BUSH APPOINTEE in Northern District of New York, Deals Right to Dissent a Death Blow! Options

[Livyjr]

And this brings us to what is known in the State of New York as the "ESCAPA Covenant", whereby in 1991, through the chicanery of burying amendments to the New York State Mined Land Reclamation Law in a "budget bill", the Empire State Concrete and Aggregate Producers' Association, Inc. ("ESCAPA") was able to negotiate themselves a "deal" with the Governor of the State of New York at the time, that being Hon. Mario M. Cuomo, that essentially made them and their members "exempt" from the provisions of Section 4 of Article XIV of the New York State Constitution above, and thus, set off a series of lawsuits in the Town of Poestenkill in Rensselaer County that caused the Town, and the state of New York to ultimately remove the source of these lawsuits by this unconstitutional and illegal device of the "PSYCHIATRIC TAKE-DOWN" that we are discussing in here, where to remove a witness against itself, the modern "state" can simply have one of its "doctors" declare the witness a "dangerous mental patient" and then order the New York State Police to transport the individual to a secure mental health facility or GULAG run by a CORPORATION willing to provide this "service" to the "state", in the interests of maintaining corporate cash flow, at the expense of the people of the state!

SO!

Please stay tuned for further developments!

SO?

Can a common American citizen find justice in a court of law in OUR America, if that common citizen is not a lawyer, and is defending him or herself, or their rights?

As an American citizen myself, I believe the answer is yes, even though, as jeffmoskin intimates, the evidence is often to the contrary, and again, when that is so, and it is all too commonly, at least up here where I am, this contrary evidence only serves to continue to inform me how very important it is to have on the bench at any level, IN ALL OF OUR AMERICA, from the lowest court to the highest in the land, judges who are totally independent, and who are willing to place the "law" above all else, and especially money and partisan politics.

And I myself have met some of these independent judges, and as a non-attorney, I certainly appreciate and value these judges, if and when I have to go to court, which up here, is far too many times for my own liking, but so what?

For as I see it, going to court against the "state", when necessary, as dictated by the circumstances, IS A DUTY, A REQUIREMENT OF CITIZENSHIP IN OUR AMERICA, in my value-system, anyway, and so, "liking" and "disliking" are just not an operative part of that equation!

If something in the public domain is wrong, and that wrongness is harming people, like the State of New York allowing pollution of ground water by industrial chemicals, say, then the longer that that is allowed to continue, the more harm to human health is potentially done, and so, what does one do in that particular case?

And what are the alternatives, besides doing nothing, or taking action in court to halt the abuse, even though that action of going to court, or trying to, in what led up to this appeal, may cause your teeth to be kicked right down your throat by some thugs whose job it is to protect the rights of the polluter, the poisoner, the despoiler, who makes more and more "profit" by polluting, since polluting doesn't cost the polluter a dime in a state like New York that is willing to crush a licensed professional engineer in the state investigating that pollution, which is contrary to the express language of the New York State Constitution, which is the organic law in this state, that which is supposed to be not only a check on the abuses of government, but a source of positive law, as well.

As an older American who has been around here long enough to now appreciate the "interconnet" between generations, where the following generations inherit both the "PUBLIC" good and bad of the generations before them, I see the harm that can come about to subsequent generations when previous generations, like my parents', for example, had an attitude of "keep quiet", and say nothing, with respect to governmental abuses that we always end up paying for, with our taxes, and more importantly, in the areas that I am concerned with, with our lives and health, as well, which is what makes this a pressing matter to me personally, for up here in the State of New York, at least, environmental and therefore health protection, has gone out the window, so that New York State can compete with the "Mexicos" of the world, and since their standards aren't coming up, well, OURS must go down, and that loss in environmental protection up here where I am will have grave consequences for generations that are yet to come, up here, where New York State can now boast of having within its borders a number of lakes that will no longer sustain life, because of their acidity, and it can further boast of air too dirty to breathe in its Capital District area, at times, in what I call state-sponsored "BLACK AIR ZONES", where the environment is essentially given over to the special interests to treat as they will, with the citizens of this state having no voice at all in the matter, as is the case now with extractive mining operations in the state, as a direct result of the ESCAPA Covenant that I began to discuss above here, a few days ago.

Back in 1969, a generation of New Yorkers who had grown up with rampant environmental pollution and contamination AS OUR LEGACY from the generations preceeding OURS, got together in the polling places of this state, including absentee ballots that were sent to people like me then in Viet Nam, and we said no more, through the vehicle of amending OUR New York State Constitution to send a message to OUR state legislature that this contamination and pollution was no longer acceptable, and that before it was too late, change was necessary!

Well, in many ways, that was a pipe dream on my part, at least, to think that merely changing a state Constitution was going to reverse anything deleterious or inimical to OUR generation, and those to follow, BUT ....

It had to start someplace, and so it did, with the amending of that Constitution in 1969, even if those of us who voted for that change did not exactly know what would happen next, as was really the case with the delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, who produced that very document that we up here in the County of Rensselaer in the State of New York today are actively working to defend in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City, sometime this fall, although the Appellant's brief is due in just so many days now, and so, when that is filed, issues to be appealed will be settled, and lines in the sand will be drawn, for all the candid world to see!

And there is something that I would hope this generation coming along after mine begins to realize at as early an age as possible, and that is that "rights" do not come to us, merely because we believe we have them, and so, are content to sit there and relish what we have in our minds, but not in reality, because we have lost the integrity of OUR judicial system to partisan politics, long ago, and in our distraction, we did not even know it!

If young people can find no other good reason to vote, and vote intelligently, the thought of losing JUSTICE to the whims of partisan politics should be an incentive, and that will not happen if we common citizens here in OUR America do not begin to realize that we have something precious to lose in the first place, like a legal system that can deliver true justice, DESPITE THE EFFORTS OF LAWYERS and the special interests that they represent, to pervert OUR system of justice, to make it their toadying lapdog, instead.

SO!

Hence this thread, to hopefully raise some "consciousness", here in OUR America .....

To be continued .....

"State DEC undermines home rule" 

Albany, New York Times Union 

First published: Friday, March 3, 2006

On Monday, the southern Rensselaer County town of Nassau learned that Callanan Industries of Schenectady had filed with the state for another mining permit, Callanan's second in the town.

The most recent application, filed with the Department of Environmental Conservation, proposes an eventual 39-acre open hard-rock mine on a 45-acre property Callanan recently acquired along Route 66.

What's notable about this is that the town's zoning prohibits mines over five acres.

Even more significantly, most of the property Callanan acquired lies inside the village of East Nassau, which has a total ban on mines.

New York prides itself as a home-rule state.

It's in our constitution.

Effectively that means that when a state law or governmental action is going to affect a locality, a home-rule message of support is sought from the grass-roots entity, usually a town or city.

Not that this has done Nassau, or East Nassau, any good at all.

Nobody's asked them if they want another mine in town, or any mine at all.

Worse, the DEC has relied for years on a self-generated technical memo from the early 1990s that states the DEC will process mining applications regardless of local zoning objections.

That memo needs to be discarded, and the conservation law rewritten.

We aren't a frontier society anymore, and if a town decides it doesn't want mining that should be the end of it.

East Nassau and Nassau have their legal rights, of course.

They can participate in the DEC's lengthy adjudicatory process, offer their own expert witnesses and even file for relief in regular courts.

Great.

And who will pay for it?

Legal expenses are staggering.

Callanan Industries, meanwhile, is a subsidiary of a global mining-construction colossus based in Dublin, with so many deep pockets they've lost count.

All made possible because the DEC outrageously creates an unlevel playing field.

"We need evidence," says Seney.

"It's not enough to be against mining."

end quotes

And of course, what Fred LeBrun does not say is that the WITNESS that these same people relied upon several years ago to defeat another major open-pit mine that was going to consume a goodly portion of the Village of East Nassau is the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer who REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Executive Kathleen Jimino had branded as a dangerous mental patient on August 22, 2001 .....

With the assistance of the State of New York .....

And its Attorney General ...

The Honorable Eliot "Big EL" Spitzer, ESQUIRE ......

Who likely will be New York State's next GOVERNOR ...

As well as being the LAWYER who provides cover for this scam the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation has been running for some years now ...

Where they simply ignore, with impunity, the Constitution and the laws of the State of New York .....

And "get" judges who are biased towards them ....

And have witnesses who are hostile to them removed as witnesses .....

And so ....

UNLEVEL PLAYING FIELD, INDEED .....

And so .....

WE

DID

IT!

MINED LAND RECLAMATION BILL PASSED WITH STATE BUDGET!

So reads the cover sheet of an exultant PROCLAMATION published all over the State of New York on or about June 17, 1991 by ESCAPA, the "Empire State Concrete and Aggregate Producers Association, Inc.", to trumpet its coup of burying an amended version of the New York State Mined Land Reclamation Law deep in the bowels of a lengthy "budget bill" that was before the New York State Legislature that year so that ESCAPA could have the law changed to suit its whims and needs ......

DESPITE THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION .....

A typical "BACK-ROOM DEAL" between LOBBYISTS, GOVERNMENT LAWYERS and POLITICIANS ON THE MAKE up here that then becomes the basis for how the "law" will be "interpreted" subsequently in the State of New York .....

DESPITE THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION .....

In a memorandum to ALL MEMBERS attached to that cover sheet above dated June 17, 1991, David S. Hamling, the then-Managing Director of ESCAPA states as follows with respect to how "business" is really done in the State of New York, DESPITE THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION AND ANY LAWS TO THE CONTRARY:

The Governor has signed the negotiated Mined Land Reclamation Law amendments into law as part of the State Budget!

This is a major piece of legislation which will dramatically improve conditions for the aggregate industry.

After many years of trying, the bill has finally passed and its provisions will become effective on September 1, 1991!

A fact sheet describing the major changes in the law is enclosed.

ESCAPA expects implementation of the Mined Land Reclamation law will SUFFER SOME "GROWING PAINS", so we have developed a strategy to smooth the transition.

OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS WILL ACT ON THE STRATEGY ON JUNE 18, 1001, AND WE WILL KEEP YOU ABREAST OF PROGRESS.

AS THE IMPACT OF THIS NEW STATUTE UNFOLDS, OUR RELATIONSHIPS WITH BOTH STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WILL CHANGE, SO WE ARE URGING DISCRETION IN THE EARLY STAGES OF IMPLEMENTATION.

YOU MAY BE ASSURED, HOWEVER, THAT ESCAPA WILL AGGRESSIVELY PROTECT YOUR INTERESTS IN THIS PROCESS.

The regulatory climate for OUR industries is improving!

THIS IS AN IMPORTANT VICTORY, AND ONE THAT WAS ONLY POSSIBLE BY THE COMBINED EFFORTS OF OUR MEMBERSHIP.

CONGRATULATIONS!

end quotes

And thus .....

Was created ...

The "UNLEVEL PLAYING FIELD" in the State of New York, and especially the County of Rensselaer and its rural towns that Fred LeBrun of the Albany, New York Times Union newspaper makes reference to above ......

And here is perhaps HIGHLIGHTED one of the real strengths that this particular FORUM gives to us common citizens up here .....

