Jennifer Jones Loses Appeal & is NOT Affiliated w/Desert Messenger

https://www.facebook.com/DesertMessengerNews

Greetings!
This blog has been inactive recently, but I've noticed there's been hundreds of views over the past few weeks. (...not sure why, but it could be the political season..see below) I just want to remind folks you can get updates on Quartzsite news, events, and entertainment on our Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/DesertMessengerNews.

Recently, I've been receiving multiple calls asking if Jennifer "Jade" Jones works with, or for, me. And then just today,  a stranger told me, "Jade really does a great job with the Messenger." After introducing myself, he seemed a bit confused saying, "Well, she said she submitted articles or something." I explained that she publishes her own paper-- sometimes. He still seemed confused saying, "But she helped sign me up to get the Messenger on my phone." My response was simply, "That's nice." 

I want to make it perfectly clear, AGAIN, that 
Mrs. Jennifer Jones is NOT affiliated with Desert Messenger.  

Jones is a candidate for Arizona House of Representatives Legislative District 5, covering La Paz & Mohave Counties. In the past Jones identified herself as an experienced dog groomer, but now she simply identifies herself as a publisher of the Desert Freedom Press. Jones published only 3 editions of her tabloid in all of 2015 and just one edition in 2016 to date. 

In 2014, Jones filed a civil rights lawsuit against me (and Towns of Parker & Quartzsite) in U.S. District Court for Arizona Under Section 1983 for posting an official government Press Release focusing on her alleged actions. To prevail in a claim under section 1983, the plaintiff must prove two critical points: a person subjected the plaintiff to conduct that occurred under color of state law, and this conduct deprived the plaintiff of rights, privileges, or immunities guaranteed under federal law or the U.S. Constitution.

The case was DISMISSED in the 

United States District Court of Arizona-Phoenix 

but Jones filed an appeal in 

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 

On April 4, 2016, the US Court of Appeals AFFIRMED the District Court's judgement.

 The short ruling reads:

"A review of the record and the responses to the court’s November 17, 2015 order to show cause indicates that the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir. 1982) (per curiam) (stating standard).

Accordingly, we summarily affirm the district court’s judgment. AFFIRMED"

The appeal went before Circuit Judges CANBY, LEAVY, and IKUTA.

(Affirmed – In the practice of the court of appeals, it means that the court of appeals has concluded that the lower court decision is correct and will stand as rendered by the lower court.)

Original Case: D.C. No. 2:14-CV-01907-SPL

U.S. District Court for Arizona, Phoenix
On May 29, 2015 Honorable Steven P. Logan, United States District Judge 
dismissed the case in its entirety with prejudice.

Here are some excerpts from Judge Logan's judgement: 
"3. Defendant Shanana Rain Golden-Bear
Lastly, Plaintiff names Golden-Bear as a defendant, the publisher of a free newspaper, “Desert Messenger,” a rival to Plaintiff’s free newspaper, “The Desert Freedom Press.” (Docs. 1 at 9; 35 at 1.) Plaintiff alleges that Golden-Bear violated her civil rights when she printed a press release issued by the Town of Quartzsite, which Plaintiff describes as “libelous and defamatory.” (Doc. 1 at 9.) This claim equally fails.

"Plaintiff does not bring a cause of action for libel or defamation; she brings a §1983 action. To survive a motion to dismiss under §1983, Plaintiff must show that: (1) a constitutional violation occurred; and (2) that deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.” West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988) (citation omitted).

"A person acts under color of state law when the person has “exercised power possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because the wrongdoer is clothed with the authority of state law.” Id. at 49 (citation omitted).

"Here, Plaintiff does not allege that Golden-Bear is employed by the Town of Quartzsite, [however in her appeal she indeed did falsely claim that I was an employee of the Town] nor does she allege that Golden-Bear is an elected official for Quartzsite. Furthermore, even if assumed true, the publishing of a press release is not “made possible only because the wrongdoer is clothed with the authority of state law.” Id. Golden-Bear did not publish the press release under the color of state law and is not liable under a §1983 claim."

"DISMISSED in its entirety with prejudice."

Jones' only option now is to appeal to the United States Supreme Court. 

I've posted the court documents so readers can see for themselves her claims made to the Federal Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals. The PDF's are located at www.DesertMessengerNewsBlog.wordpress.com

I really appreciate all of your support during this long process! 
Finally JUSTICE IS SERVED!
~RAIN

Shanana Rain BearCat (AKA Golden-Bear)
Editor/Publisher
Desert Messenger - Quartzsite's FREE Community Paper - Now in our 12th Year!
PO Box 1385, Quartzsite, AZ 85359
Editor@DesertMessenger.com  www.DesertMessenger.com 

Federal Judge dismisses Jennifer Jones' Quartzsite Free-Speech case

By Shanana Rain BearCat
Publisher, Desert Messenger
Quartzsite's FREE Community Paper

2:12-CV-01383 JAT Jones v. Town of Quartzsite et al

Jennifer Jones 

Quartzsite, AZ - Jennifer Jones, a local dog groomer, political activist, and former state candidate, lost her infamous Civil Rights case against the Town of Quartzsite in U.S. District Court Phoenix Division Tuesday, May 26th, 2015. (Jones was also publisher of a Quartzsite tabloid, but January was her last edition.)

In his ruling, U.S. District Senior Judge James A. Teilborg wrote, "this Court is dismissing this case with prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b,) He continued stating, "judgment for Defendants on all counts. Plaintiff to take nothing, and the complaint and action are dismissed with prejudice." (meaning Jones is barred from bringing an action on the same claim.)

