U.S. Representative for California's 48th congressional district
U.S. Representative for California's 48th congressional district
Speak up for California Salmon! No to Senate & House Bills 2533 & 2898
We are asking you to take a moment to help us address a critical issue, Water! The current water bills (link to bill 2533 here and bill 2898 here) introduced by Sen. Feinstein and Rep. Valadao in the Senate and House will be up for consideration in Congress before the end of the year. These bills weaken protections for salmon in order to pump more water from the Delta in Northern California for use primarily for big ag in the San Joaquin Valley. Water is a public resource, and therefore should include all constituents. These bills dramatically weaken or completely eliminate consideration of water for the environment, specifically for wild California salmon, which need cold water released at certain times of the year to spawn, rear and migrate to the ocean. They would also promote new taxpayer subsidized and salmon killing dams. We understand that ag needs water. So do salmon! Sacrificing the environment, salmon and the multi-billion dollar fishing industry to move more water is a dangerous and biased approach. We need a long-term solution for the drought which reflects the needs of all constituents, human as well as wildlife. We know how do to this. More conservation groundwater clean up and management, water recycling and capturing urban stormwater can provide plenty of additional water for cities and agriculture. And restoring habitat and ensuring adequate flows can help restore salmon and the environment. We are asking for your help, because to risk the health and future viability of wild salmon runs in California due to poor legislation is inexcusable. Speak up for Salmon!
Impeach Judge Gloria M. Navarro
We the People of the United States petition the U.S. House of Representatives to impeach Judge Gloria M. Navarro of the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada for committing treason and collaborating in the insurrection against the Constitutional authority of the federal government pursuant to Article I Section 8 Clause 15, Article 3 Section 3 and Article 2 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution, 18 U.S.C. § 2831 and 18 U.S. § Code 2383. Whereas Judge Navarro, at the direction of the FBI, BLM, and other federal agencies, is unlawfully detaining (Amendment VIII of the Bill of Rights & 18 U.S.C. § 3142), and has been for over nine months, prominent activists within the Citizens for Constitutional Freedom political movement for exercising their First Amendment protected rights—protesting against federal government overreach [the fact it had sold 9,000 acres of public land bordering Bundy Ranch and other people who own grazing rights to the division to a Communist Chinese energy firm represented by Rory Reid (Harry Reid's son), EMM, for $4.5 million, $34.1 million less than its value, and began rounding up the Bundy’s cattle and holding them in inhumane conditions … at least 60 purportedly suffering death or missing]—and, in order to suppress C4CF 's education of the People, they have been charged by the FBI for violating 18 U.S.C. § 371 - Conspiracy to Commit an Offense Against the United States; 18 U.S.C. § 372 - Conspiracy to Impede and Injure a Federal Officer; 18 U.S.C. § lll(a)(l) and (b) - Assault on a Federal Officer; 18 U.S.C. § 115(a)(l)(B) - Threatening a Federal Law Enforcement Officer; 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) - Use and Carry of a Firearm in Relation to a Crime of Violence; 18 U.S.C. § 1503 - Obstruction of the Due Administration of Justice; 18 U.S.C. § 1951 - Interference with Interstate Commerce by Extortion; 18 U.S.C. § 1952 - Interstate Travel in Aid of Extortion; 18 U.S.C. § 2 - Aiding and Abetting. Among the political prisoners are Cliven, Ammon, Ryan and Mel Bundy, Peter Santilli (a journalist), Ryan Payne, Blaine Cooper, Eric Parker and Jerry DeLumus—all of whom provide C4CF with necessary influence. Whereas the discovery comprises substantial evidence proving the innocence of the defendants but is being concealed from the public at the order of Judge Navarro (in violation of Amendment VI of the Bill of Rights and Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure). These prisoners have also been subjected to mistreatment by the FBI, U.S. Marshall Service and employees of the correctional facilities. Whereas Judge Navarro is consciously proceeding with falsified charges filed by the FBI against C4CF and refusing to grant motions to dismiss after learning that Sheriff Douglas Gillespie and many other local, state and federal officials ordered the BLM to return the cattle to the Bundy’s and withdraw from the land, and being presented with relevant laws [Article I Section 8 Clause 17 & Article IV Section 3 Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, Rule 501 of the Federal Rules of Evidence and Nevada Revised Statute 568.225] were presented to her by the defense. Whereas, after being ordered by Sheriff Gillespie to stand down, Special Agent Dan P. Love of the BLM continued to impede on the rights and jurisdiction of the People of Clark County and all People of Nevada unabated; Committing acts of aggression that should be considered attempts to seriously