I’ve been told that the Coalition of Anaheim Taxpayers for Economic Responsibility (C.A.T.E.R.) – the non-profit creature of Cynthia Ward, Greg Diamond de la Brea, and funder(s) unknown) — is taking legal action against the City of Anaheim for a third time, and supposedly regarding the Angels negotiations and probably over some (real or imagined) procedural error.
We’ll have to see what the complaint says. The last one, penned by Diamond, read more like a blog post than a lawsuit. Maybe Greg – true progressive that he is – will once again try to intimidate critical commenters by threatening to sue to learn their identities.
Maybe these high priests of transparency will reveal who is funding their political group – but that would require walking their talk. Not likely.
UPDATE: Here’s the CATER lawsuit. I recommend consuming an energy drink or strong coffee prior to reading it in order to ward off stupefaction.
Cynthia Ward is due for filing another frivolous lawsuit.
I guess it’s healthier for Cynthia to be addicted to
frivolous actions than to be addicted to illegal narcotics
like the gangbangers she sympathizes with. I sincerely
hope Cynthia gets treated for her frivolousness!
I would like to know how much Ms. Wards frivolous litigation is costing Anaheim taxpayers – in addition to who is funding her escapades. Perhaps now that they’ve sued he city, it will all come out in court!
I am interested in who is funding C.A.T.E.R.??!? Any bets?
I’ll bite: Tait.
Here is why: I’d bet my dollar is on this being the brainchild of Tait’s staffer, Montgomery. She floats the idea of CATER to Cynthia to make her feel like she is part of the “in crowd,” gets her to recruit Diamond and his group and has the whole thing funded through Tait’s family trust. It costs Tait little and was done as a ploy to try and keep at least this group loyal through the election because its pretty evident a lot of “supporters” are going to jump ship to the Galloway camp.
Isn’t that against his fiduciary duty to the city and the state bar. I suspect his license can be revoked because of that. Will someone PLEASE look into that?!!?
BTW- Mishal needs to go.She reports to the City Manager. The last thing Ms. Edwards should do on her way out is fire her!
An astute hypothesis Anaheim Jack. It also now stands to wonder if the same machine could have been behind the ACLU lawsuit. What is the thread that links all these lawsuits together? Tait and Montgomery’s personal friendships with the plaintiffs. They have been known to wine, dine and meet with Moreno and Ward outside of city hall time and time again. Why official city representatives would consort in an “unofficial” capacity with these bottom feeders who enjoy suing our city is beyond comprehension.
Everybody knows that Ward is a patsy for Tait and Montgomery. Also don’t forget that when Tait flip-flopped on his support and suddenly became anti-Steven Chavez-Lodge, it was Ward that filed that lawsuit too.
I do not even think the lawsuit is “ripe” yet? Where is the “damage?” This is all a political smoke and mirror game.
No — for the first time.
That one wasn’t a legal complaint.
I don’t recall threatening to sue anyone “to learn their identities.” But if someone commits an act of defamation, I can sue for appropriate damages. I believe that your friend James Robert Reade can tell you all about that. If your other friends (avatars, personalities, spirit guides,whatever they are) “Proud Colonist,” “Stand For Anaheim,” “Anaheim Jack,” “Watson,” and “HiNeighbor” committed acts of defamation, is it your position that the target of that defamation should not be able to sue because a pseudonym provides magical powers of legal protection? Should that target just sue you as the publisher, instead — as if there’s a difference between you and those “authors”?
When and where the law requires disclosure of funding sources for our category of non-profit, we will abide by that law. (“Abide by the law,” Matt. That’s an important phrase. Look it up if you have to.)
By the way, the allegation that either the Mayor or his staffer is funding a lawsuit against his own city is not only false, but likely defamatory as well — so you were smart to have that insinuation come out under a name other than your own. Good thinking; at least Pringle has taught you something.
No one here is defaming anyone. Just discussing interesting theories on who might be your secret source of funding which seems to have upset you for some reason. To avoid this in the future, care to share your funding source so we don’t have this confusion again?
You’re a poor judge of what constitutes defamation — and that presumes that you even exist independently outside of Matt’s mind.
We’re following the law. Do you have a problem with that? Sorry, pointless question — of course you do!
Hey, based on your legal expertise — just in case you did ever defame anyone, how would they take action against you? File suit against “Anaheim Jack” c/o … whom, exactly?
Of course, they can’t — which is why your flinging accusations is an act of cowardice and your demanding transparency is an act of absurdity. Now if Matt wants to work out a deal regarding disclosure of records that by law need not be disclosed, he and I can certainly talk.
Bye for now, phantasm!
If a person commits an act of violence by physical altercation and charges at me to block my exit from a city council meeting in retaliation for my public comments as I walk up the aisle after speaking at the podium then I have a legitimate cause for legal action. Courts frown on frivolous filings. So keep that in mind.
Dan Chmielewski and James Robert Reade, together at last! You two make an exquisite pair.
I think Mr. Reade is a deplorable individual. But then again you hang around with and cultivate a relationship with Mr. Fitzgerald who gets off on using all sorts of homophobic, sexist language in almost every time at the podium. Fitzgerald is part of your email string, is he not? Pathetic attempt to associate me with a jerk.
Under GD’s distorted view of the law, I could sue you DC for defamation of character!
