Tuesday, April 2, 2013

Did Eureka Ca. Sidestep The Constitution By Issuing Pension Obligation Bonds?

From Bill Holmes of Eureka

For my fellow Eurekans who treasure their right to vote.

The Constitution of the State of California has guaranteed since 1879 the voters the right to approve by 2/3 majority the sale of long term obligations.  (Bonds)

In the dark of election night last November the Eureka City Council passed a resolution that in effect filed a lawsuit against "All Persons Interested."   In effect every citizen of Eureka was sued, but more importantly the 14,000 voters of Eureka were sued to strip them of their right to vote on an $8.5 million bond issue - and ALL PENSION BOND ISSUES IN THE FUTURE.

We have one week to fix this.  Trial is next Monday April 8th. and I have asked for a jury trial.  I am not a lawyer the best defense I will be able to mount will be a few simple constitutional arguments and hope that the jury rules in our favor.

If you want the details go to my blog.  http://highboldtage.wordpress.com/

This is a bizarre reverse class action lawsuit and I was the only one to answer it.  Am I the only one in Eureka that cares about the right to vote?  I don't think so but where are you?

This issue cuts across party and left/right lines.  My issue is that I am a small "d" democrat who wants to protect democracy.  I think the bonds are crappy junk bonds but the city has the right to issue crappy junk bonds - if the voters approve.  That's my issue.

Call the city council and demand that they end this farce NOW!  Demand that they WITHDRAW THE LAWSUIT AGAINST YOU AND PUT THE BOND ISSUE ON THE BALLOT.

have a peaceful day,


  1. "Did Eureka Ca. Sidestep The Constitution By Issuing Pension Obligation Bonds?"

    And the answer is a resounding NO, as the Judge dumped Bill's suit.

  2. Contrary to "Anonymous" April 21st posting, a RESOUNDING YES! All one needs to do is read the seminal case on this issue, The State of California ex rel. Pension Obligation Committee v. All Persond Interested (2007) 152 Cal. App 4th 1386, and cases referenced therein. Also read the State of California Constitution, Article XVI Section 1 and 18, subdivision (a). Lastly, read People ex rel. Attorney General v. Johnson,(1856) 6 Cal. 499, and Dougues v. Douglass,(1857)7 Cal. 66 ( the very first Calif. cases on the "debt limit" issue. Note! it is all on the WEB. Then the people of Eureka need to get behind Bill for an appeal - 30 day time limit.

    David E. Mix, Oakland CA


US Senator Joe Liberman, WTC 7 Did Not Occur