Jones had filed no less than 6 cases against the Town in Federal Court. This case was originally filed on June 27, 2012 by Jones herself. Since then, two attorneys requested to be withdrawn from representing Jones in separate filings, so Jones represented herself Tuesday. In September, 2014 the Court dismissed all complaints but First Amendment Freedom of Speech complaint. In one of her earlier complaints, Jones claimed that Quartzsite Town Council and Police Department had harassed her with warrant-less searches in an attempt to discourage her political activities. A court tossed that 2010 case a year later, a similar lawsuit filed in 2012 fell apart for failure to prosecute. As recently as March 30th this year, U.S. District Judge Diane J. Hemetawa ruled in favor of the Town of Quartzsite, against Jones for failure to prosecute.

These cases are related, in one way or another, to a Town Council meeting on June 28th, 2011 when Jones was ejected and arrested (later dismissed) during a public comment period. The video of the arrest soon went viral.

According to the Court, Jones had called the Court's chambers Friday, May 22nd, indicating that she intended to file a motion to continue the trial scheduled for Tuesday, May 26th, the next business day. The court notified Jones that the trial will begin Tuesday as scheduled and if a motion was filed, the Court would not rule on it before Tuesday. The court also Ordered Jones to appear for the hearing. Judge  Teilborg stated that Jones must be prepared to proceed to trial  in the event the Court denies the motion. "If plaintiff fails to appear or if the Court denies the motion to continue and Plaintiff is not prepared to proceed to trial at that time, her case will be dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b)."

After much publicity, Jones finally had her day in court, but filed two Emergency motions before the 9 am hearing Tuesday morning. The subpoenaed Jury Pool was assembled next door; the attorney for the Town, Larry Jay Crown of Titus Brueckner & Levine PC, was in attendance along with witnesses for the Town: former Quartzsite Town Manager Alexandra Taft, Former Quartzsite Chief of Police Jeffrey Gilbert and former Quartzsite Police Detective Richard Patterson. Quartzsite Mayor Ed Foster was in attendance supporting Jones.

Judge Teilborg denied Jones' first motion which asked the court to deny a previous motion allowing witnesses to testify via telephone.

Jones then pleaded her case for an extension. She explained that many of her witnesses were in public service and "it would be impossible for them to testify without a subpoena." Jones said there was no "physical way" to serve her witnesses all over the state of Arizona in a timely manner. She also explained she was learning very quickly, but did not expect to have to represent herself in this case.

Jones complained about not having a vehicle and having to drive multiple times to Phoenix. Jones complained about the long distance drive to Phoenix from Quartzsite. She also stated it was not possible for her to travel without making prior arrangements for her show dogs to be cared for. Jones said she made "every effort possible" to find a location in Phoenix for her dogs. Jones also reached out to people through social media, but "could not find anyone willing to accommodate the dogs with electricity."

She said she had problems with her email; admitting to not reading an important notice from the Court.

"Given I only had 21 days to spontaneously have 15 witnesses to prepare questions for, to locate if I could, to get subpoenas issued for, to get subpoenas served for...Nowhere in my logical mind did it occur to me that the May 26th date was being carried over," said Jones. She said she thought they were "back to the point of proposing dates."

Judge Teilborg mentioned Jones' lengthy document seeking an extension, calling it a masterpiece with citations and rulings a lawyer might prepare. He asked Jones how long she worked on it. Jones replied, "Every waking moment from the 12th [of May] until last night until about 10 pm." Judge Teilborg suggested the amount of time spent on the document could have been used to get subpoenas out and preparing her witnesses.

Jones said she didn't think the judge would actually approve her most recent attorney's request to withdraw from the case. "Never in a million years did I dream that you would grant that order" and not be allowed time to seek additional counsel. She stated she even went to the Arizona Governor's Inaugural and asked former Governor Jan Brewer's son if he would take a look at the case, but she didn't hear back from him.

Jones admitted fault in that she "did misunderstand the plain reading of what was in front of me. I'm throwing myself on the mercy of the court" and was not ready to proceed at this point.


After a 25 minute recess, the Court reconvened. Judge Teilborg denied Jones' motion for an extension. He said, "to move the case forward would invite the same litany of failures and excuses from the Plaintiff."

The Judge stated, "Plaintiff's claim that she was unaware of the trial date simply is not credible."

He said, "Plaintiff CHOSE to file in Federal Court in Phoenix."

Regarding the jurors, Judge Teilborg said, "some may have come from regions even further than Quartzsite!"

The Judge also stated Jones did not seek more time to find counsel after her 2nd attorney asked for withdrawal. Earlier this month, the clerk of the court sent an email to Jones with full instructions to prepare for trial date of May 26th.

Judge Teilborg stated Jones "disregarded Court's orders." He also stated, "The court has bent over backwards to accommodate the plaintiff's needs."

When Senior Judge James A Teilborg of U.S. District Court DISTRICT OF ARIZONA (Phoenix Division) asked if Jennifer Jones was ready to move forward 

with the hearing, Jones replied, 

"No, your honor, I'm prepared to go home and take care of my dogs." 

CASE DISMISSED.

Quartzsite to get much needed Dog Park

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Arizona 

Promotes Wellness and Sense of Community by Funding

 Improvements to Quartzsite Town Park

(PHOENIX –Nov. 10, 2014) – With a continued focus on promoting health, wellness, and community, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Arizona (BCBSAZ) is proud to provide improvement funding to Quartzsite Town Park. In honor of its 75th anniversary statewide outreach campaign, “Arizonans First. Always.,” the generous donation from BCBSAZ will be used for various park enhancements, including development of the town’s first dog park. The much-needed park improvements will encourage physical activity, community spirit and greater enjoyment of the public space by Quartzsite residents and visitors.

Quartzsite Town Park is located on the northwest corner of N. Plymouth Ave and Chandler. As the centerpiece of Quartzsite, it hosts various community gatherings and events including an annual Easter Egg Hunt, 4^th of July and Labor Day celebrations, car shows and a summer program for children. It is enjoyed by thousands of people every year, especially when the population of Quartzsite swells in the winter months with RV visitors in town for the gem show and swap meets.