Because Fred LeBrun and the Albany, New York Times Union have been as aware of this unconstitutional BACK-ROOM DEAL in 1991 between ESCAPA and the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the COUNSEL for the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the Governor of the State of New York as WE, THE PEOPLE ......

And yet ...

Both Mr. LeBrun and the Albany, New York Times Union, which has a corporate parent actively engaged in "development" up here, for its and their own personal reasons, HAVE CHOSEN TO STAY LARGELY MUM ON THIS ISSUE .....

To OUR detriment, of course ....

Since that particular newspaper could have been a force early on in decrying the unconstitutional manner in which ESCAPA had itself and its members IMMUNIZED AND EXEMPTED FROM COMPLIANCE WITH BOTH OUR STATE CONSTITUTION AND THE LAWS OF THE STATE WHICH DERIVE FROM IT by the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the Governor of the State of New York, the Attorney General of the State of New York ...

AND THE COURTS .........

For without the courts on board, continued corruption in New York State would be an impossibility, and so .....

This post has been edited by Livyjr: Mar 4 2006, 08:23 AM

[Livyjr]

WE

DID

IT!

MINED LAND RECLAMATION BILL PASSED WITH STATE BUDGET!

So reads the cover sheet of an exultant PROCLAMATION published all over the State of New York on or about June 17, 1991 by ESCAPA, the "Empire State Concrete and Aggregate Producers Association, Inc.", to trumpet its coup of burying an amended version of the New York State Mined Land Reclamation Law deep in the bowels of a lengthy "budget bill" that was before the New York State Legislature that year so that ESCAPA could have the law changed to suit its whims and needs ......

DESPITE THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION .....

A typical "BACK-ROOM DEAL" between LOBBYISTS, GOVERNMENT LAWYERS and POLITICIANS ON THE MAKE up here that then becomes the basis for how the "law" will be "interpreted" subsequently in the State of New York .....

DESPITE THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION .....

In a memorandum to ALL MEMBERS attached to that cover sheet above dated June 17, 1991, David S. Hamling, the then-Managing Director of ESCAPA states as follows with respect to how "business" is really done in the State of New York, DESPITE THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION AND ANY LAWS TO THE CONTRARY:

The Governor has signed the negotiated Mined Land Reclamation Law amendments into law as part of the State Budget!

This is a major piece of legislation which will dramatically improve conditions for the aggregate industry.

After many years of trying, the bill has finally passed and its provisions will become effective on September 1, 1991!

June 7, 1991

From: Empire State Concrete and Aggregate Producers Association, Inc.
421 New Karner Road, Suite 10
Albany, New York 12205

To: Hon. Mario M. Cuomo
Governor
New York State
The Capital
Albany, NY 12224

Re: Bill S. 6079/A. 8491
Amendments to Mined Land Reclamation Law
ECL Article 23, Title 27

Dear Governor Cuomo:

The Empire State Concrete and Aggregate Producers Association ("ESCAPA") strongly recommends approval of Bill S. 6079/A. 8491, specifically Sections 227 through 238, which contains much needed clarifying amendments to the Mined Land Reclamation Law (Environmental Conservation Law, Article 23, Title 27).

ESCAPA is a state-wide non-profit trade organization representing mining interests throughout the State.

Members include producers of concrete, sand and gravel, crushed stone and light-weight aggregate.

********

During the sixteen or so years since the Mined Land Reclamation Law (MLRL) took effect on April 1, 1975, local governments have continually attempted to regulate the mining industry under the guise of reclamation laws, relying on the exclusion from the supersedure provision of local laws imposing "stricter reclamation standards".

These so-called reclamation laws placed such severe restrictions on actual mining operations as to render mining physically impossible, if not economically prohibitive, (i.e. prohibition of the continuation of mining without obtaining a "reclamation" permit, depth limitations, excessive setback distances, prohibition of processing and limits on hours of operation).

Such attempts of local government regulation of the mining industry under "reclamation laws" resulted in costly litigation to protect the property rights of mine operators and the equally costly destabilization generated by conflicting court decisions.

Additional confusion was created by the differing interpretation of the MLRL definitions and substantive provisions by the various Department administration.

Thus, a combined effort began a little less than ten years ago to have the Legislature pass much needed amendments to the MLRL to ensure that its original policy goals would be achieved.

AFTER YEARS OF INTENSE NEGOTIATIONS, these amendments emerged as Sections 227 through 238 of Bill S. 6079/A. 8491 AND REPRESENT A COMPROMISE FORGED BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT, THE MINING INDUSTRY AND THE INTERESTS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THROUGHOUT THE STATE.

ESCAPA was INTRICATELY INVOLVED IN NEGOTIATING these amendments and supports approval of Bill S. 6079/A. 8491.

Respectfully,

Mr. Thomas Barry
President
ESCAPA

[Livyjr]

June 7, 1991

From: Empire State Concrete and Aggregate Producers Association, Inc.
421 New Karner Road, Suite 10
Albany, New York 12205

To: Hon. Mario M. Cuomo
Governor
New York State
The Capital
Albany, NY 12224

Re: Bill S. 6079/A. 8491
Amendments to Mined Land Reclamation Law
ECL Article 23, Title 27

Dear Governor Cuomo:

Thus, a combined effort began a little less than ten years ago to have the Legislature pass much needed amendments to the MLRL to ensure that its original policy goals would be achieved.

AFTER YEARS OF INTENSE NEGOTIATIONS, these amendments emerged as Sections 227 through 238 of Bill S. 6079/A. 8491 AND REPRESENT A COMPROMISE FORGED BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT, THE MINING INDUSTRY AND THE INTERESTS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THROUGHOUT THE STATE.

ESCAPA was INTRICATELY INVOLVED IN NEGOTIATING these amendments and supports approval of Bill S. 6079/A. 8491.

Respectfully,

Mr. Thomas Barry
President
ESCAPA

There are no record of these NEGOTIATIONS, of course .....

Just an outcome ...

That "outcome" being that ESCAPA's membership was exempted from having to comply with the amended New York State Constitution and the laws of the State of New York which derive from it ...

BY THE COMMISSIONER of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ....

Which is an administrative agency of the State of New York that was created to serve the PEOPLE of the State of New York as a result of Article XIV of the New York State Constitution being amended in 1969 to make it the POLICY of the State of New York to conserve and protect its natural resources and scenic beauty and encourage the development and improvement of agricultural lands for the production of food and other agricultural products, while at the same time, DIRECTING THAT OUR LEGISLATURE, in implementing this policy, SHALL INCLUDE adequate provision for the abatement of air and water pollution and of excessive and unnecessary noise .... and the development and regulation of water resources .....

Which of course, ended up cramping ESCAPA's "style", because the extractive mining industry has a real ugly history in the State of New York as a despoiler of the land, water and air, not to mention the property values of anyone who owns land near a large extractive mining operation ....

And so ....

There were in ESCAPA's own words, "YEARS OF INTENSE NEGOTIATIONS" which resulted in A COMPROMISE FORGED BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT, THE MINING INDUSTRY AND THE INTERESTS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THROUGHOUT THE STATE, which COMPROMISE, ESCAPA was INTRICATELY INVOLVED IN .....

A COMPROMISE that included, again, according to ESCAPA, the COMPLETE ELIMINATION of a MINING ADVISORY COMMITTEE from the law, which section of law was REPEALED "AS A RESULT OF ATTEMPTS BY LOCAL CITIZENS GROUPS TO SKEW THE COMMITTEE TO THEIR CONCERNS AND PROBLEMS" .....

Which takes us back to WHY WE AMENDED OUR OWN NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION in the first place .....

SO AS TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR PROBLEMS AND CONCERNS WOULD BE MADE KNOWN TO OUR LEGISLATURE, which has a sordid reputation of being for sale to the highest bidder .....

And this takes us back to Section 1 of Article I of the New York State Constitution, which is its BILL OF RIGHTS, wherein is stated that NO member of this state shall be ...... deprived of any of the rights or privileges secured to any citizens thereof, unless by the law of the land ....

And the "law of the land" is the ORGANIC LAW, which is the New York State Constitution ....

And around and around and around this little game goes ...

WITH THE SAME OVERALL END RESULT ...

More and more and more, the "common citizen" up here is being totally SHUT OUT of DUE PROCESS OF LAW, and EQUAL PROTECTION OF LAW, and OUR right to dissent is being crushed ....

And there is nothing that we can do about it ...

When the doors to the courts are slammed shut in OUR faces ...

And so ....

[Livyjr]

There are no record of these NEGOTIATIONS, of course .....

Just an outcome ...

That "outcome" being that ESCAPA's membership was exempted from having to comply with the amended New York State Constitution and the laws of the State of New York which derive from it ...

BY THE COMMISSIONER of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ....

Which is an administrative agency of the State of New York that was created to serve the PEOPLE of the State of New York as a result of Article XIV of the New York State Constitution being amended in 1969 to make it the POLICY of the State of New York to conserve and protect its natural resources and scenic beauty and encourage the development and improvement of agricultural lands for the production of food and other agricultural products, while at the same time, DIRECTING THAT OUR LEGISLATURE, in implementing this policy, SHALL INCLUDE adequate provision for the abatement of air and water pollution and of excessive and unnecessary noise .... and the development and regulation of water resources .....

Which of course, ended up cramping ESCAPA's "style", because the extractive mining industry has a real ugly history in the State of New York as a despoiler of the land, water and air, not to mention the property values of anyone who owns land near a large extractive mining operation ....

And so ....

And to keep the discussion in here relevant to "external reality" out there in the State of New York and the federal Northern District of New York from the perspective of the RIGHT TO INTELLIGENT DISSENT and the public health .........

"Planned rules set cleanup guidelines - Proposed regulations that would set standards for developers building on polluted sites called inadequate by critics"

By COLIN McDONALD, Staff writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Monday, March 6, 2006

ALBANY -- In a state polluted with toxins, carcinogens and heavy metals since colonists began tanning animal hides in the 1600s, the question now is: how clean is clean?

Newly proposed regulations are designed to help the state catch up on a 400-year backlog of cleanup work.

Developers seeking tax credits and certification under New York's Environmental Remediation Program would work from a matrix of standards based on the contamination of their property, the uses of the surrounding land and the site's intended purpose.

The highest standards are based on a survey of rural property across New York.

But critics say the whole state is so polluted that even those standards are inadequate.

"The issue is difficult for all of us because of how we have impacted our environment," said Linda Shaw, a Rochester environmental attorney who supports the new regulations.

"The rural background numbers came out higher than everyone expected because our environment is unfortunately more contaminated than anyone thought."

Some of the worst locations are now classified as brownfields, where contamination is hindering development, and Superfund sites, land so polluted the state takes over the cleanup.

Each year the state adds an average of 45 Superfund sites to its list, and thousands of spills and accidents increase the number of brownfields, Shaw said.

Of the tens of thousands of contaminated properties, 1,788 are being dealt with under the current remediation programs.

A 2003 state law was designed to deal with the worst properties and encourage developers to clean up sites for redevelopment.

It came after 10 years of wrangling over how clean sites should be and was supposed to expedite the work.

The law required the state departments of Environmental Conservation and Health to come up with new regulations to protect the public while providing developers clear standards so they could estimate cleanup costs.

The regulations were released in November and are open to public comment through March 27.

