solano county supervisors are aidding/abetting a known ECONOMIC TERRORIST
Posted in the Solano County Forum
#2 Feb 25, 2013
5 rooster ordinance pass by county supervisors
#3 Feb 26, 2013
#5 Feb 26, 2013
HISTORY LESSON ON ANIMAL RIGHTS AND TYRANNY
Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
Hitler's Nazi Germany was marked by a preoccupation with "animal rights." Hitler's Third Reich passed numerous animal protection laws, such as declaring that shoeing a horse was cruel, and declared an end to dissection. This reduced Mans status to that of animals, and justified treating men as animals. Before the war was ended, the Nazis stepped up experiments on the best way to castrate a Jew without anesthesia, and turned countless men, women and children into lampshades and soap. These Nazi actions were justifiable by their belief that it was possible to "...increase the moral standing of animals and decrease the moral standing of people, thus integrating human characteristics to animals... elevating animal life to the level of cult worship...which would lead to the spiritual and ideological changes necessary... for a new national identity."
The real political objective of animal rights is to eliminate "unalienable rights," and to make way for all these other supposed rights and pervert our Bill of Rights to the point where only the perverted are protected. A favored socialist strategy is to separate the population from common sense and its own laws by bringing about chaos, clouding real issues, then bring about change through gradual legislation from within. Ruling by planned crisis is the favored method, as this short-circuits the brains ability to think and reason clearly about true issues. This planned chaos (such as animal cruelty,puppy mills and cock fighting) is designed to rob the nation of its creativity and life force, degrade human existence, make everything seem uncontrollable and bad, which then allows the introduction of a tyrannical form of government.
The Gestapo was first used by Goring to do away with political opponents. A "temporary" state of emergency was declared after the Reichstag fire, but was never rescinded. This allowed the Gestapo to enforce conformity at every level of society. Block wardens monitored their neighbors, and children were recruited to inform on their teachers and parents. The Gestapo was authorized to hold people in "protective custody" which was really arbitrary arrest and imprisonment. At first, only political prisoners were taken under the guise of "preventive protective custody" and placed in SS-controlled concentration camps; later, anyone was hunted down and taken who was deemed to not fit in with SS and Gestapo vision of a perfect Aryan society.("SS" came from Schutzstaffel which means "elite guard").
Today we see this same conduct and set of circumstances appearing in some of our civic institutions. The only way for one man to achieve dominion and control over another is through the darkness of IGNORANCE. Lets get educated about our own laws, so that tyranny cannot gain a foothold in America, and so that we can once again have happiness and good government flowing forth as paraphrased by all our early education laws. We do have some beautiful laws. Lets learn them, and insist that our civic institutions obey them for the good of our nation. God Bless America.
-Compiled by: Janet I. Fischer and S.A. Martin
17954-A S. Euclid Ave.
Chino, CA 91710
#6 Feb 26, 2013
2nd trail over a chicken?
Jury selection begins in Solano County rooster trial
Jury selection got under way on Monday in Solano County Superior Court for a Dixon man facing a retrial on a pair of misdemeanor charges related to complaints about his roosters.
Neftali Rivera Sr. has been charged with misdemeanor disturbing the peace as well as maintaining a public nuisance on his rural Clark Road property. The charges stemmed from complaints from neighbors irked by the amount of crowing coming from Rivera's property between January and February of 2011.
In December, a 12-person jury heard testimony from neighbors, code compliance officers and saw numerous photos of Rivera's property and audio recordings made of the crowing. The jury did not reach a unanimous verdict and a mistrial was declared.
Rivera has lodged multiple civil lawsuits against Solano County since the Solano County Board of Supervisors approved an ordinance in April 2011 limiting property owners to four roosters without an exemption from the county agricultural department. The ordinance was in response to concerns over cockfighting and noise.
In April, Rivera and his son, Neftali C. Rivera Jr., filed a civil lawsuit in Solano County Superior Court that claimed they purchased their 80-acre parcel of land in 2001 with the intent to raise chickens. For about a decade, the pair raised "chickens for hobby, pleasure, show, poultry, eggs and for sale."
The pair claimed that their ownership of 60 roosters and 40 hens complied with the then-existing land-use regulations permitting up to 100 roosters, or "crowing fowl." The outcome of that lawsuit is still pending.
The trial is expected to continue today in the Fairfield courtroom of Judge Alesia Jones.
#8 Jan 14, 2015
DOMESTIC TERRORISM IS AGAINST THE LAW
California Constitution, Article 1, section 1. Inalienable Rights.All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy. On September 11, 2001, the American people were given new meanings for the word terrorism when four stolen passenger planes loaded with jet fuel were used as smart bombs to kill over 5,000 innocent and unsuspecting civilians, and cause untold destruction and fear. Feelings of patriotism were immediately aroused coast-to coast. Waving a flag is one thing, understanding what it really stands for is another. The best way to eliminate ALL terrorism, is to regain an understanding of our own laws, and understand how and why CONGRESS defines terrorism. ALL terrorism takes away our freedoms, and shuts down our businesses and lives. Domestic terrorism takes many forms - racketeering, extortion, false liens, false personations and cheats, animal enterprise terrorism, and theft under color of law. This problem is not new; the Colonists were plagued by cringing Attorneys-General and Solicitors-General of the Crown and the arbitrary Justices of the King's Court, all bent on the conviction of those who opposed the King's prerogatives, and who twisted the law to secure convictions. Rights have VALUE. Anybody wishing to restrict the use of any private property or ownership right, including rental agreement, must PAY the owner or occupant for that right. A property is bought or rented as is. Nobody can come along later and restrict its use except if they BUY IT, first. For example, the Title to your car doesnt say,This car may be driven every day except on Wednesdays. Likewise, a property Deed does not say,This land may be owned and used to the exclusion of all others for 10 years, after which it becomes City property, which the City can regulate and control." City or county codes are for CITY or COUNTY property they do not apply to any private property, unless the city or county lawfully acquires the property by BUYING it, first. Only then can they regulate it.
