A mystery, a hunt, then success!

October 15, 2024

Jim Reeves commentary, News, Personal , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

On September 8, I wrote about the City of Visalia and it’s Charter. I noticed in one section it said (Deleted November 4, 1974). No mention of what that section was, or why it was “deleted”.

Under Article XVI, Section 21 said simply “(Deleted November 4, 1974)”

Well, I needed to know what that was all about.

I cogitated about it for a while. A mystery that kept bugging me, begging to be solved. Last Monday I decided to track down the truth, if possible. Looking online hadn’t turned up the missing section, and it had been 50 years since the change was made. The local newspaper doesn’t have online access for historical stuff, and while I had the date of the vote taken to approve changes to the Charter, I didn’t know when the City Council had acted to put the measure on the ballot. That could have been almost any time in 1974, to have time to get it on the mid-term election ballot in November. I really didn’t want to sit in front of the micro-fiche reader at the library, scrolling through the newspapers for every day that year! (Are micro-fiche readers and their films still a thing?)

The hunt had to be done the old-fashioned way – sleuthing in person.

I headed down to the library to see if they had a copy of the original charter, but they were closed for Indigenous People’s Day (It might be called something else, too, but never mind that…)

Next stop – The City Clerk’s office. I was surprised to find the offices open, since it was that holiday. I also expected it might take a while to find that for which I was looking. I was afraid that the relevant documents would be in that warehouse where the US Government stuck the Ark of the Covenant, as seen in one of the Indiana Jones’ movies, or in Warehouse 13. The City Clerk thought it might take some digging, too. The Assistant City Manager came by as we were discussing the Charter, and since he’s new to the city as well, he didn’t know anything about the change. The Clerk took my info, and told me she would research it. I expected I might hear something back in a week or so, if I was lucky. Surprise, surprise, they found and emailed me the original text before I even got home! Talk about service!

The original Charter contained the following:

Article XVI. Miscellaneous Provisions:

Section 21.

Neither the City Manager nor any person in the employ of the City shall take any active part in securing, or shall contribute money toward the nomination or election of any candidate for a municipal office.

Seems in 1974 the City decided to do a bit of tweaking to the Charter, and since the only way it can be changed is a vote of the people, it was on the ballot in November 1974. The above section was deleted. (I’m assuming it was due to infringing on people’s rights to support the candidate of their choice, even though they were city employees.) Some other wording was added, looks like to clarify some minor things that had changed in the previous 50 years.

It’s been 50 years since that update, and I think it’s time to do another refresh.

I noticed references to the City Manager (and other offices as well) as “he” or “his” throughout the Charter. We don’t have a “he/him” City Manager now, so time to change the masculine pronouns to gender-neutral.

(the fact that changing masculine pronouns in city documents will undoubtedly raise the blood pressure of those who see such things as “woke liberalism” is a bonus in my book!)

Thank you to the new City Clerk, Jennifer Gomez, for digging this up for me!

Mystery solved!

(even if it was a bit anti-climatic. I was hoping for some good, scandalous dirt! oh well…)

