Humboldt County Concedes Measure T ‘Null And Void’

County agrees to pay out $44k; no sign of financial support from Democracy Unlimited

Humboldt Sentinel
11/10/08
By Charles Douglas

Already on its death bed after a federal court injunction issued by Judge Susan Illston in September, Measure T is now officially deceased and buried at an expense of over $100,000 to local taxpayers.

A proposed settlement signed on Nov. 7 and filed in federal district court in San Francisco today has conceded the illegality of Measure T, otherwise known as the Humboldt County Ordinance to Protect Our Right to Fair Elections and Local Democracy, which was adopted in a 2006 campaign marred by heavy personal attacks made by its proponents from its proponents at Democracy Unlimited of Humboldt County.

“Judgment shall be entered…that Measure T violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment, as incorporated into the Fourteenth Amendment…that Measure T violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,” the stipulated judgment stated. “Measure T shall be declared unconstitutional, and therefore wholly null and void, and without any legal effect whatsoever.”

The agreement was reached between the San Francisco law firm of Renne, Sloan, Holtzman and Sakai, which represented Humboldt County, and the Pacific Legal Foundation, which filed suit in August on behalf of O & M Industries of Arcata and Mercer-Fraser Company of Eureka -- local firms which wished to make modest contributions to the campaign of Johanna Rodoni to retain her Second District seat on the Board of Supervisors.

These companies ran afoul of Measure T, which sought to strip constitutional rights from all corporations, as well as to ban “non-local corporations” -- defined as any incorporated firm with even a single shareholder or employee residing beyond the county line -- from making any monetary or non-monetary contribution to any county-level campaign.

“This settlement vindicates fundamental rights of free speech,” PLF Attorney Damien Schiff stated in a release. “Measure T was an attempt to strip businesses and employers of the freedom to participate in the political process. Nothing could be more at odds with the letter and spirit of the Constitution.”

The settlement also orders Humboldt County to pay the legal fees incurred by the plaintiffs within 60 days, which total $44,000. County officials estimate that their own legal expenses in defense of Measure T bring the butcher’s bill for local taxpayers to just above $100,000.

The proponents of Measure T, the “Humboldt Coalition for Community Rights” -- a front group for Democracy Unlimited -- swiftly issued a condemnation of local elected officials, with HCCR spokesperson and DUHC executive director Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap accusing the entire five-member Humboldt County Board of Supervisors of having no integrity.

“While this is a sad day for democracy, the fight is far from over. Past social movements like the civil rights struggle, the abolitionists, women's suffragists and the trade unionists have shown us that when people don't back down, justice ultimately prevails,” said Sopoci-Belknap in a release. “All movements have their wins and losses, and the movement for local democracy and citizen sovereignty over large corporations will prevail. Humboldt County will play a role regardless of whether the current Board of Supervisors have the integrity to stand with us.”

The integrity of Sopoci-Belknap and her DUHC “non-profit” is itself at question, however, in light of their promises that Measure T would survive challenges to its constitutionality, not to mention promises by DUHC to cover the entire cost. DUHC held a series of fundraising forums in Eureka and Arcata over the last few months to help “defend” Measure T, and also had a “Donate Now!” advertisement on their votelocalcontrol.org website next to their statement concerning the Measure T defeat. No funding, nor the “free legal help” pledged during the Measure T campaign, was ever forthcoming from Democracy Unlimited, their HCCR front group, or any other Measure T supporters, leaving county taxpayers with the bill during an economic crisis.

“The whole thing, doesn’t it just kind of reek of fiscal irresponsibility?” asked Redwood ACLU vice chair Greg Allen of Arcata in an interview with the Sentinel today. “There’s never any discussion of what this costs, and the county is very economically strapped now. I don’t find it impossible that a couple of people could lose their jobs because of Measure T, we’re in a hiring freeze and we’ve got to pay for all this somehow.”

Allen and the Redwood ACLU supported the lawsuit against Measure T due to their commitment to defending free speech rights in local elections. Allen and the publisher of this newspaper were subjected to hate-filled personal attacks from Sopoci-Belknap and other Measure T proponents on KMUD radio during the original campaign, when they were called “nutcases” and “trust fund babies” for voicing concerns with the ill-fated ballot initiative. Allen went on in his interview to dispute Sopoci-Belknap’s notion that the county should have continued to appeal the federal court injunction.

“I don’t see any understanding or grasp of the economics of this, that [Democracy Unlimited] apparently thinks that the county should pay for them to have their day in court when it’s probably that the county’s own attorney told them this isn’t going to fly,” Allen said. “It might be reasonable if these [DUHC] folks paid for it, but they don’t really contemplate that. If they went on to lose in trial court, do they want the county to appeal it? Where does it end?”

Allen estimated that even one more round of court wrangling would cost the county a further quarter of a million dollars, although this didn’t dissuade Sopoci-Belkap from insisting on a different course of action by local elected officials.

"We are deeply dismayed that our elected officials bowed so easily to the pressure from the corporate-backed Pacific Legal Foundation," stated Sopoci-Belknap. "We have offered help and support to the Board of Supervisors to do the right thing every step of the way - instead they chose to make this decision without soliciting input from the people of Humboldt County who were looking to them to defend our rights and respect our authority to determine what is best for our local elections."

Allen responded by defending the “prudence” of the Board of Supervisors in declining further appeals in defense of Measure T.

“To even suggest that it has anything to do with the integrity of the Board of Supervisors is an outrage,” Allen said. “I guess it’s easier to talk about integrity when it’s somebody else’s money. Unfortunately these are difficult economic times and Humboldt County is having very real economic problems. How responsible would it be to continue to pour money into a black hole with the chances of winning almost zero? It’d be tremendously irresponsible…the real truth is that they had a statute that was very defectively drawn by non-attorneys and I believe the voters were misled.”

Allen and the ACLU have also been subject to attacks from Kim “Verbena” Starr, who is the operator of an alphabet soup of local organizations such as RCC (Redwood Curtain Copwatch, TPP (The People Project), PARC (People’s Action Resource Center) and others. Starr sent out an e-mail to her “vervain” distribution list in September which assailed the ACLU and several members of its Board of Directors for speaking out against Measure T.

“My advice: Steer clear of the Redwood Chapter ACLU,” Starr stated. “Why would anyone need the ACLU’s (sic) ‘help’ to oppose Measure T while a huge right wing (sic) law firm (featuring Ronald Regan video (sic) on its website) is already brining a case against it.”

Starr went on to attack Christina Allbright, the chair of the Redwood ACLU, for being a public defender, as well as the publisher of this newspaper, who she accused of “personal paranoia.” She also accused Redwood ACLU officer Stephen Davies for “having yet to win a lawsuit in his over 10 year (sic) career,” even though Davies has won several lawsuit for various clients. Allen defended his fellow Boardmembers and the reputation of the ACLU against Starr’s accusations

“The outcome was really never in doubt, and the only thing that the ACLU supported was the right of free speech, no more, no less,” Allen said. “To even suggest that the ACLU was on the side of anybody but the principle of free speech is patently absurd. This initiative was extremely and profoundly flawed, and on constitutional grounds, it was absurd. Most corporations are mom and pop businesses, and [Starr and Sopoci-Belknap] don’t have any concept of that at all.”

In their objections to Measure T, the ACLU called for election reforms that would meet constitutional muster, and Councilmember Jeff Leonard has since set a town hall meeting to discuss the potential for campaign finance reform in Eureka next week.

Charles Douglas is the publisher of the Humboldt Sentinel. He can be reached at his blog, Vagabond Journalist, at charlesdouglas.us.