TERRORISM IS AGAINST THE LAW - FEDERAL CRIMINAL CODES:
Title 18 U.S.C. CHAPTER 113B TERRORISM, Section 2331. Definitions.As used in this chapter (1) the term international terrorism means activities that -(A) involve violent acts ; (B) appear to be intended -(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by assassination or kidnapping The end results of all terrorist acts are to restrict the victims freedoms and put them out of business. The punishment is imprisonment for 25 years.
#9 Jan 14, 2015
Title 18 U.S.C. section 43. Animal enterprise terrorism.Whoever (2) intentionally causes physical disruption to the functioning of an animal enterprise by intentionally stealing or causing the loss of, any property (including animals or records) or conspires to do so; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both...(d) Definitions the term animal enterprise means-(A) a commercial or academic enterprise that uses animals for food or fiber production, agriculture (B) a zoo, aquarium, circus, rodeo, or lawful competitive animal event; or (C) any fair or similar event intended to advance agriculture arts and sciences (b) Aggravated offense Whoever causes serious bodily injury shall be fined or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both. The County is liable for their or cities employees illegally taking anonymous complaints and use of threats, fear, and intimidation (animal terrorism) to restrict federally protected events intended to advance agriculture arts and sciences, namely, all 4H and FFA projects, all hobbyists who raise livestock and small animals and birds including pigeons for shows and competitions, and anybody who raises an animal for food. NOTE: The Humane Society is a private corporation, contracted with the County to get rid of unwanted pets and nuisance wildlife. They are NOT contracted to violate the Fourth Amendment in order to inventory and steal dogs, cats, chickens, horses, etc. under ANY pretext, or to conspire with corrupt judges, lawyers and court clerks to use the courts as a racketeering enterprise. The Humane Society was declared by the FBI to be an animal terrorist organization in 1993, yet they not shut down thanks to bribe money used to void judgments against them in court. See REPORT TO CONGRESS ON THE EXTENT OF DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM ON ANIMAL ENTERPRISE online under Department of Justice or DOJ reports.
Title 18 U.S.C. section 3112. Repealed November 16, 1981. This federal law used to provide for the issuance of search warrants for seizure of animals, birds, and eggs, but it was repealed, which means that it has been illegal since 1981 for anybody to issue a warrant to seize an animal, a bird, or an egg. The County is liable for any of its cities, agents or employees acting outside the law to restrict ownership of livestock, and using fear, threat, intimidation, and fraud to coerce citizens to give up their property rights.
THREAT TO DOMESTIC & NATIONAL SECURITY
Title 18 U.S.C. section 3592. Mitigating and aggravating factors to be considered in determining whether a sentence of death is justified:(b) Aggravating factors for espionage and treason. In determining whether a sentence of death is justified for an offense the court shall consider each of the following aggravating factors for which notice has been given and determine which, if any, exist:(2) Grave risk to national security In the commission of the offense the defendant knowingly created a grave risk
#10 Jan 14, 2015
THREAT TO DOMESTIC & NATIONAL SECURITY
Title 18 U.S.C. section 3592. Mitigating and aggravating factors to be considered in determining whether a sentence of death is justified:(b) Aggravating factors for espionage and treason. In determining whether a sentence of death is justified for an offense the court shall consider each of the following aggravating factors for which notice has been given and determine which, if any, exist:(2) Grave risk to national security In the commission of the offense the defendant knowingly created a grave risk of danger to the national security. Our dwindling resource of farmers is being wiped out by vigilantes in government and private sectors committing terrorism, racketeering and theft under color of law. Farmers, by their own hard work, produce something out of nothing to feed our nation. The 3 million farmers left in the United States today are under threat of dwindling down to zero, because Title 18 U.S.C. section 43 Animal enterprise terrorism is adopted and perpetrated by county employees. The County is liable for any of its agents or employees taking anonymous complaints and illegally imposing limits or restrictions on livestock and property ownership without just compensation, and who threaten food supplies through regulation and control of all wealth with the aid of private vigilantes to enforce a no ownership policy upon citizens to the point where they can no longer keep and raise livestock, food or pets. The County would be liable for its agents threatening national security/food supply.
LAW FORBIDS GIVING AID TO ENEMIES OF THE U.S.
Animal terrorism: FBI Report:The Animal Enterprise Protection Act codified as Title 18 section 43, makes it a federal offense to cause physical disruption to the functioning of an animal enterprise resulting in economic damage exceeding $10,000 While the Act characterizes terrorism as physical disruption (including stealing or causing the loss of property), the FBI defines terrorism as the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives. The County would be liable for its agents furthering political or social objectives of domestic terrorism,takings without just compensation, use of the courts to give legally void judgments the appearance of legally valid for the purpose of property confiscation; and other crimes described in racketeering enterprises to steal property, which is what will happen when the chicken and livestock police terrorists are loosed upon the Countys citizens.
Title 18 U.S.C. sec. 2381 Treason:Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death Title 18 U.S.C. section 2383 Rebellion or insurrection:Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the law thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both, and shall be incapable of holding any office ... The Humane Society puts in a strong presence at many public hearings. The Board illegally adopts their policy of making laws against property/chicken ownership under the guise of stamping out cock fighting. The County is liable for adopting Humane Society objectives, which amount to a covert operation to steal property, livestock, and real estate without just compensation by using criminals in government positions to give it the appearance of a legitimate operation.
#11 Jan 14, 2015
CITIES & COUNTIES CANNOT LEGISLATE EXCEPT AS TO LANDS THEY OWN
UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION Article 6, Cl.2 Supremacy of Constitution.This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. We have three separate branches of government legislative, administrative, and judicial - set up this way to ensure we would not become a dictatorship.Dictatorship means that one branch assumes all control, takes over the other branches, and becomes a legislator who makes its own laws,administrates to set up its own court, and prosecutes its own laws. Under a dictatorship, citizens have no rights, and property ownership is eliminated, as the dictatorship assumes regulation and control over all private property. The penalty for conspiring to overthrow the government of the United States is death or life imprisonment.