RIP, VTD

December 30, 2023

Jim Reeves commentary, News, Personal , , , , Leave a comment

Well, it’s finally happened.
My first relationship with the Visalia Times-Delta was as a paperboy in the 1970’s. My route at the time was the largest in the city, which had a population of less than 50,000 back then. I wish I could say that having a paper route taught me how to handle money, but sadly it did not. But that, perhaps, is a story for another blog.
As an adult, I’ve read the paper frequently if not daily, written many letters to the editor, had a couple of my community blog posts appear in the printed edition (Hate in a small town – 9-22/23-2013, and It’s not easy to make SPLC’s hate list – 5-15-2015), and even had them request I write a column (Connecting LGBT community and government – 7-16/17-2016) that appeared in print. They even paid me for that last one.
But that was then, this is now.
Sitting at the computer today, I realized it had been months since I logged into my account at VTD, one I pay for monthly.
I went to the page, logged in, and found the weekend edition online. (I stopped the paper edition a couple of years ago, keeping only the online subscription)
There were exactly two items in the entire paper related to Visalia.
One obituary, and the weather. No other local news. At all. Not even any local sports.
For some time now, the VTD has been fading. It’s a shadow of it’s former self. A shadow on a heavily overcast day. Almost not there.
I cancelled my subscription right then.
I’ve found that the Sun-Gazette and the Valley Voice newspapers have better local coverage than the Times-Delta, and have for some time. I also subscribe to the Fresno Bee‘s online presence.
The Visalia Times Delta has (for some time now) become simply another version of USA TODAY.
RIP VTD

“Shoving it down our throat…”

December 12, 2023

Jim Reeves commentary, News , , , , Leave a comment

One of the most common refrains those of us in the queer community hear is something along the lines of, “we don’t care what you do in the bedroom, just don’t shove it down our throats!”

This is usually in response to something innocuous, like a queer couple holding hands in public while walking down Main Street, or perhaps when a rainbow flag is flown from a home or business during June. Proclamations by City Councils or County Board of Supervisors really set some people off.

Oddly, however, that is a one-way outrage street.

Christians love to “shove it down our throat” when they’re proselytizing about their god. Today’s example is courtesy of the Tulare County Board of Supervisors.

During today’s (December 12, 2023) Board meeting, they approved the addition of “IN GOD WE TRUST” to the chambers. Board Chair Dennis Townsend, District 5 (Porterville area), recently proposed adding the phrase to a wall in the chambers, supposedly as a nod to the United States Motto, saying in the November 28th meeting that “… in god we trust is how our nation was founded, and even in that it is not specific” to any particular god.

However…

Maybe I missed it in the multitude of gods believed in over the years, and the somewhat smaller group with active believers around the world and in Tulare County today, but, as far as I know, only one particular god is referred to as GOD. That’s the Christian god, also known as Yahweh or Jehovah.

So to claim the Christian god is not necessarily the one being referred to when “IN GOD WE TRUST” is prominently displayed is disingenuous. It’s also not the case, in spite of fundamentalist Christians going on otherwise, that this nation was founded as a Christian nation, and with the Bible being a primary source of the nation’s underpinnings.

On June 10, 1797, President John Adams signed the Treaty of Tripoli, after a unanimous vote to approve by the United States Senate. Article 11 of that treaty states, in part, that “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion…” There are other instances of the founders making it clear they were not Christians and were not basing the new nation on that faith system. Many were deists, and had a belief in a god, but not necessarily the Christian version.

And yet, “IN GOD WE TRUST”.

Kudos to Supervisor Amy Shuklian for her actions which changed the sign from an obvious Christian proselytization to something more in line with the alleged homage to the United States. She proposed, and was successful in adding, “E Pluribus Unum” to the signage. In the final vote Supervisor Shuklian voted against the installation, but was outvoted by the rest of the Board.

If the goal was really to show respect for the founding of the United States, and display something that encompasses that which the nation is really based upon, I think this would have been more appropriate:

But that doesn’t shove anything down anyone’s throat, does it?

Hamas attacks Israel

October 8, 2023

Jim Reeves commentary, News, Personal , , , , , , Leave a comment

Photo: AP News

The terrorist organization Hamas launched an attack against Israel that has left hundreds, perhaps thousands, dead. Israel has said it had no intelligence that would lead them to believe an attack was being planned.

I don’t buy that.

Mossad is one of the premier intelligence agencies in the world. Their association with the CIA and MI6 makes me think, despite movies that pit each agency against each other for dramatic effect, that they had to have known something was imminent. How could Hamas moved, secured, and kept hidden that many rockets and guns without someone being aware of it and letting Israel know?

