Just A Note

Oh how one can see how Lance thinks.

As I watch this workshop right now I see Lance asking Mary Ann to explain flowers and beautification and explain that the last Budget Committee threw this back to the General fund.

Now we have all heard their plan to steal from tourism again.

Next lets all watch Lance try to put this back as a tourism expenditure in an upcoming agenda.

Well before Lance goes there let’s stop it now.

If he would have been at all the Budget Meetings he would know that it was unlawfully put there and it is a non TRT tax use and had no legal authority to have been put into the Tourism Budget.

So if anyone cares to check with Travel Oregon (the state agency in charge of tourism) this is out of the book they sent me.  

“SPENDING ON TOURISM

The restrictions on spending existing or new TLT revenues are designed, in part, to maintain or increase the spending of TLT revenues on tourism, as a reinvestment in tourism. ORS 320.300 provides the following definitions of tourism and related activities:

“Tourism” means economic activity resulting from tourists.

“Tourism promotion” means any of the following activities:

(a) Advertising, publicizing or distributing information for the purpose of attracting and welcoming tourists;

(b) Conducting strategic planning and research necessary to stimulate future tourism development;

(c) Operating tourism promotion agencies; and

(d) Marketing special events and festivals designed to attract tourists.

“Tourism promotion agency” includes:

(a) An incorporated nonprofit organization or governmental unit that is responsible for the tourism promotion of a destination on a year-round basis.

(b) A nonprofit entity that manages tourism-related economic development plans, programs and projects.

(c) A regional or statewide association that represents entities that rely on tourism-related business for more than 50 percent of their total income.

“Tourism-related facility”:

(a) Means a conference center, convention center or visitor information center; and

(b) Means other improved real property that has a useful life of 10 or more years and has a substantial purpose of supporting tourism or accommodating tourist activities.

So if this council puts that unlawful expenditure on the backs of the tourism TRT tax revenue again in violation of the law this Council can expect another complaint to Travel Oregon along with the Oregon Department of Justice.

Now back to the meeting.

Cody

Good grief now Gail Lewis is trying to take the museum and put onto the back of tourism. They really want to steal that TRT tax just like they preached.

Cody

Sorry to good.

Now an admission that Tracy has been authorizing his department to subsidize TV and Internet into the electrical light rates.

I want to see the resolution or Ordinance that authorized that.

ORS 221.410 Power of city to control local affairs; limitation of floating indebtedness. (1) Except as limited by express provision or necessary implication of general law, a city may take all action necessary or convenient for the government of its local affairs.

      (2)(a) A city may not, unless authorized to do so by its electors, contract a voluntary floating indebtedness in excess of the sum of $5,000 for general city purposes. A city official or employee who creates or officially approves such an indebtedness in excess of the limitation shall be liable for the amount of the excess.

      (b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this subsection, a city may contract a voluntary floating indebtedness in excess of the sum of $5,000 for general city purposes without an election specifically approving the indebtedness if authorized to do so by a statute or charter.

      (3) As used in this section, “city” has the meaning given that term in ORS 221.010. [Amended by 2003 c.195 §9]

Sucks to be anyone who authorized it. It was just explained that one problem alone is more than seven grand easy.

Cody

I will have this video on line tomorrow on my YouTube channel.

First off credit for the subject of this meeting goes to our previously recalled council.

This is something they had Paul get together when he first arrived.

Just like Chief Wells.

So make no mistake about it here tonight. This council once again gets no credit for this other than coming up with illegal and immoral ideas to add to it touched on tonight.

Not to mention retaliation against the city services committee to go after me.

I will just love their retaliation against me for being a whistle blower.

I like spending other people’s money as my own.

But before I leave those that did watch tonight here is a giggle.

All the hours they were trying to figure out what information they wanted the city treasurer to submit to council and how often, all they did was waste theirs and ours time as well.

All they had to do is tell Mary Ann to comply with Ordinance 123 as I have been asking her to do going on a year now.

But I was ROTFLMAO (Rolling on the floor laughing my ass off) during the whole thing.

