly corrupted." Bulloch v. US 763 F.2d 115 - Google Search

"Fraud upon the court" has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals
to "embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the
court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the
judicial machinery can not perform in the usual manner its impartial task of
adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication." Kenner v. C.I.R., 387
F.3d 689 (1968); 7 Moore's Federal Practice, 2d ed., p. 512, 60.23. The
7th Circuit further stated "a decision produced by fraud upon the court is
not in essence a decision at all, and never becomes final." Kenner v. C.I.R.,387 F.3d 689 - Google Search

3. How does "fraud upon the court" affect court proceedings?

"Fraud upon the court" makes void the orders and judgments of that court.

It is also clear and well-settled Illinois law that any attempt to commit
"fraud upon the court" vitiates the entire proceeding. The People of the
State of Illinois v. Fred E. Sterling, 357 Ill. 354; 192 N.E. 229 (1934)

The People Ill v. Fred E.Sterling,357 - Google Search
("The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters
applies to judgments as well as to contracts and other transactions.");
Allen F. Moore v. Stanley F. Sievers, 336 Ill. 316; 168 N.E. 259 (1929) Allen F. Moore v. Stanley F. Sievers,336 Ill 316 - Google Search


("The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters
..."); In re Village of Willowbrook, 37 Ill.App.2d 393 (1962)

("It is In re Village of Willowbrok, 37 Ill.App.2d 393 - Google Search
axiomatic that fraud vitiates everything."); Dunham v. Dunham, 57 Ill.App.
475 (1894), affirmed 162 Ill. 589 (1896);Dunham v. Dunham 57 Ill.App.475 (1894) - Google Search

Skelly Oil Co. v. Universal Oil Skelly Oil Co.v.Universal Oil Products Co., 338 Ill.App - Google Search
Products Co., 338 Ill.App. 79, 86 N.E.2d 875, 883-4 (1949); Thomas Stasel v.
The American Home Security Corporation, 362 Ill. 350; 199 N.E. 798 (1935).

Thomas Stasel v. The American Home Security Corp 362 Ill.350 - Google Search

Under Illinois and Federal law, when any officer of the court has committed
"fraud upon the court", the orders and judgment of that court are void, of
no legal force or effect.

4. What causes the "Disqualification of Judges?"

Federal law requires the automatic disqualification of a Federal judge under
certain circumstances.

In 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "Disqualification is required if
an objective observer would entertain reasonable questions about the judge's
impartiality. If a judge's attitude or state of mind leads a detached
observer to conclude that a fair and impartial hearing is unlikely, the
judge must be disqualified." [Emphasis added]. Liteky v. U.S., 114 S.Ct.
1147, 1162 (1994). Liteky v. US 114 S.Ct 1147 - Google Search

Courts have repeatedly held that positive proof of the partiality of a judge
is not a requirement, only the appearance of partiality. Liljeberg v. Health
Services Acquisition Corp., 486 U.S. 847, 108 S.Ct. 2194 (1988)

(what Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp., 486 US 847 - Google Search
matters is not the reality of bias or prejudice but its appearance); United
States v. Balistrieri, 779 F.2d 1191 (7th Cir. 1985) US . Balistrieri, 779 F.2d 1191 - Google Search

(Section 455(a) "is
directed against the appearance of partiality, whether or not the judge is
actually biased.") ("Section 455(a) of the Judicial Code, 28 U.S.C. 455(a),
is not intended to protect litigants from actual bias in their judge but
rather to promote public confidence in the impartiality of the judicial
process."). Judicial Code, 28 USC 445 - Google Search

That Court also stated that Section 455(a) "requires a judge to recuse
himself in any proceeding in which her impartiality might reasonably be
questioned." Taylor v. O'Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7th Cir. 1989).Taylor v. O'Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 - Google Search