Bobbi Chase Wilding of the Citizens Environmental Coalition cited the proposed brownfield development in downtown Albany at Quackenbush Square as an example of a place where an inadequate cleanup under the new standards would leave future generations at risk.

The property at the intersection of Broadway and Spencer Street is zoned for industry, and investors want to clean it up and build an apartment and office complex.

The DEC suspects the soil on the property -- which has been home to industry for centuries -- contains petroleum, metals, pesticides and semivolatile and volatile organic compounds, which continue to spread through the ground and groundwater.

But under the proposed standards, not all the contaminated soil would be removed, because DEC assumes there would be limited exposure to people living and working around Quackenbush Square.

Such an assumption, she said, ignores studies that suggest the risk of exposure to lingering pollutants is higher than previously thought.

Exposure, for example, could be through vapor intrusion -- the seeping of chemicals through the soil and groundwater into nearby basements and buildings.

Gabrielle DeMarco, a DEC spokeswoman, said the standards are based on the best science available and will be changed as science advances the understanding of the movement and threats of toxic materials.

The state could even require further work on a site previously certified as clean and is further studying the risks from vapor intrusion.

"Remediation measures may differ for each project depending on the nature and extent of contamination and the site's end use, but the main priority of the state has and will always be to ensure that these projects safeguard public health and the environment" she said.

Once the draft standards are approved and developers can make a reasonable estimate of cleanup costs, the number of cleanups will likely grow substantially, Shaw said.

Environmental groups counter that if the cleanup is insufficient the first time, the work will have to be done again and the state will have failed to protect the public.

"It means we will have a toxic legacy for years to come," said John Stouffer of the Sierra Club.

McDonald can be reached at 454-5441 or by e-mail at cmcdonald@timesunion.com.

CONTACT DATA

The draft regulations for the Environmental Remediation Program can be viewed on line at http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/der/sup...nd/fact375.html or in person at Department of Environmental Conservation regional offices. To contact the Region 4 office, which includes Albany, Columbia, Greene, Rensselaer and Schenectady counties, call 357-2234. The Region 5 office, which includes Saratoga, Warren and Washington counties, can be reached at 897-1200.The DEC will conduct three public hearings to gather comments on the proposed standards. The Capital Region hearing will be at 1 p.m. March 15 at the DEC Building, Room 129, 625 Broadway, Albany.

[Livyjr]

PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEER: The term public health engineer SHALL mean a person who applies engineering principles for the detection, evaluation, control and management of THOSE FACTORS IN THE ENVIRONMENT WHICH INFLUENCE MAN'S HEALTH .....

- Title 10, New York Code of Rules and Regulations, Section 11.100

[Livyjr]

In that March 16, 1989 Report of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which was before Judge Sharpe in the Plaintiff's Motion for Injunctive Relief as Exhibit J, a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, based upon a review of substantial evidence, concluded:

"According to [name deleted], the results of the State's investigation were that New York State laws were not being followed by the Rensselaer County Health Department, Rensselaer County laws were not being followed by the Rensselaer County Health Department, and there was very little 'enforcement activity' even in the face of illegal sales."

"According to [name deleted], the object of any county health department (in the state of New York) is to protect the public, and not to facilitate developers, or development."

"In the case of Rensselaer County, it appears that the Rensselaer County Health Department was in business to facilitate developers and development rather than to protect the public!"

It was that last statement by this F.B.I. Special Agent in March of 1989 that set in motion the very chain of causality which has brought us up to this present moment in time in the Northern District of New York, where this Sua Sponte Dismissal of this Federal Civil Rights lawsuit and Plaintiff's Motion for Injunctive Relief by Federal District Court on March 31, 2005, now seriously jeopardizes the rights of all citizens in the Northern District of New York by removing from them the services of the licensed professional engineer whose expert witness testimony they would need to file a Petition for Redress of Grievance with the courts of the State of New York alleging a continuation of this same negligence by the State of New York and Rensselaer County Department of Health to this day.

In the State of New York, for a common citizen to file a Petition for Redress of Grievance with the courts of the state, where negligence by the state, or one of its political subdivisions is alleged, it is necessary to have expert witness testimony which supports the claim, otherwise the petition will be dismissed as frivolous, which can then result in sanctions being issued by the court.

By intimidating those few licensed engineers in the State of New York who are qualified to serve as expert witnesses in court against the State of New York, and its political subdivisions, through this illegal device of the "PSYCHIATRIC TAKE-DOWN", the State of New York has effectively muzzled each and every one of us common citizens here in the Northern District of New York, since without this expert witness testimony, we are simply OUT OF COURT, forever, with no way back in, and the government corruption in the County of Rensselaer and the State of New York that was outlined in that series of F.B.I Reports annexed to the now-dismissed Motion for Injunctive Relief can now flourish with impunity!

The apparent sanctioning of this alleged illegal activity by the State of New York, and its political subdivisions, the County of Rensselaer, and the Town of Poestenkill, by the Federal District Court for the Northern District of New York as of March 31, 2005 now sends a very chilling message indeed to the residents of the Northern District of New York, to wit:  "KEEP YOUR MOUTHS SHUT, OR YOU WILL BE NEXT!"

And so, that sucking sound we hear up here is the protection of law going right out the window, and that clanging sound we hear is the massive door of the Federal District Court for the Northern District of New York slamming shut in OUR faces!

And so it goes, here in the Northern District of New York, for the constitutional right of the common man, and woman in the State of New York to redress of grievance, and the right to dissent against corrupt governmental activities in the State of New York, and its political subdivisions that adversely impact the public health, safety, and well-being of those of us in the State of New York who also reside in the Northern District as it is defined by the United States government!

Going, going, gone!

As of March 31, 2005!

The story is how did Chris Kapostacey-Jansing get REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Executive John L. Buono to openly discuss what was in reality a BRIBE offered to him by a group of land developers in Rensselaer County in early-1988 .....

And that answer brings us to one of the more interesting documents in the lengthy FBI file concerning this matter back in 1989 .....

And that document is a transcript of the MINUTES of a CONFERENCE between the RENSSELAER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL and the NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, held at the offices of the Department, 2 University Place, Albany, New York, on Tuesday, March 1, 1988, commencing at 1 PM and stenographically reported by Mary Lomonoco, Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of New York.

In attendance at this meeting, according to this document in the FBI files, were as follows:

Dr. Leo Hetling, Director, and James "Mr. Jimmy D." Decker of the Division of Environmental Protection of the New York State Department of Health; Steven Anderson and Fred Nero of Mountain Meadow Properties; Rod Michael of the Eastern New York Society of Land Surveyors; Kevin Brady of the Rensselaer County Regional Chamber of Commerce; Douglas Clark of Clark Engineering; George Duggan of Best Building; Richard Melius of the Rensselaer County Development Council, and Victor Gush and Jack Leonard, land developers.

And how this TRANSCRIPT came to be in the possession of the FBI is as follows:

This TRANSCRIPT was "made public" in a matter of speaking by this RENSSELAER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL at a "closed door meeting" on the fifth floor of the Rensselaer County Office Building shortly after that CONFERENCE was held, and an "AGREEMENT OF SORTS" was reached with the New York State Department of Health concerning "OVERSIGHT" of the Rensselaer County Department of Health .....

And that agreement was that the New York State Department of Health would turn its back ...

IF the RENSSELAER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL could get Buono to "GET RID OF" the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer ......

So as to "unplug" their "pipeline" into the Rensselaer County Department of Health for rapid "approvals" of their "subdivisions" so they could then sell lots as "HEALTH-DEPARTMENT APPROVED" ...

When in fact, that was anything but the case .....

A FRAUD, in fact, that was being perpetrated on the public in Rensselaer County on a regular basis ......

But who cares about them, eh?

CAVEAT EMPTOR ......

As the lawyers like "Big BOB" Smith like to say ...

And so .....

The "State Health Department" agreed to turn its back ....

ESCAPA expects implementation of the Mined Land Reclamation law will SUFFER SOME "GROWING PAINS", so we have developed a strategy to smooth the transition.

OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS WILL ACT ON THE STRATEGY ON JUNE 18, 1001, AND WE WILL KEEP YOU ABREAST OF PROGRESS.

AS THE IMPACT OF THIS NEW STATUTE UNFOLDS, OUR RELATIONSHIPS WITH BOTH STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WILL CHANGE, SO WE ARE URGING DISCRETION IN THE EARLY STAGES OF IMPLEMENTATION.

YOU MAY BE ASSURED, HOWEVER, THAT ESCAPA WILL AGGRESSIVELY PROTECT YOUR INTERESTS IN THIS PROCESS.

PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEER: The term public health engineer SHALL mean a person who applies engineering principles for the detection, evaluation, control and management of THOSE FACTORS IN THE ENVIRONMENT WHICH INFLUENCE MAN'S HEALTH .....

- Title 10, New York Code of Rules and Regulations, Section 11.100

And so ....

There were in ESCAPA's own words, "YEARS OF INTENSE NEGOTIATIONS" which resulted in A COMPROMISE FORGED BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT, THE MINING INDUSTRY AND THE INTERESTS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THROUGHOUT THE STATE, which COMPROMISE, ESCAPA was INTRICATELY INVOLVED IN .....

A COMPROMISE that included, again, according to ESCAPA, the COMPLETE ELIMINATION of a MINING ADVISORY COMMITTEE from the law, which section of law was REPEALED "AS A RESULT OF ATTEMPTS BY LOCAL CITIZENS GROUPS TO SKEW THE COMMITTEE TO THEIR CONCERNS AND PROBLEMS" .....

MINUTES of a CONFERENCE between the RENSSELAER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL and the NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, held at the offices of the Department, 2 University Place, Albany, New York, on Tuesday, March 1, 1988, commencing at 1 PM and stenographically reported by Mary Lomonoco, Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of New York.

In attendance at this meeting are as follows:

Dr. Leo Hetling, Director, and James "Mr. Jimmy D." Decker of the Division of Environmental Protection of the New York State Department of Health; Steven Anderson and Fred Nero of Mountain Meadow Properties; Rod Michael of the Eastern New York Society of Land Surveyors; Kevin Brady of the Rensselaer County Regional Chamber of Commerce; Douglas Clark of Clark Engineering; George Duggan of Best Building; Richard Melius of the Rensselaer County Development Council, and Victor Gush and Jack Leonard, land developers.

MR. ANDERSON: Essentially, as my memo stated, we're just after information.

We feel we've got a situation in Rensselaer County.

We're not operating totally in the dark, but we really don't know where things are headed and which direction we should go in.

So we decided to start at the logical place, with the State and County people, and then meet with local Town officials, BECAUSE WE THINK THAT THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IS IN A STATE OF CHAOS IN RENSSELAER COUNTY RIGHT NOW.

We're after essential information.

What State Health Code is applicable; the rules and regulations; are there any impending changes that we should be aware of?

And that's really why we asked to meet.

A number of us have various questions.

I would just as soon as not lead myself, because I'm - I've been marching in front of the media for too long.

DR. LEO HETLING: From your letter - where there is a State subdivision law, in response to that law the Department has had rules and regulations that we delegate, for the most part, the environmental program, to county health departments.

And county health departments, for the most part, take our codes and regulations, adopt them in whole, and usually follow the procedures that we publish.