injure or even kill peaceful protesters, including tazing several individuals and using blunt force (some already challenged by physical disabilities)—an apparent result of its militarization. Sheriff Gillespie stated that "anyone who had been in policing would question their tactics." Whereas Judge Navarro is participating in a cover up of the suppression by the FBI (by way of COINTELPRO tactics) of the right to the free exercise of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, peaceful assembly, and petition the Government for a redress of grievances. One of the main functions of government is to enforce contracts, and in this case not only is the government failing to enforce a contract but it is also the contractor, and have abridged their obligations in addition to preventing the contractee(s) [Cliven Bundy—We the People] from discharging our duties enumerated in Article I Section 8 Clause 15 & 16 of the U.S. Constitution & 10 U.S.C. § 311 and pursuant to Rule 501 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Whereas Judge Navarro has proven herself unfit to be an impartial Federal Judge; Consistent to the extreme bias expressed by her assistance given to the federal government and its usurpation of power and by covering up the inhumane treatment of political activists who are being unlawfully detained for exercising their rights protected by the First Amendment to enforce the rule of law—to establish justice, insure domestic Tranquility, secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, guarantee a Republican Form of Government, and secure the right to life, liberty and property, as ordained by the Creator in the U.S. Constitution.
Impeach Judge Anna J. Brown
We the People of the United States petition the U.S. House of Representatives to impeach Judge Anna J. Brown of the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon for committing treason and for her participation in the insurrection against the Constitutional authority of the federal government pursuant to Article I Section 8 Clause 15, Article 3 Section 3 and Article 2 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution, 18 U.S. § Code 2831 and 18 U.S. § Code 2383. Whereas Judge Brown, at the direction of the FBI and other federal agencies, is unlawfully detaining, and has been for over eight months, prominent activists within the Citizens for Constitutional Freedom political movement for exercising their First Amendment protected rights. Among the political prisoners are Ammon and Ryan Bundy, who both provide C4CF with necessary influence. These prisoners have also been subjected to mistreatment by the FBI, U.S. Marshal Service and employees of the correctional facilities. Whereas Judge Brown denied the Motion for mistrial after two of the government's witnesses introduced prejudicial information. Whereas Judge Brown is consciously proceeding with falsified charges filed by the FBI against C4CF and refusing to grant motions to dismiss after relevant laws (60 stat 1065 & Article I Section 8 Clause 17) were presented to her by the defense. Whereas Judge Brown is participating in a cover up of the suppression by the FBI (by way of COINTELPRO tactics) of the right to the free exercise of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, peaceful assembly, and petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Whereas Judge Brown has been/is conspiring with the prosecution and FBI by prohibiting the defense to admit relevant evidence and to sufficiently question the witnesses, and by sustaining objections never raised by the prosecution but rather herself. Whereas Judge Brown has proven herself unfit to be a impartial Federal Judge; Consistent to the extreme bias expressed by her assistance given to the federal government and its usurpation of power and by covering up the inhumane treatment of political activists who are being unlawfully detained.
Pass H.R. 2737: Filipino Veterans of World War II Congressional Gold Medal Act of 2015
On June 11, 2015, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and Sen. Mazie Hirono introduced HR 2737 & S 1555 respectively as the Filipino Veterans of World War II Congressional Gold Medal Act of 2015. The pending legislation, “directs the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives to make appropriate arrangements for the award of a single Congressional Gold Medal to the Filipino Veterans in recognition of their dedicated service during World War II.” Other groups have been formally recognized by the United States with the Congressional Gold Medal for World War II service; they include the Tuskegee Airmen, Montford Point Marines, Navajo Code Talkers, Women Air Service Pilots, Japanese American Nisei Soldiers and Puerto Rican Soldiers. Filipino World War II Veterans are equally deserving of this honor. In order to pass HR 2737, the bill requires sponsorship from 290 congressional representatives, S 1555 needs 67 senators. Today, HR 2737 has 312 cosponsors, S 1555 has 71. I would like to ask your assistance in reaching out to your congressional representative to get their support as a sponsor for the pending legislation. Time is not on our side; the number of remaining Filipino Veterans is fast decreasing. We need to pass these bills before the 114th Congress come to a close at the end of the year.
