STRUCTURAL EROSION OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS

By Teddi Alves

COMMUNITY ADVOCACY.

• POLICE MISCONDUCT: Wrongful death, excessive and lethal force
• MANDATED Spay/Neuter of ALL PETS at SIX (6) MOS = Extinction
• PRIORITY OF MEDIA REFORM: Paralysis of Political and Social Structures and Process

• WRONGFUL DEATHS, EXCESSIVE AND LETHAL FORCE BY LAW ENFORCEMENT

It was a Friday, August 25, 2006. With three uniformed officers of The HBPD on the scene in an empty public park in the early morning hours, fifteen bullets were fired into the petite, 120 lb frame of an eighteen year old girl, five of them in her back, and as her mother, a resident of this 67th AD. How did this happen? Why no public outcry? A $20 Million lawsuit is pending.

Law Enforcement is amok nationwide, recent conduct at The OC Jail suggests a culture of depravity; the former Sheriff now with a felony indictment cleared the shooting.

It was so disturbing to me that it prompted my visit to to the Mortuary, meeting the family and friends of this young woman and viewing videos set up in the lobby showing her in various settings as a normal teenager, attractive, well dressed. I spoke before the Huntington Beach City Council to express dismay.

A colleague on The OCDCC, also an attorney, partnered with me to initiate a Resolution to call for Citizen Review Panels in instances of use of excessive/lethal force by law enforcement. This of my own volition and overcoming vigorous opposition from the union segment, it passed eventually with a 90% vote in November of 2006.

The Resolution was subsequently submitted it to the Resolutions Committee of The Democratic State Central Committee at the meeting of The Executive Board in December of 2006, passed at the general assembly of the Executive Board of The California Democratic Party upon recommndation of the Resolutions committee. No legislation followed. Only one publication even reported on it: The Orange County Weekly.

http://www.ocweekly.com/news/news/thanks-for-the-work/26957/

• MANDATED SPAY/NEUTER OF ALL PETS = EXTINCTION

A tiny item informed that The City of Huntington Beach was to pursue an ordinance, and I read it on On Sunday, September 2 of 2007, in a state of disbelief. Initiated by a member of the council and then assigned to the Chief of Police, for a study, which report was listed as an "administrative item" on the Agenda for the meeting of Tuesday, September 4, subsequently embraced and propelled with gusto not shared by three of the seven council members and ultimately defeated.

It was a shock because in July of 2007, AB #1634, a statewide effort similarly directed had been pulled due to public outrage, and longitudinal veterinary studies as to adverse impacts: http://www.ab1634.com/ ; American Veterinary Medical Association Destroys Case for AB 1634: http://www.cdoca.org/HealthIssues.html

Most recent polling by the originator, a Democrat termed out and pursuing a Senate seat, showed 71% of the public surveyed were opposed [a Parade Magazine survey placed opposition at 90+%]; Animal Rights (AR) folks, some having been designated as domestic terrorists, are pushing this bizarre agenda and defaming any opposition as "back yard illegal breeders." Biology 100; pet "extinction."

Most disturbing to me is that this bill was originated by a Democrat who is mustering support of other Democrats and, need it be mentioned, ORGANIZED LABOR on board, those job slots of ANIMAL CONTROL to be added at 2% union dues on those payrolls.

Only recently, the home of a UCLA researcher had been flooded and an incendiary device placed at her front foor by AR people, an auto of a staff of the City of Los Angeles had been trashed.

363 million pets reside among 60% of American families and support a $38 Billion industry of products and supplies, $17 Billion in veterinary services alone. Most pet owners are not aware of this threat even today.

On Sunday, Sep 2, a few of us residents of Huntington Beach, unknown to one another, individually contacted PetPAC, http://www.petpac.net/ 50,000 members, which had been prominent in coverage of the opposition to AB #1634, speaking with its founder and director, this on Labor Day Weekend.