Schulz v. Milne, 94 Daily Journal D.A.R. 6688 (1994) at 9989,[D]efendants fail to apprehend basic constitutional tenets restricting the extent to which state power may be delegated to private parties. See also page 6694, footnotes 1 & 5: 1. It appears to the court that the City may have improperly contracted away its legislative and governmental functions to the Board and Milne, both of whom are private parties .the Ninth Circuit clearly held that a municipality may not surrender its control of a municipal function to a private party. Cities and Counties are private municipalities; they CANNOT assume legislative powers without the Governors signature, or without it going through the State Legislature. Only the Governor can sign laws against consumer goods. If any city or county does this, its racketeering, fraud, embezzlement, extortion, and impersonating an officer; in this case, a State Legislator or the Governor.
People v. Parmar, 86 Cal.App.4th 781; __Cal.Rptr.2d__(Jan. 2001):To establish a conflict of interest, it must be shown that the district attorneys discretionary decisionmaking has been placed with the influence and control of a private party with a particular interest in the prosecution of the defendant With respect to nuisance abatement, the district attorney is subject to a greater direction from the county than he or she is in other respects. In plain language, ALL complaints must go through the district attorney. We have the three separate branches of government executive, legislative, and judicial to preserve freedom, as any one of them taking over brings about a DICTATORSHIP. The city (administrative) CANNOT set up its own court to prosecute and fine its own citizens just to raise revenue or because some other private party doesnt like them. Any city committing this conduct is impersonating an officer and committing treason against the Constitution of the United States.
In re Ellett, 254 F.3d 1135 (9th Cir. 2001):Under Ex Parte Young and its progeny, a suit seeking prospective equitable relief against a state official who has engaged in a continuing violation of federal law is not deemed to be a suit against the State for purposes of state sovereign immunity; Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S. at 159-160, 28 S.Ct. 441; Will v. Mich. Dept of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 71 n. 10, 109 S.Ct. 2304, 105 L.Ed.2d 45 (1989)(stating that official-capacity actions for prospective relief are not treated as actions against the State.). Since the State cannot authorize its officers to violate federal law, such officers are stripped of [their] official or representative character and [are] subjected in [their] person to the consequences of [their] individual conduct. Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S. at 160, 28 S.Ct. 441 Ex Parte Young gives life to the Supremacy Clause, as remedies designed to end a continuing violation of federal law are necessary to vindicate the federal intere
#12 Jan 14, 2015
CITIES AND COUNTIES CANNOT ISSUE CITATIONS
California Penal Code, Chapter 5b CITATIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF COUNTY, CITY OR CITY AND COUNTY ORDINANCES. Sections 853.1 through 853.4. Enacted 1955. Repealed 1967. It has been illegal since 1967 for city or county ordinances to be enforced on private property. County employees are committing domestic terrorism if they issue citations for code violations on private property.Repealed means CANCELLED SINCE 1967. Twelve years of lawsuits between the years 1955 and 1967 clearly established the unconstitutionality of city and county CITATIONS, so they were ABOLISHED. Any city or county employee writing one after 1967 is guilty of racketeering, extortion, and terrorism. The penalty is four years in prison.
CITIES AND COUNTIES CANNOT STEAL
California Civil Code section 669. Seisin or Ownership.All property has an owner, whether that owner is the state, and the property public, or the owner an individual, and the property private. The County is liable for illegal and wrongful presumption that its agents/employees are the lawful owners of all those guinea pigs, pigeons, chickens, pigs, horses, fish, frogs, goats, rabbits, sheep, crowing fowl, turkeys, ducks, geese, and chinchillas that belong to an individual, who is an owner other than the city, county or the state. This applies to ALL property. If the county does not own it, the county cannot restrict it. If the city doesnt own it, the city cannot regulate or restrict its use. And if the city wants to exert acts of ownership or control over any part of another man' property, the city must PAY for it. Rights have VALUE.
California Civil Code section 670 Lands owned by State.The state is the owner of all land below tide-water, and below ordinary high-water mark, bordering upon tide-water within the state; of all land below the water of a navigable lake or stream; of all property lawfully appropriated by it to its own use; of all property dedicated to the state; and of all property of which there is no other owner. The County is liable for its agents/employees unlawful appropriation of property owned by private individuals, when they commit stalking, criminal trespass to inventory livestock and other property. In order to place a restriction upon any property, the county must first lawfully appropriate the property by buying it.
California Penal Code section 484. Acts Constituting Theft.Every person who shall feloniously steal, take, carry, lead, or drive away the personal property of another, or who shall fraudulently appropriate property which has been entrusted to him, or who shall knowingly and designedly, by any false or fraudulent representation or pretense, defraud any other person of money, labor or real or personal property, or who causes or procures others to report falsely of his wealth or mercantile character and by thus imposing upon any person is guilty of theft. The County is liable for its employees/agents use of false or fraudulent representation or pretense [to] defraud any other person of money, labor or real or personal property by having county or city agents/employees go door-to-door, falsely representing that they have any legal authority to use stalking, threats, fear, intimidation to restrict anothers ownership of property and livestock, and is liable for said employees/agents trespass to knowingly commit terrorism to steal, take, carry, lead, or drive away the personal property of another.
#13 Jan 14, 2015
CITIES AND COUNTIES CANNOT FABRICATE CHARGES
California PenalCode section 526 Imitation or Pretended Process Delivery Any person, who, with intent to obtain from another person any money, article of personal property or other thing of value, causes to be delivered to the other person any paper, document or written, typed or printed for purporting to be an order or other process calculated by its writing to cause or lead the other person to believe it to be an order is guilty of a misdemeanor Citations for CITY or COUNTY violations have been void since 1967; and anybody purporting to steal property/livestock by pretended service gets one year in prison.
California PenalCode CHAPTER 7 EXTORTION section 518 Defined.Extortion is the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, or the obtaining of an official act of a public officer, induced by a wrongful use of force or fear, or under color of official right. It is a wrongful and terrorist act to deprive one American citizen of the ability or freedom to spend one dollar on one rooster, small animal, dog, cat, pigeon, or other livestock, or any animal feed. The penalty is four years in prison.