Petition CA-48 Rep. Dana Rohrabacher - host in-person town hall meeting with constituents.
Constituents in CA-48 have been trying to meet with Representative Dana Rohrabacher, to discuss many issues that are important to those living in the district. Representative Rohrabacher has refused to meet with any constituents, and has refused to schedule an open-in person town hall. Visitors to the Huntington Beach office have been met with locked doors and police officers. Phone calls are not being returned, and are often not even answered. Rather than meeting with constituents, Representative Rohrabacher has been calling them thugs and enemies of democracy. We, the constituents of California's 48th Congressional District, are respectfully petitioning our representative, Congressman Dana Rohrabacher to hold a public Town Hall meeting as soon as possible. The majority of voters in the 48th Congressional District, did not vote for Donald Trump. Those voters do not feel that they are being equitably represented. We want all voices to be heard, however this is not happening since it is apparent that Representative Rohrabacher is refusing to meet or listen to his constituents, Representative Rohrabacher will be voting on many important and relative issues that concern the citizens in the 48th District, including the Affordable Care Act, Medicare, climate change, education, immigration, women's health funding, veterans affairs, immigration, and the building of a border wall . We deserve to ask our Representative questions and want to hear his answers.
Justice for 14 yr. old boy fainted and hospitalized after 16 hours of interrogation.
PROP 57-Judge decides whether to charge minor as adult, NOT prosecutor.... BILL SB 1052- Law Enforcement can no longer interrogate minor without legal counsel. With no Evident against Sky except for his coerced incriminating statement, he's still locked up. It's time to FREE SKYLER AVILA!!! Interrogating children without a parent’s consent or knowledge should not be legal. Yet it is. As parents, we teach our children to obey the law and do what they are told so they will not get hurt. I have come to learn, we also absolutely need to teach them their constitutional/civil rights as well. We should take steps to protect our children from the abuse of governmental power. We don't have a perfect system, but we have a system. To be clear, I don't think we have a corrupt system. I strongly believe, however, that we have corrupt people with power in the system. I still have faith in the system and that is why I'm reaching out for help to demand the release of my son, Skyler Avila ( a boy with no record whatsoever). Six years ago, my three children and I moved back to California after living in Dallas and Austin, Texas, for 18 years to get away from a physically abusive marriage. My son Skyler, 14, struggled with the move and with his parents separating. His dad initially remained in Texas. After we settled in with extended family in California, Skyler quickly gravitated toward his 16-year-old cousin, Andy. Skyler, who had been carefree and had only known school and football back in Texas, was desperate for stability and a male figure in his life. One Saturday March 19, 2011, the boys were hanging out with their aunt in Andy’s garage. This aunt was a minor. There was no food in the house so they decided to go out to eat. Sky sat next to his aunt all night in the restaurant. When it was time to leave, he rode in the same back seat with his aunt while Andy drove. Along the way, Andy and the front passenger, who is Andy’s friend, communicated with other people on the phone. Andy continued driving and a drive-by shooting ensued. The shooter was later determined to be the front passenger, Andy’s adult friend. My son, who was fourteen at the time, had no way of stopping what seemed to be the inevitable or even get out of a moving car. He was a witness to a murder. At 2 p.m. the next day (Sunday March 20, 2011) detectives from Garden Grove arrested Andy after he left his residence. Skyler was with Andy and was taken into custody as well. Their minor aunt and Andy’s mother were home at the time. While at the Garden Police station, Skyler asked for his asthma rescue inhaler (in Andy’s car) as he was being led down a hallway by two detectives. Andy was with them. Skyler has been diagnosed with asthma since he was two years old. He needs his rescue inhaler every 2-4 hours, depending on the weather. There are good days when he is not as dependent on the inhaler but there are many bad days as well. The detectives ignored Skyler’s request for the inhaler. They took him into a room and interrogated him for roughly 16 hours. Transcript of the interrogation shows it commenced on Sunday 11/20/2011 at 4:34 p.m. and ended on Monday 11/21/2011 at 8:44 a.m. After sixteen hours, Skyler fainted in the interrogation room. An ambulance responded to the police department and transported him to Garden Grove Hospital (there is medical