"The Town of Quartzsite is very thankful for the donation from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Arizona,” said Skylor Miller, Quartzite Town Manager. “With this funding, the Town will be able to move forward with a much needed amenity in our park."

“Quartzsite Town Park is a hallmark of the community that serves as a gathering place for residents and visitors of Quartzsite alike,” said Rich Boals, president and CEO of BCBSAZ. “We are happy to fund park enhancements that will encourage increased physical activity, resulting in better overall health and wellness in one of the communities we serve.”

The “Arizonans First. Always.” campaign has already visited Pima, Maricopa, Santa Cruz, Cochise, Greenlee, Graham, Apache, Navajo and Mohave counties. Following La Paz County, BCBSAZ will visit Coconino County. To learn more about BCBSAZ and its 75 years in Arizona, visit azblue.com/birthday.

Arizona voters - Deadline to request early mail ballot is Aug. 15

Deadline to request early mail ballot is Aug. 15

All voters may vote by mail, 

early in person or on Primary Election Day

STATEWIDE – The last day to request a ballot from your County Recorder for the Primary Election is 5 p.m., Friday, August 15. The Secretary of State’s Office recommends having your early ballot voted, signed, sealed and sent by August 22. If early voters miss the August 22 deadline they may return their ballot to an early voting location, at the County Recorder’s Office, or at the polling place in their county on Primary Election Day.

For security reasons, election officials recommend to only give your early mail ballot to your postal worker. Should you miss the mailing deadline, you may drop your ballot at an early voting location or with your County Recorder. For locations and availability, contact the County Recorder’s office. If you vote by early mail ballot, do not vote in person.

All voters – including independent voters or those without a party preference – are able to vote through one of three ways:

1.     Early mail ballot;

2.     Early in-person voting; or

3.     In-person on Primary Election Day, Tuesday, August 26.

To find an early voting location and availability, contact the County Recorder. 

Early in-person voting ends Friday, August 22.

For those voting on Election Day, August 26, make sure you know your correct polling location, as voting locations may change from election to election. To know before you go, go online to www.azsos.gov, and click on the Voter View icon or call 1-877-THE VOTE or in the Phoenix Metro Area 602-542-8683. The Voter View portion of the website is compatible with smartphones and tablets. You also may contact your County Recorder’s office.

Last day to register to vote for Arizona Primary July 28th

Monday, July 28^th 

last day to register to vote in 

Primary Election

Arizona Primary Election is 

Tuesday, August 26

ARIZONA – Secretary of State Ken Bennett reminds Arizonans that Monday, July 28^th before midnight is the last day to register to vote or update voter registration to cast a ballot in the upcoming August 26^th Primary Election.

“It is encouraging to see the citizens of Arizona taking seriously their role in government,” said Secretary Bennett. “The ability to vote for our leaders is a fundamental right more people should exercise.”

To be eligible to register, a person must be a citizen of the United States, 18 or older as well as a resident of Arizona and the county listed on the person’s registration. To view personal voter registration information, go online to the Secretary of State’s website at www.azsos.gov and click on the Voter View icon. Information on a person’s current registration, polling place, party affiliation and more is available.

There are three different ways to register to vote: by mail, in-person and online. Mail-in registration forms are available from the County Recorder and online from the Secretary of State at www.azsos.gov and click on the Voter Registration icon. Simply, fill in the form, print the form, sign and date it, affix the proper postage and mail the form to the County Recorder of the county of legal residence. In-person registration is also available at the County Recorder’s Office. If a legal Arizona resident has an identification card or driver license issued by the state of Arizona, the resident may register to vote or update voter registration online at www.ServiceArizona.com.

For questions about voter registration, contact the County Recorder or call the Secretary of State at 1-877- THE VOTE or in the Phoenix Metro Area 602-542-8683.

Quartzsite Town Council to hold special meeting Friday, June 20th at 3:30pm

Quartzsite Town Council will hold a Special Meeting Friday, June 20 at 3:30pm at Town Hall. The meeting was called after Town Manager Skylor Miller presented council members with a Memo updating them on meetings held with WIFA and USDA regarding the sewer expansion project and the case of Mayor Ed Foster v. Town of Quartzsite.

The full memo is below:

Memo TM to Council 6-18-14.pdf




http://www.docstoc.com/docs/document-preview.aspx?doc_id=171285788

Political Advertising Policies for Desert Messenger- Quartzsite, Arizona

It's political season again in Quartzsite. As a courtesy to political candidates, Desert Messenger is posting the requirements for advertising published by Arizona Newspaper Association and ARS Statutes regulating advertising for candidates.  SEE BELOW: It is the candidate's responsibility to know the law.

DESERT MESSENGER POLICY:

Political advertising, advertising on public policy questions and controversial issues will be prepaid. These ads must contain “Paid for by...” the name and contact of person(s) or organization(s) responsible for the advertisement.

CANDIDATE ADVERTISEMENTS

Any advertisement by a candidate or political committee that advocates the election or

defeat of any candidate or solicits contributions to a political committee shall state that it

was paid for by the candidate or the candidate’s campaign committee, if that statement is

accurate, or shall state the name of the political committee that paid for the

advertisement, identify the chairman of the political committee and provide a telephone

number for that individual.

If the literature or advertisement is not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s

campaign, the advertisement shall so state. If the advertisement is an independent

expenditure (i.e., an expenditure by a person or political committee, other than a

candidate’s campaign committee, that expressly advocates the election or defeat of a

clearly identified candidate, that is made without cooperation or consultation or at the

request or suggestion of any candidate or committee or agent of the candidate) by a

political committee, the advertisement shall also state the names and telephone numbers

of the three political committees making the largest contributions to the political

committee that paid for the advertisement. If an acronym is used to identify any political

committee, the name of any sponsoring organization of the political committee must also

be identified.