Maybe it’s my cynicism in my old age, but I suspect this story will unravel to become one of the most damning conspiracies in recent history. Why do I think that? Well, sit back and let me ‘splain it to you, Lucy.

Here’s my scenario:

It all goes back to Trump and Jared.

We know Trump provided access to secret intelligence documents to unauthorized individuals. Jared (Kushner, son-in-law of President Trump, just in case you didn’t know the name) was “in charge” of the Middle East “peace process”. We know nuclear secrets of one of our allies (presumed to be Israel) was given (you can’t even give it the prestige or precedent of calling it a “leak”) to unknown agents (assumed to be Saudi Arabia). I think it’s safe to assume a lot of other information was included in this incident.

Jared was rewarded with 2 billion dollars.

Saudi Arabia has had several years to infiltrate Gaza with weapons, provide intelligence and support, and plan an assault on Israel.

All of that is bad, but here’s where my inner cynic really gets wound up.

I think Mossad knew Hamas was planning an attack. If they didn’t, they’re incompetent, and the entire upper leadership should not only be sacked, but charged with criminal negligence.

I suspect Netanyahu new there was an attack coming, and let it happen.

Why?

Because that would give him the political power to do what he’s always wanted to do: Destroy the Palestinians.

I think his government knew. I think the CIA knew. I think MI6 knew. Maybe not how big the attack was going to be, but they had to know something was cooking and ready to boil over. Netanyahu and his government let it happen to be able to respond with the full force of their US-supplied military.

This weekend’s attack and the (totally justified) Israeli response has set the peace process back at least 50 years.

Let’s hope it doesn’t lead to World War III.

Happy Pride 2022!

June 1, 2022

Jim Reeves commentary, Gay, Humor, News, Personal , , , , , , , Leave a comment

Happy Pride! Make it a good month. Here in California, it’s going to be a hot one… and the weather will be on the warm side, too.

An earthquake is rolling across America

May 2, 2022

Jim Reeves commentary, News , , , , , Leave a comment

Politico has just published a report that the United States Supreme Court has voted to overturn Roe V. Wade, and the news is thundering across the country. We don’t yet know that the report is true, although it certainly seems to be, and that it might change (perhaps in details, but not in the overall decision).

This conservatively-skewed Court, with three Justices appointed by Trump, have ruled (will rule) that women do not have a Constitutional right to control their own bodies. This could have long-lasting and far-reaching implications.

This ruling, if it comes to fruition, will not end abortion. It won’t even slow it down much. All it will do is end safe abortions in some states. We’ll go back to back-ally and black-market abortions in GOP controlled states, and women will die. This court will be killing women. The right-wing evangelicals don’t care.

The next targets will be voting rights and marriage equality, even though the ruling (at this time) says it doesn’t apply to any other previous Court rulings. The minions of the right won’t care about that.

Why the swastika?

We’re moving towards a fascist society, where the government controls even your basic rights. For being allegedly “small government”, the right in this country wants control over everyone. They want to control who you marry, what your doctor can do, and what books you can read.

“Papers! (no please about it)”

If the swastika fits, wear it.

4 U.S. Code § 7

April 15, 2022

Jim Reeves commentary, News, Pictures , , , , , Leave a comment

While on a bike ride recently, I happened upon this monstrosity.

It should be pointed out that the flagpole in question does not belong to the house in the background. The house out-of-frame to the right is the owner.

4 U.S. Code § 7

(c)“No other flag or pennant should be placed above or, if on the same level, to the right of the flag of the United States of America,…”

https://www.military.com/flag-day/us-flag-code.html

Did you know? Planned Parenthood worships Satan!

February 7, 2022

Jim Reeves commentary, News , , , , , Leave a comment

I never knew that!

But it must be so, because several people at tonight’s Visalia City Council meeting made sure to speak out against a proposed move by the local Planned Parenthood facility, to a larger building, by telling us that the organization worshipped Satan.