Although not by law, they have to publish those procedures.

COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENTS ARE AGENTS OF THE STATE, BUT I CHARACTERIZE THEM AS INDEPENDENT AGENTS.

THEY HAVE A LOT OF LEEWAY!

MR. ANDERSON: On that point, I have one question which is really a matter of curiosity that I don't understand.

Perhaps you could clarify.

One section, 1120 of the State Code, has something that leaves me mystified.

Essentially, it says that the State Commissioner may establish rules, but in the event there is an inconsistency in these rules and regulations with the local health unit, the State Commissioner's shall be deemed to be inapplicable.

I'm mystified by that.

My understanding is all state laws take precedence.

DR. LEO HETLING: We're talking about Rules and Regulations.

County health departments have the authority - or the county does have rules and regulations different from the State Code as long as they're consistent with it.

In theory, we should never file a rule or code that is not consistent, but from time to time, it does happen.

In that case, the county's thing is what would hold.

MR. MELIUS: CAN THE COUNTY HAVE SOMETHING THAT IS LESS STRICT THAN THE STATE?

DR. HETLING: NO!

IN THEORY THEY CAN'T!

IN PRACTICE ......

[Livyjr]

What does this mean above here, a "professional" position?

Is that a fancy name for a hyped-up bureaucrat?

OR ...

Is it a requirement?

Or a MINIMUM QUALIFICATION ....

Such as "possession of a license and registered to practice professional engineering in New York State ..."

And if that is in fact the case, which it is, since those exact words are on the Civil Service job description for this position, what does that mean to the citizens of the United States of America who should happen, as I do, to reside in Rensselaer County in the State of New York?

And here I am thinking about such things as DUE PROCESS OF LAW ....

And EQUAL PROTECTION, as well .....

DOES THIS REQUIREMENT IN THE CIVIL SERVICE LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK THAT THE RENSSELAER COUNTY ASSOCIATE PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEER POSSESS A LICENSE TO PRACTICE AND BE REGISTERED TO PRACTICE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING IN NEW YORK STATE HAVE ANY FEDERAL IMPLICATIONS WHATSOEVER FOR THOSE OF US AMERICANS WHO HAPPEN TO RESIDE THERE?

And that answer is YES ....

According to the CIVIL SERVICE JOB DESCRIPTION for this professional position, the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer "represents the Rensselaer County Department of Health on all matters and problems related to environmental health", and in the course of doing that, the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer "maintains relationships and cooperates with local, state and federal agencies whose work or policies affect the public health program" in Rensselaer County ...

Pursuant to the Rules of the New York State Board of Regents which govern this engineer's practice as an engineer in the State of New York, AS WELL AS IN RENSSELAER COUNTY, the engineer is to carry out these responsibilities in "substantial compliance with ALL federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations which govern ..."

And a disabled American veteran living in Rensselaer County in the State of New York, dependent upon ground water which is protected by law in the State of New York for my drinking water, I should have been able to rely upon the integrity of this engineer for my own protection ...

EXCEPT ...

This engineer was coerced ....

This engineer was intimidated ....

This engineer was threatened ...

This engineer was bullied ...

And then physically assaulted by a back-hoe operator ..

And when he still would not "take a turn" ...

His professional standing as Rensselaer County Associate Public health Engineer was stripped from him in a FARCE ...

MARCH 15, 1989

CROSS-EXAMINATION OF REPUBLICAN RENSSELAER COUNTY ATTORNEY ROBERT A. SMITH, ESQUIRE

Q: And where was this meeting held, sir?

SMITH: It was held at Mr. Buono's office.

Q: And who was present?

SMITH: Just Mr. Buono and myself ....

Q: SO .......

I take it then .....

That the Associate Public Health Engineer had already been placed on "leave of absence" by the time of this meeting?

SMITH: I believe that was the case ....

I think there was the administrative leave that was granted the Associate Public Health Engineer at the time ....

This meeting probably would have been shortly after he commenced that leave, I believe ....

Q: Let me ask you this .....

Prior to the time the Associate Public Health Engineer was placed on leave ....

WERE YOU CONSULTED REGARDING WHETHER HE SHOULD BE PLACED ON LEAVE?

SMITH: I believe I was .....

NOT WHETHER HE SHOULD BE .....

BUT WHETHER OR NOT HE COULD BE ....

I think was more the tenor of the conversation .....

Q: And with whom did ....

WHO CONSULTED YOU ABOUT THAT?

SMITH: IT PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN MR. BUONO, I BELIEVE .....

MINUTES of a CONFERENCE between the RENSSELAER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL and the NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, held at the offices of the Department, 2 University Place, Albany, New York, on Tuesday, March 1, 1988, commencing at 1 PM and stenographically reported by Mary Lomonoco, Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of New York.

In attendance at this meeting are as follows:

Dr. Leo Hetling, Director, and James "Mr. Jimmy D." Decker of the Division of Environmental Protection of the New York State Department of Health; Steven Anderson and Fred Nero of Mountain Meadow Properties; Rod Michael of the Eastern New York Society of Land Surveyors; Kevin Brady of the Rensselaer County Regional Chamber of Commerce; Douglas Clark of Clark Engineering; George Duggan of Best Building; Richard Melius of the Rensselaer County Development Council, and Victor Gush and Jack Leonard, land developers.

MR. ANDERSON: Essentially, as my memo stated, we're just after information.

We feel we've got a situation in Rensselaer County.

We're not operating totally in the dark, but we really don't know where things are headed and which direction we should go in.

So we decided to start at the logical place, with the State and County people, and then meet with local Town officials, BECAUSE WE THINK THAT THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IS IN A STATE OF CHAOS IN RENSSELAER COUNTY RIGHT NOW.We're after essential information.

What State Health Code is applicable; the rules and regulations; are there any impending changes that we should be aware of?

And that's really why we asked to meet.

A number of us have various questions.

I would just as soon as not lead myself, because I'm -

I've been marching in front of the media for too long.

DR. LEO HETLING: From your letter - where there is a State subdivision law, in response to that law the Department has had rules and regulations that we delegate, for the most part, the environmental program, to county health departments.

And county health departments, for the most part, take our codes and regulations, adopt them in whole, and usually follow the procedures that we publish.

Although not by law, they have to publish those procedures.

COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENTS ARE AGENTS OF THE STATE, BUT I CHARACTERIZE THEM AS INDEPENDENT AGENTS.

THEY HAVE A LOT OF LEEWAY!

MR. MELIUS: CAN THE COUNTY HAVE SOMETHING THAT IS LESS STRICT THAN THE STATE?

DR. HETLING: NO!

IN THEORY THEY CAN'T!

IN PRACTICE ......

And thus, the SELL-OUT of the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer and the PEOPLE of Rensselaer County BY THE CORRUPT NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH that continues to this day began ......

Right there in that room ....

With just those few sentences back and forth between this group of land developers and the top licensed professional engineers of the New York State Department of Health in charge of the State of New York's Division of Environmental Protection ....

Not even two full pages into that TRANSCRIPT of that CONFERENCE that is a part of the FBI records underlying this matter that were suppressed by the federal District Court for the Northern District of New York, which suppression was then "rubber-stamp" approved by the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City late last year, in December 2005 .....

AND THE DEAL WAS DONE ....

Just like that .....

THE ANATOMY OF A SELL-OUT BY A STATE AGENCY CHARGED WITH PROTECTION AND PROMOTION OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK TO A GROUP OF LOBBYISTS WITH BAGS OF MONEY IN THEIR POCKETS, LOOKING FOR SOME STATE OFFICERS WITH "RESPONSIBILITIES" IN THE RIGHT "AREAS OF INTEREST" TO THE LOBBYISTS, TO BUY .....

Right out in plain sight of everybody in the world, since this TRANSCRIPT is a public record released to the public through FREEDOM OF INFORMATION, Richard Melius of the RENSSELAER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, a LOBBYING GROUP, and Steven Anderson, the alleged FORCE behind the formation of the RENSSELAER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL threw their left legs in, they threw their left legs out, they threw their left legs in, and then, they shook them all about ...

Which Dr. Leo Hetling of the New York State Department of Health's Division of Environmental Protection instantly recognized as a "symbol of compatability" between him and them, and so .....

He immediately shook loose with the handful of words that these developers wanted him to say on the record that was being transcribed BY A NOTARY PUBLIC:

COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENTS ARE AGENTS OF THE STATE ....

BUT I CHARACTERIZE THEM AS INDEPENDENT AGENTS ......

THEY HAVE A LOT OF LEEWAY!

AND BINGO!

A "sale" was made ...

And the "job" was done ....

And the RENSSELAER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL thanked Dr. Hetling ...

And off they went, back to Rensselaer County with this transcript as PROOF POSITIVE that the Rensselaer County Department of Health could do whatever it damn well pleased, and so ...

Because the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer would not pay any heed to these words of Dr. Leo Hetling as having any applicability to him, then he would have to be replaced with someone who would, and that was that ...

And it was ...

Based on these few words above of Dr. Leo Hetling to the RENSSELAER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL on March 1, 1988, the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer was removed from his office by REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Executive John L. Buono acting on the advice of REPUBLICAN Rennsselaer County Attorney Robart A. "Big BOB" Smith, ESQUIRE ......

AND THE PEOPLE OF RENSSELAER COUNTY WERE STRIPPED OF THE PROTECTION OF THE NEW YORK STATE PUBLIC HEALTH LAW ...

All in one fell swoop .....

Which point, of course, was made to the United States Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agent to whom this TRANSCRIPT was given back in 1989, when the F.B.I. was investigating public corruption in Rensselaer County as part of an on-going HOBBS ACT investigation launched by then-U.S. Attorney DAVID HOMER, now a federal Judge in the Northern District of New York .....

Where the events in this matter all took place ...

And so ....

This post has been edited by Livyjr: Mar 7 2006, 08:10 AM

[Livyjr]

Troy, New York RECORD

Wednesday, February 22, 1989

"Environmental Health Director PLAINTIFF'S disciplinary hearing has been delayed until the legal issue of opening the proceedings to the public is resolved."

"State Supreme Court Justice Edward S. Conway signed a Show Cause Order Tuesday filed by attorney Barbara G. Billet, a media attorney with the Albany law firm of O'Connell and Aronowitz of Albany, representing THE RECORD newspapers and Capital Newspapers."

"Both newspapers are fighting Rensselaer County's move to close the hearing."

"Arguments for and against the proposed closing are scheduled to be presented to State Supreme Court Justice Lawrence Kahn Friday!"

"PLAINTIFF has filed a formal waiver of his right to a closed hearing."

"He has repeatedly said he wants the public to know why he took the actions he did."

"We believe there is just cause for closure," (REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Deputy Attorney Gordon) Mayo told Judge Conway Tuesday.

"Not only could PLAINTIFF say things during the hearing that could affect pending litigation, but PLAINTIFF'S behavior is questionable."

"Mayo said PLAINTIFF suffers from a post-combat stress condition that could result in irrational behavior."

"PLAINTIFF is a Vietnam veteran."

PLAINTIFF said later, "Regarding my mental state, and particularly post-Vietnam stress disorder, I am dismayed that Gordon Mayo would make such personal comments in public!"

"I feel very sorry for the man."