The required disclosures must be printed clearly and legibly in a conspicuous manner in

the advertisement. In printed advertisements, the disclosure must appear in a font that is

at least 3/32 inches tall in a dark type on a light background surrounded by a dark box.

§ 16-901(14), (19). Definitions

In this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires:

14. “Independent expenditure” means an expenditure by a person or

political committee, other than a candidate’s campaign committee, that expressly

advocates the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate, that is made without

cooperation or consultation with any candidate or committee or agent of the candidate

and that is not made in concert with or at the request or suggestion of a candidate, or any

committee or agent of the candidate. Independent expenditure includes an expenditure

that is subject to the requirements of section 16-917 which requires a copy of campaign

literature or advertisement to be sent to a candidate named or otherwise referred to in the

literature or advertisement. An expenditure is not an independent expenditure if any of

the following applies:

(a) Any officer, member, employee or agent of the political

committee making the expenditure is also an officer, member, employee or

agent of the committee of the candidate whose election or whose opponent’s

defeat is being advocated by the expenditure or an agent of the candidate whose

election or whose opponent’s defeat is being advocated by the expenditure.

(b) There is any arrangement, coordination or direction with

respect to the expenditure between the candidate or the candidate’s agent and the

person making the expenditure, including any officer, director, employee or

agent of that person.

(c) In the same election the person making the expenditure,

including any officer, director, employee or agent of that person, is or has been:

(i) Authorized to raise or expend monies on behalf of the

candidate or the candidate’s authorized committees.

(ii) Receiving any form of compensation or

reimbursement from the candidate, the candidate’s committees or the

candidate’s agent.

(d) The expenditure is based on information about the candidate’s

plans, projects or needs, or those of his campaign committee, provided to the

expending person by the candidate or by the candidate’s agents or any officer,

member or employee of the candidate’s campaign committee with a view

toward having the expenditure made.

19. “Political committee” means a candidate or any association or

combination of persons that is organized, conducted or combined for the purpose of

influencing the result of any election or to determine whether an individual will become a

candidate for election in this state or in any county, city, town, district or precinct in this

state, that engages in political activity in behalf of or against a candidate for election or

retention or in support of or opposition to an initiative, referendum or recall or any other

measure or proposition and that applies for a serial number and circulates petitions and,

in the case of a candidate for public office except those exempt pursuant to section 16-

903, that receives contributions or makes expenditures in connection therewith,

notwithstanding that the association or combination of persons may be part of a larger

association, combination of persons or sponsoring organization not primarily organized,

conducted or combined for the purpose of influencing the result of any election in this

state or in any county, city, town or precinct in this state.

§ 16-912(A)-(E). Candidates and independent expenditures; campaign literature and

advertisement sponsors; identification; civil penalty

A. A political committee that makes an expenditure for campaign literature or

advertisements that expressly advocate the election or defeat of any candidate or that make any

solicitation of contributions to any political committee shall be registered pursuant to this chapter

at the time of distribution, placement or solicitation and shall include on the literature or

advertisement the words “paid for by” followed by the name of the committee that appears on its

statement of organization or five hundred dollar exemption statement.

B. If the expenditure for the campaign literature or advertisements by a political

committee is an independent expenditure, the political committee, in addition to the disclosures

required by subsection A of this section, shall include on the literature or advertisement the names

and telephone numbers of the three political committees making the largest contributions to the

political committee making the independent expenditure. If an acronym is used to name any

political committee outlined in this section, the name of any sponsoring organization of the

political committee shall also be printed or spoken. For purposes of determining the three

contributors to be disclosed, the contributions of each political committee making the independent

expenditure during the one year period before the election being affected are aggregated.

C. Subsection A of this section does not apply to bumper stickers, pins, buttons,

pens and similar small items on which the statements required in subsection A of this section

cannot be conveniently printed or to signs paid for by a candidate with campaign monies or by a

candidate’s campaign committee or to a solicitation of contributions by a separate segregated fund

from those persons it may solicit pursuant to §§ 16-920 and 16-921.

D. The disclosures required pursuant to this section shall be printed clearly and

legibly in a conspicuous manner or, if the advertisement is broadcast on a telecommunications

system, the disclosure shall be spoken. For printed material that is delivered or provided by hand

or by mail, the disclosure shall be printed in a font that is at least 3/32 inches tall in dark type on

light background surrounded by a dark box. For communications that are broadcast on a

telecommunications system or other medium that can provide a viewable disclosure and a spoken

disclosure, the disclosure may be made in printed format only and a spoken disclosure is not

required.

E. A person who violates this section is subject to a civil penalty of up to three

times the cost of producing and distributing the literature or advertisement. This civil penalty

shall be imposed as prescribed in § 16-924.

For all your Quartzsite Advertising needs, contact 

Shanana "Rain" Golden-Bear, Publisher of Desert Messenger, 

Quartzsite's FREE Community Paper 

at 928-916-4235. 

Email Editor@DesertMessenger.com.

2013-2014 Rate Card is available at www.DesertMessenger.com. 

Quartzsite Mayor offers settlement IF Council abolishes Police Dept.

By Shanana Rain Golden-Bear
Publisher Desert Messenger

Quartzsite, AZ - In a letter dated April 9, 2014, Mayor Ed Foster's attorney Julie A. LaBenz presented a "Settlement Offer" to the Town of Quartzsite, in an effort to resolve La Paz County case number CV2013-0115. Foster wants the Town Council to vote to abolish the Quartzsite Police Department, and have La Paz County Sheriff provide law enforcement services. 

Foster's case challenges a ruling which denied him the right to use his Mayor's Veto. Quartzsite Town Council approved Resolution 13-09 on December 10, 2013 regarding a USDA Sewer Loan to expand the sewer treatment plant. The council voted 5-1 to approve the resolution with an emergency clause, but that failed because 6 votes were required from the 7-member board. Council approved the resolution without the emergency clause.
Then on December 17th, the council approved the resolution with the emergency clause, with Foster voting nay. Foster later attempted to use his Mayoral Veto and stop the resolution. Mohave Superior Court Judge Rick Lambert ruled the execution of the contract as an "emergency". Foster is appealing that ruling, which has resulted in placing the sewer loan on hold.

