Zimmerlink sues fellow Fayette commissioners By Liz Zemba
TRIBUNE-REVIEW Friday, February 19, 2010
A Fayette County commissioner has filed a federal lawsuit alleging her fellow commissioners have put the muzzle on her right to speak freely, all in retaliation for her consistent criticism of the pair.
In the civil rights lawsuit filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Pittsburgh, Angela Zimmerlink, a Republican, named fellow commissioners and Democrats Vincent Vicites and Vincent Zapotosky as defendants.
Through her attorney, Jordan Lee Strassburger of Strassburger McKenna Gutnick and Gefsky of Pittsburgh, Zimmerlink alleges the Democratic commissioners have used their majority status to stop her from effectively expressing her opinion on various matters...
She alleges Vicites and Zapotosky violated the state's Sunshine Act by taking official actions in private, by holding improper executive sessions, and by manipulating meeting minutes to "misstate and mischaracterize" events that occurred at the meetings....
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/fayette/s_667976.html
Might we suggest that somebody - the local District Attorney, perhaps - right quick obtain all copies of the official audio-taped Meeting Minutes of the county of Fayette? And perhaps any hearings of the county's autonomous Zoning Hearing Board?
Among the charges filed in the federal Civil Rights case by Commissioner Angela Zimmerlink is one alleging the alteration of Meeting Minutes.
Are these the written Meeting Minutes, Minutes of the Board of Fayette Commissioners, only? Or does the allegation include original audio-taped Meeting Minutes of the board? And are the Minutes of the Fayette Zoning Hearing Board included in the charge of alteration?
If the allegation doesn't apply to the audio-taped Meeting Minutes, a comparison of those could be made to determine what portions of written meeting minutes were altered so as to ""misstate and mischaracterize" events that occurred at the meetings..."
We believe this is a tremendously important Civil Rights case in that an elected public official is bringing it against two other elected public officials.
It really calls to our attention the numerous times we'd have liked to file a federal lawsuit for civil rights violation in regard to the county's voter registration listing. Scheduled for a five-year review, by resolution passed July 24, 2008, the voter list will remain virtually as-is for those interim-years. Inactive voters have been identified.
Has the name of any ineligible voter been removed since May 8, 2008 when the board authorized the Election Bureau Director to not only submit a plan for a Purge, but to begin something along the lines of mailings because there was a known deadline for completion of the Purge (3-months out from a federal election)?
Or have any names of ineligible - not just inactive - voters even been scheduled for review in the 5-year SURE Purge adopted unanimously during a July 26, 2008 meeting?
Names of ineligibles would be those of the still registered, but deceased, and those of voters who have moved out of the precinct, district, and/or county, and/or state?
Is it not a violation of our eligible voters' voting rights and civil rights to free expression as well by having a known, known, inaccurate voter registry for potential use of names of ineligibles, potentially swaying the outcome of an election by even one or two votes in a close local election?
Looking at only the "inactives" also won't produce an accurate voting registry down the line since it is known - absolutely known - that names of deceased and names without signatures on the voter registration cards/digital image/precinct poll books - remain among the voters listed as "active?"
Where is that federal civil rights lawsuit by any sitting county commissioner (also member of the county Voter Registration Commission and Election Board) from as far back as 1996?
Better yet, where are Meeting Minutes of the board of county commissioners wherein the board rescinded the Election Bureau Director's - at the time, Laurie Lint - plan for beginning the process of "a Purge" as authorized by a former directive by the board of commissioners back on May 8, 2008?
Minutes are published online, and we have yet to find an action - prior to July 2008's resolution to conduct the 5-year SURE Purge program - which rescinds the former May 8, 2008 directive to begin the "purge."
The deadline date for the Purge completion was known on May 8, 2008, yet the board doesn't rescind it prior to its July action?
Commissioner Meeting Minutes 2008-2011
http://www.co.fayette.pa.us/fayette/cwp/view.asp?a=2269&q=594513
Jan. 24, 2008
http://www.co.fayette.pa.us/fayette/lib/fayette/commminutes2008/january_24_2008.pdf
Feb. 6, 2008
http://www.co.fayette.pa.us/fayette/lib/fayette/commminutes2008/february_6_2008.pdf
Feb. 28, 2008
http://www.co.fayette.pa.us/fayette/lib/fayette/commminutes2008/february_28_2008.pdf
March 27, 2008
http://www.co.fayette.pa.us/fayette/lib/fayette/commminutes2008/march_27_2008.pdf
Notice of Election Board Meeting scheduled for Friday, March 28, 2008 but no subsequent Minutes of the Meeting available online
Commissioner Zimmerlink informed the public of an Election Board Meeting tomorrow at 9 am and urged public attendance.
http://www.co.fayette.pa.us/fayette/lib/fayette/commminutes2008/march_27_2008.pdf
Meanwhile, the May 8, 2008 directive for the Purge remains online, at least.