record). After they revived Skyler, one of the detectives finally went out of his way and notified his father. At the time, I was a single mother without a steady income but had to come up with thousands of dollars to retain a private attorney. Four and a half years into Skyler’s incarceration, while waiting for the resolution of his case, Skyler’s defense lawyer and the District Attorney persuaded me to convince him to plead guilty to a deal that would require him to serve a total of 5 years and 8 months. During that time span, he would be required to testify in one trial. However, as it was further explained and emphasized to me in a meeting with the DA and defense lawyer, Skyler would be free after 5 years and 8 months, even if the DA did not ask him to actually testify in a trial. Informed with this information, from a source I thought I could trust, I talked to Skyler about it. Initially, Skyler did not want the deal because he believed in his innocence; he was just a witness to a crime. I got him to focus on the 5 years and 8 months and about how he had already served 4 years and 6 months, which meant he just needed to survive another 14 months in jail before he could forget about this nightmare and start his life anew. Believing that I had gotten the correct information from the DA and his own defense attorney, Skyler signed the plea agreement. The time of truth has come. Skyler served his full 5 years and 8 months, hoping he would be released at his sentencing date on 11/04/2016. The sentencing date, inexplicably, had been postponed in court over 10 times since the plea agreement was signed. On 11/04/16, my recently widowed mother and I showed up to court hoping to take Skyler home for the holiday. We had been through a lot with two deaths in the family within the last year. We were looking to bring Skyler home so we could all begin to heal. At the court hearing on 11/04/16, the sentencing was postponed once again. My mom and I started to cry. Even after serving his agreed upon 5 years and 8 months, just for seemingly witnessing a crime, there appeared to be no end in sight. What happened to the agreement explained to me in a meeting with the DA and Skyler’s attorney that my son would be set free after serving 5 years and 8 months, even if he had not been used to testify in a trial by that deadline? I had apparently been fed this misinformation so that I would convince my son to sign the plea agreement. To add to the injustice, the only thing loosely linking Skyler to this whole mess was his coerced statement, which was extracted from him over the course of 16 hours, under the duress of him not being able to properly breathe without an asthma inhaler, and eventually necessitating his hospitalization. Incidentally, the detective who interrogated Skyler incorrectly documented some key facts in his report. For instance, in the detective’s report, he wrote that Skyler had said he exited the vehicle (prior to the shooting incident) with a crow bar in his hand. In the actual interview transcript, Skyler was asked and responded he did not exit the vehicle, and certainly never did so with a crow bar. Does anyone in our legal system still cares about integrity and constitutional and civil rights? After a sad and devastating year of two funerals, our family’s only hope of happiness was to see Skyler release after honoring what was agreed upon. At court on 11/04/2016, all my hope and faith were shattered. I cried and screamed outside the court room because I had lived for this day and now they told me my son cannot go home! There was a verbal agreement between the DA, Skyler’s attorney, and I that Sky would go home after 5 years and 8 months. Skyler was also required to testify, in one trial (with the exception of Andy or the other minor passenger in the car), during that time span if the DA needed his testimony. I feel misled and betrayed by the DA and the very own defense attorney I had hired. They never showed me the actual plea agreement. I did not think to ask for it and scrutinize it myself since we were represented by the defense attorney and I had believed in the integrity of the DA. I regret not having the chance to read the agreement that Skyler eventually signed. He was convinced by me and he assumed I had read it. The agreement was drawn up for Skyler to sign roughly two months after my meeting with the DA and the defense attorney. After the hearing date on 11/04/16, when Skyler’s sentencing was postponed yet again, I was in tears and tried to make some sense of what was happening. I asked the defense attorney to let me see the plea agreement but he denied my request. He told me he would take himself off the case if he showed it to me. Frustrated, I made a request to the court records clerk and was able to obtain a copy of the agreement. Much to my surprised, the terms in the agreement were different than what had been communicated to me. To protect my son I cannot go into details. Why would I, a mother, agree