In Pfizer
Inc. v. Lord, 456 F.2d 532 (8th Cir. 1972), the Court stated that "It is
important that the litigant not only actually receive justice, but that he
believes that he has received justice." Pfizer Inc. v. Lor,456 F.2d 532 (8thCir) 1972 - Google Search

The Supreme Court has ruled and has reaffirmed the principle that "justice
must satisfy the appearance of justice", Levine v. United States, 362 U.S.
610, 80 S.Ct. 1038 (1960),Levine v. US 362 US610 - Google Search

citing Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14,
75 S.Ct. 11, 13 (1954). A judge receiving a bribe from an interested party
over which he is presiding, does not give the appearance of justice. Offutt v. US 348 US 11,14,75 S.Ct.11,13 (1954) - Google Search

"Recusal under Section 455 is self-executing; a party need not file
affidavits in support of recusal and the judge is obligated to recuse
herself sua sponte under the stated circumstances." Taylor v. O'Grady, 888
F.2d 1189 (7th Cir. 1989). Taylor v. O'Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7thCir.1989) - Google Search

Further, the judge has a legal duty to disqualify himself even if there is
no motion asking for his disqualification. The Seventh Circuit Court of
Appeals further stated that "We think that this language [455(a)] imposes a
duty on the judge to act sua sponte, even if no motion or affidavit is
filed." Balistrieri, at 1202. Balistrieri at 1202 - Google Search

Judges do not have discretion not to disqualify themselves. By law, they are
bound to follow the law. Should a judge not disqualify himself as required
by law, then the judge has given another example of his "appearance of
partiality" which, possibly, further disqualifies the judge. Should another
judge not accept the disqualification of the judge, then the second judge
has evidenced an "appearance of partiality" and has possibly disqualified
himself/ herself. None of the orders issued by any judge who has been
disqualified by law would appear to be valid. It would appear that they are
void as a matter of law, and are of no legal force or effect.

Should a judge not disqualify himself, then the judge is violation of the
Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Due Process US Constitution - Google Search

United States v. Sciuto, 521 United States v. Sciuto 521 F2d 842, - Google Search
F.2d 842, 845 (7th Cir. 1996) ("The right to a tribunal free from bias or
prejudice is based, not on section 144, but on the Due Process Clause.").

Should a judge issue any order after he has been disqualified by law, and if
the party has been denied of any of his / her property, then the judge may
have been engaged in the Federal Crime of "interference with interstate
commerce". The judge has acted in the judge's personal capacity and not in
the judge's judicial capacity. It has been said that this judge, acting in
this manner, has no more lawful authority than someone's next-door neighbor
(provided that he is not a judge).

However some judges may not follow the law.

If you were a non-represented litigant, and should the court not follow the
law as to non-represented litigants, then the judge has expressed an
"appearance of partiality" and, under the law, it would seem that he/she has
disqualified him/herself.

However, since not all judges keep up to date in the law, and since not all
judges follow the law, it is possible that a judge may not know the ruling
of the U.S. Supreme Court and the other courts on this subject. Notice that
it states "disqualification is required" and that a judge "must be
disqualified" under certain circumstances.

The Supreme Court has also held that if a judge wars against the
Constitution, or if he acts without jurisdiction, he has engaged in treason
to the Constitution. If a judge acts after he has been automatically
disqualified by law, then he is acting without jurisdiction, and that
suggest that he is then engaging in criminal acts of treason, and may be
engaged in extortion and the interference with interstate commerce.

Courts have repeatedly ruled that judges have no immunity for their criminal
acts. Since both treason and the interference with interstate commerce are
criminal acts, no judge has immunity to engage in such acts.