The agenda item was postponed to next month, and plenty of notice of the change was given, but several people stepped up during public comments to vent their spleens. Most of them didn’t realize that Planned Parenthood has been in Visalia for years, and spoke against allowing the medical service “in our city”. Several of them made the “Satan worship” claim during their spiels.

The debunked video of Planned Parenthood selling body parts was also referenced. That woman was very incensed over the notion that we’d let anything like that into our city. (again, they’ve been here for years, this is just about getting approval to move into a larger building.)

The next meeting scheduled to deal with this request, in March, promises to be a maelstrom of anti-abortion nonsense and vitriol. The City has moved the meeting to the Convention Center in anticipation of the crowds.

If you want the facts about Planned Parenthood, here’s their website.

A sign of the times: more

November 15, 2021

Jim Reeves commentary, Gay, News, Pictures , , , , , 1 Comment

Another sign of the times, this one just south of Visalia on Mooney Blvd. One of several rotating messages on an electronic billboard, this one still promoting STI testing but with a different image.

I haven’t heard of any complaints, so far. I’ll assume the Visalia City Council won’t hear about it, since it’s in the county, but will someone complain to the Tulare County Board of Supervisors? We’ll see.

Stay tuned.

A sign of the times. Someone in Porterville doesn’t like it.

October 20, 2021

Jim Reeves commentary, Gay, News , , , , 1 Comment

Last night I attended a City Council meeting in Porterville, California. A very long city council meeting. Item 21 on the agenda was listed as:

“21. City Billboard Regulations

Re: Reviewing City signage regulations pertaining to billboards within the City of Porterville.”

This all came to be because Pastor Brent Whitley of Living Word Fellowship Church didn’t like the sign above, which he complained could be seen from his son’s high school (Butterfield Charter School) He spoke up about it at the City Council meeting October 5.

“It features two young men naked from the waist up in a sexually-suggestive pose,” Whitley said. (Porterville Recorder, 10/07/21)

“So, I am asking the City Council, as duly-elective representatives of the City of Porterville, to sign letters affirming that sexually graphic advertising for any purpose is not appropriate for the billboards in our community. They aren’t going to listen to one man’s opinion. We have to speak with a unified voice.”

The letters, he said, won’t cast any aspersions on The Source nor makes any kind of statement about the LGBTQ Plus community.

“We are simply saying to Lamar Advertising and to any of their clients that the citizens of Porterville prefer not to have any sexually-explicit, suggestive or graphic content posted on billboards in our city because we have no way to filter this content from our children.”

Following his complaint, the Council had staff put the subject on the agenda for the next meeting (October 19, 2021) for discussion.

Porterville, in 2017, enacted an ordinance* which was designed to eventually remove “off-site” billboards from within the city limits. Since the 1st amendment to the Constitution of the United States severely limits what restrictions can be placed on content of signs, the only option is to prohibit them altogether.

The city attorney has informed the council** that they can speed up the timeline for removing the billboards. The current ordinance requires that when they are “abandoned”, they can no longer exist under the grandfathering clause that allowed them to continue to be used after the ordinance was enacted. The city attorney has advised the Council that they can set a timeline, based on past court cases of what has been adjudicated as reasonable, of 5-7 years for removal. That may be problematical, however.

San Diego apparently tried something very similar in the 70’s, and was sued. The suit went all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States.*** They lost.

The SCOTUS case transcript can be found here. A summary of the court’s findings can be found here.

I’m not a lawyer, of course, but it looks like Porterville will run afoul of the same situation if it tries to remove billboards from the city. Perhaps someone can check these out and let me know if the city can follow through with it’s apparent plan to “amortize” these billboards out of existence.

The City Council directed staff to bring them a proposed action to address the issue (setting a timeline that results in removal of remaining signs in the city) at a future meeting.

The city ordinance, city attorney’s advice, and SCOTUS ruling can be found after the jump.

More

Older Entries Newer Entries