to convince my son to sign a plea agreement that would expose him to 10 – 15 years? I am Skyler’s hope, his resource, and all his trust rests with me. As his mother, I am supposed to protect and fight for him, not let him sit and wait for a day that may never come. I've stayed silent, I've been patient, played ball and through it all got strung along by these attorneys. I now have an obligation to stand up and fight for my son instead of waiting indefinitely for an outcome controlled by these attorneys who can no longer be trusted. We need answers. We need justice. Where are Skyler’s constitutional rights when he pleaded the fifth during his interrogation and yet the interrogation continued? When a child say, "I plead the fifth," that means I don't want to talk. I want all this to stop. Where are Skyler’s civil rights? I want to bring these other important questions to light: *Why did the police officer and/or detective not give Skyler his asthma medicine when he asked for it before he was led into interrogation? 16 hrs of interrogation without his medication resulted in him being hospitalized.*why did they finally decide to call his parent AFTER he was taken by an ambulance to the hospital after 16 hours of interrogation?*why did they promise a 5 year 8 month deal (testifying or not) and not live up to it? DA and unfortunately the defense attorney (I hired) fed me this information and asked me to convince my son to sign.*why did the detective write in his report that Skyler stated he exited the car with a crow bar when Skyler said the exact opposite during the interrogation (as noted in the interview transcript).*when Skyler asked to see his cousin Andy, why did the detective promise this would happen only after Sky give a statement. How can his statement still be voluntary after that promise was introduced?*why was the minor aunt who sat in the same car as the shooter, witnessing the same thing Skyler did, never got arrested for even A DAY? Why is she any different from Skyler?My son is a witness to a crime, not part of the crime.I won't stop reaching out to every entity needed to bring this case to light or until the day my son is release.These are the questions I have been living with for almost 6 years. My son has loss the best years of his youth. He missed his high school prom, falling in love, school field trips, family vacations, and the chance to create memories with his grandfathers before they passed away this past year. Instead he has been locked up in a room 23 hours a day, allowed to see sunlight one hour a week. Skyler has three cousins currently serving in the military to protect our freedom and constitutional rights, meanwhile he is fighting to be treated fairly in system protected by those very rights. As a mother and an American, our nation is better than what has been shown to my son and all the other mistreated juveniles. To date, they NEVER caught the shooter .......
Pledge to Support DACA Dreamers
In light of current events, it is unclear whether DACA will be renewed in 6 months, AND applications are no longer being accepted as of September 5, 2017. We dare to dream of a better tomorrow. We dream of a future in which our friends, families, and neighbors will be able to keep contributing to our society and work together to overcome hardship as a community. We pledge to never alienate DREAMERS. We pledge to hold great pride in the DREAMERS of our community. These human beings truly represent the values that make our nation great, they exude the ideals of hope, determination, and a better tomorrow. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) is a kind of administrative relief from deportation. The purpose of DACA is to protect eligible immigrant youth who came to the United States when they were children from deportation. DACA gives young undocumented immigrants: 1) protection from deportation, and 2) a work permit. The program expires after two years, subject to renewal. What Are The Requirements For DACA? You were under 31 years old as of June 15, 2012;You first came to the United States before your 16th birthday;You have lived continuously in the United States from June 15, 2007 until the present;You were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012 and at the time you apply;You came to the United States without documents before June 15, 2012, or your lawful status expired as of June 15, 2012;You are currently studying, or you graduated from high school or earned a certificate of completion of high school or GED, or have been honorably discharged from the Coast Guard or military (technical and trade school completion also qualifies); andYou have NOT been convicted of a felony, certain significant misdemeanors (including a single DUI), or three or more misdemeanors of any kind. Consult with an attorney about ANY contact you have had with law enforcement or immigration authorities. For more information on requirements and updates, visit Berkeley.edu
Oust 45. Save America.