----------------------------------------------------------


Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, October 18, 2009

Vote 3Nov09_IRV_MarkOswald Title18s241_Judge JohnVandenorth

CC: askdoj@usdoj.gov, frank.magill@usdoj.gov, b.todd.jones@usdoj.gov, james.lackner@usdoj.gov, minneapolis@fbi.gov
Sent: 10/18/2009 2:56:23 P.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: St.Paul will cast vote on instant-runoff elections StarTribune.Sharons Comment
Dated Sun. 18Oct09 ISSUES:
ELECTIONS/RESIDENCE/IRV/ST.PAUL'S PONZI REALESTATE SCHEME'S
$28 Million ROW Public Works Assess.
AFFIDAVIT OF SHARON SCARRELLA ANDERSON AKA PETERSON
QUITAM_VA WIDOW_WHISTLEBLOWER re: 62cv09-1163
CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST DFL MARK OSWALD,LYN MOSER,CHRIS COLEMAN ACTING IN CONCORT WITH
DFL COUNTY ATTORNEY SUSAN GAERTNER ACTING IN CONCORT WITH JUDGE JOHN VANDENORTH

Complaint Requesting An Investigation of Judge John Vandenorth For Pecuniary and Political Activity Inconsistent With His Official Duties As A State MN Employee

COUNT I Bait_Switch Acorn re: Elections_Hud

AT ALL TIME MATERIAL Affiant: with newly discovered Evidence that

Judge John Vandenorth 1932 Princeton has not paid any Fees/Assessments/ROW except the Recycle of $24.xx dollars since 2006

on their Homesteaded Property while denying Affiant "due process"

Grand Jury or Trial by Jury when Taxes are paid in full for that year

MN 62cv09-1163 « Sharon4anderson’s Weblog

Thus acting in concort with Ramsey Co. Auditor Mark Oswald, Court Administrator
Larry Dease et al City Financial Lyn Moser et al
COURT II
Judge John Vandenorth by information and belief has full knowledge
that Ponzi Schemes at the City of St.Paul are in fact in full swing
to sway elections by Covert Fee's/Assessment/ROW based
on theft of Cars,trailers, Trespass on Private Property,Treason
heinous violations of State and Federal Laws on Protected Class's
Usurious Interest on Bogus Fees/Assessments/ROW
Right of Way Maintenance without decending to particulars
Minnesota AG sues Source Lending over 'bait-and-switch' tactics Judicial Watch Files Lawsuit against HUD to Obtain ACORN Documents Judicial Watch LegalNewsline
"Judge not, and ye shall not be judged." Luke 6:37 - The Holy Bible

This is my glowing angel holding Earth.

"The butterfly is my emissary. They are so very fragile, like life. When I see one,
I am reminded of the shortness of life and how important it is to live wisely."
~ Virgil ~
GOOD LUCK TO ALL NOTE TO CHRIS COLEMAN
Coleman 686 Chippewa apparantly pays for Fees/Assessments/ROW
EVEN IF YOU WIN, WHAT HAVE YOU REALLY WON
WITH HIGH TAXES, EXCESSIVE FEES,ASSESSMENTS
NOW THIS ROW IE: RIGHT OF WAY MAINTENANCE
STARTED APPROX. 10 YEARS AGO, AS STATED TO AFFIANT
SHARON SCARRELLA ANDERSON AKA PETERSON,
WHEN AFFIANT GOT THE BILL OF $117.60 for 697 SURREY, IMMEDIATELY
CALLED 651-266-8858, "IF YOU PAY WITH PROPERTY TAXES
ANOTHER ILLEGAL FEE/INTEREST OF 5.5% AND AS JUAN
ORTIZ@CI.LSTPAUL.MN.US STATED A 13% INCREASE FROM
LAST YEAR.
Another usurious interest as if Property taxes are not paid on Time
12% interest tacked onto
IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR IS MARGARET XXXX AND LYN MOSER
ADDRESS'S UNK.
RE: RAMSEY DIST.COURT FILE 62CV09-1163 JUDGE JOHN VANDENORTH RE: ORDER Sharon4Anderson v. Judge John Vandenorth mn - Google Search
Case Fixing by Judge John B. Vandenorth,Order, taking HS Credit on the Seniors,Disabled ... 11Sept09 To Judge John Vandenorth at 1932 Princeton Ave St.Paul, MN. ... The Theft of Sharons 91 Chrysler Vin V-1CYGY54R5MX5A Further research that ... Attorney General QuiTam Whistleblower, Sharon4 Anderson - Google Profile ...
www.slideshare.net/Sharon4Anderson/j-vandenorth1932-princeton - Cached - Similar -
Show more results from www
The kicker of Tax/Election/Fees/Assessments/ROW, apparantly the Ponzi Scheme that Judge John Vandenorth of 1932 Princeton
Tax and Property Look Up Information - Quick Info given Full HS, denied to Sharon who is Senior,Woman,Disabled for 20 yrs,Candidate_Whistleblower DOES NOT PAY ANY FEES/ASSESSMENTS/ROW SINCE 2006, EXCEPT THE $27 RECYCLE FEE.
COLEMAN AND WIFE CONSTANCE OF EDINA REALESTATE
BUT FOR THE MAKE OVER HOME WITH APPARANT LICENSED
CHILD CARE: 226 PRESCOTT Owner Sandra Rosario also has not paid any Fees/Assessments/ROW since 2006 up to and including the present.
LEGAL NOTICE: /s/Sharon4Anderson@aol.com ECF_P165913Pacersa1299 telfx: 651-776-5835:
Attorney ProSe_InFact,Private Attorney General QuiTam Whistleblower, Sharon4 Anderson - Google Profile Candidate AG2010 www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com Blogger: User Profile: Sharon Anderson SharonsYahoo! iGoogle

