Saturday, October 31, 2009

Don Wagner and LA County’s tiny golden cross

1. WHAT BECAME OF JOHN WILLIAMS’ “GRAND JURY” PROBLEM? It’s been months since we’ve heard anything about trustee John Williams’ battle with the OC Grand Jury.

The latter slapped him around pretty good four months ago for being an incompetent and cronyistic spendthrift—no, not as trustee but as OC's Public Administrator/Guardian. (See John Williams’ "egregious" mismanagement.)

Two months ago, Red County’s Matt Cunningham ran into Williams, who happily handed him his brand spankin' new retort to the GJ. Cunningham has a link to the document. (Public Guardian John Williams Blisters Grand Jury Report. Here's Williams' retort, a small pdf file. Check it out.)

But has Williams submitted it? If so, has he received a response? Inquiring minds wanna know.

2. TOM FUENTES’ PAL JIM LACY. One of the names that pops up as one peruses trustee Tom Fuentes’ political activities is “Jim Lacy.” Lacy endorsed Fuentes in Tom's last run for trustee. He's the guy who organized the recent Western CPAC extravaganza (Pious turds in a punchbowl), which, naturally, included a spot for both Fuentes and Wagner. (The conference started with a Fuentes B-day party!)

Since Lacy is one of Fuentes' pals, you will not be surprised to learn that he has a reputation as a low-life sleazetarian. According to the OC Weekly, he was one of the classy Repubs who spread the rumor, during the 2008 campaign, that Obama is a Muslim.

Evidently, even many Republicans can’t stand the guy. For instance, on Tuesday, Red County/OC editor Matt Cunningham (Legal Aid For The Lunatic Fringe) wrote:
Lacy has decided to put his legal talents to use making the OC blogosphere safe for smearing, and make himself handmaiden to cyber-cruelty. How noble. How uplifting. How admirable. What a guy.

I'm talking about Lacy's baffling and deeply disappointing decision ... to destroy an innocent bystander in the AD72 special election.

Here's Lacy's letter ... setting forth his unique and dangerous legal reasoning:

"Your client has been established as a public figure by virtue of a widely broadcast media report featured on television on CBS2/KCAL9...concerning a political debate in an election context."

Translation: "KCBS' smear made your client a 'public figure', so my sleazy clients are therefore free to continue the smear." That is an appalling, reckless standard to posit, and the ramifications are frightening. Using Jim Lacy's standard, any media outlet can smear a private citizen and anyone who piles on can claim legal protection because the victim is now a "public figure." Maybe Jim can open up a niche practice, specializing in representing character assassins: "Hi! I'm Jim Lacy! Let me, help you, hurt others!"

I am stunned Lacy would lower himself to this….

Matt’s stunned? Don’t see why. Pay attention, Matt!

3. DON WAGNER AND L.A. COUNTY’S TINY GOLDEN CROSS. Do you recall the controversy four years ago concerning the LA County seal?

The old seal (created in 1957—see at left) sported the usual historical icons plus a small golden cross. But then, in 2004, the ACLU seemed interested in suing the board for its apparent failure, seal-wise, to separate church and state. So the LA Board of Supes had the seal changed. The new seal was very similar to the old one, and it did sport a mission, but the tiny golden cross was gone. (See below.)

At the time, all sorts of people came out of the woodwork objecting to the de-crossification of the seal. “My God!!!!!” they shrieked.

Among that crew was close Tom Fuentes pal (they share a spot at the Ahmanson-funded Claremont Institute) John Eastman, who evidently led a team of like-minded lawyers—on behalf of the likes of David Horowitz—to challenge the Supes’ decision in a legal “complaint.” You can read the complaint here (warning: it is a pdf file, though a smallish one).

Eastman’s team included four attorneys.

But get this: trustee Don Wagner was among them.

According to the 2004 complaint, the
effect of Defendants’ policy of targeting the cross for removal is to convey a message of disfavor of and hostility toward religion in general and Christianity in particular, and thereby to cause harm by sending a message to Christians, including certain Plaintiffs, that they are outsiders, not full members of the political community. Once this policy is implemented, this harmful and unconstitutional effect will be repeated each time the Seal without the cross is displayed.
Good Lord! Imagine getting smashed in the face with absence-of-tiny-crossitude on a daily basis! Oh, the humanity!

The complaint failed. The seal stayed changed. (Read a description of the change here.)

Eastman and 2004 holdover attorney Manuel S. Klausner then appealed (see Ninth Curcuit, May 15, 2007). Don Wagner was not involved in the appeal.

The appeal failed.

Evidently, this crew tried to take the matter to the Supremes, but the latter refused to hear the case.

Note:
Klausner is with the Reason Foundation, which battles environmental regulations. How noble. What a guy.
• Eastman, of course, is with the Chapman U School of Law. He’s also “the founding Director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, a public interest law firm affiliated with the Claremont Institute for the Study of Statesmanship and Political Philosophy” (Claremont Institute--which, again, is funded by wacko Howard Ahmanson).
• William J. Becker, Jr. (Wagner and Eastman’s co-counsel in the 2004 complaint) recently published The American Library Association’s Stealth Jihad Against Free Speech. He’s also the author of The ACLU campaign to advance communist goals. How noble. What a guy.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Does Orange County have a seal? What's on it?

Anonymous said...

John Williams is an interesting study: devoted to his wife, engaged in sports (as a spectator now), a man who sees some opportunities (regular trips to Orlando to stay in expensive hotels) and the apparent fiasco of trying to run a government agency without the leadership and organizational skills needed.

He has always advocated for good salaries and benefits for faculty (and I believe staff) but his unwavering attachments--to some very oddly 19th century conservative values and to this Chancellor--reveal the Jesus bug in him. He skirts across water without ever wondering what's beneath its surface. He doesn't seem to probe, only advocate for ideas he really does not seem to have thought through.

Roy raises a point that I've been wondering about--what is his response to the Grand Jury? When will it be made public?

And why has John been so quiet at Board of Trustee meetings?

Anonymous said...

For those of you wondering what has happened to the PA/PG (John Williams) and his response to the Grand Jury report.......
Well he would have us all believe that the Grand Jury report was tainted by made up stories of current and former employees who have been put throught the discipline process. What a slap in the face to our esteemed Grand Jury and the whole Grand Jury process.

It seems as though the Orange County Board of Supervisors is FINALLY going to act on these findings. In the agenda for the upcoming BOS meeting you will find under Item 45 where the BOS will adopt an ordinance to separate the elected position of the Public Administrator's office and the ex officio Public Guardian. This will again create two departments and Mr. Williams will now have to account for his actions to the CEO and will serve at the discretion of the Board of Supervisors. (finally ACCOUNTABILITY!!!)

Take a look at the County's Board of Supervisor's Agenda item 45 and the Agenda Staff report. It details what will become of the position. If you read between the lines it doesn't appear as if Mr. Williams will continue to be the Public Guardian after his current Public Administrator term is up, even if he is re-elected as PA.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Anon at 4:19 - it's nice to know that the blog and the colleges get noticed across the county. I'll contact my supervisor regarding my concerns about Mr. Williams.

Roy's obituary in LA Times and Register: "we were lucky to have you while we did"

  This ran in the Sunday December 24, 2023 edition of the Los Angeles Times and the Orange County Register : July 14, 1955 - November 20, 2...