[CRNMC] Call with CELDF

Shannon Biggs shannon at globalexchange.org
Tue Aug 26 13:22:16 PDT 2014 

We can answer that question when the times comes ­ who will file the brief
IF we get sued. We have some lawyers that understand and support this work,
and some who ­ if available at that specific time ­ may work probono with
Thomas, others may be willing to do the work at very low cost. Thomas will
not be able to become a CA certified lawyer.


On 8/26/14 1:02 PM, "karinajoy" <karinacotler at gmail.com> wrote:

> Regarding the question below and your answer that CELDF will "act in an
> advisory capacity to the City's chosen counsel"   Since Lozak has opined that
> the ordinance is unconstitutional, it might be difficult for him to seek
> advice from CELDF.
> 
> We would certainly not be able to rely on Losak to defend the Measure. Are
> there any attorneys licensed in California, who have worked with CELDF or
> understand their work? Would any of them be willing and able to work with the
> BOS or CRNCM to defend this measure? If not, would Linzey himself be able to
> get a temporary license to practice in CA in order to defend us?
> 
> Please ask this question of LInzey.
> Thanks,
> Karina
> 
> 
> On Aug 25, 2014, at 2:29 PM, karinajoy wrote:
> 
>> Actually I don't remember the subject (who is our direct contact) coming up
>> at all at democracy school.
>> 
>> Anyway, I have this question for LInzey:
>> 
>> If the measure passes and is taken to court, what specific legal help will
>> CELDF provide? Who will be the attorney and is s/he licensed in California?
>> 
>> I won't be able to make the call, but would love to listen to the recording.
>> Thanks for arranging this!
>> Karina
>>  
>> On Aug 22, 2014, at 7:00 PM, Shannon Biggs wrote:
>> 
>>> Your primary partner is ME not CELDF this was made very clear to everyone at
>>> Democracy school. What you are asking for is not appropriate in terms of
>>> access. All of these questions I can answer. It's my job. It's not CELDFs
>>> role. Do not attack CELDF for not doing their job. They are.
>>> 
>>> This work is 90 percent ORGANIZING and 10 percent legal work. Don't flip it
>>> around or we will get lost in what we are really trying to achieve.
>>> 
>>> You need to trust that I am here for you and know my job. I bring in CELDF
>>> from time to time as needed. But Ben and I are equals, as organizers. He
>>> cannot take time away from his communities any time you have questions but I
>>> can.  I offer my support to you all Constantly, though not nearly so often
>>> am I called upon. Use the resources offered to you, let's coordinate and do
>>> this together as partners.
>>> 
>>> Blessings 
>>> Shannon 
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>> On Aug 22, 2014, at 4:30 PM, "dougmck at mcn.org" <dougmck at mcn.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> Yes,
>>>> I contacted CELDF yesterday as I was asked to do by our point committee 4-6
>>>> weeks ago but did not have the time or energy to do it at that time.
>>>> Frankly, there has been some consternation expressed by a few in our
>>>> community about the accessability to those who wrote Measure S by those of
>>>> us working so hard to get it passed in November.
>>>> 
>>>> While I appreciate that CELDF is working hard on multiple issues throughout
>>>> the country, I also understand the feelings by those who want to learn more
>>>> about CELDF and so acted upon them yesterday to get a little more
>>>> information about the ideas behind the legalese written into Measure S in
>>>> order to better respond to those who have expressed these concerns.
>>>> 
>>>> Ben was clear that their partnership with Global Exchange was such that
>>>> communication should go through Shannon.  Nonetheless, he did spend some
>>>> time on the phone with me to ensure that we were all on the same page.
>>>> 
>>>> I do feel that a confrence call would be appropriate in order to further
>>>> solidify our relationship and build trust with the organization that has
>>>> promised legal representation should Measure S be challenged.  I would
>>>> recemmend the confrence call be with the chosen members of the point
>>>> committe so as to follow the protocal currently accepted by the group with
>>>> all interested members of the CRNMC able to listen in as they wish.  If
>>>> others, such as Meg, wish to participate as well, I have no problem with
>>>> that personally, but do feel it should be discussed at next Thursday's
>>>> point meeting just to make sure everyone is on the same page.  I will make
>>>> sure this is on the agenda, as well as the idea that others should listen
>>>> in, to see if we reach consensus.  I would not expect this to be a problem.
>>>> We are already planning to discuss allowing members of the CRNMC listen in
>>>> to all point committee meetings and feel we will probably reach consensus
>>>> on this as well.
>>>> 
>>>> Should this be the case, we could schedual a meeting with Thomas soon after
>>>> that.
>>>> 
>>>> Doug
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From:
>>>>>  "Meg Courtney" <mcourtney1 at mcn.org>
>>>>> 
>>>>> To:
>>>>> "Community Rights Network" <crn at lists.mcn.org>
>>>>> Cc:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sent:
>>>>> Fri, 22 Aug 2014 15:10:07 -0700
>>>>> Subject:
>>>>> Re: [CRNMC] Contacting CELDF there is a wrong way and a right way
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I would like to be a part of that conversation.  I think you know what my
>>>>> concerns are so you could forward them along.
>>>>> Meg
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 22, 2014, at 12:01 PM, Shannon Biggs wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> > 
>>>>>> > Greetings all,
>>>>>> > 
>>>>>> > Doug and others have attempted to contact Thomas Linzey. He will not
>>>>>> speak with anyone that way without going through me and not one at a
>>>>>> time. That goes for Ben too. :-)
>>>>>> > 
>>>>>> > If folks want me to put together a group call with Thomas I can
>>>>>> arrange. Doug if you can send me your questions ahead of time I can make
>>>>>> this happen and let you all know when he's available
>>>>>> > 
>>>>>> > Best, Shannon
>>>>>> > 
>>>>>> > Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>> > 
>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>> > crn mailing list
>>>>>> > crn at lists.mcn.org
>>>>>> > http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> crn mailing list
>>>>> crn at lists.mcn.org
>>>>> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> crn mailing list
>>>> crn at lists.mcn.org
>>>> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> crn mailing list
>>> crn at lists.mcn.org
>>> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn
>> 
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/crn/attachments/20140826/6dd0a7f1/attachment.html

More information about the crn mailing list