California PenalCode CHAPTER 8 FALSE PERSONATIONS AND CHEATS section 531 Conveyance to Defraud Creditors and Others.Every person who is a party to any fraudulent conveyance of any lands, tenements, or hereditaments, goods or chattels, or any right or interest issuing out of the same had, made, or contrived with intent to deceive and defraud others, or to defeat, hinder, or delay creditors or others of their just debts is guilty of a misdemeanor. Livestock is classified as property having value which can be used as collateral. Any city or county which restricts or eliminates livestock ownership, and anybody such as humane Society or veterinarians who conspire with them violates contract and debt obligation laws.
CITIES AND COUNTIES CANNOT INDUCE FEAR
California PenalCode CHAPTER 7 EXTORTION section 519 Fear Induced by Threat.Fear, such as will constitute extortion, may be induced by a threat, either: 1. To do an unlawful injury to the person or property of the individual threatened or of a third person; or, 2. To accuse the individual threatened, or any relative of his, or member of his family, of any crime; or, 3. To expose, or to impute to him or them any deformity, disgrace or crime Threats by the city or county to turn ownership of livestock into a crime is EXTORTION, TERRORISM, and COMMODITIES TAMPERING. The penalty is four years in prison.
#14 Jan 14, 2015
California PenalCode CHAPTER 7 EXTORTION section 521 When Under Color of Office, section 522 Extorting Signature to Transfer of Property, section 523 Written threat Made to Extort.Every person who commits any extortion under color of official right Every person who, by any extortionate means, obtains from another his signature to any paper or instrument, whereby, if such signature were freely given, any property would be transferred Every person who, with intent to extort any money or other property from another, send or delivers to any person any letter or other writing, whether subscribed or not, expressing or implying any threat is punishable in the same manner as if the actual delivery of such debt, demand, charge, or right of action were obtained. This section was enacted to prosecute and incarcerate corrupt government employees using threats and fear to terrorize innocent property owners, elderly, and other citizens into giving up any right or any property without due process. The penalty is four years in prison.
California Penal Code, Title 11.6 CIVIL RIGHTS. Section 422.6 Use of Force, Threats, or Destruction of Property to Interfere With Anothers Exercise of Civil Rights - Punishment.(a) No person, whether or not acting under color of law, shall by force or threat of force, willfully injure, intimidate, interfere with, oppress, or threaten any other person in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him or her by the Constitution or laws of this state or by the Constitution or laws of the United States Acquiring and owning livestock is an unalienable right secured by Congress. Nobody can take that right away, unless they PAY you for it. Rights have VALUE. The owner must be paid, and all moving expenses reimbursed for being relocated to some area where there is no domestic terrorism, the Constitution is the law of the land, and the owner is free to acquire and own property for personal enjoyment and use to the exclusion of all others. City or county employees are stripped of all immunity for attempting vigilante action against property owners.
CITES AND COUNTIES CANNOT TAX PROPERTY TWICE
California Civil Code section 732. Right to Accessions and Increase.The owner of a thing owns also all its products and accessions. The State, directly or indirectly through their agents, cannot tax future profits. So if the STATE cannot do this, how can a municipal corporation CITY do it, by requiring permits or fees for private property ownership? How can a non-profit corporation such as the Humane Society do it by requiring licensing of all dogs, or conditional use permits for dogs or livestock? By law, dogs and livestock are property, and, once purchased or acquired, are never taxed again except in socialist dictatorships, which punish property ownership. Besides, how can a non-profit corporation be damaged by somebody else raising dogs or livestock for profit, unless their real agenda is domestic terrorism, introduce socialism, take away all property rights, and regulate and control all wealth.
#15 Jan 14, 2015
California Food and Agriculture Code section 30951.It is unlawful for any person to own, harbor, or keep any dog over the age of four months, or to permit such a dog which is owned, harbored, or controlled by him to run at large, unless the dog has attached to its neck or leg a substantial collar on which one of the following is fastened:(a) A metallic tag which gives the name and post office address of the owner.(b) A metal license tag which is issued by the authority of a county, city and county, or any municipal corporation for the purpose of identifying the dog and designating the owner. Notice the either/or enacted to protect the property owner if his dog gets lost or stolen so that it can be returned to him. Working dogs taken off the property can be registered with the County Recorder for cheap. It is illegal for a private corporation such as the Humane Society to require fees or taxes on private property dog, as this constitutes taxation without representation. California is the only state in the union that has stalking laws, and where it is a felony to steal a dog. These laws are to PROTECT the owner of a dog, so that he can recover it for FREE if it gets lost or stolen.
CITY AND COUNTY EMPLOYEES CANNOT VIOLATE THEIR OATHS
Indebtedness: California Constitution Article XX section 3 Oath of Office: All public officers and employees, executive, legislative and judicial shall, before they enter upon the duties of their respective offices, take and subscribe the following Oath or affirmation:I,_________ do solemnly swear [affirm] that I will support and defend the constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the state of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United Sates and the Constitution of the state of California; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter. And I do further swear [affirm] that I do not advocate, nor am I a member of any party or organization, political or otherwise, that now advocates the overthrow of the government of the United States or of the State of California by force or violence or other unlawful means; that within the five years immediately proceeding the taking of this oath [affirmation] I have not been a member of any party or organization, political or otherwise, that advocated the overthrow of the government of the united states or the state of California by force or violence or other unlawful means except as follows:_________if no affiliations, write in the words no exceptions) and that during such time as I hold the office of (name of office), I will not advocate nor become a member of any party or organization, political or otherwise, that advocates the overthrow of the government of the United States or of the State of California by force or violence or other unlawful means. And no other oath, declaration, or test shall be required as a qualification for any public office or employment.Public officer or employee includes every officer and employee of the state, including the University of California, every county, city, city and county, district, and authority, including any department, division, bureau, board, commission, agency, or instrumentality of any of the forgoing.[adopted May 1879. Amended Nov. 1952]. City and County employees are indebted to fulfill their Oaths, which forbids them to overthrow the government by means of adopting the policies of non-governmental organizations/corporations, animal terrorists, or criminals masquerading as government employees that steal property under false pretenses.