Homestead Act of 1862 Twitter / Sharon4Anderson Shar1058's Buzz Activity Page - My Buzz Activity - Yahoo! Buzz neopopulism.org - Pro Se Dec Action Litigation Pack Sharon4Anderson Scribd Document's are based on SEC filings, Blogger: Dashboard Home
FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of whistleblower protection issues, MY FindLaw SharonsWritProA06_1150_30Jun06_26
The CAN-SPAM Act: Requirements for Commercial Emailers
kare11.com_SA
Sharons-Psychic-Whispers: Sharons Gypsy Curse-Court-Cop Corruption 3Apr0http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPlawsuit/courtfilings/Docket.htm Sharon4Council: DLJ Management v. City St. Paul A06-2118,Money LaunderinNo direct un-apportioned tax confirmed by the US Supreme Court rulings in CHAS. C. STEWARD MACH. CO. v. DAVIS, 301 U.S. 548, 581-582(1937) g andFCC Complaints - http://sharons-copywrite.blogspot.com/knowledge gained as financial journalists , http://taxthemax.blogspot.com/ securities they recommend to readers, affiliated entities, employees, and agents an initial trade Public domain recommendation published on the Internet, after a direct mail publication is sent, before acting Google Search Times v. Sullvian Libel with malice - on that recommendations, and may contain errors. Investment decisions should not be based solely on these or other Public Office documents expressly forbids its writers from having financial interests in Google Search BlogItBabe2007 Candidate profile Sharon4Anderson's Legal BlogBriefs Sharon4And
Subject:Fwd: St.Paul will cast vote on instant-runoff elections StarTribune.Sharons...
Date:10/18/2009 3:09:16 P.M. Central Daylight Time
From:Sharon4Anderson