In turn, PetPAC contacted other organizations of a coalition of pet owners, breeders, specialty breed organizations, and show people with champion animals, some of them: CONCERNED PET OWNERS OF CALIFORNIA,, http://www.cdoca.org/; CAT FANCIERS ASSOCIATION, http://www.cfa.org/; CALIFORNIA FEDERATION OF DOG CLUBS http://www.cfodconline.org/. THE NATIONAL ANIMAL INTEREST ALLIANCE is another resource, http://www.naiaonline.org/index.htm, as AMERICAN KENNEL CLUB http://www.akc.org/

Those of us in HB feared we would be flying solo when we arrived at the meeting of Sep 4, Tuesday, and found instead an overflowing chamber of The City Council with outraged residents, informed and authoritative opposition armed with statistics and charts provided all seven members of The City Council.

THE UNION BLOCK defeated efforts repeated with my colleague to submit for approval to the OCDCC in October of 2007 a Resolution to be a statement of support of protection of our pets, civil and constitutional rights, as we had the previous Resolution to call for Citizen Review Panels of conduct of law enforcement. In November of 2007, I took it directly to the Resolutions Committee of The Democratic State Central Committee at the meeting of The Executive Board in Anaheim; BARRIERS WERE IN PLACE. By contrast with prior experience, the presiding official refused to allow presentation of supporting information, but gave a courteous reception to the author of AB #1634 and opportunity to oppose the Resolution to protect pets.

It took until April 21, 2008 to finally put the HB ordinance to rest. POWER-HB [Pet Owners Want Equal Rights] is now incorporated http://www.powerinhb.com/.

At one point, the Council had quashed the ordinance and directed instead of incentive based schedule of licensing fees, which the Chief of Police then adjusted upward to $200+ for an unaltered male dog, and this in conflict with directions from the council, pulled; next emerged a requirement of a BUSINESS LICENSE to advertise the sale, transfer, adoption or transfer of pets (no other sales of items as furniture, autos) was proposed and this subsequently failed. Six of the seven members of our Council wanted nothing more to do with it; one sulked!

At the outset, we contacted members of The Council and with the same notable exception they were courteous and receptive to valid supporting data provided and that authoritative testimony those organizations of our coalition and others provided, in addition to our own residents of HB in opposition. Signs, Letters, email, FAX, Fliers, Protests outside City Hall.

How it computes: numbers of job slots x $$s = total payrolls x 2% UNION DUES billed in taxes than cannot be refused, nor can attached fees/fines/costs assessed by ANIMAL CONTROL that are PUBLIC EMPLOYEES secured by those UNIONS, with authority to put "holds" on pets as "collateral," until demands are satisfied, inclusive of castration/hysterectomy and those costs compounded by any harm or even deaths of beloved pets as a result of these major surgical procedures."

Orange County Animal Control was very positive about this program, given they have been been virtually non-performing when by their own testimony only 40% of pets are even licensed, much less enforcing existing regulations prohibiting dogs allowed to roam.

HOWEVER, there were to be forty three (43) job slots required; there would be "canvassers" going door to door to check "body parts" of pets, demanding access to private property, to be paid $70,000/yr. It was to be self-funding with the built in schedules of fines/fees for non-compliance. In now thirty years as a resident/homeowner and having paid into the General Fund of this county licensing fees for most of that time for our pets, I have yet to see what services for pets are even available much less provided since our pets are confined to a fenced yard or on leash.

OCAC is "right on the money." There has been an ordinance successfully implemented against "dogs barking" that is ludicrous but guaranteed to generate revenues. "Barking" is not defined by intensity from mere "chatter," but is a violation if it sums to sixty minutes over a twenty four hour period, 4.17% of that time, not half a cup of coffee, or is "incessant" for thirty minutes.

THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES.

Creativity of this city is to be noted in manner of passing an ordinance to MANDATE SPAY/NEUTER of ALL PETS at 6 MOS. Following allegations of "roaming pit bulls," a "public safety" issue, that Commission referred to The City Council a concern on Monday that became a full blown ordinance proposed and passed on Friday at 10 AM.