Right out in plain sight of everybody in the world, since this TRANSCRIPT is a public record released to the public through FREEDOM OF INFORMATION, Richard Melius of the RENSSELAER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, a LOBBYING GROUP, and Steven Anderson, the alleged FORCE behind the formation of the RENSSELAER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL threw their left legs in, they threw their left legs out, they threw their left legs in, and then, they shook them all about ...

Which Dr. Leo Hetling of the New York State Department of Health's Division of Environmental Protection instantly recognized as a "symbol of compatability" between him and them, and so .....

He immediately shook loose with the handful of words that these developers wanted him to say on the record that was being transcribed BY A NOTARY PUBLIC: 

COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENTS ARE AGENTS OF THE STATE ....

BUT I CHARACTERIZE THEM AS INDEPENDENT AGENTS ......

THEY HAVE A LOT OF LEEWAY!

AND BINGO!

A "sale" was made ...

And these words above here by New York State Department of Health Division of Environmental Protection Director Dr. Leo Hetling, New York State licensed professional engineer, lead us to one of the more interesting exchanges that took place during the lengthy "DISCIPLINARY HEARING" that REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Attorney Robert A. "Big BOB" Smith, ESQUIRE had told REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Executive John L. Buono the RENSSELAER COUNTY CHARTER empowered Buono to put the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health through .....

So that Buono would then have a "plausible" excuse or pretext with which to "fire" the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer .....

Who had been locked out of his office in the Rensselaer County Office Building since October 12, 1988 ....

The issue of contention at this portion of the hearing had to do with this exact question of HOW the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer was in fact an agent of the State of New York, and not the County of Rensselaer at all ...

Or more exactly, the issue was over EVIDENCE .....

EVIDENCE FROM THE OFFICIAL FILES AND RECORDS OF THE RENSSELAER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WHICH BUONO WANTED DESTROYED ....

Because that evidence cut the legs completely out from underneath Dr. Leo Hetling's specious parroted assertion to the RENSSELAER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL that the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer had "LOTS OF LEEWAY" in how he interpreted the New York State Public Health Law and Sanitary Code .....

And because PLAINTIFF intended to present that documentary evidence to a GRAND JURY in the State of New York pursuant to Section 6 of Article I of the New York State Constitution .....

In support of requesting an inquiry by that GRAND JURY of alleged wilful misconduct in office by Buono, Van Praag and others in the Rensselaer County Department of Health .....

As an AGENT of the State of New York with specific authority in the County of Rensselaer to enforce the provisions of the New York State Public Health Law and Sanitary Code in that County ....

And this by virtue of the fact that the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer was licensed by the State of New York to practice professional engineering anywhere in the State of New York .....

A "privilege" bestowed upon the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer by virtue of his engineering license .....

That could not be stripped from him by the REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Executive in a New York State Civil Service Law section 75 hearing .....

Where the "normal" RULES OF EVIDENCE did not apply ...

And hearsay and "secret" testimony that could not be cross-examined were permissable by ORDER of REPUBLICAN Buono's "EYES AND EARS" in the matter, that being REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Social Services LAWYER Phil Lance, ESQUIRE .....

April 18, 1989

A CONFRONTATION BEFORE THE "EYES AND EARS" OF REPUBLICAN RENSSELAER COUNTY EXECUTIVE JOHN L. BUONO BETWEEN THE RENSSELAER COUNTY ASSOCIATE PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEER AND REPUBLICAN RENSSELAER COUNTY DEPUTY ATTORNEY GORDON MAYO OVER EVIDENCE WHICH SUPPORTS THE ENGINEER'S POSITION AS TO THE "LAWFULNESS" OF ALL OF HIS ACTIONS SINCE ASSUMING THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE RENSSELAER COUNTY ASSOCIATE PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEER IN JUNE OF 1986 ...

MAYO: PLAINTIFF, there was mention made yesterday of a historical review of the Health Department made by an R.P.I student, a M*** L****.

She apparently did some work on a contractual basis for the Health Department, is that correct?

ENGINEER: That would be correct.

I SO STATED!

MAYO: And she was in fact paid county funds to prepare this report, is that correct?

ENGINEER: Her time was paid, yes.

MAYO: Okay.

DO YOU HAVE A COPY OF HER REPORT?

ENGINEER: Indeed I do, Mr. Mayo, yes.

MAYO: Is a copy of the report you have the only copy of the report?

ENGINEER: Yes, it is, Mr. Mayo.

MAYO: And sir, have you been asked to return that report to the COUNTY OF RENSSELAER?

ENGINEER: No, I have not, Mr. Mayo.

MAYO: Mr. Van Praag never asked you to turn a copy of the report back over to him?

ENGINEER: No, he did not, Mr. Mayo.

MAYO: If in fact I was to request that you turn that report over to me ....

Would in fact you have any problems with doing that, sir?

ENGINEER: Yes, I would, Mr. Mayo.

MAYO: WHY IS THAT, SIR?

ENGINEER: I would need to have a clarification.

You're with the County Attorney's Office.

YOU HAVE NO DIRECT RESPONSIBILITIES IN THE RENSSELAER COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT .....

YOU DO NOT SHOW UP ANYWHERE ON ANY ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS ......

AND I WOULD NEED YOUR AUTHORIZATION FROM THE BOARD OF HEALTH TO TAKE POSSESSION OF HEALTH DEPARTMENT DOCUMENTS.

end quotes

To be continued ....

[Livyjr]

And these words above here by New York State Department of Health Division of Environmental Protection Director Dr. Leo Hetling, New York State licensed professional engineer, lead us to one of the more interesting exchanges that took place during the lengthy "DISCIPLINARY HEARING" that REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Attorney Robert A. "Big BOB" Smith, ESQUIRE had told REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Executive John L. Buono the RENSSELAER COUNTY CHARTER empowered Buono to put the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health through .....

So that Buono would then have a "plausible" excuse or pretext with which to "fire" the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer .....

Who had been locked out of his office in the Rensselaer County Office Building since October 12, 1988 ....

The issue of contention at this portion of the hearing had to do with this exact question of HOW the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer was in fact an agent of the State of New York, and not the County of Rensselaer at all ...

Or more exactly, the issue was over EVIDENCE .....

EVIDENCE FROM THE OFFICIAL FILES AND RECORDS OF THE RENSSELAER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WHICH BUONO WANTED DESTROYED ....

Because that evidence cut the legs completely out from underneath Dr. Leo Hetling's specious parroted assertion to the RENSSELAER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL that the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer had "LOTS OF LEEWAY" in how he interpreted the New York State Public Health Law and Sanitary Code .....

And because PLAINTIFF intended to present that documentary evidence to a GRAND JURY in the State of New York pursuant to Section 6 of Article I of the New York State Constitution .....

In support of requesting an inquiry by that GRAND JURY of alleged wilful misconduct in office by Buono, Van Praag and others in the Rensselaer County Department of Health .....

And while we are on this short interlude in here, we have just had some clarification come in off the "wires" from no less a personage in OUR America than Tommy DeLay .....

Who is informing us that any attempts to hold at least REPUBLICAN politicians accountable for misuse of their offices IS A LEFTIST ABUSE OF POWER .....

Which apparently means that section 6 of Article I of the New York State Constitution is a LEFTIST PLOT actually put down on paper for all the candid world to read and heed ...

Which explains why it was necessary for REPUBLICAN lawyer Robert A. "Big BOB" Smith, ESQUIRE, to tell REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Executive John L. Buono to get rid of the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer ...

So as to be able to PROTECT the PEOPLE OF THE STATE of New York from their own Constitution .....

"DeLay tries to fight off GOP challengers"

By ALICIA A. CALDWELL, Associated Press
Last updated: 7:05 p.m., Tuesday, March 7, 2006

SUGAR LAND, Texas -- Rep. Tom DeLay tried to beat back three challengers for the Republican nomination Tuesday in his first election since he was indicted and forced to step aside as House majority leader.

While DeLay was widely expected to win, a close race could foretell a tough contest for the congressman in the fall.

For his part, DeLay said he was confident his constituents would see the campaign-finance case against him for what it is:

"a leftist abuse of power."

The other big Texas primary race Tuesday pitted two little-known Democrats against each other for the right to challenge Republican Gov. Rick Perry in a state where the GOP holds every statewide office.

Perry had little GOP opposition.

Texas voters could see a historic four-way race for governor in November if two independents with considerable political charisma -- Texas Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn and musician and professional wiseacre Kinky Friedman -- gather enough signatures from voters who do not vote in the primary to get onto the fall ballot.

In a third contest Tuesday, Democratic voters in a congressional district stretching from San Antonio to Laredo had to decide a rematch between freshman Rep. Henry Cuellar and Ciro Rodriguez, who served 3 1/2 terms in before losing to Cuellar in 2004 after two recounts and a court challenge.

With no Republican running in the district, the winner will take the seat.

Rodriguez seized on a photo of President Bush affectionately cupping Cuellar's cheeks at the recent State of the Union address to portray Cuellar as a stealth Republican.

DeLay, 58, was indicted last year and is awaiting trial on charges he illegally funneled corporate donations to GOP candidates for the Texas House in 2002.

The Republicans won a majority in the Legislature that year, and then pushed through a congressional redistricting plan engineered by DeLay that sent more Republicans to Washington in 2004.

DeLay has also come under scrutiny over his ties to lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who pleaded guilty to fraud in January and is cooperating in an investigation of influence-peddling on Capitol Hill.

Tuesday's contest was DeLay's first serious primary challenge in the 22 years since he took office.

Tom Campbell, a lawyer who was general counsel for the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration during the first Bush administration, was considered the front-runner among DeLay's Republican challengers, who also included Mike Fjetland and Pat Baig.

Campbell portrayed himself as a man of integrity and branded DeLay "unelectable."

Texas law requires a runoff if no candidate gets more than 50 percent plus one.

While no independent polls were taken for the primary, a poll taken in January by the Houston Chronicle found that DeLay's support in his district was 22 percent.

Only about half of those who voted for him in 2004 said they would do so again.

But Republican strategist Allen Blakemore predicted DeLay would win with at least 60 percent of the vote.

"We have awakened the sleeping giant," Blakemore said.

DeLay, who cast his ballot with his wife, Christine, said he expected Republicans to come out in droves to send a message to his detractors.

"My constituents get it."

"They know what a leftist abuse of power this is," he said of the charges brought by District Attorney Ronnie Earle, a Democrat.

A documentary about Earle's investigation, "The Big Buy: How Tom DeLay Stole Congress," was set for release on Tuesday by a Hollywood producer whose last movie, sponsored by unions, took a critical look at Wal-Mart.

"I welcome it."

"As long as they spell my name correctly," DeLay said.

The Democratic nominee in the fall will be Nick Lampson, a well-financed former congressman ousted from office in 2004 under the new congressional map engineered by DeLay.

Lampson had no primary opponent Tuesday.

The state's top election official predicted only 13 percent of the 12.7 million registered voters would cast primary ballots, so Strayhorn and Friedman should not have much trouble finding the 45,000-plus voters they each need to sign their petitions over the next two months.

Strayhorn, who calls herself "one tough grandma," got elected comptroller as a Republican but is running for governor as an independent, avoiding a primary against the popular Perry.