From: Sharon4Anderson
To: eva@evaformayor.com, Sharon4Mayor, BillDahn4Mayor, chris.coleman@ci.stpaul.mn.us, bob@calhouncompanies.com, will@willrossbach.com, aonealpha@yahoo.com, mayorlongrie@yahoo.com, jtstiles@gmail.com, baverill@mndaily.com, eeskola@cbs.com, ddavis@forumcomm.com, hopfen@startribune.com, rstassen-berger@pioneerpress.com, ochsnews@yahoo.com, bbowring@tpt.org, charley.shaw@legal-ledger.com, mlohn@ap.org, jragsdale@pioneerpress.com, ahart@kare11.com, swente@republican-eagle.com, mfischenich@mankatofreepress.com, EEskola, tim.budig@ecm-inc.com, ndraper@startribune.com, lmccallum@mpr.org, bsalisbury@pioneerpress.com, lschumacher@stcloudtimes.com, pcondon@ap.org, mbrunswick@startribune.com, ntibbetts@mndaily.com, pjkessler@wcco.cbs.com, jcroman@kare11.com, plopez@startribune.com, tscheck@mpr.org, thauser@kstp.com, mlahammer@tpt.org, pdoyle@startribune.com, rrosario@pioneerpress.com, klksnews@yahoo.com, lsturdevant@startribune.com, jayjohnson@postbulletin.com, bbakst@ap.org, dbrewster@startribune.com, FREEDOMFORUM@yahoogroups.com, FreedomLawSchool@yahoogroups.com, COURTWATCHERS_OF_AMERICA@yahoogroups.com, rcwcodebuster@yahoo.com, rcwcodebuster, rcwcodebuster@comcast.net, rcwcodebuster@gmail.com, luis@luisewing.com, customerservice@theliberators11.org, wm@greenes.us, Shewolfeagle, dthoule@redred.com, info@theradiantimage.us, psamdahl@hotmail.com, stan@izoom.net, lbolton1@hotmail.com, tim.pawlenty@state.mn.us, velma.korbel@state.mn.us, carol.molnau@state.mn.us, brian.mcclung@state.mn.us, steve.sviggum@state.mn.us, clark.dyrud@state.mn.us, dli.commissioner@state.mn.us, general.commerce@state.mn.us, susan.heegard@state.mn.us, cal.ludeman@state.mn.us, webmaster.finance@state.mn.us, dorweb.comm@state.mn.us, data.center@metc.state.mn.us, webmaster@doc.state.mn.us, webmaster@pca.state.mn.us, deed.customerservice@state.mn.us, dhs.info@state.mn.us, admin.info@state.mn.us, info@dot.state.mn.us, webinfo@mda.state.mn.us, webmaster@mn-arng.ngb.army.mil, alice.seagren@state.mn.us, dan.salomone@state.mn.us, oet.web@state.mn.us, ward.einess@state.mn.us, mhfa@state.mn.us, bms@state.mn.us, mdva.webmaster@mdva.state.mn.us, mde.webmaster@state.mn.us, info@dnr.state.mn.us, michael.pugliese@state.mn.us, sanne.magnan@state.mn.us, tom.sorel@state.mn.us, info@IronRangeResources.org, peter.bell@metc.state.mn.us, glenn.wilson@state.mn.us, michael.campion@state.mn.us, Dps.webmaster@state.mn.us, citizen.service@ci.stpaul.mn.us, CityofSaintPaul@govdelivery.com, jerry.ludden@ci.stpaul.mn.us, mayor@ci.stpaul.mn.us, erin.dady@ci.stpaul.mn.us, ann.mulholland@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Jean.Karpe@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Anne.Hunt@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Vallay.Varro@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Kris.Fredson@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Joe.Spencer@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Darlyne.Morrow@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Chris.Rider@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Melvin.Carter@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Nancy.Homans@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Milyon.Tekle@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