During his campaign, Foster pledged to fire former Quartzsite Police Chief Jeff Gilbert. Gilbert was released from his contract in October 2013. Gilbert stated his ouster was orchestrated to cover up an inquiry he launched into Town Council members for allegedly releasing confidential police documents. Foster has advocated disbanding the police force and letting La Paz County Sheriff's Office handle the town's law enforcement. Earlier this year, the council refused Foster's idea, so now he's offering to "settle" his case.

The letter reads as follows: (see link at end of article for copy of the original letter)

In the settlement offer Re:       

Settlement Offer pursuant to Rule 408, Arizona Rules of Evidence

Dear Mrs. Schwab & Mrs. Ronan, In an effort to resolve La Paz County case number CV2013-0115, pursuant to Rule 408, Arizona Rules of Evidence, Plaintiff Mayor hereby conveys the following offer of settlement:That in exchange for Defendants' agreement to the following, Plaintiff Mayor will withdraw his veto and dismiss his appeal:

• Vote to abolish the Quartzsite Police Department;

• Enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement with the La Paz County Sheriff's Office to provide a Quartzsite Metro Squad to patrol Quartzsite, saving the Town approximately $500,000 per year;

• Dedicate the funds saved by abolishing the Quartzsite Police Department to the HURF loan and the prospective USDA loan for a period of six (6) years;

• Agree that the sewer rates be restructured to be based strictly on a volumetric rate based on water usage; and

• Payment of Mayor Foster's legal fees and costs in full.

This offer will expire at 5:00 p.m. on Friday, April 25, 2014.

Today, Desert Messenger received the following opinion letter from a reader,

"It appears that Mayor Foster is "blackmailing" the rest of the Town council in exchange for dropping the law suit he has pending against his own Town! He is calling (soliciting) (demanding) for a vote to abolish the Quartzsite Police Department and to enter into an agreement with La Paz County!  Dictating the sewer rates to his terms! Demanding that his legal fees and cost are paid by the Town he is the mayor of! This must be exposed and reported to the Attorney General's office!

If this isn't BLACKMAILING or some type of violation of public office laws, then there is no hope for this Town! The Mayor is suppose to serve the people who elected him, NOT be SELF SERVING! This man will never get it! The council meeting is Tuesday (today) 4-22-14 at their first evening meeting at 7:00 pm. It is about time the Desert Messenger is responsible and it exposes the corruption of Foster and his dictatorship style of a public figure. Come on Ms Rain, get your butt down to the meeting and get the facts reported. You should be able to still up some real thunder with a name like that! This may mean nothing more for the rest of the county to laugh at, but for Quartzsite we take it very seriously because it is destroying everything good that we have."

The next meeting is tonight, Tuesday, April 22 at 7pm.

Foster settlement offer. 4-9-140001.pdf

Quartzsite Town Council terminates contract with Police Chief Jeff Gilbert

By Shanana Rain Golden-Bear
Publisher Desert Messenger
Quartzsite, AZ - Tuesday, October 22, 2014, Town Council voted to terminate the contract of Quartzsite Chief of Police Jeff Gilbert. Council members had been attempting to terminate Gilbert for many years, and recently the efforts escalated. Council returned from a long executive session and terminated Gilbert's contract "Without Cause" and will "provide severance as provided by the contract." No explanation was given to the public, however, Council Member Mary Scott said, "The Town is going in one direction, and the Chief is going in another." After the vote, Gilbert addressed the council and the public saying he was grateful for the support of the community for the past eight years. The Council denied the public to comment on their decision. 

Former Quartzsite Chief of Police Jeff Gilbert
Photo by Shanana Rain Golden-Bear

Desert Messenger

Gilbert became famous in June 2011 when 80% of QPD officers filed a vote of "No Confidence" in his leadership. The majority of those officers were eventually terminated by former Town Manager Alex Taft, and are still in litigation with the Town. In 2010, Mayor Ed Foster initiated several complaints against Gilbert. Town of Quartzsite administration ordered an investigation by Jackson Lewis, LLC, which has since been made public online: http://www.epageflip.net/issue/37347.

When the video of local activist Jennifer "Jade" Jones being forcefully removed from a council meeting went viral in July 2011, Quartzsite received attention from around the globe. Shortly thereafter, Mayor Ed Foster, who had been censured, announced to media that the Town was under "Martial Law" and that Gilbert was "running the town". Foster's 2010 mayoral campaign was based on promises to "get rid of the Chief." Foster was ousted by voters in a recall election in 2011, but regained his Mayoral position in 2012. Foster spearheaded the attempt to oust the Police Chief for many years by filing more complaints with state agencies.

Several DPS investigations could not prove any wrong doing by the Chief. Gilbert continued in his position until September 2012 when Assistant Town Manager Al Johnson illegally placed him on paid administrative leave. Quartzsite Town Council then terminated Taft, and hired Interim Town Manager Laura Bruno. Council reinstated Gilbert on Sept. 25th, 2012. http://desertmessenger.blogspot.com/2012_09_01_archive.html After Council granted Bruno another year contract, tensions increased between Bruno, Gilbert and Council members.

UPDATE: In an interview with Arizona Republic's Dennis Wagner, "Gilbert said his ouster was orchestrated to cover up an inquiry he launched into Town Council members for allegedly releasing confidential police documents.

On August 8, 2013 Council Member Mark Orgeron submitted two requests to Bruno requesting agenda items to be placed upcoming meetings; for the August 13th meeting Orgeron wanted "to define the office hours of the police department as well as when phones should be routed to central dispatch." Council held a lengthy discussion on this procedural matter. Planning ahead for the September 10th Town Council Meeting, Orgeron wanted to "recruit and hire an Interim Chief of Police," but this item did not appear on the meeting's agenda to be discussed.