She is the mother of White House press secretary Scott McClellan.

Friedman is a cigar-chomping cowboy musician whose backup group on the road was called the Texas Jewboys.

At least two veterans of the Iraq war are running for Congress from Texas.

David T. Harris, a Democrat, is expected to take on Rep. Joe Barton in November, and Van Taylor, a Republican, sought the nomination Tuesday to go up against Democratic Rep. Chet Edwards in the Crawford-area district that includes Bush's ranch.

------

Associated Press writer Kelley Shannon in Austin contributed to this report.

[Livyjr]

April 18, 1989

A CONFRONTATION BEFORE THE "EYES AND EARS" OF REPUBLICAN RENSSELAER COUNTY EXECUTIVE JOHN L. BUONO BETWEEN THE RENSSELAER COUNTY ASSOCIATE PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEER AND REPUBLICAN RENSSELAER COUNTY DEPUTY ATTORNEY  GORDON MAYO OVER EVIDENCE WHICH SUPPORTS THE ENGINEER'S POSITION AS TO THE "LAWFULNESS" OF ALL OF HIS ACTIONS SINCE ASSUMING THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE RENSSELAER COUNTY ASSOCIATE PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEER IN JUNE OF 1986 ...

MAYO: PLAINTIFF, there was mention made yesterday of a historical review of the Health Department made by an R.P.I student, a M*** L****.

She apparently did some work on a contractual basis for the Health Department, is that correct?

ENGINEER: That would be correct.

I SO STATED!

CONTEXT is everything, of course ...

And so ...

I must provide some here, so that the SITUATION REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Deputy Attorney Gordon Mayo had gotten himself into in front of REPUBLICAN John L. Buono's "EYES AND EARS", not to mention the F.B.I. and all the TV cameras, and the newspapermen ......

And WE, THE PEOPLE of Rensselaer County .....

Who were watching Gordon Mayo, ESQUIRE, the Deputy Rensselaer County Attorney allegedly in charge of defending the Rensselaer County Department of Health against any lawsuits make a fool of himself ...

Becomes more clear in here .....

Along with its relevance to what transpired in the federal District Court for the Northen District of New York in this matter in March of 2005 ....

Because this HISTORICAL REVIEW that Mayo is asking or pressuring PLAINTIFF to provide him with on April 18, 1989 came right from the very files that Mayo himself would have had to use to properly defend the Rensselaer County Department of Health against any litigation that might be initiated against it ...

And so .....

Had Mayo been doing his job, instead of the HOKEY-POKEY, he would have been as familiar with these documents as was the PLAINTIFF ...

And like the PLAINTIFF, Mayo would have had HIS OWN BOUND COPY ...

That would have been identical to the one that PLAINTIFF had ...

SUCH ARE THE RULES OF EVIDENCE IN A COURT OF LAW .....

And so ....

The fact that Mayo was trying to get possession of this SOLE BOUND COPY in PLAINTIFF's possession spoke volumes to all of us in the room ...

Including the F.B.I. ......

Who knew at this time in 1989 that PLAINTIFF had been locked out of his office in the Rensselaer County Office Building since October 12, 1988 .....

And that most of his files and evidence had already been confiscated and destroyed ......

Which process was over-seen in part by REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Deputy Attorney Gordon Mayo .....

And so ....

[Livyjr]

RENSSELAER COUNTY ASSOCIATE PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEER

This is a professional position involving responsibility for the planning, direction and supervision of the environmental health program of the Rensselaer County Department of Health.

The work involves providing advice and guidance to local officials and the general public in regard to environmental health problems and the measures necessary for improvements and compliance with legal requirements.

An incumbent provides leadership in the promotion of public health through application of environmental practices.

In addition, an employee is responsible for the enforcement of the provisions of the Public Health Law and local and State Sanitary Codes in relation to environmental matters.

TYPICAL WORK ACTIVITIES

Makes environmental health investigations of outbreaks of disease;

Represents the Department of Health on ALL matters and problems related to environmental health;

Prepares technical reports including recommendations;

Formulates public health engineering and environmental policies.

Approved Civil Service Commission, December 13, 1979

April 18, 1989

A CONFRONTATION BEFORE THE "EYES AND EARS" OF REPUBLICAN RENSSELAER COUNTY EXECUTIVE JOHN L. BUONO BETWEEN THE RENSSELAER COUNTY ASSOCIATE PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEER AND REPUBLICAN RENSSELAER COUNTY DEPUTY ATTORNEY  GORDON MAYO OVER EVIDENCE WHICH SUPPORTS THE ENGINEER'S POSITION AS TO THE "LAWFULNESS" OF ALL OF HIS ACTIONS SINCE ASSUMING THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE RENSSELAER COUNTY ASSOCIATE PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEER IN JUNE OF 1986 ...

ENGINEER: I would need to have a clarification.

You're with the County Attorney's Office.

YOU HAVE NO DIRECT RESPONSIBILITIES IN THE RENSSELAER COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT .....

YOU DO NOT SHOW UP ANYWHERE ON ANY ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS ......

AND I WOULD NEED YOUR AUTHORIZATION FROM THE BOARD OF HEALTH TO TAKE POSSESSION OF HEALTH DEPARTMENT DOCUMENTS.

And here ...

An astute off-screen observer has commented to me that it looks like GORDON MAYO, ESQUIRE, the REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Deputy Attorney alleged to be charged with defending the Rensselaer County Department of Health in a court of law in the event of a challenge of its policies .....

IS ACTAULLY PROSECUTING HIS OWN EXPERT WITNESS .....

Whose clearly-defined DUTY is to set those policies in the first place ....

At least as those DUTIES are defined in the OFFICIAL Rensselaer County paperwork establishing the position of Associate Public Health Engineer in the Rensselaer County Health District .....

And that astutue off-screen observer is CORRECT ....

MAYO was in fact conducting a PROSECUTION .....

ALONG WITH A COVER-UP .....

And as an ATTORNEY in the State of New York ...

Mayo was above and beyond the law himself ...

So that in this PROSECUTION .....

WHERE THE NORMAL RULES OF EVIDENCE DID NOT APPLY .....

Mayo was absolutely free to use all of the "tools" of the lawyer's trade to PROTECT CORRUPTION in the State of New York ...

Those being subornation of perjury, withholding and suppression and destruction of evidence, intimidation of witnesses ......

Actually, anything and everything needed to completely BLACKEN a man's professional reputation ....

And to thereby financially CRIPPLE him for the rest of his life ...

AS AN EXAMPLE TO ANYONE ELSE WHO MIGHT TRY TO TACKLE CORRUPTION IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK .....

And by this TACTIC, these corrupt public officials up here are able to defeat the provisions of Section 6 of Article I of the New York State Constitution ...

By making sure that no witnesses of any repute can come forward to a GRAND JURY in the State of New York with evidence of corruption .....

And since it is a sure-fire tactic .....

Well ...

Work that one out for yourselves ...

And so ....

This post has been edited by Livyjr: Mar 9 2006, 08:39 AM

[Livyjr]

And here ...

An astute off-screen observer has commented to me that it looks like GORDON MAYO, ESQUIRE, the REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Deputy Attorney alleged to be charged with defending the Rensselaer County Department of Health in a court of law in the event of a challenge of its policies .....

IS ACTAULLY PROSECUTING HIS OWN EXPERT WITNESS .....

Whose clearly-defined DUTY is to set those policies in the first place ....

At least as those DUTIES are defined in the OFFICIAL Rensselaer County paperwork establishing the position of Associate Public Health Engineer in the Rensselaer County Health District .....

And that astutue off-screen observer is CORRECT ....

MAYO was in fact conducting a PROSECUTION .....

ALONG WITH A COVER-UP .....

And as an ATTORNEY in the State of New York ...

Mayo was above and beyond the law himself ...

And here ...

A reader has asked me whatever became of REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Attorney Robert A. "Big BOB" Smith .....

And that answer is that "Big BOB" is alive and well ...

And is likely one of the most powerful men in Rensselaer County .....

If not the State of New York ...

And yes ...

"Big BOB" Smith is still the Rensselaer County Attorney ......

Just as he was back on October 12, 1988, when PLAINTIFF was locked out of the Rensselaer County Office Building pursuant to "Big Bob" Smith's "legal advice" that the Rensselaer County Charter gave REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Executive John L. Buono the authority to do so ...

And as "Big BOB" was on August 22, 2001 ...

When the "PSYCHIATRIC TAKE-DOWN" went down .....

And on August 22, 2001, "Big BOB" Smith was also the LAWYER for the Town of Poestenkill Planning Board, as well ...

And so .....

With respect to "land development" in Rensselaer County, by virtue of these various "LEGAL" positions that "Big BOB" holds down in Rensselaer County ...

He pretty much has a LOCk on who gets to do what ...

And where ...

And so ...

THAT IS POWER ...

In an economy where land is money ...

And so ....

And back in 1989, when all of this business was going down with MAYO's prosecution of the PLAINTIFF, local news reports also gave out that Robert A. "Big BOB" Smith was some high "officer" in the Rensselaer County Bar Association WITH RESPONSIBILITY FOR LAWYER'S ETHICS IN RENSSELAER COUNTY ......

Which of course would include the "ethics" of Gordon Mayo in conducting this PROSECUTION of his own expert witness so as to discredit him as a witness for Rensselaer County in several lawsuits that were pending against Rensselaer County in connection with the renewed enforcement of the New York State Public Health Law in Rensselaer County .....

And the "ethics" of John L. Buono's "EYES AND EARS", who was a LAWYER .....

And the "ethics" of the Chief Assistant Rensselaer County District Attorney who prosecuted PLAINTIFF on several false criminal charges in a vain attempt to convict PLAINTIFF of criminal charges in order to have his engineering license stripped from him on moral fitness grounds ...

As well as to protect Gary James "Jimmy Dawg" Horton, who had run the PLAINTIFF down in a hit-and-run assault on December 29, 1989 ......

And the "ethics" of any honest attorney in Rensselaer County who might think of lending PLAINTIFF some aid or assistance, as well ......

And so ...

As was said, "Big BOB" Smith is indeed alive and well .....

As well as being one of the most powerful men in eastern New York State ...

If not the whole state, itself ....

And so .....

[Livyjr]

"Industry finds an ally in regulatory battles - Bush administration undermines state efforts on consumer standards"

By STEPHEN LABATON, New York Times
First published: Friday, March 10, 2006

WASHINGTON -- Supporters and detractors call it the "silent tort reform" movement, and it has quietly and quickly been gaining ground.

Across Washington, federal agencies that supervise everything from auto safety to medicine labeling have waged a powerful counterattack against active state prosecutors and trial lawyers.

In the last three decades, the state courts and legislatures have been vital avenues for critics of Washington deregulation.

Federal policy-makers are now striking back.

Using a variety of largely unheralded regulations, officials appointed by President Bush have moved in recent months to neutralize the states.

At the urging of industry groups, the federal agencies have inserted clauses in new rules that block trial lawyers and state attorneys general from applying higher standards in state laws and those in state court precedents.

Last month, for instance, the bedding industry persuaded the Consumer Product Safety Commission to adopt a rule over the objections of safety groups that would limit the ability of consumers to win damages under state laws for mattresses that catch fire.