Nick.Shuminsky@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Carol.Washington@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Bob.Hume@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Sean.Johnson@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Va-Megn.Thoj@ci.stpaul.mn.us, rway@minnpost.com, sberg@minnpost.com, swaterman@minnpost.com, bhawkins@minnpost.com, dbeal@minnpost.com, brobson@minnpost.com, sjanecek@minnpost.com, info@minnpost.com, mhelms@minnpost.com, ccapecchi@minnpost.com, sschmickle@minnpost.com, rbattle@minnpost.com, jkimball@minnpost.com, dgrow@minnpost.com, minnclips@minnpost.com, jreinan@minnpost.com, eagle@eagleforum.org, Bonnuge, bob.fletcher@co.ramsey.mn.us, matt.bostrom@ci.stpaul.mn.us, neil.melton@state.mn.us, john.harrington@ci.stpaul.mn.us, mary.bjornberg@state.mn.us, kwilkening@co.nobles.mn.us, terry.sandbeck@state.mn.us, johnp@alx.tec.mn.us, mitch.lee@state.mn.us, mylan.masson@minneapolis.edu, paul.monteen@state.mn.us, tracey.a.martin@co.hennepin.mn.us, mark.letexier@co.polk.mn.us, john.bolduc@co.crow-wing.mn.us, dan.glass@state.mn.us, brent.richter@state.mn.us, debra.soderbeck@state.mn.us, mdohman@ci.maple-grove.mn.us, sheryl.waddick@state.mn.us, junstad@yahoo.com, carol.j.hall@state.mn.us, mike.ardolf@state.mn.us, bill.martinez@ci.stpaul.mn.us, michael.young@ci.minneapolis.mn.us, peggy.strand@state.mn.us, timbildsoe@visi.com, starr.suggs@state.mn.us, harr@csp.edu, diverson@pioneerpress.com, dbeal@pioneerpress.com, mhopp@pioneerpress.com, rhubbard@pioneerpress.com, twebb@pioneerpress.com, jforster@pioneerpress.com, jkrocheski@pioneerpress.com, khubbard@pioneerpress.com, aharrington@pioneerpress.com, lsuzukamo@pioneerpress.com, dfondler@pioneerpress.com, janice.rettman@co.ramsey.mn.us, chiefclerk@co.ramsey.mn.us, Julie.Kleinschmidt@co.ramsey.mn.us, tony.bennett@co.ramsey.mn.us, jim.mcdonough@co.ramsey.mn.us, rafael.e.ortega@co.ramsey.mn.us, jan.parker@co.ramsey.mn.us, toni.carter@co.ramsey.mn.us, victoria.reinhardt@co.ramsey.mn.us, rob.fulton@co.ramsey.mn.us, bonnie.jackelen@co.ramsey.mn.us, DOR.taxpayeradvocate@state.mn.us, indinctax@state.mn.us, salesuse.tax@state.mn.us, withholding.tax@state.mn.us, minnesotacare.tax@state.mn.us, insurance.taxes@state.mn.us, special.taxes@state.mn.us, businessincome.tax@state.mn.us, mdor.collection@state.mn.us, elections.dept@state.mn.us, secretary.state@state.mn.us, public.information@state.mn.us, direct.access@state.mn.us, authentication.inquiries@state.mn.us, ucc.dept@state.mn.us, dave.thune@ci.stpaul.mn.us, pat.harris@ci.stpaul.mn.us, kathy.lantry@ci.stpaul.mn.us, Lee.Helgen@ci.stpaul.mn.us, dan.bostrom@ci.stpaul.mn.us, russ.stark@ci.stpaul.mn.us, mranfang@hotmail.com, nathan.stublaski@ci.stpaul.mn.us, steve.schneider@ci.stpaul.mn.us, john.zanmiller@ci.west-saint-paul.mn.us, will.rossbach@ci.maplewood.mn.us, waterinquiries@ci.stpaul.mn.us, jim.graupmann@ci.stpaul.mn.us, dave.schuler@ci.stpaul.mn.us, steve.gleason@ci.stpaul.mn.us, dave.wagner@ci.stpaul.mn.us
CC: askdoj@usdoj.gov, frank.magill@usdoj.gov, b.todd.jones@usdoj.gov, james.lackner@usdoj.gov, minneapolis@fbi.gov
Sent: 10/18/2009 2:56:23 P.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: St.Paul will cast vote on instant-runoff elections StarTribune.Sharons Comment