What part of the wheel was built do any of these unconstitutional appointees not understand.

ORDINANCE NO. 123

AN ORDINANCE CREATING THE OFFICE OF CITY TREASURER, DEFINING THE DUTIES THEREOF, AND REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 3.

The City of Cascade Locks, Hood River County, Oregon, ordains as follows:

Section 1. There is hereby created the office of city treasurer.

Section 2. The treasurer shall give a bond and the amount of the bond shall be not less than $1,000.00. The council shall determine the amount and conditions of the bond.

Section 3. The duties of the treasurer shall include the following:

(a) To prepare and present to the council and accurate statement of the city’s finances for the previous month at the first regular meeting of the council each month. The statement shall show:

1. The amount of money received, from all sources, during the previous month.

2. The amount of money withdrawn from each fund; and the balance on hand therein.

3. The total amount of money remaining in his custody at the end of each month.

4. A schedule of all checks paid by the treasurer during the month, specifying the amount and number of each, and the fund out or which such amounts were paid.

(b) To permit the mayor or any member of the council to examine city books, accounts and records and to make an actual count of the funds on hand at any time and the examination may be the subject of a special report to the council.

(c) To sign all orders on the treasury.

(d) To perform such other duties as may, from time to time be prescribed by the council.

Section 4. Ordinance No. 3, enacted September 16, 1935, is repealed.

Passed by the Council of the City of Cascade Locks this 16 day of October 1961.

Approved by the Mayor of the City of Cascade Locks this 18 day of October, 1961.

See what happens when incompetent people are given power? Opps it is a violation of the law to vote on any matter in a workshop.

So now you must bring this matter back before the people and go through the Ordinance process to change this. What a waste of time!!!

So answer me this in closing tonight. If Lance was truly all knowing he would have known this Ordinance existed wouldn’t he?

I will soon show you all with video just what Lance knows.

The others soon to follow as I am building theirs up now.

Cody

And They Call This Getting Business Done? What A Joke!!!

To all those who keep asking where the videos are here they are.

Many already know that they have been on youtube.

They could have been found on the video channel codysteelman1.

But after you watch them compare these jokers with an elected council.

Those videos are on line.

So without further a dew the dog and pony show.

November 28, 2011 Cascade Locks, Oregon, Appointed City Counciil Meeting.

December 5 2011 Cascade Locks City Council And Port Meeting

December 12, 2011 Cascade Locks, Oregon, UnConstitutionally Appointed City Council.

Gail Lewis Your True Political Colors Are Shining Through!

I guess it is true and Gail Lewis was wrong.

I asked him to explain how he figured the city abandoned the volunteers.

This is a copy of our correspondence.

As you can see Mr. Lewis the appointed in violation of the 4^th amendment councilor, who also paid for his seat cannot prove to me that the City abandoned the volunteers as he said in his mis-information campaign to justify the recall and his unconstitutional appointment in violation of state law.

Read it for yourself.

Re: Really now a strike? December 16, 2011 12:41 PM  

From: "gail lewis" <glewis14659@yahoo.com>  

To: "Cody Steelman" <codysteelman@embarqmail.com>

Cc: Tom Cramblett; "lmasters" <lmasters@cascade-locks.or.us>; "Sto911" <Sto911@yahoo.com>; "EveZerfing" <ezerfing@cascade-locks.or.us>; "rods88609" <rods88609@mypacks.net>; "strnwheel" strnwheel@aol.com

Cody 

This will probably be the last email you receive from me.....you can say what you wish and do what you wish....doesnt matter to me.

I do not consider myself a politician and have never worried about being politically correct.  It is only out of respect for the rest of the city council that I do not call you an idiot

--- On Thu, 12/15/11, Cody Steelman <codysteelman@embarqmail.com> wrote:

From: Cody Steelman <codysteelman@embarqmail.com>

Subject: Re: Really now a strike?