The move was the first time in its 33-year history that the commission voted to limit the ability of consumers to bring cases in state courts.

In January, the Food and Drug Administration approved a drug label rule that pre-empts state laws.

The rule will make it easier for pharmaceutical makers to prevail in consumer lawsuits that could have been brought under state laws more favorable to victims.

Pending before the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration are proposals announced last year by the agency that would pre-empt state laws on the safety standards for car roofs and seat positions.

A third rule proposed by the traffic safety agency would preclude states from adopting more stringent fuel emission standards for light trucks and sport utility vehicles.

This week, the Office of Thrift Supervision, a unit of the Treasury Department, successfully challenged a law recently adopted in Montgomery County, Md., a suburb of Washington, that was intended to reduce discriminatory lending practices.

Congress has occasionally encouraged the effort.

On Wednesday the House of Representatives, at the urging of the White House and the food industry, adopted a food safety measure that would prevent the states from imposing higher standards than those set by the FDA.

The bill, which faces an uncertain future in the Senate, was strongly opposed by the states.

They say it would undermine scores of stringent state laws and regulations.

The moves in recent months magnify the more limited action taken earlier in the Bush administration to pre-empt the states in consumer cases.

The Comptroller of the Currency, another unit of the Treasury Department, has repeatedly moved at the urging of large banks to block enforcement of tougher lending laws in New York, California and elsewhere.

The trend alarms consumer and victims' rights groups and some legal scholars.

They say it is only unfair to victims, gives short shrift to thoughtful state lawmakers and judges and eliminates an important check on inept federal regulators.

State prosecutors and state lawmakers have also lodged objections.

Attorneys general in 16 states, including New York, California and Massachusetts, recently sent a letter to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration saying its effort to pre-empt roof safety rules removes a vital check on federal standards.

Administration officials, industry representatives and their scholarly supporters disagree.

They say that overzealous state regulators and vexatious lawsuits require a federal response that sets uniform national standards.

Michael S. Greve, the John G. Searle scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and director of the research organization's Federalism Project, said that what some consider "insufficiently demanding standards, too many people think of as outrageously demanding."

"Many people think that too-high standards imposed by the states hamper research and innovation."

The official White House view has been that the federal government knows better than the states.

"The Supreme Court has frequently recognized that federal agencies, rather than courts, are often in the best position to make this determination about what best protects public safety," said Alex Conant, a spokesman at the Office of Management and Budget, part of the White House.

[Livyjr]

And here ...

A reader has asked me whatever became of REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Attorney Robert A. "Big BOB" Smith .....

And that answer is that "Big BOB" is alive and well ...

And is likely one of the most powerful men in Rensselaer County .....

If not the State of New York ...

And yes ...

"Big BOB" Smith is still the Rensselaer County Attorney ......

And back in 1989, when all of this business was going down with MAYO's prosecution of the PLAINTIFF, local news reports also gave out that Robert A. "Big BOB" Smith was some high "officer" in the Rensselaer County Bar Association WITH RESPONSIBILITY FOR LAWYER'S ETHICS IN RENSSELAER COUNTY ......

Which of course would include the "ethics" of Gordon Mayo in conducting this PROSECUTION of his own expert witness so as to discredit him as a witness for Rensselaer County in several lawsuits that were pending against Rensselaer County in connection with the renewed enforcement of the New York State Public Health Law in Rensselaer County .....

And the "ethics" of John L. Buono's "EYES AND EARS", who was a LAWYER .....

And the "ethics" of the Chief Assistant Rensselaer County District Attorney who prosecuted PLAINTIFF on several false criminal charges in a vain attempt to convict PLAINTIFF of criminal charges in order to have his engineering license stripped from him on moral fitness grounds ...

As well as to protect Gary James "Jimmy Dawg" Horton, who had run the PLAINTIFF down in a hit-and-run assault on December 29, 1989 ......

And the "ethics" of any honest attorney in Rensselaer County who might think of lending PLAINTIFF some aid or assistance, as well ......

And so ...

ABOUT HALT

Founded in 1978, HALT – An Organization of Americans for Legal Reform, a nonprofit, nonpartisan public interest group of more than 50,000 members, is the nation's largest and oldest legal reform organization.

Dedicated to the principle that all Americans should be able to handle their legal affairs simply, affordably and equitably, HALT's Reform Projects challenge the legal establishment to improve access and reduce costs in our civil justice system at both the state and federal levels.

Since 1978, HALT has provided self-help books and public educational materials to help citizens understand the legal process and better manage their legal affairs.

Its self-help series includes Using a Lawyer... And What To Do If Things Go Wrong, Do-it-Yourself Law, The Easy Way to Probate, Small Claims Court, Real Estate, Trusts, If You Want to Sue a Lawyer: A Directory of Legal Malpractice Attorneys, and Everyday Contracts.

2006 Lawyer Discipline Report Card

HALT produced the 2006 Lawyer Discipline Report Card to assess whether states have taken any meaningful action to improve the lawyer discipline system since our last Report Card in 2002.

Unfortunately, few states showed any improvement, and many states' systems actually saw their grades decline!

"Consumers today are still not adequately protected by state systems that investigate only a fraction of cases, almost never impose sanctions, attempt to intimidate and silence victims, hide misconduct behind a veil of secrecy, and often take years to process cases," stated HALT Associate Counsel Suzanne Blonder.

"After years of ignored calls for reform by our organization, the American Bar Association and ethics scholars around the country, the situation is not getting any better."

HALT graded lawyer discipline systems in six categories:

Adequacy of Discipline --- The most critical category produced the weakest grades.

Analyzing the ABA's most recent statistics, HALT found that only six states - Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Hampshire, West Virginia and Wisconsin - review every grievance, while the average state investigates only 58 percent of the complaints it receives.

And unfortunately, investigations rarely result in discipline.

A whopping 24 states impose formal public sanctions - disbarments, suspensions and public reprimands - in just five percent of investigated cases.

In the average jurisdiction, only 7.8 percent of investigations yield public discipline.

Almost half of the sanctions take the form of private discipline, rendered behind closed doors.

"A secret reprimand amounts to little more than a slap on the wrist," explained HALT Associate Counsel Suzanne Blonder.

"Because it is so lenient, it fails to deter unethical conduct and because it is done in secret, it fails to warn consumers about which attorneys to avoid."

Publicity and Responsiveness --- While disciplinary bodies are not publicized in courthouses and local media as much as they were four years ago, their online resources have dramatically improved since 2002.

Today, most disciplinary Web sites offer downloadable complaint forms, information about upcoming hearings and clear explanations about the disciplinary process - features that most states lacked four years ago.

Unfortunately, telephone services have not seen as much progress.

California is one of the nation's worst offenders, forcing consumers to wade through a complex and time-consuming automated system before they can obtain information from Bar staff.

Openness --- Attorney discipline continues to be shrouded in secrecy.

Nine states - Alabama, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Maryland, Nevada, Utah and Wyoming - prohibit the public from attending disciplinary hearings.

Hamstrung by rules that require them to keep the process secret, officials in the vast majority of states refuse to release information about attorneys' discipline histories.

Oregon and Arizona have always been the exceptions to the rule, providing consumers with complete records, including whether a grievance was ever filed against a lawyer.

After HALT submitted comments to New Hampshire in 2004, the state adopted new rules which now allow disciplinary officials in that state to release complete disciplinary histories.

Fairness --- Disciplinary systems still utilize biased procedures.

The most egregious - Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Iowa, Mississippi, South Dakota, Texas and Utah - prohibit consumers from disclosing information until the disciplinary body imposes public discipline in the case.

New Jersey and Tennessee are the only two states that significantly improved in this area.

At HALT's urging, supreme courts in both states struck down their gag rules as unconstitutional.

Public Participation --- On most hearing panels just one out of every three members is a non-lawyer.

Six states - California, Hawaii, Kansas, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee -do not allow a single layperson to hear evidence in disciplinary proceedings.

Idaho is the only jurisdiction in the country where non-lawyers comprise the majority on hearing committees.

Promptness --- Shamefully, 18 states - Alaska, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, South Carolina, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin - stonewalled, refusing to release information about their timeliness to the ABA.

Of the states that did report on the pace of their case processing, the average jurisdiction took nine months just to bring charges against an attorney and an additional five months to impose sanctions.

Louisiana, the nation's most inefficient disciplinary body, took an astonishing 45 months - nearly four years! - to file formal charges in the average case.

"American legal consumers deserve a system that investigates promptly, deliberates openly, and weeds out unethical or incompetent attorneys," stated Turner.

"Until there is meaningful reform, the legal profession has only itself to blame for the widespread public mistrust that mars every attorney's reputation."

CONTACT HALT

Email: HALT@HALT.org
Phone: 1-888-FOR-HALT
(202) 887-8255
Fax: (202) 887-9699
1612 K ST NW
STE 510
WASHINGTON, DC 20006

Lawyer Discipline REPORT CARD

What’s New Since 2002: New York’s standing remains abysmal, primarily because of the state’s confusing, bifurcated system.

Consumers tell us that they are unsure where to turn when they wish to report a lawyer’s misconduct in New York.

About New York’s Lawyer Discipline System:

Unlike every other state in the country, New York is divided by county into several distinct lawyer discipline agencies.

The First Department regulates attorneys working in Manhattan and the Bronx; the Second Department, Districts 2 and 11, governs lawyers with offices in Brooklyn, Queens and Staten Island; the Second Department, District 9 regulates attorneys working in the Hudson Valley; the Second Department, District 9 governs lawyers with offices on Long Island; the Third Department regulates attorneys working in the state’s western counties; and the Fourth Department governs lawyers with offices in the state’s northern counties.

Because HALT has conducted a state-by-state comparison, we have averaged the grades for each disciplinary body and produced one set of results for the state of New York.

Ranked 36th in the nation overall.

The average attorney discipline body in New York imposes public sanctions in less than three percent of investigated cases.*

One of only 13 states in the country that applies the fair “preponderance of the evidence” standard for proving misconduct.

The rest of the states require the far more onerous “clear and convincing” standard.

Four out of every five members of the average New York disciplinary hearing panel are lawyers; non-lawyers have only a token role in the decision-making process in most New York disciplinary departments.*

* According to the most recent statistics from the American Bar Association, which derive from the 2004 ABA Survey on Lawyer Discipline Systems. Analysis based on the average disciplinary body in New York.

Adequacy of Discipline Imposed - D
Publicity and Responsiveness - C+
Openness of the Process - D+
Fairness of Disciplinary Procedures - B
Public Participation - D
Promptness - C
Overall Grade - D+

NEW YORK
Overall Grade: D+

Compiled by An Organization of Americans for Legal Reform

[Livyjr]

2006 Lawyer Discipline Report Card

HALT produced the 2006 Lawyer Discipline Report Card to assess whether states have taken any meaningful action to improve the lawyer discipline system since our last Report Card in 2002.

Unfortunately, few states showed any improvement, and many states' systems actually saw their grades decline!

"Consumers today are still not adequately protected by state systems that investigate only a fraction of cases, almost never impose sanctions, attempt to intimidate and silence victims, hide misconduct behind a veil of secrecy, and often take years to process cases," stated HALT Associate Counsel Suzanne Blonder.