Click here: St. Paul will cast vote on instant-runoff elections StarTribune.com

Dated Sun. 18Oct09 ISSUES:
ELECTIONS/RESIDENCE/IRV/ST.PAUL'S PONZI REALESTATE SCHEME'S
http://www.usdoj.gov/osg/briefs/2001/0responses/2001-0791.resp.pdf
$28 Million ROW Public Works Assess.

http://stpaul.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=37&clip_id=1473&meta_id=77545 Kathy Lantry
Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, September 27, 2009

CitySt.Paul VetsGarden

Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, September 24, 2009

State GOP files complaint v Mayor Chris Coleman.

Letter from MN GOP to campaign finance board

By City Hall Scoop on September 23, 2009 4:44 PM No Comments No TrackBacks

September 23, 2009

Campaign Finance & Public Disclosure Board
Attention: Gary Goldsmith, Executive Director
190 Centennial Office Building
658 Cedar Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-1603

Dear Mr. Goldsmith:

We are writing to request an advisory opinion regarding the campaign expenditures of St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman.

State statute 10A states: "'Candidate' means an individual who seeks nomination or election as a state constitutional officer, legislator, or judge. An individual is deemed to seek nomination or election if the individual has taken the action necessary under the law of this state to qualify for nomination or election, has received contributions or made expenditures in excess of $100, or has given implicit or explicit consent for any other person to receive contributions or make expenditures in excess of $100, for the purpose of bringing about the individual's nomination or election. A candidate remains a candidate until the candidate's principal campaign committee is dissolved as provided in section 10A.24."

Furthermore, state statute 10A.14 states: "The treasurer of a political committee, political fund, principal campaign committee, or party unit must register with the board by filing a statement of organization no later than 14 days after the committee, fund, or party unit has made a contribution, received contributions, or made expenditures in excess of $100, or by the end of the next business day after it has received a loan or contribution that must be reported under section 10A.20, subdivision 5, whichever is earlier."

Based upon our examination of expenditures from the Chris Coleman for Saint Paul Campaign Committee and recent news accounts, we believe there can be little question that Mayor Coleman's expenditures in pursuit of an all but announced gubernatorial bid have far exceeded $100 threshold for filing a campaign committee.

Given that $100 is the threshold limit established by the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board, we believe Mayor Coleman's expenditures deserve the scrutiny of the Board.

In addition, Mayor Coleman's Campaign Manager John Stiles has confirmed in several published reports that a potential run for governor by the mayor was likely discussed at multiple political events, including the Young Democrats of America Convention in Chicago, the Minnesota Building Trades Convention in Rochester, and the Minnesota Association of Justice Convention held at Alexandria's Arrowwood Resort & Conference Center. Stiles further "doesn't dispute" that a run for governor was discussed at political events in Rochester and Alexandria.

"Coleman campaign manager John Stiles said Coleman spent campaign money to address The Young Democrats of America Convention, the Minnesota Building Trades Convention and the State Convention of the Minnesota Association of Justice. ... Stiles said it's likely that Coleman discussed a probable run for governor in 2010 at the events..." (Tom Scheck, "Is Chris Coleman using mayoral campaign funds for 2010 planning?" Minnesota Public Radio, September 22, 2009)

"[Chris Coleman for Mayor Campaign Manager John] Stiles doesn't dispute that Coleman may have discussed a possible run for governor at events in Alexandria and Rochester." (Laura Yuen, "Challenger questions Chris Coleman's travel expenses," Minnesota Public Radio, September 22, 2009)

"Since March, the Chris Coleman for St. Paul Committee has reimbursed $1,932.95 in travel, hotel and meal expenses ranging from airline tickets to nights in Alexandria or meals in Rochester. John Stiles, Coleman's campaign manager, explained each of the expenses. Coleman spokesman and campaign worker Bob Hume, for example, traveled to Washington, D.C., in March to attend the National League of Cities convention. John Stiles, Coleman's campaign manager, explained each of the expenses. Coleman spokesman and campaign worker Bob Hume, for example, traveled to Washington, D.C., in March to attend the National League of Cities convention. 'That could have been official business,' Stiles said. 'We could have put it on the taxpayers, but he did some political work there...'" (Dave Orrick, "Challenger criticizes travels of St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman," Pioneer Press, September 23, 2009)