May 8, 2008
Election Bureau
Moved by Commissioner Vicites and seconded by Commissioner Zimmerlink to develop a plan to purge voter records
Commissioner Zapotosky Aye
Commissioner Vicites Aye
Commissioner Zimmerlink Aye
Motion passed unanimously
Laurie Lint Director of Election Bureau states she will try to have the records ready for the next
Commissioners meeting. Commissioner Zapotosky informed Mrs. Lint that we have 90 days. The
Federal Law requires us to have the records done 90 days prior to the next Election. Commissioner
Zimmerlink questioned the Director if she will have a plan ready in June. She replied she had to
check on that. Commissioner Vicites informed Mrs. Lint she needs to get started on records as soon as
possible. He added that we have many people that will never vote again for different reasons for
example some may be deceased. He said we need to clean those up to make sure they are as accurate
as possible.
Commissioner Zimmerlink stated that prior to 2004, a voter purge was done on a smaller scale and in
2006, and another purge was done in conjunction with mailing 21,000 new voter machine information
affecting 30,000 voters. The Director confirmed this and Commissioner Zimmerlink said the County
has since discussed another purge
Commissioner Vicites asked Mrs. Lint to get all information for this process, which would be the cost,
and where we would be seeking the funds. He added that 10,000 voters have not voted since the 2003
election, so there are still individuals on there that should not be. On the Federal Level they use to
have to vote every 2 years, if they did not they would automatically be taken off the roll. They dropped
that when they did the Motor Voter Law in 1996
http://www.co.fayette.pa.us/fayette/lib/fayette/commminutes2008/may_8_2008.pdf
June 3, 2008
http://www.co.fayette.pa.us/fayette/lib/fayette/commminutes2008/june_3_2008.pdf
Voter purge, which had been approved May 8, 2008 prior to June 26, 2008 had been mentioned during citizen comment.
June 26, 2008
http://www.co.fayette.pa.us/fayette/lib/fayette/commminutes2008/june_26_2008.pdf
No subsequent motion was made to rescind authorization for a plan to be produced to conduct the purge, by the Election Bureau Director, and for the purge to move forward, can be found for meetings which occurred prior to June 26, 2008 specifically May 8, 2008, and no such motions to rescind the authorization for the purge can be found in minutes after June 26, 2008.
Yet during the July 24, 2008 meeting, the commissioners unanimously adopt a 5-Year SURE Purge authorization.
Election Bureau
Laurie Lint Director of the Election Bureau stated the funds that were allocated from the sell of the Eslates cannot be used for the purge Commissioner Vicites said he did not think the DOS understood our request about using certain funds
Commissioner Zapotosky said that August 8, 2008 is the deadline for the purging to be completed.
He also stated that the County Manager Warren Hughes said funds could be transferred from the Material & supply line, at approximately $25,000 if needed.
Moved by Commissioner Zimmerlink and seconded by Commissioner Zapotosky to direct the
Election Bureau to do a 5yr Sure purge in the time allotted by the Election code & to transfer funds internally from the General Fund subject to approval / review of the County Controller & Financial Consultant
Commissioner Zapotosky Aye
Commissioner Vicites Aye
Commissioner Zimmerlink Aye
Motion passed unanimously
http://www.co.fayette.pa.us/fayette/lib/fayette/commminutes2008/july_24_cc_meeting.pdf
What needs investigated is the former authorized Purge to have been completed by August 8, 2008 when and for what reasons was there a 'delay' in beginning the mailings for the determination of identifying "inactive" voters, and when was a motion made to rescind the authorization for the Purge prior to the July 24, 2008 meeting?
Might we also encourage every citizen and every citizen who is elected to public office who has anything to say start a blog. Just let someone anyone try or try and succeed to curtail one's free speech rights on the Internet. Just let them try.
At public meetings, citizens can be limited in time during public comment, but not in comment, even if slanderous comments are made, it is the citizen's right to say whatever the citizen desires, short of issuing physcial threats to do bodily harm.
As for the Zimmerlink lawsuit, we just can't totally buy that her ability to speak freely on any issue during the public meetings has been infringed upon by the two majority commissioners.
Disagreement among them will occur, and there will be times when things get heated, people talking over each other, but has Commissioner Zimmerlink been gaveled into silence by the Chairman? Has her time to speak been lessened by both commissioners so that Commissioner Zimmerlink has 5 minutes while other commissioners have unlimited time?
As to violations of the PA Sunshine Law, we have to ask, as we have before with school board members making similar allegations of violations, where is the locally filed paperwork that would cause local court action to determine if the violation occurred?
Has Commissioner Zimmerlink filed one over the past 6-years in office when making similar allegations publicly of a Republican commissioner and the Democrat commissioner? What about over the past couple of years?