To: "gail lewis" <glewis14659@yahoo.com>

Cc: "Cramblett, Tom" <tcramblett@cascade-locks.or.us>, "lmasters" <lmasters@cascade-locks.or.us>, "Sto911" <Sto911@yahoo.com>, "Zerfing, Eve" <ezerfing@cascade-locks.or.us>, "rods88609" <rods88609@mypacks.net>, "strnwheel" <strnwheel@aol.com>

Date: Thursday, December 15, 2011, 12:50 PM

Council as a whole did not make that statement you did.

Now I want you to prove it.

The problem is you can't so you want to hide behind the skirts of the council.

But since you want to involve council as a whole in this so be it.

But you will learn they did not say it.

And I will do one better.

I will make a page for this subject on the blog this weekend.

Now whose skirt are you going to hide behind?

You said and created this problem not council, now prove it yourself.

Cody

From: "gail lewis" <glewis14659@yahoo.com>

To: "Cody Steelman" <codysteelman@embarqmail.com>

Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 12:13:35 PM

Subject: Re: Really now a strike?

Cody, I am not going to continue an email stream with you.....if you have issues....bring them to council

--- On Thu, 12/15/11, Cody Steelman <codysteelman@embarqmail.com> wrote:

From: Cody Steelman <codysteelman@embarqmail.com>

Subject: Re: Really now a strike?

To: "gail lewis" <glewis14659@yahoo.com>

Date: Thursday, December 15, 2011, 12:11 PM

Gail

I think you need to go back and watch the video of the November 14th meeting and listen to yourself during the”Approval of temporary Intergovernmental Agreement for Fire Services from the City of Hood River.”

Now taking what you said how can you explain taking from the general fund and taking from beautification if the previous budget Committee did something wrong. After all you could not find any money and learned that even property taxes were spent in and by that very department already.

As far as the flowers is that the best you can do? The previous Council and budget had just exposed over a half a million dollars in mismanagement from the EMS department managers and you want to bring up flowers with me. Why should beautification pay for the screw-up of the managers of the EMS department?

Now you said “My statement that the City abandoned the volunteers was based upon the Fire fund budget being reduced so severely, while other accounts (such as flower maintenance) were funded.”

That is a blanket statement answer to my question. Now prove it using budget and fund use laws. Because first off if you care to look that fund was budgeted with the exact same amount that was budgeted the year before and the year before that. Or is it that you do not understand that the property taxes are where that department is funded? So prove to me that the previous budget changed that percentage to fund that department.

The only thing that budget and council did was comply with the law!!!

All you are telling me here is that if management makes mistakes then everyone else in the city should pay. Is that about right?

Cody

From: "gail lewis" <glewis14659@yahoo.com>

To: "Cody Steelman" <codysteelman@embarqmail.com>

Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 8:36:07 AM

Subject: Re: Fwd: Really now a strike?

Cody,

My statement that the City abandoned the volunteers was based upon the Fire fund budget being reduced so severely, while other accounts (such as flower maintenance) were funded.

Even Tom made comments agreeing with me that the City abandoned them.

From: Cody Steelman <codysteelman@embarqmail.com>

Subject: Fwd: Really now a strike?

To: "GLewis14659" GLewis14659@yahoo.com

Date: Wednesday, December 14, 2011, 1:51 PM

Gail

 How dare you even imply that the previous council abandoned the volunteer fire fighters?

If you want the truths start with the Hood River News before the illegal strike. There you will read the crime of blackmail and coercion against not only the council the voters had the crime of fraud committed on them to steal the seat you now hold, but the volunteers blackmailed every citizen in that article as we did not vote anyone other than council to hold powers they stole in our City Charter.

So my question to you would be who granted these volunteers that abandoned the city the power to decide anything.

Which leads me to my question to you?

I want you to explain to me how anyone abandoned the volunteers or how the previous council is responsible for anything?

I suggest you know my history on this by reading an email I am forwarding you.

Then explain to me how you are going to be able to back up your statement, because as I see it you are out of line and need to be called on for your misinformation campaign you are attempting here.

The volunteers abandoned the city criminally and charges have been filed against them with the State Police (Lt. Patrick Ashmore), which turned it over to the Department of Justice (Mike Lowery) and now it is going to the governor.