"A number of the expenses were for Coleman's lodging or meals at similar conferences and conventions, such as the National Convention of Young Democrats of America in Chicago in late July or the Minnesota Association for Justice in Alexandria in mid-August." (Dave Orrick, "Challenger criticizes travels of St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman," Pioneer Press, September 23, 2009)
We also offer to the Board the following information from the Chris Coleman for Saint Paul Committee report which we believe further demonstrates that Mayor Coleman's expenditures in pursuit of the governor's office have far exceeded the $100 limit set by the state.

Travel

3/12/09 Midwest Airlines $619.39
3/13/09 Orbitz.com $107.88
7/23/09 Arrowwood Resort Deposit $200.00
7/30/09 Kahler Grand Hotel $452.98
7/30/09 Northwest Airlines $249.19
8/17/09 Arrowwood Resort Lodging $107.80

Meals

6/18/09 Congressional District 7 Dinner $60.00
7/29/09 Gilligan's Cove (Rochester) $13.00
7/30/09 Kahler Grand Grill $86.89
8/3/09 Granite City Brewery $35.82

Other

4/14/09 Mileage for Stiles $90.00
7/27/09 Mileage for Stiles $60.00

Donations to DFL Units

2/7/09 Senate District 32 DFL $50.00
6/11/09 Rice County DFL $200.00

Please find a copy of Mayor Coleman's 2009 Saint Paul Campaign Committee report and copies of the above news articles included with this correspondence.

Thank you for attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Tony Sutton, Republican Party of Minnesota Chairman
Michael Brodkorb, Republican Party of Minnesota Deputy Chairman

Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, September 20, 2009

Chapter 3: How Franken's attorneys outmaneuvered Coleman's team to secure the Senate seat. - TwinCities.com

Chapter 3: How Franken's attorneys outmaneuvered Coleman's team to secure the Senate seat. - TwinCities.com

Shared via AddThis
Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, September 19, 2009

Sharon,Bill Challenge Denial of IRV 3Nov09Election

St. Paul Instant Run-Off Voting Question (2009)

From Ballotpedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The St. Paul Instant Run-Off Voting Question is a ballot measure that will appear on the November 3,2009 ballot in Ramsey County for St. Paul voters.

The question will ask whether voters want to change the way they elect city officials.[1]

In instant-runoff voting, also called ranked-choice voting, voters will rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate gains a majority, the candidate with the least amount of support is dropped and the second-place votes cast by supporters of that candidate are added to the remaining candidates. This same process continues until one candidate gains a majority.

Previous attempts for IRV

In July 2008, under the threat of a lawsuit, the St. Paul City Council on voted against putting the Instant Run-Off Voting (IRV) question on the November 2008 ballot. During this time, IRV was deemed a controversial method, and city council members said it would probably violate the state's constitution.[2]

The St. Paul city attorney's office offered their opinion on IRV in a 10 page opinion, laying out an argument that stated the voting method would more than likely violate the Minnesota Constitution. Council members approved a separate resolution that called for the question to be put on the ballot if instant-runoff voting is found to be acceptable constitutional.[3]

References

  1. ↑ Minneapolis-St.Paul Star Tribune, "St. Paul voters to get instant runoff question in November", June 24, 2009
  2. ↑ Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune, "St. Paul instant-runoff voting question to stay off ballot", July 2, 2008
  3. ↑ Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune, "St. Paul advised not to consider instant-runoff election system", June 18, 2008
Retrieved from "http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/St._Paul_Instant_Run-Off_Voting_Question_(2009)"



Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Shewolfeagle's shared items

Sharon Can Do It

Sharon Can Do It
Take back our Government