Those of us of POWER-HB, PetPAC, CDOC and others of our organizations now a steady coalition were in attendance and spoke in opposition dismissed as other public testimony in favor of support of proponents notably employees of the Animal Control testifying in support and AR folks crowding the chamber. A "veterinary expert" brought to testify asserted that he had performed those surgeries on kittens and puppies at ages in weeks! Litigation is now pending vs. The City of Los Angeles, http://www.cdocaction.org/. The Director of that Animal Control crashed a meeting where the litigation was to be discussed prior to filing [a staff member is assigned to cart boxed chicken for the Mayor that "went along."]

COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA .

Civic responsibility was on display in Santa Barbara, the Members of The BOARD OF SUPERVISORS readily grasped the opposition to any consideration of the word MANDATE at this hearing to consider such an ordinance to "MANDATE SPAY/NEUTER of ALL PETS.

Again POWER-HB, PetPAC, CDOC, and our coalition joined residents in opposition. Notably we were outnumbered by AR folk and among them a veterinarian who testified to support of The Veterinary Association that had been withdrawn.

There are reports that AR people had infiltrated a commission that worked with staff to draft the proposal and managed to displace those in opposition. A blue ribbon commission is to be appointed by Board Members to study related issues; "mandate" recognized as a non-starter.

PROGRESSIVE TARGETING OF OTHER COUNTIES AND CITIES

KERN, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO, SAN JOSE COUNTIES and others along with CITIES statewide, nationwide have been targeted and drawn into battle against this insurgency which is demonstrably dysfunctional and destructive and perhaps "coming to you?" Where these "mandates" have been imposed, owners want to protect their pets and do so by not registering them nor getting the rabbies vaccinations that are reported to Animal Control. Revenues go down, incidence of rabbies increases.

A cumulative citation of these issues in such a Blog with contributions from "those in the know:"

http://www.ckcscsc.org/blog.htm

REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PUBLIC INTEREST AWOL?

GIVEN THE NUMBERS of Pet Owners who VOTE for the welfare of their PETS, a Democratic Assemblyman from Van Nuys introduced AB #1634 and an Orange County Democratic Assemblyman was a co-sponsor; where are the outraged Republicans so strongly opposed to "big brother government?" Our coalition of activists has been footing all the costs of this opposition, travel and meals, to meetings of our organizations and those of "governments" to protect entitlements of pet owners to CHOICE as to veterinary procedures and these major castration and hysterectormy surgeries on pets that would be "mandated."

THIS ISSUE BRINGS TO THE FORE RELUCTANCE OF POLITICIANS to take on PUBLIC EMPLOYEE UNIONS; THEIR PERCEPTION of MOTHERS' MILK. We need to ensure they realize that $$$s won't replace the VOTES needed for their political futures, AND in the process, the "THE SLEEPING GIANT," "the little people," may become activated.

Other questions to be asked and answered are those surrounding the tolerance of conduct of this insurgency with records of conduct spreading like wild fire across the United States unabated, heavily funded, inserting their representatives as volunteers within Animal Control operations, working municipal staffs and officeholders while hitch-hiking on agendas of public employee unions and spreading CASH in abundance, by comparison with private citizens who had to raise the funding to litigate protection of pets in The United States where homes and the right to quiet use and enjoyment of same are Constitutional entitlements?

LEARNING CURVE

It has been a steep learning curve for me as "just a pet mom" prior to September of last year. None of the four male dogs residing with this family these many years were castrated; none have been bred; they have resided in an adequate "beach house" with a fenced yard and a large pool, never having roamed! Two had pet shop origins, the last two, Black Labradors, AKC Pedigree, American field, Very Smart. All have been covered by Veterinary insurance.

I was devastated and heartbroken to lose my homemaker, Beaujolais, in 2005, seven years old, to cancer, after the trauma of anesthesia for surgery and hopes for recovery to no avail. Lucque is nearing three years, swims like a Dolphin and thinks I am a "wind up" toy! Frizbee and Ball and more of it! He is Very Smart and amusingly mischievous, and manipulative! Why would I submit him to risk of any surgery?