THE COUNTY CANNOT SHIRK ITS LIABLE FOR THE CONDUCT OF ITS EMPLOYEES OR AGENTS, OR ANY CITY EMPLOYEES OR AGENTS
#16 Jan 14, 2015
THE COUNTY CANNOT SHIRK ITS LIABLE FOR THE CONDUCT OF ITS EMPLOYEES OR AGENTS, OR ANY CITY EMPLOYEES OR AGENTS
Allen v. City of Portland, 73 F.3rd, 232 (9th Cir. 1995):By definition, probable cause to arrest can only exist in relation to criminal conduct; civil disputes cannot give rise to probable cause contract dispute cannot give rise to probable cause to arrest. Cities or counties CANNOT butt in on any civil dispute between neighbors, or presume there is any criminal activity related to ownership of livestock, fowl or other property. Civil disputes go through the DISTRICT ATTORNEY. If the city gets involved, it commits domestic terrorism.
Watkins v. City of Oakland, 145 F.3d 1087 (9th Cir. 1998) at 1088:6. Civil Rights 214(4) Municipality is not entitled to the shield of qualified immunity from liability under 42 U.S.C.A. section 1983. Discrimination against disenfranchised citizens because they own fowl (roosters) and/or other livestock, and/or are Latinos, strips the County of immunity.
Burns v. Reed, 500 U.S. 478, 486, 111 S.Ct. 1934, 114 L.Ed.2d 547 (1991):[T]he law requires that the official seeking immunity to bear the burden of demonstrating that immunity attaches to the particular function. County or city employees could not bear the burden of demonstrating that sabotage, terrorism, extortion, theft under color of law, discrimination, racketeering, violation of due process, and takings without compensation attaches to their particular function of upholding the Constitution and protecting the property and rights of tax-paying citizens and property owners; therefore, the County would not be immune, either for the conduct of criminals posing as city or county employees.
Brandon v. Holt, 105 S.Ct. 873 (1985) at pp. 873, 874:2. Civil Rights 13.16 - In cases arising under section 1983, judgment against a public servant in his official capacity imposes liability on the entity that he represents provided the public entity receives notice and an opportunity to respond. 42 U.S.C.A. section 1983. Held: 2. In cases under section 1983, a judgment against a public servant in his official capacity imposes liability on the entity that he represents. This rule was plainly implied in Monell, supra; Hutto v. Finney, 437 U.S. 678, 98 S.Ct. 2565, 57 L.Ed.2d 522; and Owen v. City of Independence, 455 U.S. 622, 100 S.Ct. 1398, 63 L.Ed.2d 673. Cities and counties cannot take anonymous complaints. The Supreme Court says that the County is the municipality upon which liability is imposed for civil rights claims against city employees within its jurisdiction. Any County Claim Form filed regarding these terrorist acts, frauds and swindles will be the Countys Notice and Opportunity to be heard regarding city or county employees criminal conduct/conspiring to steal property.
Lalonde v. County of Riverside, 204 F.3d 947 (9th Cir. 2000):If, however, there is a material dispute as to the facts regarding what the officer or the plaintiff actually did, the case must proceed to trial, before a jury if requested10 even when immunity
#17 Jan 14, 2015
CITIES AND COUNTIES CANNOT VIOLATE RACKETEERING LAWS
Title 18 section 1951 Interference with Commerce:Whoever in any way or degree obstructs, delays or affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity by robbery or extortion or attempts or conspires to do so shall be fined or imprisoned not more than twenty years (2) the term extortion means the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right. Title 7, section 2 [Agricultural commodities] Definitions:The word person shall include individuals, associations, partnerships, corporations, and trusts. The word commodity shall mean wheat, cotton, rice, corn, oats, barley, rye, flaxseed, grain sorghums, mill feeds, butter, eggs, [Irish potatoes], wool, wool tops, fats and oils cottonseed meal, cottonseed, peanuts, soybeans, soybean meal, livestock, livestock products, and frozen concentrated orange juice, and all other goods and articles Title 7 section 2131 The Congress finds that animals and activities which are regulated under this chapter are either in interstate or foreign commerce or substantially affect such commerce or the free flow thereof, and that regulation of animals and activities as provided in this chapter is necessary to prevent and eliminate burdens upon such commerce and to effectively regulate such commerce, in order (3) to protect the owners of animals from theft of their animals by preventing the sale or use of animals which have been stolen. Title 18 section 1962. Prohibited activities:(b) It shall be unlawful for any person through a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt to acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly, any interest in or control of any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce (d) It shall be unlawful for any person to conspire to violate any of the provisions of subsection (a),(b), or (c) of this section. Title 18 Stolen Property, section 2311 Definitions:As used in this chapter livestock means any domestic animals raised for home use, consumption, or profit, such as horses, pigs, llamas, goats, fowl, sheep, buffalo, and cattle, or the carcasses thereof. Title 7 Agriculture section 601: No state can restrict the raising of any commodity (chicken - hen or cock, other poultry, cattle, horse, goat, pig, sheep, parakeet, frog, fish, chinchilla, guinea pig, rabbit, etc.) for personal use. If the state is forbidden to restrict commodities, neither can the city or county. City or county employees get 20 years in prison for conspiring to restrict the free flow of commerce and agricultural commodities known as chickens (roosters and hens),birds and poultry, cattle,crowing fowl,pigeons,goats,horse s,pigs,sheep,other small farm animals (rabbits, fish, chinchillas, frogs, parakeets, guinea pigs, etc.), and animal/livestock feed consisting of mill feeds: rice, corn, oats, barley, rye, flaxseed, and grain sorghums. The penalty is 20 years imprisonment or $250,000 fine.