"After years of ignored calls for reform by our organization, the American Bar Association and ethics scholars around the country, the situation is not getting any better."

And here we are ......

SILENT TORT REFORM, it is called, euphemistically .....

IT JUST GOES AWAY .....

What was once a Constitutional right of citizens in the State of New York has now been BARGAINED AWAY, by lawyers and politicians .....

BEHIND CLOSED DOORS ....

And so ......

Back in 1988 and 1989, when all of this was going down in Rensselaer County in the State of New York, no one, including myself, could have conceived that in 2005 and 2006, there would be such a thing as this internet forum, and fortuitously, I believe anyway, all of these various individuals in Rensselaer County and the State of New York who spoke so openly and freely on the record, people like REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Attorney Robert A. "Big BOB" Smith, for example ....

Were induced to do so by a belief in their own invincibility .....

And so ...

Their words are preserved for all time to come ...

Or however long this virtual paper in here lasts, anyway ....

And so .....

WE, THE PEOPLE get a perhaps rare opportunity to glimpse exactly what SILENT TORT REFORM is actually all about ...

Which can be classified simply as CLOSING THE DOORS OF JUSTICE to us, the common citizens of OUR America .....

Unless we have the GEETUS to buy our way in ...

In which case, you are not a common citizen like me, anyway .....

And so ....

[Livyjr]

And here we are ......

SILENT TORT REFORM, it is called, euphemistically .....

IT JUST GOES AWAY .....

What was once a Constitutional right of citizens in the State of New York has now been BARGAINED AWAY, by lawyers and politicians .....

BEHIND CLOSED DOORS ....

And so ......

"Kudos to LeBrun for mining column"

Letter to the Editor
Albany, New York Times Union
First published: Friday, March 10, 2006

A very sincere "thank you" is due both Fred LeBrun and the Times Union for his March 3 column on the state Department of Environmental Conservation's disgraceful processing of mining applications.

This environmental sore thumb is even worse than Mr. LeBrun has described it.

In 1991, our Legislature quietly amended the state's mining law.

Usually, DEC then amends its rules and regulations (including a public hearing) to implement such legislation.

Instead, the department issued a Technical Guidance Memo TGM MLR 92-2, without public review.

Yes, here in East Nassau where mining of any sort is banned, we could rely solely on our zoning, but if we wanted to challenge any of the hearing's findings later in court, we'd be blocked, having not exhausted our administrative remedies.

Just imagine our village budget process.

Obviously, any zoning challenges should be taken up first.

This is not "environmental conservation."

I would ask the public, my fellow municipal officials, governmental and environmental organizations, our state legislators and the governor to see this shameful DEC policy brought to a close.

ROBERT L. HENRICKSON
Mayor
Village of East Nassau

[Livyjr]

I have said many times now how thankful I am to be able to communicate with America and the world on this forum ...

As a disabled Viet Nam veteran living out in the country ....

And after posting this "hacked-up" Letter to the Editor above here of Village of East Hassau Mayor Robert L. Henrickson published in the March 10, 2006 edition of the Albany, New York Times Union newspaper .....

I want to say one more time that from my perspective as a disabled veteran living up here in proximity to this Village of East Nassau that like Muhlenburg County, Kentucky, is going to be torn down to its roots and hauled away, this time by the Callanan Company out of Dublin, Ireland, instead of the Peabody Coal Company .....

This forum is a blessing to a free and democratic people ...

Who like Mayor Henrickson ...

Are trying to see that OUR Constitution and the laws of the State of New York which derive from it are carried out not only in spirit, but to the letter as well .....

Which is in full accordance with the provisions of the OATH OF OFFICE which ALL of our public officers in the State of New York have to swear to, at the beginning of each year, so long as they hold public office ....

That letter of Mayor Henrickson in the Times Union was a "chop-job" .....

Where some assistant editor, or censor at the Albany, New York Times Union exised paragraphs out of that letter ...

And so made it largely meaningless to the general public ...

Who should be hearing ALL sides of this issue ......

But are not ...

Because of CENSORING at the Albany, New York Times Union .....

I myself have a bit of a problem with the newspaper "CLIPPING" the public statements of a public official in this manner .....

But that is that ...

I don't dwell on it overlong ...

Because it would be a complete and total waste of time to do so ...

The Albany, New York Times Union has been playing this same game for some long time now, "CLIPPING" and "CHOPPING" public statements by certain public officials on the wrong side of an issue .....

And so ....

To me, this forum is indeed a blessing ...

And I just wish to make that point known ....

For posterity ...

And so .....

[Livyjr]

And here it has to be said that Village of East Nassau Mayor Robert L. Henrickson is likely one of the more knowledgable citizens in the State of New York when it comes to this issue of extractive mining in the State of New York .....

As he was a direct participant in two landmark mining cases in the State of New York .....

One of those being the proposal by Lane Construction Company of Connecticut to rip down Snake mountain in the Village of East Nassau .....

A "proposal" imposed on the PEOPLE of East Nassau by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation .....

Which agency, after a lengthy HEARING where Lane is said to have spent almost $1,000,000, saw its "APPROVAL" go up in smoke at the hands of a determined group of well-prepared common citizens .....

Who were led in their success against this rogue state agency and the well-stocked coffers of the extractive mining industry in the State of New York .....

By Mayor Robert L. Henrickson .....

And his knowledge of the law .....

And so .....

[Livyjr]

And with that said ...

One other point needs to made in here with respect to Mayor Henrickson's knowledge of the law ....

A point which the Albany, New York Times Union "walks around" .....

Without comment ...

Is that back in December of 1995 ...

When the Lane Hearings were on-going .....

Mayor Henrickson DID ATTEMPT to challenge the CONSTITUTIONALITY of this very Technical Guidance Memo TGM MLR 92-2, which was "issued" without public review ......

And that attempt was rebuffed ...

By a New York State Supreme Court Justice ...

Who told Mayor Henrickson, in front of witnesses .....

That this judge WAS NOT INTO THAT "JUDICIAL ACTIVISM" BUSINESS ....

And so ....

The judge was going to rule that there was no "justiciable controversy" that was "ripe for adjudication" .....

And so it was to be ...

In other words, or in more simple words, CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGES BY CITIZENS ABOUT TO BE AFFECTED BY THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION'S POLICY OF IGNORING LOCAL ZONING SCHEDULES AND REGULATIONS WHEN ISSUING MINING PERMITS IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK WILL NOT BE HEARD BY THE COURT .....

They will be turned away instead ....

On the grounds that they are not timely ....

Which means that they can never be heard ...

And so ......

While these statements by this judge were public ...

The Albany, New York Times Union has chosen to stay mum on the issue ...

And so .....

[Livyjr]

"Public's right to know needs nonstop vigilance"

By CHRISTINE TATUM

Albany, New York Times Union
First published: Sunday, March 12, 2006

If my career in journalism has taught me anything, it is that government seldom tells the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Admit a mistake, much less abject failure?

Right.

People -- especially those entrenched in "the system" -- are more concerned about saving their jobs, their money, their personal and political connections, their reputations, their time.

Catch them if you can.

The cover-ups and outright lies don't surprise me -- but the degree to which Americans are willing to tolerate them does.

This week -- observed in newsrooms across the country as "Sunshine Week" -- marks the 40th anniversary of the Freedom of Information Act, the first law giving Americans the right to access federal government records.

FOI, as it is commonly called, is one of the most powerful tools Americans have to supervise the inner workings of their government.

The act has been revised several times, but its gist remains the same: The public benefits when government conducts its business in the open.

Because of FOI:

Environmental records have been released, exposing the degree to which companies have polluted land and water.

Vietnam War veterans have learned about their exposure to Agent Orange.

Vice President Spiro Agnew resigned in 1973 amid corruption charges.

The Food and Drug Administration released studies about aspirin and Reye's syndrome that resulted in mandatory warning labels.

The Justice Department was ordered to pay $355,000 in legal fees in a case related to the FBI's crime lab and post 53,000 pages of related information on its Web site.

This is the kind of accountability that makes journalists weep with joy.

But make no mistake: FOI is not about journalists' rights.

This remarkable piece of legislation helps make America the world's strongest democracy.

It is about the right all citizens have to know what their government is doing in their name.

Yet FOI has been undermined seriously in recent years and is truly under attack.

The Bush administration has led the charge -- and it uses the "war on terror" to justify its actions.

As recently noted by the American Society of Newspaper Editors:

"Using the terror attacks of 9/11 as a reason to turn essential American values upside down, the federal government refused to name prisoners being held at Guantanamo Bay; dragged its feet at requests to turn over documents to the 9/11 commission; and used the Patriot Act to issue secret search warrants."

Then there was the revelation in February that federal intelligence and security agencies for almost a decade have removed more than 55,000 pages of declassified historic documents from public access.

After contending with the wrath of angry historians, Allen Weinstein, the nation's chief archivist, had the good sense to declare a moratorium on the removal of more documents until an audit is conducted to determine whether any of those records actually needs to be secret.

Of course, none of this should come as any surprise.

The first sign that the FOIA was in major trouble came in October 2001, when then-Attorney General John Ashcroft instructed federal agencies to look for legal grounds on which to reject FOI requests rather than to presume the public was entitled to the information it sought.

In January 2003, the administration asked the Supreme Court to narrow FOI significantly.

The case hasn't been heard.

The administration's non-release policy and repeated claims of executive privilege and "national security" have had a profound impact.

The number of classified documents rose from 8.6 million in 2001 to 15.6 million in 2004, according to the Information Security Oversight Office, a division of the National Archives and Records Administration.

The number of declassified documents fell from 100 million to 28.4 million.

Don't think that this cavalier behavior at the federal level doesn't have a trickle-down effect on the halls of state and local government.

One Colorado judge cited lack of funding and staffing as justification for barring public access to domestic and probate case court files.

The judge ordered that such files be released only to parties in a case or to attorneys of record.

So much for thoughtful inspection of judges' fairness and competency while handling divorces and wills.

But, there are bright spots in the battle for open government.

Another Colorado judge ordered the Denver Police Department to release internal-affairs documents concerning the discipline of two officers involved in the department's "spy files" case.

People wanting to know if they are among the 51,000 spied on by the Denver Intelligence Bureau since 1953 may now find out.

The floodgates were opened largely because CopWatch, a citizen group that monitors police activities, refused to take no for answer.

I always close my talks with this quote from Abraham Lincoln:

"Let the people know the facts, and the country will be safe."

Christine Tatum writes for The Denver Post. Her e-mail address is ctatum@denverpost.com.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

What will you do to uphold the public's right to know how its government operates?

If you're like most Americans, absolutely nothing.

But you're not like most Americans, are you?

Here's what you can do:

Learn how FOI works and use it.

Visit the Society of Professional Journalists' Web site at http://www.spj.org/opendoors for a primer about the act and an alphabetized list of public records that can be requested.

For example, consider looking into the campus crime rate reported by the colleges to which you're thinking about sending your children.

Or ask to look at tax assessor records that affect your home and neighborhood.

You'll find a template that helps you craft your requests in appropriate government-speak at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, http://www.rcfp.org.

Pay attention.

Government is constantly dreaming up exemptions that allow it to shield records from public review.

Write to your elected officials, insisting that they reject such exemptions.