Justice will be ours in the end.

Cody

From: "Cody Steelman" <codysteelman@embarqmail.com>

To: firefighterwebb@yahoo.com

Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2011 9:24:35 PM

Subject: Really now a strike?

Megan Webb

In reading the paper you are the person speaking for the volunteers so let me address you directly with my concerns.

I tracked your email down to address you as a citizen to speaker for the volunteers.

The way I see it you and the volunteers have yourselves between a rock and a hard place here.

Let me explain what I have found and will verify with my legal council Tuesday, if this is not resolved by the end of Monday night’s meeting with the City Council.

The common law rule regarding the employer-employee relationship allows the termination of the relationship by either party, without notice and without cause.

Oregon courts have long followed this general rule of "at-will" employment. This means that generally, in the absence of a contract or statute to the contrary, Oregon employers may discharge an employee at any time and for any reason, or for no reason at all. Simpson v. Western Graphics, 293 Or 96, 99, 643 P2d 1276 (1982); Nees v. Hocks, 272 Or 210, 216, 536 P2d 512 (1975).

In our city the power to hire and fire is held by the City Council.

So unless there is a provision in Jeff’s contract specifically stating the terms under which he can and cannot be let go. Then that would be between Jeff and the Council.

But the volunteers would have no say in this matter, in any way, shape or form.

All you volunteers are achieving, fighting this losing battle is risking your personal livelihoods and placing it at risk of a suit of law against each and every one of you.

The game you are playing is called coercion under the law.

Let me explain.

In reading the paper it is quoted that; “Volunteers had warned the city council in June that the firefighters would not respond to calls if Pricher was let go.”

Well if the city has the legal right to hire and fire at will under the law, this statement committed the crime of black mail and other crimes under the law as I read them.

First off Pricher was not let go by the city. Pricher resigned.

And even if Pricher was let go Oregon State Law says the City has the right to hire and fire at will.

So that statement made in the paper, is in direct confliction with Oregon State Law concerning the rights of employers to hire and fire at will.

And this big stink you volunteers are making is in direct violation of the laws as employees have no legal right to tell an employer who he has to keep employed.

Again this gave new meaning to more criminal actions being committed as I read in the laws.

So when Pricher resigned the volunteers as reflected in the paper did as they said they would do if the chief was let go and did not respond to calls.

This action took that blackmail to a whole new criminal level.

This constituted a sit down strike under the law.

Well I have bad news for the volunteers here again.

Oregon Law for municipal governments forbids public workers to strike unless a provision specifically adhered to is found in the articles of incorporation or the municipal charter.

You see Oregon follows the Wagner Act which sets the policy of promoting collective bargaining and providing a statutory right to strike in the private sector only.

I will quote the intent of the act concerning governmental employees as written by Franklin Roosevelt to the president, National Federation of Federal Employees.

“Militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of Government employees…. A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking towards the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable.”

Now since the 70’s there have been exceptions to the rule here but very limited to government employees also a member of a union.

This is allowed because a safety net in the by-laws is required by law being a nonbinding fact-finding precondition to a lawful strike. Where pre-strike fact-finding is required, the parties must first present their positions regarding unresolved issues to a neutral fact finder who holds a hearing and makes recommendations for final settlement.

Now at this point the City could file an injunction with the courts or request the governor to intervene to order the volunteers back to work.

The basis for that injunction would be a violation of the Wagner Act as well as the strike is a clear and present danger to the public health, safety and welfare.

But even so I see nowhere in Oregon law where Emergency Services employees are allowed any exemption to strike and rightfully so.

Nor do I see in any public record of this city council where a public hearing was held.

Now you are representing an association.

So I would hope that this association you are representing has fulfilled the legal requirements of state law to be a lawfully recognized association.

So at this point I would request disclosure of your State Association License along with a copy of the by-laws for your association.

In these by-laws I expect provisions and terms to strike to be clearly stated and defined.

I would like to see the agreement with the city to accept these strike terms.

I wish to see your policy for pre-strike negotiations.