Salinas v. United States, 118 S.Ct. 469 (1997)[I]nterprative canon is not license for judiciary to rewrite language enacted by legislature... Predominant elements in substantive Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) violations are:(1) conduct (2) of enterprise (3) through pattern of racketeering activity. 18 U.S.C.§ 1962(c).... Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) conspiracy conviction does not require overt or specific act. 18 U.S.C.§ 1962(d).... If conspirators have plan which calls for some conspirators to perpetrate crime and others to provide support, supporters are as guilty as perpetrators.... Conspiracy may exist and be punished whether or not substantive crime ensues, for conspiracy is distinct evil, dangerous to public, and so pu
#18 Jan 14, 2015
Amortization:The World Book Dictionary defines amortize as: 1. To set money aside regularly in a special fund for future wiping out of (a debt ); 2. Law. To convey (property) to a body, especially an ecclesiastical body, which does not have the right to sell or give it away.Amortization is: 1. The act of amortizing a debt; 2. The money set aside for this purpose. The County is liable for cities fraudulent misuse of the word amortization to mean an 18-month grace period before county agents crack down on all livestock and other small farm animal owners, 4-H, and FFA. The correct definition of amortization means that the county and cities need to set money aside right now for conveying property (deeds/bundle of rights/chickens/chicken feed/livestock) to a body,(city or county agents), which does not have the right to sell or give it away. This is hard evidence of Countys liability for fraud they know they have no right to con citizens into amending their own Deeds by giving up their property, but count on the public being too ignorant to look up the real definition of amortize.
CIVIL RICO by DAVID B. SMITH and TERRANCE G. REED, 1999 Edition published by MATTHEW BENDER, publication update September 1999, front page:Injuries to Business or Property: Interpreting the scope of compensable business or property injuries under section 1964(c), THE Sixth Circuit recently held in Isaak v. Trumble Savings & Loan Co., 169 F.3d 390 (6th Cir. 1999), that the use and enjoyment of real estate constitutes property within the meaning of RICO so as to trigger the accrual of a RICO claim. The county and its cities are liable for racketeering conduct of its employees/agents use of fear, threats, and intimidation to interfere with the use and enjoyment of property by citizens who pay city and county employees to protect and serve their property rights.
California Civil Code section 3482.5 Preexisting Agricultural Uses Not Nuisance.(a)(1) No agricultural activity, operation, or facility, or appurtenances thereof, conducted or maintained for commercial purposes, and in a manner consistent with proper and accepted customs and standards, as established and followed by similar agricultural operations in the same locality, shall be or become a nuisance, private or public, due to any changed condition in or about the locality, after it has been in operation for more than three years if it was not a nuisance at the time it began. County is liable for their agentsracketeering and extortion in using threats, fear and intimidation by going door-to-door issuing citations for having too many parakeets, fish, frogs, goats, guinea pigs, fowl, pigeons, pigs, horses, etc., which information they obtained illegally through criminal trespass or violation of property owners Fourth Amendment.
U.S. v. Frega, 179 F.3d 793 (9th Cir. 1999) at 793:To establish conspiracy under Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) does not require proof that individual defendant participated personally, or agreed to participate personally, in two predicate offenses; rather, the conspiracy must contemplate the commission of two predicate acts by one or more of its members. 18 U.S.C. section 1962(d). More than two predicate acts occur when private individuals conspire with public employees to violate state and federal law by restricting property ownership without just compensation in furtherance of a racketeering scheme or artifice (denial of honest government services and theft under color of law); therefore, the County is the municipality upon which the liability is imposed for conduct constituting RICO conspiracy
#19 Jan 14, 2015
AR zoning:Existing animal keeping uses in the AR Agricultural-Residential District which become nonconforming by reason of development on an adjoining site which was vacant when the animal keeping use was established may be continued indefinitely; provided, however, if the animal keeping use is abandoned or discontinued for a period of eighteen (18) months, it shall not be resumed except in conformity with the provisions of Section 9-3.420 of this article. The County is liable for illegally proposing (extortion) that citizens be given 18 months to get rid of chickens or face charges in order to threaten and intimidate citizens to give up their property rights, which is a scheme or artifice to defraud under color of official right. The County is liable for any of its employees/agents using extortion, threats, fear and intimidation to coerce citizens to amend their Deeds and give up their property rights without just compensation or due process, and for falsely purporting that if the chickens or other livestock/small farm animals are gone for 18 months, the County can then fraudulently amend the owners deed, illegally convert the title, and get rid of the Prop 13 tax break.
Jones v. United States, 529 U.S.__, 146 L Ed 2d 902, 120 S.Ct___(May 22, 2000):Held: Because an owner-occupied residence not used for any commercial purpose does not qualify as property used in commerce or commerce-affecting activity, arson of such a dwelling is not subject to prosecution The Supreme Court says that you cannot be prosecuted by anybody for damaging your own property. The county is liable for its employees/agents fraud, perjury, and extortion to steal property under the guise of rescuing it from its lawful owner.
PROPERTY OWNERS STANDING TO SUE UNDER RICO
Rotella v. Wood, 528 US__, 145 Led 2d 1047, 120 SCt.__, at pg. 1047:The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)(18 U.S.C.S §§ 1961 et seq.) provides that (1) it is unlawful to conduct an enterprises affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity (18 U.S.C.§ 1962(c),(2) a pattern requires at least two acts of racketeering activity, the last of which occurs within 10 years after the commission of a prior act (18 USCS § 1962(c),(3) a person injured by a RICO violation can bring a civil RICO action (18 USCS 1964(c)). Any person injured by racketeering activity can file a civil RICO lawsuit.Racketeering activity is anything which interferes with land use and property rights threats, fear, false process, false liens, etc.
