• frustrated

    “What part of against the laws do you not understand when the cops violate the citizens rights while ON DUTY and commit crimes because they look at the average citizen as the criminal while committing crimes themselves in the name of law enforcement”.

  • frustrated

    No, not good because they tell you that they are not playing politics with people’s lives when they are and also telling you that they are not discriminating against people when they are and breaking the laws at the same time.

  • RyanCantor

    Good.

  • Jane Rands

    Spencer, thank you for your timely posting of this story. I hope you won’t mind if I may clarify the reasoning for the judge’s ruling.

    The “main issue” according to the court’s minute order was:
    1) whether the map “inappropriately considers the residences of incumbent council members to avoid their having to run against one another”
    2) whether the map “inappropriately splits the downtown region into multiple districts, thus violating community of interest principles”
    3) whether the map ” fails to create any majority- minority districts, even where such districts arise naturally.”

    Of the three, only the second was stated as having “merit.” The first was not accepted, unfortunately, based on the understanding that creating a district for Sebourn still left 2 other council members in a single district and the third was not discussed.

    However, it appears in the article that the lack of a majority-minority districts was a factor in the decision to confirm Jaramillo’s complaint that map 8a violates the settlement agreement, when it actually hinged upon
    1) the inability to justify the separation of the downtown community of interest and
    2) the unclear settlement wording that led the judge to believe that in order for a map to be selected it has to be included in 2 public hearings.

    Thank you for endulging me.

    • David Zenger

      This is GOOD news. It means that somebody objective saw a community of interest downtown (apart from the self-serving booze peddlers) without dragging ethnicity into it.

      • frustrated

        “Discrimination clearly exists but discrimination is against the laws”. – George W.anker Bush

    • frustrated

      “Changing the wording in order to make you believe it”.

    • frustrated

      Um, Can you say Jim Righeimer?

  • Irascible Professor

    Let’s hope that our City Council will take the judge’s comments to heart.

    • frustrated

      Remove judge from bench.

      • Jane Rands

        Frustrated, I think you have misunderstood the comments here.
        The original complaints from Paik and Jaramillo discuss racially polarized voting according to the CVRA. That will only be reviewed by a judge if the settlement fails.
        This discussion is about how to draw district boundaries according to the settlement terms which include the state elections code pertaining to district boundaries.
        The judge was very smart in upholding state law and enforcing the settlement terms. It is unclear to me why you would have a problem with that.

        • frustrated

          And you might be a lawyer, and lawyers lie for a living. I however see the other side of the coin at how corrupt the OC judges really are in some cases. They do not meet out justice.

        • frustrated

          The State should not be involved in local political issues, its none of the states business.

          • Rivett

            The State makes laws that cities have to abide by. This, like most things, may not make sense to you.

  • David Zenger

    So much for Jeremy Popoff, Boy Cartographer.