I wish to see who the neutral mediator was that was assigned to make a recommendation and this persons contact information.

I wish to be disclosed the minutes to these pre-negotiations.

I request disclosure of the recommendations made by the neutral mediator which led to this strike.

I would also request disclosure of the officers of the association and the dates and terms in which they became officers of this Association.

I request the names and contact information for all volunteers of the Cascade Locks Emergency Services Fire and Rescue Department.

I make this request under the statues and provisions of law concerning public record requests and the Freedom of Information Act.

Now if you are not a legally recognized Association under the law and you are representing it as that, this could be a crime.

ORS 162.355 Simulating legal process. (1) A person commits the crime of simulating legal process if, with the intent to harass, injure or defraud another person, the person knowingly issues or delivers to another person any document that in form and substance falsely simulates civil or criminal process.

(2) As used in this section:

(a) “Civil or criminal process” means a document or order, including, but not limited to, a summons, lien, complaint, warrant, injunction, writ, notice, pleading or subpoena, that is issued by a court or that is filed or recorded for the purpose of:

(A) Exercising jurisdiction;

(B) Representing a claim against a person or property;

(C) Directing a person to appear before a court or tribunal; or

(D) Directing a person to perform or refrain from performing a specified act.

(b) “Person” has the meaning given that term in ORS 161.015, except that in relation to a defendant, “person” means a human being, a public or private corporation, an unincorporated association or a partnership.

(3) Simulating legal process is a Class C felony. [1971 c.743 §210; 1997 c.395 §1; 2005 c.2 §1]

ORS 162.365 Criminal impersonation. (1) A person commits the crime of criminal impersonation if with intent to obtain a benefit, to injure or defraud another or to facilitate an unlawful activity, the person does an act in the assumed character of:

(a) A public servant; or

(b) An active member or veteran of the Armed Forces of the United States.

(2) It is no defense to a prosecution for criminal impersonation that:

(a) The office, position or title that the person pretended to hold did not in fact exist; or

(b) The unit of government that the person pretended to represent did not in fact exist.

(3)(a) Criminal impersonation is a Class A misdemeanor.

(b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this subsection, criminal impersonation is a Class C felony if the public servant impersonated is a peace officer, judge or justice of the peace. [1971 c.743 §211; 1993 c.243 §1; 1997 c.395 §2; 2003 c.577 §12; 2007 c.510 §1]

ORS 165.102 Obtaining execution of documents by deception.(1) A person commits the crime of obtaining execution of documents by deception if, with intent to defraud or injure another or to acquire a substantial benefit, the person obtains by means of fraud, deceit or subterfuge the execution of a written instrument affecting or purporting to affect the pecuniary interest of any person.

(2) Obtaining execution of documents by deception is a Class A misdemeanor. [1971 c.743 §168]

Now at this time the city along with each and every citizen in this town could file civil and criminal charges against this so called association and every volunteer.

Now civilly I would just turn the matter over to my attorney and let her deal with it.

But at this time I am prepared to file criminal charges against this Association and each and every volunteer personally on crimes I feel have occurred against myself and every tax payer in Cascade Locks, Oregon.

I will let you read them for yourself.

ORS 162.015 Bribe giving. (1) A person commits the crime of bribe giving if the person offers, confers or agrees to confer any pecuniary benefit upon a public servant with the intent to influence the public servant’s vote, opinion, judgment, action, decision or exercise of discretion in an official capacity.

(2) Bribe giving is a Class B felony. [1971 c.743 §179]

ORS 162.235 Obstructing governmental or judicial administration. (1) A person commits the crime of obstructing governmental or judicial administration if the person intentionally obstructs, impairs or hinders the administration of law or other governmental or judicial function by means of intimidation, force, physical or economic interference or obstacle.

(2) This section shall not apply to the obstruction of unlawful governmental or judicial action or interference with the making of an arrest.