Disagreements became evident during the September 24th council meeting. Bruno, Gilbert, and Town Attorneys disagreed about the proposed Police Policies which requires officers to video ALL contacts with citizens. Gilbert argued for the officers to able to use their professional judgement. Council approved the new policies with minor changes to read, "In the event a citizen requests that they not be recorded, the officer shall take the request into consideration." Citizens expressed their disagreement with their decision. Evidently, negotiations with Gilbert were already underway, as Council then went into executive session to "consider its position and instruct its attorneys regarding the Town's position regarding the contract with Police Chief Jeff Gilbert that is the subject of negotiations." Council took no action at that time.

Almost a full month later, Quartzsite Town Council terminated Gilbert's contract without any discussion or public comment. 

Following Tuesday's Council meeting, Gilbert's supporters expressed their disappointment, while Gilbert opponents jeered. 

Gilbert consoling his supporters after contract was terminated by council

Photo by Shanana Rain Golden-Bear

Desert Messenger

Town of Quartzsite issues Press Release re: Jennifer Jade Jones' 15 dogs

Quartzsite, Arizona

The Town of Quartzsite issued an unusual Press Release today regarding Jennifer "Jade" Jones, owner of "A Fur Salon" and "The Desert Freedom Press" (which according to the Town, neither business has a current business or vendor license.) 

Quartzsite Police officers and Town Building Inspector, Steve Henrichs visited Jones at her location at Rice Ranch swap meet on August 22, 2013 with a warrant to inspect a 1956 trailer to ensure compliance with Town Codes. According to the press release, they found 15 Pit Bull dogs housed in cages in the old trailer. 

Two days later, Jones moved the trailer out of Rice Ranch to a BLM camping area in the desert. Jones spoke to Quartzsite Town Council during today's meeting, accusing Henrichs was not qualified to inspect a recreation vehicle. She angrily threatened to file felony perjury charges against Henrichs and Town Manager Laura Bruno if she discovers they lied on the affidavit supplied to the court for the warrant. 

Jones also notified Parker Court that, although she may not be able to sue the appointed magistrate judge who issued the warrant, she said, "I can certainly sue his employer and the Town of Parker can expect a Notice of Claim in this matter."

Quartzsite Town Code 6-2-6 requires a person operating a kennel to obtain a permit. "Failure to obtain a permit after 30 days of written notification is a guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor." 

The full release is below:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

August 26, 2013

MORE THAN 15 PIT BULL DOGS FOUND ON LOCAL PROPERTY

Quartzsite, AZ --- Local authorities found more than 15 Pit Bull dogs housed at Rice Ranch RV Park, in an RV space occupied by Jack and Jennifer Jones.  More than ten of the animals were housed in small kennels inside a mobile unit, with more animals stored in smaller vehicles also located in the RV space.  Inspectors describe experiencing an overwhelming stench and very hot conditions inside the mobile unit.

The Jones’ have been residing as renters at the Rice Ranch RV Park, and have been operating at least one business at this location.  None of Jones’ businesses are legally permitted to operate within the Town of Quartzsite.  After requests to inspect the RV site were refused, Quartzsite authorities obtained and served an Inspection Warrant late Thursday afternoon.  Authorities found several potential violations, including operating a dog kennel that is not in compliance with the laws of Quartzsite.

Upon finding the more than 15 Pit Bull dogs, authorities expressed strong concern about the number of aggressive and dangerous animals contained in the small RV space.  Adding to the concern was Ms. Jones’ repeated warnings that she couldn’t guarantee the safety of anyone entering her location.  Generally, Pit Bull dogs have identifiable traits such as unpredictability of aggression, refusal to give up a fight, high pain tolerance, and their “hold and shake” bite style. 

The Town will be issuing citations for various Town Code Violations.  Jennifer “Jade” Jones is a local tabloid blogger who has a history of violating the Town’s laws.

For more information, contact Steve Henrichs, Community Development/Code Compliance Officer at 928-927-4333.

Quartzsite Town Clerk seeks emails from Council & Board Members

By Shanana Rain Golden-Bear
Desert Messenger Editor/Publisher

Quartzsite, Arizona
Quartzsite Town Clerk, Terry Frausto, issued the following letter to Mayor and Members of the Common Council for the Town of Quartzsite and Members of Advisory Boards, Committees and Commissions regarding Emails as Public Records and Appropriate Limitations on Email Communications.

The letter is a reminder "that all emails to and from Council members, board and committee members and Town employees concerning Town business are public records. She cautions members not to communicate with four or more members of the same board, which constitutes a quorum. (Evidently Frausto forgot that the Municipal Utilities Commission consists of only five members, and a quorum would therefore be three members. Also, the Personnel Board is a three-member Board, so a quorum would therefore be only two members.)

Frausto then asks the council and board members to forward all emails regarding Town Business to the Town Clerk, even if "only one line is about Town business" stating it is a public record and must be preserved.

Frausto asked Council and board members for their "cooperation in searching your private emails for messages sent or received in the past that relate to Town business," so she may "properly preserve these public records."

However, the Arizona Ombudsman's Open Meeting Law Booklet, clearly defines limitations pertain to a topic that is or may be presented to the public body for a decision, not any issue regarding the very generic phrase, "TOWN BUSINESS"!

OPEN MEETING LAW BOOKLET

Section 7.5.2 Circumvention of the Open Meeting Law.

Discussions and deliberations between less than a majority of the members of a

governing body, or other devices, when used to circumvent the purposes of the Open

Meeting Law violate that law. See Ariz. Att'y Gen. Op. 75-8; Town of Palm Beach v.

Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1974). Public officials may not circumvent public

discussion by splintering the quorum and having separate or serial discussions with a

majority of the public body members. Splintering the quorum can be done by meeting in

person, by telephone, electronically, or through other means to discuss a topic that is or

may be presented to the public body for a decision. Public officials should refrain from

any activities that may undermine public confidence in the public decision making

process established in the Open Meeting Law, including actions that may appear to

remove discussions and decisions from public view.

For example, Board members cannot use email to circumvent the Open Meeting Law

requirements. See Ariz. Att’y Gen. Op. I05-004 at 2. “[E]ven if communications on a

particular subject between members of a public body do not take place at the same time

or place, the communications can nonetheless constitute a ‘meeting.’” See Del Papa v.

Bd. of Regents of Univ. and Cmty. Coll. Sys. Of Nev., 114 Nev. 388, 393, 956 P.2d 770,

774 (1998) (rejecting the argument that a meeting did not occur because the board

members were not together at the same time and place.) Additionally, “[w]hen members

of the public body are parties to an exchange of e-mail communications that involve

discussions, deliberations, or taking legal action by a quorum of the public body

concerning a matter that may foreseeably come before the public body for action, the

communications constitute a meeting through technical devices under the [Open Meeting

Law].” See Ariz. Att’y Gen. Op. I05-004 at 1. This may be true even if none of the

members of the public body respond to the email. Id. at 2-3. If the one-way

communication proposes legal action, then it would violate the Open Meeting Law. Id.

However, other one-way communications, with no further exchanges, are not per se

violations, and further examination of the facts and circumstances is necessary to determine if there is a violation. Id. at 3.

http://www.azleg.gov/ombudsman/Open_Meeting_Law_Booklet_w_Hyperlinks.pdf

CLICK LINK BELOW to view letter:

Town of Quartzsite letter to council & boards

Quartzsite's Jennifer "Jade" Jones fired from Planning and Zoning Commission

By Shanana Rain Golden-Bear

Quartzsite, Arizona - In a 5 minute Special Meeting held today at 1 pm, the only item on the agenda was "to rescind the appointment of Jennifer Jones from the Planning and Zoning Commission."

For the first time, Jones offered the invocation, which surprised many in attendance. Foster said there might be another lawsuit, and suggested they adjourn and not take any action. Council Member Mark Orgeron made the motion, and Council Member Mike Jewitt seconded.

Jewitt sponsored the item and had originally nominated Jones for the Commission. Jewitt stated he "did so in the hope that involving her in the governance of the town, it would possibly help her to understand how the Town is run. It seems I was wrong."

The Quartzsite Town Council voted 4 - 2, with Foster and Pat Workman voting nay. (1 vacant seat)

Late Tuesday, Jones "served" a Notice of Claim to the Town of Quartzsite. The special meeting was called Wednesday morning. See below for details:

Jones Notice of Claim



Another interesting document for today's meeting reveals that Jones has still not filed her Campaign Committee Termination Statement for the May 2012 election: 

Quartzsite & Jones campaign finance issues


Another document (see below) released to Quartzsite Town Council members today reveals Jones' emails sent to Arizona Attorney General's Office communicating as a Planning and Zoning Commissioner. Bruno states Jones "should have provided a copy of her email to the Town Clerk's office as well as to the other P & Z Commission members."  

Jones communication with AZ AG's office



In a Facebook posting earlier this week, Jones openly advocated to "recycle the 'Mess' [Desert Messenger, Quartzsite's FREE Community Paper] by the bundle and the armload".  Desert Messenger, the publisher and contributing photographer are often targets in Jones' editorials, articles and political cartoons. 

Jones publishes a tabloid in Quartzsite, however she holds no business license. She has stated multiple times that she doesn't need a license to "give away free papers." However, Quartzsite Town Code 8-2-1 states, "It is unlawful for any person to carry on any trade, calling, profession, or business... without first having procured a license from the town." 

Nationally there have been over 500,000 copies of free student newspapers stolen since 2000, according to records complied by the Student Press Law Center. Colorado law makers are currently considering a bill to reclassify the theft of free newspapers. 

Being such a vocal proponent of Free Speech, and a publisher of a free paper, surely Jones must be aware of the many articles against newspaper theft listed on First Amendment Center's website:  http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/tag/newspaper-theft

La Paz County Task Force power struggles

At March 18th's meeting of La Paz County Board of Supervisors' meeting, newly elected Sheriff John Drum read a letter into the record regarding the county's Task Force. The letter was then published on the Internet at www.Parkerliveonline.com.  Quartzsite Police Chief Jeff Gilbert responded with a statement. Drum issued a statement in response. The letters are below in order of appearance. 


La Paz County Sheriff John Drum's letter to County Supervisors:

"I am here today to talk with you about the La Paz County Task Force. When La Paz County broke away from Yuma in 1983, we didn’t have a Narcotics Task Force. Our officers handled drug cases as they occurred and the only drug enforcement we had within our County was coordinated by the Arizona Department of Public Safety.

Recognizing that we needed to be more than “reactive”, the La Paz County Narcotics Task Force was established. It was hosted by the Sheriff’s Office and consisted of the Sheriff’s Office, AZ DPS, Parker Police and the CRIT Police Department.

During that time, the Task Force was funded by a grant with the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission (ACJC). This grant paid for four Detective’s salaries (for a total of $140,000 per year) and it allowed the local agencies to dedicate officers to a group that could focus on narcotic activity and organized crime.

As the County grew, so did the need for a more aggressive approach to fighting drug sales and trafficking. In 2002, the La Paz County Task Force became part of the HIDTA (High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas) initiative and added the Quartzsite Police Department and the Drug Enforcement Administration. HIDTA is a nationwide initiative that provided the Unit with $110,000 per year and the intelligence/assistance needed to keep up with the new trends observed coming out of the larger cities and Mexico.