The truth is a defense. I’d win. Have you apologized for your deplorable bonobo comments yet?
Matt, if you personally want an answer to a question or comment posed by one of your fictive commenters, please repost that question or comment under your own name, as representing something that you personally think should be answered, and I’ll consider whether I should address it. I am not going to argue with phantasms — especially ignorant ones.
By the way, Matt — are you going to correct your story in light of my previous comment (the one with the blockquotes)? Please sign in under your own name before replying.
Greg: Chill out. You’re just a blogger. But if you keep acting like a obnoxious, bullying, insulting jackass, then you won’t be allowed to comment here anymore.
Greg — I have a copy of the lawsuit. I especially love the part where you probe the Anaheim City Attorney for who leaked your previous communication to this blog but you want to know if all communication between you two can be kept confidential. I will also note the city attorney told you several times his response was final but you didn’t seem to get it. And a nice touch to have Donna A. serve the city with the lawsuit. And I get called a “grief pimp.”
And CATER may be in compliance with the law, but for a group that demands transparency of the city, you are still hiding in the shadows. Legal, yes, Is it right, no.
And on the subject of defamation, please…your blog allows anon commenters to defame people all the time. If I want an IP address or an identity, I’d have to go to court to get it from you wouldn’t I?
(1) “Probe the City Attorney for who leaked.” You misread it, of course. I was not asking for our conversation to be kept confidential; I was confirming that in the opinion of the City Attorney, it wasn’t.
(2) Effecting service pleased Donna quite a bit. If you think that that’s a bad thing, given what she’s had to go through, your opinion is duly noted.
(3) We’re demanding that the city follow the law. We can demand transparency from them. A 501(c)(4) not only doesn’t require transparency, but if money is given to us under the expectation that it would not be reported, one would think we would be bound to honor it, right? Your position is much like arguing that Matt has a moral responsibility to itemize exactly what he (or his wife) did in order to earn the $25,000 they got from that South County transit district. Actually, come to think of it, that would be a much more legitimate question. Matt, are you joining your friend in calling for transparency?
(4) I don’t make the policy regarding commenting on OJB — except when I push things a little more towards rejecting anonymous attacks of the sort that I’ve seen on other OC political blogs. This one, for instance.
(5) If you want to sue Vern to get a commenter’s IP address or identity, you have that prerogative. If, as I suspect, you did so without any legal grounds, you might end up paying my legal fees when it gets kicked — but paying my legal fees is absolutely your right. However, when it comes to threatening lawsuits beyond the one that Pedroza lost by failing to contest it, we both know that your bark is worse than your lack of bite, don’t we?
Dan, you are still the Grief Pimp, and you don’t understand how you are, and that’s why you think everyone else is. You talk about me like there’s nothing to me but a sad mom who lost her son; like there’s no possible way I could have any of MY OWN IDEAS AND OPINIONS on what’s happening in my city.
No, Dan, the “Tait Clown Car” is not the only people who are against giving away millions of our children’s and grandchildren’s tax revenue to Arte Moreno. I served the papers because I agree with them. I think most of us in this town agree, we Anaheim taxpayers are not here to make Arte another billion.
And Greg, sorry but your comment bothers me a little too. I was happy to serve the papers because I agree with your lawsuit, not because I need cheering up after “what I’ve gone through.” Cynthia and Greg, I was glad to be of help.
I respect that Mrs. Acevedo is involved in the democratic process, whether I disagree or agree with the positions. I also applaud her for gainfully employing herself and contributing to East Street Community Renewal Initiative’s good work. It is very encouraging to hear her speak truthfully against what she perceives to be bothersome comments by the two bloggers with ulterior motives.
How many millions do the Angels give every year that benefits you and your kids Donna? You’re too dumb to know you are being used
The Angels organization gives in excess of $3 million a year; individual players and their wives contribute to multiple charities in addition to this but I don’t believe that is tracked. And its impossible to know which charities if any would benefit Ms. Acevedo.
I didn’t misread a thing Greg. And the documents are up for everyone to see. 2. When Donna figures out you guys are just using her, she’ll stop associated herself with the clown car. 3. A signed confession you don’t walk the walk when talking the talk. Thanks. 4. You fail regularly. 5. Libel is legal grounds especially when it comes to my business, my wife and my kids. My lawyer is smarter than you Greg. When the line gets crossed, I’ll bring it.
Dan, I honestly can’t tell whether you’re just blowing smoke or legitimately cannot comprehend basic facts. But really, so long as your comments are limited to your own blog and Matt’s, I don’t lose much by not engaging you.
I would look forward to your threatened lawsuit — except that your smart lawyer is too smart to bring it.
Who said I was bringing a lawsuit. Fact: my lawyer is smarter than you. I question your comprehension of basic facts all the time.
I suspect Mr. diamond will be crushed when Tom Tait endorses Tony Rack for DA. Lets see how much money you raise from those losers you blog with diamond.
Not at all. He’s a Republican official; I never expect him to oppose the endorsed Republican incumbent, just as I as a DPOC officer will not oppose Lorri Galloway if she runs for Mayor and gets our party’s endorsement. There are good people in both major parties — as well as (and this is not a reference to Lorri) less good ones.
I don’t expect to raise much money from my OJB blog-mates, who don’t have a lot of public money shoved into their pockets. That’s OK too. But they are far from losers.