(3) Obstructing governmental or judicial administration is a Class A misdemeanor. [1971 c.743 §198; 1981 c.902 §1]

ORS 162.257 Interfering with a firefighter or emergency medical technician. (1) A person commits the crime of interfering with a firefighter or emergency medical technician if the person, knowing that another person is a firefighter or emergency medical technician, intentionally acts in a manner that prevents, or attempts to prevent, a firefighter or emergency medical technician from performing the lawful duties of the firefighter or emergency medical technician.

(2) Interfering with a firefighter or emergency medical technician is a Class A misdemeanor.

(3) As used in this section, “emergency medical technician” has the meaning given that term in ORS 682.025. [2003 c.529 §2]

ORS 162.415 Official misconduct in the first degree. (1) A public servant commits the crime of official misconduct in the first degree if with intent to obtain a benefit or to harm another:

(a) The public servant knowingly fails to perform a duty imposed upon the public servant by law or one clearly inherent in the nature of office; or

(b) The public servant knowingly performs an act constituting an unauthorized exercise in official duties. (2) Official misconduct in the first degree is a Class A misdemeanor. [1971 c.743 §215]

ORS 163.190 Menacing. (1) A person commits the crime of menacing if by word or conduct the person intentionally attempts to place another person in fear of imminent serious physical injury.

(2) Menacing is a Class A misdemeanor. [1971 c.743 §95]

ORS 163.200 Criminal mistreatment in the second degree. (1) A person commits the crime of criminal mistreatment in the second degree if, with criminal negligence and:

(a) In violation of a legal duty to provide care for another person, the person withholds necessary and adequate food, physical care or medical attention from that person; or

(b) Having assumed the permanent or temporary care, custody or responsibility for the supervision of another person, the person withholds necessary and adequate food, physical care or medical attention from that person.

(2) Criminal mistreatment in the second degree is a Class A misdemeanor.

(3) As used in this section, “legal duty” includes but is not limited to a duty created by familial relationship, court order, contractual agreement or statutory or case law. [1973 c.627 §2; 1993 c.364 §1]

ORS 163.275 Coercion. (1) A person commits the crime of coercion when the person compels or induces another person to engage in conduct from which the other person has a legal right to abstain, or to abstain from engaging in conduct in which the other person has a legal right to engage, by means of instilling in the other person a fear that, if the other person refrains from the conduct compelled or induced or engages in conduct contrary to the compulsion or inducement, the actor or another will:

(a) Unlawfully cause physical injury to some person;

(b) Unlawfully cause damage to property;

(c) Engage in conduct constituting a crime;

(d) Falsely accuse some person of a crime or cause criminal charges to be instituted against the person; (e) Cause or continue a strike, boycott or other collective action injurious to some person’s business, except that such a threat is not deemed coercive when the act or omission compelled is for the benefit of the group in whose interest the actor purports to act;

(f) Testify falsely or provide false information or withhold testimony or information with respect to another’s legal claim or defense; or

(g) Unlawfully use or abuse the person’s position as a public servant by performing some act within or related to official duties, or by failing or refusing to perform an official duty, in such manner as to affect some person adversely.

(2) Coercion is a Class C felony. [1971 c.743 §102; 1983 c.546 §4; 1985 c.338 §1; 2007 c.71 §45]

Now at this time each and every volunteer can be charged with criminal negligence for their actions as well.

If this continues on and someone is harmed, dies or loses property because of the volunteer’s actions or this assosiation let me put it this way.

If someone dies then each and every volunteer could be sentenced to death as I understand it.

Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law

This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.

This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her color or race.

Acts under "color of any law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under "color of any law," the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs.

Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

This is a very dangerous game you are playing here.

I hope you know what you are doing and have your ducks in order because if this thing is not resolved by Monday night and the volunteers back on the job or resigned and all city equipment turned in the by Monday night, so that we as a city know what we have to work with, I am going to find out if I am correct and proceed with a criminal action against every volunteer Tuesday morning.

If resignations occur because this council refuses to abide by your demands to keep our Chief, then I will proceed with an action against all volunteers respectfully as I remind you this council has the legal right to hire and fire at will.