We'd of course support that effort. In good conscience we just don't see the benefit of a federal Civil Rights lawsuit because Commissioner Zimmerlink thinks she's somehow been prevented at meetings from her free speech rights.
It seems to us, Commissioner Zimmerlink has another advantage to get her message out if the meetings become overly long because Commissioner Zimmerlink might have more to say than can be fit into a 4-hour long meeting.
Hold a town hall style meeting. Hold a forum on issues where you invite whomever you want to invite. Where? Anywhere. Even if you have to pay out of your own pocket for space at the 9/11 Building where the commissioners' regular meetings are held, pay for such if you believe you need to get your message out.
Finally, we're serious about the audio-tapes being compared to the written meeting minutes. It's a very serious allegation to state Minutes of meetings have been altered to convey something differently than has happened.
That's one reason we've gone on so long about the May 2008 authorized beginning of a process to purge the county voters' rolls of ineligible voters and wonder where was the motion to rescind or delay that process?
Minutes matter. Actions matter. And to date we can find no action by the board of county commissioners which rescinded the May 8, 2008 authorization to conduct the beginnings of a purge to have been completed by August 8, 2008.
Just in time for the Presidential Election of 2008 to begin, at least in Fayette, with some semblance of an accurate voters' registration list.
Net the Truth Online
Zimmerlink sues fellow Fayette commissioners By Liz Zemba
TRIBUNE-REVIEW Friday, February 19, 2010
A Fayette County commissioner has filed a federal lawsuit alleging her fellow commissioners have put the muzzle on her right to speak freely, all in retaliation for her consistent criticism of the pair.
In the civil rights lawsuit filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Pittsburgh, Angela Zimmerlink, a Republican, named fellow commissioners and Democrats Vincent Vicites and Vincent Zapotosky as defendants.
Through her attorney, Jordan Lee Strassburger of Strassburger McKenna Gutnick and Gefsky of Pittsburgh, Zimmerlink alleges the Democratic commissioners have used their majority status to stop her from effectively expressing her opinion on various matters.
"Defendant commissioners have acted unlawfully and intentionally in conspiracy with one another to interfere with Zimmerlink's ability to perform her duties as commissioner, including her ability to speak out effectively on issues of public concern," wrote Strassburger in the complaint.
Contacted yesterday, Vicites and Zapotosky described the lawsuit as frivolous, politically motivated and aimed at setting up Zimmerlink for re-election in 2011.
"This is a desperate attempt to muddy the names of Vincent Zapotosky and Vincent Vicites and our efforts to move Fayette forward," Zapotosky said. "Her ideas are welcomed, but instead we get insults and propaganda. Instead, we get a frivolous lawsuit that has no merit whatsoever."
In the six-page lawsuit, Zimmerlink alleges the two commissioners are working in concert against her because she "has been a persistent and outspoken critic" of the pair's alleged "policies relating to operating behind closed doors."
As examples, Zimmerlink notes she has expressed her opposition to matters such as the retention of Felice Associates of Greensburg to handle human resources; the use of federal stimulus dollars to build a bus shelter; the county's handling of surplus funds; the granting of pay increases to tax collectors; and her alleged exclusion from various meetings.
She alleges Vicites and Zapotosky violated the state's Sunshine Act by taking official actions in private, by holding improper executive sessions, and by manipulating meeting minutes to "misstate and mischaracterize" events that occurred at the meetings. In addition, she alleges the two commissioners took official action without allowing her to participate and conspired with a Dunbar family in the filing of a federal lawsuit against her that resulted in a $150,000 settlement.
"All of the foregoing, unlawful actions by defendant commissioners have been undertaken in retaliation against Zimmerlink for exercising her rights of free speech, political activity and political dissent," wrote Strassburger.
Vicites and Zapotosky yesterday denied Zimmerlink's allegations. Both said she has been afforded the opportunity to express her opinions on county matters. They said she was invited to various informational meetings but did not attend. They said deliberations and decisions were made later, during public meetings attended by all three commissioners.
Vicites said the lawsuit will only further hamper Fayette's ability to shake its reputation for political infighting.
"It's another black eye for Fayette County," Vicites said. "It just brings up all of the negative things about Fayette County that were brought up from the past decade, with the fighting among commissioners, and the lawsuits."
Vicites said the lawsuit will prove costly to taxpayers because they will foot the bill to defend it. Zapotosky characterized it as "a desperate act leading into a 2011 election." He described it as in direct opposition to the duties of an elected official.
"I think Angela Zimmerlink needs to take a hard look at what public service is," Zapotosky said. "It's working together, not working apart. My job is to solve problems, not create them. She seems to believe her job is to create problems, not solve them."
Zimmerlink is seeking an unspecified amount in punitive damages, as well as in compensatory or nominal damages, and attorneys' fees. In addition, she wants a judge to declare that the two commissioners violated her civil rights and that future such violations be prohibited.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/fayette/s_667976.html
No comments:
Post a Comment