OUST 45 One President had to resign. Two others got impeached. Our Constitution got tweaked over elections and holding office. Even George Washington must weep, as his own party evaporated because fat cats sold America short to stay rich. REGARDLESS OF PARTY, LET'S WORK TOGETHER TO SAVE THIS COUNTRY! Investigate... Find out if America is being sold short so one man stays rich. Guilty? Nullify or Impeach! If the election was bought by Vladimir Putin, nullify the 2016 presidential election. If the President ignores Congress to throw us into war, get bipartisan gonads. Let past Presidents run again! Repeal the amendment that limits presidents to run for two terms. GOP primary fight... If 42, 43, and 44 can’t run again, run a truly great Republican. Save AmericaMake 2020 an Era of Good Feelings
As it stands, there are thousands of civilians left cold in the crossfire in Aleppo. The bare minimum we seek to do with this petition is ensure that they make it out safe. In the past few days, air strikes, shelling and street-to-street combat in Syria, particularly in Aleppo’s eastern neighborhoods, have killed or injured scores of civilians. Since December 13th, thousands more fled the fighting in besieged eastern Aleppo with nothing more than the clothes on their back and their children in their arms. We write with urgency to request that you use the full authority of your office to convene international negotiations designed to stop the modern-day genocide in Syria, stabilize the country, effect the return to Syria of all refugees, provide for political change towards a popularly supported, accountable Syrian leadership, and hold Bashar Al-Assad’s regime accountable for all war crimes it has been inflicting upon the Syrian people. The international community must do everything they can to put a stop to this inhumane war. The Syrian regime must give safe passage to citizens trapped in the city and allow aid workers into Aleppo to save as many lives as they can. This is not politics, this is human rights. Please, let us not be responsible for witnessing genocide being committed on an entire city and not moving the masses in order to stop it.
PUBLIC DEFENDERS WHO ARE DEFENDING PARENTS OF CPS CASES SHOULD NOT BE STAKEHOLDERS FOR CPS
Stakeholders make decisions and policies on the way CPS provides it's services. Stakeholders should not be judges, attorneys, public defenders, CPS social workers, etc... because these people have power, influence, interest, and the ability to destroy a family's life. Abuse of power in the field of Children's Protective Services is currently not only a problem in every state in the United States but also in other countries as well. The existence and survival of healthy intact families need your help to change the current unfairness and imbalance of power in the CPS system.Who picks the stakeholders for an agency? The agency forms the group to be their stakeholders. An agency simply has to hand pick their stakeholders in order to produce a wanted outcome of an agency's goal. Stakeholder mapping is a process of identifying stakeholders and assessing their power, influence, and interest. Napa County Child Protection Services stakeholder members consist of members from: Child Abuse Prevention Council (CAPC ), Juvenile Justice COordinating Committee, Child Welfare Services, Napa County Public Health Dept., Napa County Mental Health Dept., Napa County Health & Human Services (designated agency to administer CAPIT/CBCAP/PSSF), *Parents CAN Family Resources, Napa County Probation Department, Cope Family Center, Foster Parent, Napa County Counsel's Office, *Public Defender's, Napa County District Attorney's Office, St. Helena Family Resource Center, American Canyon Family Resource Center, Lilliput Children's Services (kinship support/adoption), Napa County Alcohol and Drug Programs, CASA Program, Napa Emergency Women's Services, Victim Services, Community Resources for Children, Napa County Office of Education, Napa Valley Unified School District, Calistoga Unified School District, St. Helena Unified School District, Napa Police Department, St. Helena Police Department, Napa Sheriff's Department, Family Services of Napa Valley, Bay Area Regional Training Academy, Catholic Charities, Hillside Christian Church, VOICES, Progress Foundation, Head Start Programs, Community Action Napa Valley, North Bay Regional Center, Queen of the Valley Hospital, and CDSS. The one's with * next to them are court ordered by the judge to work with the parent. Parents CAN Family Resources is appointed to be the parent advocate to advise the parent on their parental rights. The Public Defender is the parent's attorney. You could conclude that Napa County Child Protection Services has done a thorough job of hand picking and recruiting their stakeholders by identifying key members of the Napa County community and surrounding communities and assessing their power, influence, and interest. Seems to me that the cards are stacked against the parents from the very beginning! I have also been told that it is not a conflict of interest for a Public Defender, who is defending a parent in court on a CPS court case, to be a member of CPS's stakeholder group. How can this not be a conflict of