The only exception I as a citizen will accept is a factually verifiable reason pertaining to the volunteers only and in no way connected to the position of a specific employee being a specific chief.

If you are saying safety as you did in the paper I know for a fact that this chief did not respond on all calls and for you to attempt to make that claim is illogical in relation to the call logs.

I want verifiable proof and nothing less and you have until Monday night to do so.

I hope I have made myself more than clear enough to you as the speaker to the volunteers through this association you claim.

Which I still demand disclosure, of all documentation I requested, concerning this so called Association.

As we are going to find out here and now if this is a legal association under the law.

I am going to put it in laymen’s terms for you now.

This is a bull shit game you are playing here with people’s lives and property and I will not stand for it in any way, shape or form.

I hope I have made myself perfectly crystal clear in this matter.

Thank you for your time.

Michael “Cody” Steelman

_____________________________________________________________________________________

(For the record they did come back within hours of this but then started submitting resignations or temporary leaves of absences until the election. Then the volunteers used this strike as a way to fraud the voters by the use of the volunteers blackmailing the voters. Recall or no fire department. This strike was nothing more than for political purposes and each and every volunteer that went on strike need to be jailed for criminal negligence)

So my question has and is. Are these the people we want to depend on to save our property or our lives? Those that would walk out on the citizens for political purposes as a means to fraud the voters?

Think about it would you because that is exactly what happened and if you read the record it proves itself as the unde3niable truth.

That is why Gail Lewis wants to hid behind skirts when confronted by me about his statement.

He knows he is as guilty as the rest of these frauds who did this to our city.

But he wants to continue on thinking the general public is stupid and if he says that the previous council did this that in time the people will believe it.

Sorry Gail it is not that easy.

No one abandoned the volunteers.

The volunteers abandoned us in violation of many laws and for political purposes.

Those who took part in this fraud need to be jailed and in no way can be allowed to serve in our or any city again.

Cody

Is This America?

As James Madison wrote in the Federalist No. 39, “If we resort for a criterion to the different principles on which different forms of government are established, we may define a republic to be, or at least may bestow that name on, a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure, for a limited period, or during good behavior. It is ESSENTIAL to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from an inconsiderable proportion, or a favored class of it; otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppressions by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of republicans, and claim for their government the honorable title of republic. It is SUFFICIENT for such a government that the persons administering it be appointed, either directly or indirectly, by the people; and that they hold their appointments by either of the tenures just specified; otherwise every government in the United States, as well as every other popular government that has been or can be well organized or well executed, would be degraded from the republican character.”

Oregon Constitution Article I, Section 1. Natural rights inherent in people. We declare that all men, when they form a social compact are equal in right: that all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; and they have at all times a right to alter, reform, or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper.

But what happened here is what James Madison warned us about factions in The Federalist paper No. 10;

“By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.”

Mr. Lance Masters with the assistance of Eva Zerfing turned this little American City government into monarchy, socialism, fascism, communism, imperialism and all the other forms of government America is not. We are not ruled by Kings or Czars. We elect people to serve the people in this great Country and our State. But Government does not appoint a government by choosing a select class of people. A class of people who opposed the recall Lance Masters. They choose it on ability not as a reward to fraud the people.
They are all fraud's citizens and they have now stolen your vote as a first act.

Two of those that were rewarded an appointment pledged to pay $500.00 to the very Political Action Committee.

Yes Gail Lewis and Jeff Helfrich through his wife paid $500.00 and his wife was a registered officer of the political action committee that took public records and tampered with them. Yes they deleted sentences and added sentences and sent it as a political slate mailer to oppose the recall of Lance Masters to every citizen. The idiots even printed this is public record on the very slate mailers they tampered with. Do you have any idea of how many crimes were broken? I do as I am working with the State Police and Department of Justice.

Yet do you here them speak out against such injustice? How about you Lance Masters you were saved by a criminal act intended specifically to unduly influence the votes of the people.

So Mr. Masters how does it feel knowing you only won because your side had to cheat by committing criminal acts and committing fraud upon the voters.

Yet you say nothing about it and you reward them with a seat of government.