That I could be ordered to butcher Lucque by the same Gestapo rampant in OC, "police power," had me aghast that this could happen. Imagine the sense of being bludgeoned, especially for home owners, and evem renters that cannot readily relocate.

What on earth? When were the Bill of Rights of the US Constitution withdrawn and suspended, and by whom, when this could come to our homes?

Suddenly we were overwhelmed by these crazies, one of whom testified at The HB City Council meeting of September 4: "My heart is tired, my wallet is empty, because of YOU irresponsible dog owners." She is a "volunteer" at a shelter and sees "pet extinction" as OK?

What many of these people seem to have in common is a kind of sense of personal/neglect/persecution/inadequacy and obsession with filling that void through spay/neuter of pets as "a good thing," and moreover an extension of what they seem to feel is their superior wisdom and that power of pet owners.

To the point, pet owners pay licensing fees that go into the General Fund, not reciprocal services for our pets, as demonstrated abundantly herein. Buddy, the pet of President Clinton was killed when he followed a contractor out of a gate left open; these things happen and we should be confident in the security of our pets should they be rescued by Animal Control and safe until we can retrieve them; that our animals could instead be subjected to the "care and control" of these whackos, even euthanized, is beyond rational thought or defense.

Now educated by association with wonderful people in "cat/dog dom," having attended dog and cat shows and numerous meetings of similarly concerned and much more knowledgeable owners and organizations, I can appreciate how others haven't the depth of comprehension: "MANDATE!" These are major surgical procedures, risk of complications inclusive of life threatening and potential for life long impacts. The operable term should be CHOICE of informed and responsible pet owners in consultation with their veterinarians.

Observations to date are that AR folk have infiltrated commissions and committees and displaced opposition to their agenda while hitch hiking on the UNION AGENDA of more job slots. Others slide in as "volunteers" at "Animal Shelters" where this "conversion" can be completed without concern for "sunshine." Reports/studies/analysis then delivered by "STAFF" are BROKERED. An investigation of the MONEY CHANGING HANDS in this scenario is overdue

PETA [People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals] has funded an IMAGE of "concern for pets," that is not validated by statistical data indicating they euthanize 90% of animals they receive.

PETA presents its "animal friendly" position in opposition to consumption of meat, dairy products, poultry, or conversion of animals to fur or leather materials; now they have established a $1 Million reward for anyone able to replicate "chickens" for human consumption out of a lab dish, equating consumption of "broiler chickens" to the Holocaust. Pets would be extinct and chickens would take over? These people perceive family pets as being in some kind of "bondage," and their entitlement to "free speech" and related conduct begs the question of limits thereto.

Ingrid Newkirk, President of PETA, "There is no hidden agenda. If anybody wonders about -- what's this with all these reforms -- you can hear us clearly. Our goal is total animal liberation. Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation [they euthanize 90% of the animals that they receive].

HBO Documentary: "I AM AN ANIMAL," features Newkirk and her background/philosophy; unhappy childhood, preferred animals; had been married, was "too busy" for it; hadn't had children .. purposely .. "what is wrong with people that they want to 'clone themselves?;' there are children in orphanages."

http://www.hbo.com/docs/programs/iamananimal/index.html

Wayne Pacelle, HSUS, "One generation and out. We have no problems with the extinction of domestic animals." "If we could shut down all sport hunting in a moment, we would."

Both of these organizations rely on contributions they solicit aggressively even suggesting inclusion in "estate planning."

Following is a more informed and educated perspective backed by credential of a recognized authority:

Your Whole Pet. Is pet overpopulation a myth? Inside Nathan Winograd's "Redemption" By Christie Keith, Special to SF Gate Tuesday, October 2, 2007:

"In "Redemption," Winograd lays the lion's share of the blame for shelter deaths not on pet owners and communities, but on the management, staff, and boards of directors of the shelters themselves.