interest? Stakeholder mapping is a process of identifying stakeholders and assessing their power, influence, and interest. Stakeholders and shareholders are virtually the same both having a vested interest in the company's product. A shareholder is an individual, group, or organization that owns one or more shares in a company, and in whose name the share certificate is issued. It is legal for a company to have only one shareholder. Also called (in the US) stockholder. A stakeholder is a person, group or organization that has interest or concern in an organization. Stakeholders can affect or be affected by the organization's actions, objectives and policies. Some examples of key stakeholders are creditors, directors, employees, government (and its agencies), owners (shareholders), suppliers, unions, and the community from which the business draws its resources. CPS's product so to speak are the children that enter the system. Without children entering their system, there is no funding. Every member on the list of stakeholders above has a vested interest on a child entering the system. The agencies that the stakeholder members work for are written into a family's case plan which has to be completed in order for their children to come home. These agencies scratch CPS's back by providing services to parents with CPS case plans. CPS scratches these agencies by writing them into the family case plan therefore a parent is court ordered to seek services at these agencies. ================================= Your Lawyer: A User's Guide (Book)http://www.legalmatch.com/resources/lawyer-contents.html CHECK THIS INFO OUT FROM CHAPTER 7 OF THE BOOK ABOVE:You'll like this one, too. As we discussed elsewhere, your lawyer has to maintain his independence from any third party who is paying his fees, whether it is the client's dad, employer or insurance company. So, if your lawyer has some personal reason why the representation might be fettered - he has a prejudice or a business interest that might materially reduce his ardor - that interest must be disclosed to you. Similarly, if your lawyer or any other lawyer in his practice - even if he is in a 1,000-person law firm - represents your adversary, your lawyer must first ask whether a reasonable lawyer could conclude that the other representation would not significantly interfere with representing you and, even if he so concludes, he must then (a) tell you about the matter, and (b) let you decide, after being fully informed of the circumstances, whether you will permit the representation to proceed nonetheless. Meaning, can I live with it?Exactly. It's entirely your decision. Does it bother you that someone else in the firm is doing work for your adversary? That's the question you must ask. At the same time your lawyer will have to tell the law firm's other client about the possible representation of you and determine if that client will consent to his firm representing you.=================================== An attorney must inform their client that they are working with their adversary. By law, Colleen Clark, the public defender for mom's with CPS cases here in Napa, CA, has to tell her clients that she is a stakeholder with CPS and if she doesn't, she has violated this rule. She has also denied her clients to file appeals, another client filled out the paperwork twice for an appeal and she never filed the paperwork, and another client hired their own attorney to replace Colleen Clark and was not permitted to fire Colleen Clark. Public Defenders Letter To CPS Clients:https://www.facebook.com/publicdefendercc/photos/a.499166156816145.1073741825.499124830153611/870960259636731/?type=3&theater========================================= PARENTS ARE BEING DENIED DUE PROCESS: How does a parent defend themselves against false allegations in a declaration from the CPS worker that is in a Request For A Court Order Petition when they are not being properly informed? Issue 1:The first issue here in Napa county and other cities here in California, when a parent receives a request for a court order petition it doesn't include the documents required to file a responsive declaration. Documents Required to File a Responsive Declaration:Ø Responsive Declaration to Request for Order, [FL-320]Ø Proof of Service by Mail, [FL-335]Ø Attached Declaration [MC-031] (if needed)Ø Family Law Case Participant Enrollment Form, local form FL/E-LP-660 Issue 2:Most the time parents are not given proper service either. The parents are suppose to receive the petition in the mail 24 hours prior to the court hearing. The 1st time parents see the petition and meet their public defender is when it is handed to them in the 1st court hearing by their public defender. A parent has a right to file a Responsive Declaration in response to the request for a court order petition. In the courts current policy, the respondent is denied this right due to improper service, lack of time to do so properly, and not being given the necessary forms to do so. Issue 3:The public defender does not inform their client, the respondent, of the option to file a Responsive Declaration for the 1st hearing as well as any other stage where a petition is filed with the court. The parent at no time is