And in turn they rewarded you with the crown and the keys to the kingdom.

But Mr. Masters Madison also gave me the remedy.

“There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects.

So citizens remember this.

Article IV, section 4 of the Constitution reads: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.”

I have already proved to you that every public body in Oregon must guarantee all citizens a republican form of government.

So if you believe in the Constitution you cannot believe in this Council. You must oppose every action they take.

What this Council needs to do is call for a special election like the law says they will do if there is not a quorum required by law to do any City business.

ORS 221.160 Special elections to fill council vacancies; appointment of council members when all positions vacant. (1) Whenever because of death, resignation or other cause the number of the members of the governing body of any city is insufficient to constitute a quorum for the transaction of the business thereof, and the charter of such city does not otherwise provide, the mayor, or if there is no mayor, a majority of the remaining members of the governing body, may call a special election for the purpose of electing a sufficient number of persons to fill all the vacancies then existing in the governing body. For the purposes of such election the mayor, or if there is no mayor, a majority of the remaining members of the governing body, may appoint persons to act for all offices necessary to the holding of such election where such offices may be vacant. The appointments shall continue until a successor is selected as provided for by the charter or law governing such city.

Now these appointee’s may well be good for the city but unless they are voted in by the people they will always be known as cheats, scammers, fakes, and criminals. Better yet frauds as it is fitting to the cause.

Now I can live with knowing this is what they are but can they? Knowing a city feels this way about them may guarantee their terms are short.
As it is turning out worthless SOB's is the new names going around.

As it is they have been proving the things that the previous council got blamed for, there were no other options for their actions.

I now want you all to read an email from our interim City Administrator to me.

From: "Paul Koch" <pkoch@cascade-locks.or.us>
To: "Cody Steelman" <codysteelman@embarqmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 8:33:27 AM
Subject: RE: 192.660 (e)? and Jan 1st is the deadline. No excuses accepted.

Cody:  Thanks for the alerts, I appreciate them.

1. Mr. Smith has already been paid $4,000 for the easement.  The payment to Mr. Smith occurred a few years ago, but there was not a survey or legal description.  The problem is that the City accepted a FEMA grant in partnership with all the other safety agencies in the county (and spent it) then located Mr. Bates tower outside of the easement.  We find no legal right to his tower and he is rightly upset.  We now are in the final stages of survey and will take his tower down and give it back as we have no legal right to it.  I have regularly informed this Council and the previous Council that they can expect to have to pay an additional $20,000 to $25,000 to get this done right.  That cost will be shared by all the other agencies in the county, they will not be happy about that, but it is what it is.  I expect to have the total new cost in a week or so.
2. On the old fire hall, yes there are all sorts of issues, but I think the place to start is with the easement and clear description of both properties.  Then Council will know what they are dealing with.  From there, meetings with real estate professionals would help Council understand the market realities.  From there, they can make a decision about what to do.  From what I have been able to pull from the files, it appears that  there would not be much use for the building without either significant  owner or tenant improvements.

On the affordability issue, I am afraid that the city is way past that pint.  Once you accept government money and spend it you still have a responsibility to complete the plan you proposed.  The fact that it was not done correctly is unfortunate, but the reality.

Thanks again Cody for your time and expressions.  I for one appreciate it.

Thanks.

Paul

What 1 tells you is the city liberated (stole) an communications tower for the 911 system and got caught. Then they installed it on private property that did not belong to the city and they had no permission. That this is going to cost $20,000.00 to $25,000.00 estimated to resolve. That the City expects that the County will pay? And most revealing is that the 911 grant was spent and the City has to finish the project. I wonder how the County is going to take this good news?

And to think they shut down our 911 system to save the former chief and raised all the hell they did to save our former administrators for this type of behavior.

And look at their supporters who caused all the problems we now face. They are now the government and the first thing they did was took away our constitutional and lawful rights. Yep they stole our right to vote for our public officials. What’s next witch burning? Political prisons? Book burning?

You voted for it and you got it. I hope you can live with yourselves now.

Cody