"If a community is still killing the majority of shelter animals, it is because the local SPCA, humane society, or animal control shelter has fundamentally failed in its mission," he writes. "And this failure is nothing more than a failure of leadership. The buck stops with the shelter's director." http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2007/10/02/petscol.DTL

An informative article:

YOUR WHOLE PET The mandatory spay/neuter bill is not healthy for pets By Christie Keith, Special to SF Gate Tuesday, May 29, 2007

"In fact, in some parts of California, such as San Francisco, there actually is no problem. Not only are animals not being euthanized for lack of homes, there are more potential adopters than there are animals available for adoption. That's why San Francisco frequently brings pets in from other areas to be adopted locally. Areas that don't have a problem aren't in need of a solution, but they would be forced to implement -- and pay for -- the provisions of AB1634 anyway." [inclusive of 2% union dues on each payroll dollar.]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2007/05/29/petscol.DTL

"PET STERILIZATION LAWS RAISE HEALTH CONCERNS. SPAYED OR NEUTERED DOGS MORE AT RISK FOR CANCERS, OTHER ILLS, RESEARCH SHOWS."

"...Studies have shown that dogs that undergo spaying (removal of the ovaries and uterus) or neutering (removal of the testicles) are at increased risks for certain cancers, thyroid disorder, incontinence and some of the same behavior issues, such as aggression, that the surgeries are said to prevent.

The American Veterinary Medical Association has not taken a stand on spay/neuter legislation, but the American College of Theriogenologists, a group of veterinary reproduction specialists that advises the AVMA, is considering a position paper opposing the legislation at its meeting in St. Louis in August, says a member of the group's task force that looked at the issue.

"What they're saying is that because there have been problems associated with spay/neuter surgery, they think it's improper for it to be mandated, much less at an early age." "They feel the decision should be made after discussion between the owner and veterinarian."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24597888/

• REFORM OF THE MEDIA.

Americans are bombarded by self-styled talking heads content to reside in zones of mediocrity with the similarly impaired, pontificating with presumption of infallibility and insistent on their measures of validity and merit of candidates competing for the nomination for President of The United States.

It is the superficial coverage to which we are accustomed, to half truths and innuendos and nuances of no real value as to participation in a democracy when that is germane to our form of government.

The Federal Communications Commission has emboldened this "takeover," and monopoly format and the only option appears to be a CONSUMER BOYCOTT risking a plunge into an entirely "black hole!"

While owners/publishers/editors lament the dwindling readers/viewers in postures of anguish, they don't realize that their "work product" no longer appeals to readers/viewers that are the numbers required to attract the dollars of advertisers seeking to promote their goods and services?

P.O.W.E.R.- HB staffed the booth provided by and shared with PetPAC at the PET EXPO held at the Orange County Fairgrounds April 11, 12, 13. People are traumatized when they are aware of this progression; most are not aware. An issue of this magnitude of forcing pet owners to butcher their pets and "suck up the risk," injuries, deaths and heartache .. and uh, pay for it! .. ?

In LA, the dog of an owner seated on a public bench was seized by armed officers of SPCA because of a skin condition having arisen from kidney damage from the tainted food recalled last year; they charged this owner with neglect and she had to appear in court. In Pomona, with overlapping jurisdictions of AC venues, three dogs escaped and were picked up by Animal Control; the owner could only afford to "bail out" one of them, $600, forced Neuter. A senior gentleman in LA was forced to neuter his twelve (12) year old male dog; it died.

Gone are the "intrepid journalists" once having delivered a "work product" that would have followed these issues and ramifications of this insurgency invading public process and attempting to erode constitutional protections.

Nor have editorials emerged to address dysfunction of TERM LIMITS and this failed experiment many editors endorsed. Its imnpact was to overturn the automatic exercise of scrutiny by voters while inherently eliminating political expertise, now replaced by UNION secured STAFF, PERMANENT PARTIES outlasting INCUMBENT INTERNS, and they, TOGETHER WITH LOBBYISTS, have become "GOVERNMENT," to endure?

The Los Angeles Times reports in its Business Section that The Orange County Register is laying off editors and reporters just as the LAT has been doing, likely reported by the OCR. Obituaries are featured [no costs of travel for reporters]. And these owners/publishers/editors say "why?" "How?"

• PARALYSIS OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL STRUCTURES AND PROCESS