CITIES AND COUNTIES ARE FORBIDDEN TO INTERFERE WITH FEDERALLY PROTECTED AND FUNDED PROGRAMS FFA and 4H
Title 18 U.S.C. section 666. Theft or bribery concerning programs receiving Federal funds.Whoever being an agent of a State, or local government, or any agency thereof-(A) embezzles, steals, obtains by fraud, or otherwise converts to the use of any person other than the rightful owner shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both The circumstances referred to is that the organization, government, or agency receives, in any one year period, benefits in excess of $10,000 under a Federal program involving a grant, contract, subsidy, loan, guarantee, insurance, or other form of Federal assistance As used in this section-(1) the term agent means a person authorized to act on behalf of another person or government and includes a servant or employee, and a partner, director, officer, manager, and representative; (2) the term government agency means a subdivision of the executive, legislative, judicial, or other branch of government, including a department, independent establishment, commission, administration, authority, board, and bureau, and a corporation or other legal entity established, and subject to control, by a governmental or intergovernmental program. The County is liable
#20 Jan 14, 2015
The County is liable for its servants or employees, boards, etc. embezzlement of federal funds in excess of $10,000 for restricting federally funded and protected animal enterprises including hobbyists, petting zoos, fairs, aquariums, 4H and FFA, pigeon shows, etc. by stealing, obtaining by fraud, or otherwise convert to the use of any person other than the rightful owner livestock and small animals lawfully owned within the County. The county does not get to receive federal funds for protected 4H and FFA programs, then turn around and restrict them. Not only is this a crime against the tax-paying citizens in the County, it is a crime against the United States. Anything which interferes with land use is racketeering.
CITIES AND COUNTIES CANNOT DO ILLEGAL SEARCH AND SEIZURE
Steagald v. United States, 68 L.Ed.2d 38 Held: 2. The search in question violated the Fourth Amendment, where it took place in the absence of consent or exigent circumstances.(a) Absent exigent circumstances or consent, a home may not be searched without a warrant (c) A search warrant requirement will not significantly impede effective law enforcement efforts no warrant is required to apprehend a suspected felon in a public place. Moreover, the exigent-circumstances doctrine significantly limits the situations in which a search warrant is needed. And in those situations in which a search warrant is necessary, the inconvenience incurred by the police is generally insignificant. In any event, whatever practical problems there are in requiring a search warrant they cannot outweigh the constitutional interest at stake in protecting the right of presumptively innocent people to be secure in their homes from unjustified, forcible intrusions by the government The purpose of a warrant is to allow a neutral judicial officer to assess whether the police have probable cause to make an arrest or conduct a search. As we have often explained, the placement of this checkpoint between the Government and the citizen implicitly acknowledges that an officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime, Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 13-15 (1948), at 14, may lack sufficient objectivity to weigh correctly the strength of the evidence supporting the contemplated action against the individuals interests in protecting his own liberty and the privacy of his home. Warrantless search or arrest can ONLY occur IN A PUBLIC PLACE during hot pursuit. In all other cases, a fair, neutral and detached judicial officer determines FROM THE COMPLAINT is a warrant should issue based upon the commission OF A FELONY. This is where the publics ignorance is used by robbers posing as code enforcement, etc., WHO DO NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE ANYTHING.
California Penal Code Chapter 3 SEARCH WARRANTS section 1523 Definition:A search warrant is an order in writing, in the name of the people, signed by a magistrate, directed to a peace officer, commanding him or her to search for a person or persons, a thing or things, or personal property, and, in the case of a thing or things or personal property, bring the same before the magistrate. 1996 Notes:(a) the purpose of the amendment to Section 1523 of the Penal Code is to provide a mechanism for compliance with Steagald v. United States,, 68 L.Ed.2d 38 No VICTIM equals NO CRIME. And search warrants cannot be issued willy-nilly see Steagald, above. Warrants are only issued IN THE NAME OF THE PEOPLE by going through the DISTRICT ATTORNEY and the MAGISTRATE. The reference to Steagald was a warning: Cities have been caught issuing bullshit warrants BEFORE. The ONLY person who can issue ANY warrant in the NAME OF THE PEOPLE is the district attorney, and he can ONLY do this from a report taken by a police officer from a VICTIM that goes through HIS office, then through the scrutiny of a neutral and detached MAGISTRATE.
#21 Jan 14, 2015
CITIES AND COUNTIES CANNOT VIOLATE THE FOURTH AMENDMENT
U.S. CONSTITUTION Amendment 4. Search and Seizure.The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. We have forgotten that his was drafted to correct the evils of swarms of the Kings officers barging in and arbitrarily confiscating seditious material, which was determined by them to be seditious without benefit of a judge or a public trial. Today we see the same set of circumstances invasion and terrorism because somebody else invaded our privacy, and did a bench trial because they determined that our lifestyle was seditious.
California Penal Code SECTION 602.2.Any ordinance or resolution adopted by a county which requires written permission to enter vacant or unimproved private land from either the owner, the owners agent, or the person in lawful possession of private land, shall not apply unless the land is immediately adjacent and contiguous to residential property, or enclosed by fence, or under cultivation, or posted with signs forbidding trespass, displayed at intervals of not less than three to a mile, along all exterior boundaries and at all roads and trails entering the private land. County is liable for its agents/employees illegally entering fenced, posted, under cultivation, adjacent to residential, private property without written permission of the owner, owners agent, or person in lawful possession of the property.
The People v. Camacho, 1998 Daily Journal D.A.R. 12105:Police observation through bedroom window from non-public area constitutes unlawful search. The County is liable for Fourth Amendment violations, and has no immunity when its employees trespass upon areas that members of the public cannot be said to have been implicitly invited. No such implicit public invitation exists in a side yard, back yard, or neighbors yard for county employees or anybody else to conduct invasion of privacy and/or pretextual search without probable cause to inventory livestock or other property by peeking over or through fences, even chain-link fences, which are there to exclude the eyes of strangers and trespassers.