advise that they can file a Responsive Declaration to the petition that was filed with the court. According to the form How to Complete a Responsive Declaration to a Request for Order it says, "If you do not file a Responsive Declaration in time for the hearing or do not mention important facts in your Declaration, the Judge might refuse to let you speak about the issues at the hearing." So how is a parent suppose to dispute the facts in the petition if they are not informed about filing a response or not given the forms to file a response, or their public defender failed to advise them of their right to file a response or not allowed to speak about the issues at the hearing? When is the parent allowed to defend themselves against the false allegations in the petition? Issue 4:The judge can only rule on what has been filed with the court. Parents are uninformed about filing a Responsive Declaration to the petition that was filed with the court. So the only thing a judge has to review and make his ruling on is the CPS works report to the court. Again the parents are being denied due process due to not being properly informed by their public defender and not including the Responsive Declaration forms with the petition in order to give the parents a chance to respond to the allegations in the petition. The judge makes the only ruling he can which is based on the CPS workers report to the court and what they are requesting a court order for because they don’t have anything disputing the CPS worker’s report to the court. PARENTS ARE BEING DENIED DUE PROCESS:https://www.facebook.com/notes/public-defender/parents-are-being-denied-due-process/1187331821332905============================== I do realize that there are cases where CPS is needed and I am all for that in those cases. However, when CPS is so caught up in gaining federal dollars and fails to protect a little girl like Kayleigh Slusher which cost her her life, it's clear that they have their priorities mixed up. ---------------------------------The Napa Valley Register newspaper stated: A lawsuit filed Friday in San Francisco accuses Napa Police and county social workers of failing to fully investigate reports of child abuse, contributing to the death of 3-year-old Kayleigh Slusher. Napa Police found the child dead on Feb. 1, 2014, in the second unit of the Royal Garden Apartments on Wilkins Avenue, where she lived with her mother, Sara Krueger, and her mother’s boyfriend, Ryan Warner. Krueger, 25, and Warner, 27, were arrested a day later and charged with murder and assault. It also stated: Robin Slusher on Jan. 27 reported to Child Welfare Services workers Nancy Lefler-Panela and Rocio Diaz-Lara that Kayleigh was not being fed, that Krueger and Warner were using drugs and that the drugs were accessible to the child, according to the complaint. Lefler-Panela told Slusher to call police, the suit states. Two days later, Wade and another office, named only as Deguilio, went to the apartment again, the suit states. This time they saw bruises on Kayleigh’s face when an evasive Krueger brought her to the front door after refusing to let the officers inside the apartment, according to the complaint. The entire articel titled "Police, social workers sued in death of 3-year-old Kayleigh Slusher" can be viewed at:http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/police-social-workers-sued-in-death-of--year-old/article_0f51838d-f9cd-58f4-bf6e-7e9f94989b83.html=================================== It's too bad that Nancy Schaefer isn't still alive because she may have gotten something done about this issue.Nancy Schaefer exposes the EVIL CPS:https://youtu.be/_TcDTJlPWbE==================================== These children are being used to gain federal dollars, families are being ripped apart unnecessarily, and it's just plain wrong. The bond between a parent and their child is God sent and no one should mess with that bond due to greed. Please help these children! PLEASE HELP BY SIGNING THIS PETITION! Sources of Information: Exercising Judicial Leadership to Reform the Care of Youth Charged with Status Offenses:A Convenor’s Action Guide for Developing a Multi-Stakeholder Process:http://www.juvjustice.org/sites/default/files/resource-files/Convener%20Action%20Guide%20FINAL_0.pdf Child Welfare Services DocumentsNapa System Improvement Plan 2013 CFS (Page 7 of 112 list of stakeholders):http://www.countyofnapa.org/Pages/DepartmentDocuments.aspx?id=4294967432 BusinessDictionary.comhttp://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/shareholder.html#ixzz3jZbDmK7whttp://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/stakeholder.html Nancy Schaefer exposes the EVIL CPS:https://youtu.be/_TcDTJlPWbE Your Lawyer: A User's Guide:http://www.legalmatch.com/resources/lawyer-contents.html Rethinking Foster Care: Molly McGrath Tierney At TEDxBaltimore2014:https://youtu.be/c15hy8dXSps?list=PL0_plJ8j1eLa__afp5KjdZXQy7wLRraxu Public Defenders Letter To CPS Clients:https://www.facebook.com/publicdefendercc/photos/a.499166156816145.1073741825.499124830153611/870960259636731/?type=3&theater Parent's Are Being Denied Due Process: https://www.facebook.com/notes/public-defender/parents-are-being-denied-due-process/1187331821332905