By 2009, the Task Force, which was commanded and controlled by the La Paz County Sheriff’s Office, and was receiving approximately $250,000 a year in grants, we had a successful I.G.A. with the Colorado River Indian Tribes and we were recognized by the President of the United States for our pro-active approach to dismantling drug trafficking organizations within the C.R.I.T. reservation. We also were averaging 190 major felony cases per year and the communities/towns across La Paz County noticed a significant decrease in the amount of “local drug dealers” within our communities.

In July of 2010, the Sheriff’s Department relinquished command of the Narcotics Task Force. Since that time, we have noticed a significant decrease in drug enforcement across the County, we lost the I.G.A. with the Colorado River Indian Tribes, we have lost both the ACJC and the HIDTA grants totaling in $250,000 per year and there were a total of only 56 cases investigated in 2012.

Being a retired Law Enforcement officer (Narcotics Detective), I know what it takes to re-build and sustain the Narcotics Task Force. It is my intention to re-establish command and control of unit so we can recover the grants and begin working with other agencies to bring us back to where we need to be.

There is a lot of speculation around the community that it is my intention to dismantle the Task Force to build my own unit. That is not entirely true; my plan is to put together an effective Task Force that stays focused on the overall objective without self-interest and politics getting in the way. If the Parker Police Department and the Quartzsite Police Department would like to join us, I would like the local agencies to come together with C.R.I.T., the Department of Public Safety, the Drug Enforcement Administration and Border Patrol so we can share personnel, resources, and funding to create a Task Force that everyone in La Paz County can be proud of."

Quartzsite Police Chief Jeff Gilbert released the following statement Thursday night:

"On March 18, 2013, a letter was read into the record at the La Paz County Board of Supervisor’s meeting by Sheriff John Drum regarding the La Paz County Task Force.  The statements made by Sheriff Drum are mostly inaccurate and very misleading.

In October, 2007, La Paz County, The Town of Parker and the Town of Quartzsite entered into a new Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) establishing the La Paz County Anti-Drug and Racketeering Enforcement Task Force know as CADRE.  The new IGA became effective with all three governing bodies agreeing to a term of five (5) years with an automatic renewal of another five years unless otherwise terminated by the parties.  The IGA automatically renewed at the beginning of 2013 for a new five year period.

I have served on the CADRE Board of Directors for nearly eight years as the Chief of Police for the Town of Quartzsite.  Before that time I served as the Operations Lieutenant for the Task Force for a period of two years from 2001-2003, while employed with the Colorado River Indian Tribes Police Department.  Before that time I regularly participated at the monthly meetings as a representative for the CRIT Police Department during my ten year tenure.

For more than fifteen years, I have personally witnessed and participated in a Task Force that had one common goal as an objective.  This one common goal was to be effective in combating the illegal drug activities in La Paz County, the Town of Quartzsite, the Town of Parker and the CRIT Reservation.  We did not draw lines in the sand.

What Sheriff Drum has presented to the Board of Supervisors and the community members of La Paz County with his statement is nothing short of drawing a “line in the sand”.  He has presented an ultimatum to the Town of Quartzsite and the Town of Parker to “join him” along with C.R.I.T., the Department of Public Safety, the Drug Enforcement Administration and Border Patrol to “create a Task Force that everyone in La Paz County can be proud of.”

Maybe Sheriff Drum has not been in office long enough to realize that we already have a Task Force that all the communities of La Paz County “are” proud of.  We are already working collectively and cooperatively with AZ DPS, DEA, Border Patrol, HIDTA, and our Board just recently met last week with representatives of C.R.I.T. to discuss final terms of a new IGA with them.  

You have my commitment as the Chief of Police for the Quartzsite Police Department to continue working with the Parker Police Department and Chief Mendoza, alongside the La Paz County Attorney Tony Rogers, to continue to keep our current Task Force strong and effective.  I hope that Sheriff Drum decides not to let his “self-interest and politics” get in his way of doing the same.  For no one agency can handle the job that needs to be done alone.

Jeff Gilbert, Chief of Police
Quartzsite Police Department

La Paz County Sheriff John Drum's response:

"I would like to respond to Chief Gilbert’s response to the letter I read to the Board of Supervisors on March 18th, 2013. None of the statements in this letter are misleading or inaccurate.

Let’s start with HIDTA and ACJC: I met with Chief Mendoza on March 21st and we discussed this very thing. When the La Paz County Sheriff’s Office ran the Task Force, the Task Force was receiving funding from HIDTA and ACJC. Since the CADRE took over the HIDA and ACJC funding was lost. This is fact not misleading or inaccurate. There may be a play in words here. HIDTA was suspended. This means there is no funds coming to La Paz County because of this, so when I said “lost” the funding; I meant it is not there anymore.

It is clearly obvious the productivity of the Task Force is way down since the CADRE took over. What I drafted in the letter were stats received from the CADRE and Task Force. Nothing misleading or inaccurate stated here.

When Chief Gilbert was a Lieutenant overseeing the day-to-day operations of the Task Force between 2001 and 2003, the Task Force was being run by the Sheriff’s Office. The Task Force was going broke during this time and he and the Sheriff’s Office Command were extremely frugal with the funds. After he left the Task Force, all Local, State, and Federal Agencies began to participate in a cooperative manner. This resulted in large narcotic and currency seizures. The Currency Seizures over a six year period ran into millions of dollars. This is a fact not misleading or inaccurate.

I am aware there is a CADRE or Task Force in this county. I was able to attend a Task Force meeting when I was a County Supervisor. Without going into detail, I knew then the CADRE was BROKEN!

Since 2010 when the CADRE took over, the funds in the Task Force have depleted dramatically. Chief Gilbert was in the Task Force when it was almost broke and now the same thing is on the horizon. I told my constituents if I was elected Sheriff I would make a Task Force that is accountable. This means more productivity, increased personnel and fiscal responsibility.

I want all of us to work together and I welcome the participation of all agencies interested. This matter will be resolved with all of us coming together as Department Heads.

Respectfully,

Sheriff John Drum

La Paz County Sheriff