U.S. v. Hotal, 143 F.3d 1223 (9th Cir. 1998).To comply with Fourth Amendment, anticipatory search warrant must either on its face or on the face of the accompanying affidavit clearly, expressly, and narrowly specify the triggering event Consent to search that is given after illegal entry is tainted and invalid under the Fourth Amendment Plain-view doctrine did not apply to seizure of evidence from defendants residence after officers conducted initial search based on invalid anticipatory search warrant Plain-view doctrine does not apply unless the initial entry is lawful pursuant to a valid warrant The county is liable for its agents/employees stealing anything without probable cause on a tainted warrant that fails to narrowly list things with particularity that are connected with a crime, and that fails to have an attached affidavit from a victim injured in his or her business or property. State and federal law protects the unalienable right to own property/livestock, so the county is liable for its employeesfabricated charges and pretextual search without probable cause.
See v. City of Seattle, 387 US 541, 18 L.Ed.2d 943, 87 S.Ct. 1737:[I]t was held that the Fourth Amendment forbids warrantless inspections of commercial structures as well as of private residences The search of private commercial property, as well as the search of private houses, is presumptively unreasonable if conducted without a warrant. Again, if there is no victim, there is no crime. The county would be liable for violating the Fourth Amendment in allowing any of i
#22 Jan 14, 2015
CITIES AND COUNTIES CANNOT VIOLATE THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT
U.S. Constitution Fourteenth Amendment Section 1:All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law. The County is liable for failure to provide equal protection to all citizens owning property, as the County is not a separate country, it falls within the State of California within the United States, and its employees do not get to make up their own laws intended to steal property and disenfranchise and discriminate against citizens for owning chickens, pigeons, parakeets, guinea pigs, goats, ducks, turkeys, cattle, horses, pigs, sheep, fish, chinchillas, frogs, etc.
Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S.___, 145 L.Ed 2d 1060, 120 S.Ct.___(Feb. 2000):Fourteenth Amendments equal protection clause held to give rise to cause of action on behalf of class of one where property owners equal protection claim did not allege membership in class or group. The County is liable under the Fourteenth Amendment for each claim by each feed store, feed mill, and livestock owner for property loss without the necessity of a class action suit, and without being in any particular group. All that is necessary, under this Supreme Court decision, is for one person to be denied equal protection.
Equal protection: If the city or County restricts crowing fowl, it must also restrict all other vehicles, machinery, etc. whose noise levels exceed the decibel level of crowing fowl. This means restricted use of all sirens, construction equipment, aircraft, motorcycles, stereos, 18-wheel trucks, etc. within the county. Under the laws they ordain, city and county employees including the Board of Supervisors must open their homes for public inspection. If the public finds any property that is abused, neglected, abandoned or in excess of acceptable numbers, the public shall rescue the property and adopt it out to a new owner. Given the countys code enforcement officers past practices and precedents, this inspection shall include living conditions and all other personal property, which can likewise be rescued and adopted out. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander.
CITES AND COUNTIES CANNOT VIOLATE CIVIL RIGHTS
Title 42 U.S.C. Section 1983:Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress... The County would be liable for discrimination against livestock owners, 4-H, FFA, feed stores, and feed mills.
Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1343 Civil rights and elective franchise.(a) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action authorized by law to be commenced by any person:
#23 Jan 14, 2015
CITIES AND COUNTIES CANNOT ENGAGE IN EXTORTIONATE CREDIT TRANSACTIONS
Title 18 U.S.C. sections 891-896. Section 891 Definition and rules of construction:(7) An extortionate means is any means which involves the use, or an express or implicit threat of use, of violence or other criminal means to cause harm to the person, reputation, or property. This applies to bogus utility liens or attorneys fees, which sanctions are only for licensed attorneys, and only for DEFENDANTS for causing undue delay and needlessly increasing the cost of litigation. Private attorneys conspiring with private corporations/Humane Societies to bribe federal or state judges, etc. to get rulings/judgments favorable to the robbers fits these rules of construction, as only Hitler punished those who sued and confiscated their property. The county is not immune for cities criminal profiteering within the county, when they are paid to protect and serve, NOT to rob and do these white-collar con games.
CITIES AND COUNTIES CANNOT IMPERSONATE FEDERAL AUTHORITY
Under Title 7 U.S.C. section 2159, Congress restrains all states subject to Public Law regarding animals and livestock. All investigations for alleged animal neglect fall under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture, NOT the County. The United States Department of Agriculture Secretary, sends a request to the United States Attorney General, now John Ashcroft, to request of a United States District Court Judge to issue a restraining order or injunction pursuant to section 2159 of Title 7 United States Code, whenever the Secretary has reason to believe the health of any animal [is] in serious danger The County employees and agents are not the United States Department of Agriculture Secretary, and The County Board of Supervisors are not United States District Court judges, therefore, they conspired to intentionally and willfully impersonate federal authority, restricted since 1966 under the following explicit statute:
Title 7 U.S.C. Section 2159. Authority to Apply for Injunctions.-(a) Request. Whenever the Secretary has reason to believe that any dealer, carrier, exhibitor, or intermediate handler is dealing in stolen animals, or is placing the health of any animal in serious danger in violation of this Act or the regulations or standards promulgated thereunder, the Secretary shall notify the Attorney General who may apply to the United States district court in which such dealer, carrier, exhibitor, or intermediate handler resides or conducts business for a temporary restraining order or injunction to prevent any such person from operating in violation of this Act or the regulations and standards prescribed under this Act. The County is not immune from citys criminal conduct, and impersonating federal authority in order to commit terrorism and theft under color.
HISTORY LESSON ON ANIMAL RIGHTS AND TYRANNY
Add your comments below
|City OK's pact with Pacific Flyway Fund to cove...||Jun 22||Birds Landing Bob||1|
|2014 Vallejo fatal stabbing case in court for t...||May '16||Gary C||1|
|District Attorney will pursue another trial for...||May '16||Birds Landing Bob||1|
|Solano County Fair invites you to come 'Play It...||May '16||Billy||1|
|County honors former 4th District supervisor||Apr '16||Nic Gagnon||2|
|Witness statements studied during Sloan trial||Apr '16||Birds Landing Bob||2|
|Coroner identifies victim in accident (Nov '07)||Apr '16||Nic Gagon||15|
Find what you want!
Search Solano County Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC