Republicans spar with library over Fremont meeting

From our very own Walter Stanley III:

Dear Chairman Ron Nehring, Vice Chairman Tom Del Becarro, and Bay Area Regional Vice Chair Morgan Kelly,

I wanted to bring to your attention something that has occurred in the last couple of days regarding an infringement on the free speech rights of the Alameda County Republican Party. As Acting Chairman of the ACRP, I called a Special Meeting to be held on July 6, 2009 in order to hold an election for the chairmanship. The ACRP has been without an elected chairman for over three months now since Karen Wind’s resignation back in March.

I scheduled the Special Meeting at the Alameda County Library in Fremont. Today, I was notified by the Director of the Alameda County Library, Jean Hofacket (510-745-1501), that our meeting was canceled based on a report that the meeting is not open to the public. I immediately assured Ms. Hofacket that the Special Meeting is indeed open to the public and have directed her to the official ACRP website where it says as much ( http://www.alamedagop.org/events/ ) along with our Meetup Group as well ( http://www.meetup.com/alamedacountygop/calendar/10765569/ ). I also reminded her that the Peace and Freedom Party Central Committee of San Francisco meets at the main San Francisco library ( http://www.peaceandfreedom.org/home/pfp-net/counties-and-chapters/san-francisco-county ) and the Alameda County Democratic Party Central Committee meets at the San Leandro library. ( http://www.acdems.org/calendar.php ) Nonetheless, she has refused to let the ACRP meet at the Fremont library on July 6th.

As I’m sure you are aware Ms. Hofacket’s refusal is a violation of the ACRP’s free speech rights since she is acting on behalf of a governmental entity. Among other things, preventing the ACRP from meeting will irreparably harm the ACRP, as well as, the public and would constitute a prior restraint of speech and association that would violate the United States Constitution and California Constitution. The ACRP’s fundamental political speech and associational activities are at stake as the ACRP’s meeting is undeniably a political affair protected by the First Amendment against governmental interference.

This prohibition also could be extended to meetings of our grass roots Assembly District Caucus Committees, which have met in that same library in the past, thus inhibiting us from growing the party. Further, California Elections Code explicitly permits the use of State buildings, so this policy by Alameda County prohibiting (Republican) County Committees from meeting in their County libraries is contrary to what is permitted by State law.

I hope you will see this as a threat not only to the ACRP but also to the California Republican Party as it creates a precedent that could severely infringe on the CRP’s rights in the future. To that end I ask that you intervene to the extent possible so that the ACRP can hold its Special Meeting at the Fremont library on July 6, 2009. Anything that you can do to ensure the ACRP’s rights to free political speech would be much appreciated.


Walter Stanley III
Acting Chairman
Alameda County Republican Party Central Committee

Matt Artz


  1. There’s still enough Republicans in Alameda County to warrant reserving a room at the library? That should be the headline 🙂

  2. Dear republicans, there is PLENTY of room at GitMO where no one else has freedom of speech OR right to representation. You all set GitMo up so maybe now you should try it for a while?

  3. This is Hofacket’s way of saying “dissent is un-Alameda-ian”.

  4. Great idea, John! That makes as much sense as Ted Kennedy having brain surgery at the bottom of Lake Chappaquiddick.

    Partisan hackery does wonders for roller coaster logic.

  5. It’s truly a sad day in America when government workers like Jean Hofacket decide to flex their “limited” power, and this, right before the celebration of our national birthday, freeing us of the shackles of a tyrant an ocean away. Shame on Hofacket. Here’s a link to her email account with the library administration: http://www.aclibrary.org/default.asp?topic=Library&cat=EmailTo

    Let your voice be heard!

  6. Ironies abound in this one, Jon. I’m sure the local Republicans can find a lawyer somewhere in there ranks to draft a nasty letter.

  7. crp couldn’t put a pair together to challenge anything. well, unless it is a threat to ron and his cronies….. quick, call bell

  8. Does Walter seriously think that not being able to get a room at the library is going to “inhibit (the GOP) from growing the party”? Wow. Finding a venue for the circular firing squad to meet is hardly the biggest problem on their plate these days.

    On a more serious note, however, I do believe that the rules about who can use public buildings must be applied fairly and equally. As much as it churns my gut to contemplate any position that supports the GOP, if other more functional parties are allowed to use the space, then they have a right to do so as well. And I say this in full recognition of the fact that no Republican would ever make the same argument if it was the Dems who couldn’t get a room, but that’s the trouble with us liberals – we believe in doing the right thing, even when it aids and abets folks who would never do the same for us.

    Jon – the ACLU’s not a bad idea – they did good work in Skokie.

    And Walter, give my best to Mark and Sarah. Perhaps you or NBW an provide us with the link to your e-mail account as well?

  9. F.L – LOL – you made my afternoon.

    THese folks have been busy pounding their chests about their civil liberties while they’ve been denying same for so many other individuals or groups in the name of . . . . (fill in the blank); pounding their bibles about protecting lives of unborn children while simultaneously approving the use of deadly force worldwide in the name of (. . . . fill in the blank). . . . the list goes on.

    The double standards exhibited by this political faction are (IMHO) irrational, scary, and – at best – inconsistant.

  10. BTW – I second your thoughts re use of this public facility. Based on the few facts avaialble the Library should allow them access immediately.

  11. It seems as though some would like to turn this into a Republican vs. Democrat thing. This is not the issue here. The members of the Alameda Co. GOP central committee are elected Party representatives that are provided the right to use state buildings under the CA Elections Code. Ms. Hofacket should be aware of this being the Director.

    There are a few requirements (for any group) to hold meetings at the library.

    * Community based organization

    * Not for profit (no sales at meeting)

    * Open to the public

    * Completed application prior to meeting date

    I would say that the Alameda Co. GOP central committee is “community based,” and “open to the public.” Mr. Stanley suggests that the special meeting is for electing a new chairman, not to sale anything. And I can only assume that an application was completed. My question is, what seems to be the problem?

    As a tax-payer (not a Republican or Democrat), I have to say that this doesn’t sit with me well. The Fremont Main Library should be expecting a lawsuit in the very near future, and rightfully so!

  12. Lawsuit? What happened to the tried-and-true Republican platform of tax breaks and tort reform? Oh yeah, telling folks that the justice system is being abused by plaintiffs only works until you your own personal nose is out of joint, like the 2000 election or Norm Coleman. I guess just correcting the error by giving them a room wouldn’t be sufficient; the GOP has to punish them as well to make their point. Way to grow the party!

  13. I’ve loved Matt Taibbi ever since I heard him say:

    “You know it’s funny this morning outside of Penn Station I saw a guy huffing glue out of a paper bag, and he was making more sense than Michelle Bachmann was making. I can’t believe it. You need to pass a written test to drive a car in this country but I bet this woman can’t even write her name in the ground with a stick. I mean it’s just unbelievable to me that this person is in the Congress.”


    Matt rocks. Thanks for the link, Doug.

  14. FL – He (Taibbi) tells it like it is. He points out that under the Clinton Administration Goldman Sachs profited and they are primed to do the same under the Obama Aministration given the former GS employees that continue to infiltrate key positions in government.

    He also points out (in the video clips) there is not a damned thing we, as ordinary citizens, can do about it.

  15. This incident is just another example of north-county GOP central committee members using “rule by lawyers” to protect their little do-nothing social club, which most of last year (an election year) could not even get a quorum at their regular monthly meetings until the newly elected members, many of whom are being sued, took their positions!

    One of their big complaints was that Walter should have held the meeting in San Leandro vs. holding it in Fremont. Apparently having to come all the way to southern Alameda County was too painful.

  16. Come on, FL – This republican vs. democratic thing needs to cease— immediately !!


  17. Obviously some strings are being pulled. This is totally a double standard. For the big-government, pro-war GOPer’s it’s a godsend. They were against this meeting from the start, and looks like they are getting their way… as usual. Perhaps they used party funds (typical) to finance ten or twenty minutes of their state party lawyer’s time to call Fremont Main?

    Oh well, just one of many authoritarian acts on the part of the Republican party leadership. They don’t want power anywhere, no matter how minor and petty to slip.

  18. Well, you know, B, the back-and-forth might be easier to curtail if the parties didn’t stand on such completely opposite ends of the spectrum in all of the ways that most effect people’s lives; abortion, global warming, civil liberties, health care, living wage, immigration, education policy, scientific innovation, the tax code, trade policies, Iraq and Afghanistan, Korea, Iran, Pakistan, nuclear proliferation – you could drive a truck through the differences between the parties.

    I will extend a hand to the GOP, however, because I do realize that, in the last election, folks did not so much vote for Democrats as they voted against Republicans. Americans voted against ignorance, xenophobia, religious fanaticism, waging endless foreign wars of “regime change” and demands for unlimited police and surveillance power. Plus, the floor fell out of the economy. I’ve got to hand it to ’em, Republicans did more than any other force to put Democrats in power. They were tough years to live through, but that dark cloud did ultimately have a silver lining.

    Besides, they’re just so entertaining now. I was never a fan of soap operas before.

  19. Fremont Lifer,

    I, too, am a Bay Area native. But I hold no reservations in saying this place is an echo chamber. What I’m seeing from you is the same-ol’ Republicans are baby eaters talk that I’ve heard for the last 20+ years in this town.

    These attitudes makes us appear ignorant and parochial when we’re heard by outsiders, and I would say this attitude which our rep Pete Stark so well represents marginalizes us on the national stage (given his seniority, you would think he would be magnitudes more effective than what he has).

    The Democratic Party takes us absolutely for granted, tossing promises but doing nothing to fulfill them (Obama is the second Democratic president in the last twenty years to flat-out lie to his gay supporters); the Republican party has written off the area as no-man’s land — not even going to the effort to publicly advertise their views. And we’re stuck feeling smug but powerless.

    Face it: we’re a non-player in the scheme of things.

  20. I find the following most interesting:

    “that our meeting was canceled based on a report that the meeting is not open to the public”

    Who made this report? What was it based on? I think the worst case scenario is that Walter didn’t realize the meeting had to be public. In finding this out, he decided to make it public so that they could use the library. Even in this case, I think they should be allowed to go ahead with the meeting.

    I agree that one has to look at this outside or Rep. vs. Dem. blinders. They have a right to have a public meeting here.

    Charles, BTW, my fiance and I found your web site quite interesting. 🙂

  21. So if I understand you correctly, FR, Democrats are powerless, but we have a majority in Congress and a Democrat in the White House. We’re non-players, but one Bay-Area woman is the Speaker of the House, another serves on the Appropriations and Foreign Affairs Committees, and another serves on the Appropriations and Judiciary Committees and is Chairwoman of the Intelligence Committee. Oh, yeah, there’s that Democrat Secretary of State too.

    I’m not happy about Obama’s inaction regarding LGBT rights, but the guy’s had a few other things to deal with during his first six months in office (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/browse/). If you think Obama’s not your guy for LGBT issues, good luck getting the GOP to do anything about them.

    Of course Republicans don’t eat babies and I never said they did. They have simply made unbelievably poor policy decisions that limit their appeal to a dying demographic: the old, the under-educated, the rural, the white, and Christian fundamentalists. A May 09 Gallup poll showed that Democrats enjoy a party identification advantage over Republicans at every age between 18 and 85 (http://www.gallup.com/poll/118285/democrats-best-among-generation-baby-boomers.aspx).

    Since the New Deal, the GOP has been on the wrong side of every issue of significance for ordinary Americans, and that is why no one takes them seriously as honest purveyors of ideas. I’ll go one better and say that some Americans have not rejected conservative ideas; they simply don’t think Republicans are conservatives anymore.

    As a fellow Bay Area native, I’m sure you’ll understand when I say that I don’t give a good ding-dang about how I or we sound to outsiders, and the party can count on me for the foreseeable future, come good times or bad. Still, smug feels a lot better than the deep, dark hole of the Bush years.

  22. I agree with #21 in that you can expect no action when you sign a lifetime contract with either political party. People are only represented when those doing the bidding have to compete for support.

    In the Bay Area, it’s somewhat ironic the hate and prejudgment many apply to anything right of center, when it’s those few independent and/or right thinkers which forces some political action beyond fundraising.

  23. Marty,

    I think the prejudice extends to those who even support centrist or slightly left of center views. Fremont, and the Bay Area in general, is probably the most liberal area of the United States. And we’ve shown that we’ll vote for anyone with a ‘D’ behind their name and oppose anything that the Republicans support.

    In essence, we’ve become worthless votes. Why give us what we want? We won’t vote for the other guy if we don’t get it.

    Fremont Lifer illustrates the point perfectly.

  24. What is up with the Bay Area Native thing – is that some kind of qualification or badge of honor ?
    Having been born and raised in the Bay Area – – – entitles me to nothing more or less than the next citizen and taxpayer.

    I’m struggling to follow this dialogue.

    Perhaps these are too sophisticated for me to grasp – but I struggle to follow the reasoning.

    These *feel* like the same antithetical rhetoric (and let’s be clear – all political debate is at some level or another – rhetorical) I have heard from various fringe organizations like Scientology and the “Moonies”.

    I fully acknowledge that these conecpts may be too sophisticated for me to grasp.

  25. Perhaps some clarification is in order, box. The pecking order is:

    Union City Resident <<<< Tourist < Newark Resident < Bay Area Transplant < Bay Area Lifer < Fremont Lifer.

  26. Res – you know, far from being an echo chamber, this site is open to pretty much anybody with an internet connection and at a keyboard. There’s nothing wrong with a loyal Democrat speaking up for his party, just as there is nothing wrong with members of other parties telling us all why they support their party. So, please enlighten us all with the policies, platforms and programs currently being proposed by the GOP that are going to get this country back on track.

    Also, B, I don’t think that being a Bay Area native is any particular badge of honor. It’s just what you are, and there’s no reason to hide it. The only advantage that I can think of is that, if you’ve been paying attention, you may be able to recall more history on local issues than newer arrivals know about, but as a local yourself you probably know that that can be as much of a curse as a blessing.

    As far as Democrats being like Moonies or Scientologists; those “beliefs” are based on faith, on acceptance of that which cannot be seen. Politics is the business of fact, albeit accompanied by a fair amount of spin. In the end, politics comes down to what you can prove; religion is based on what you want to be true. They’re also tax-exempt, but that’s a whole ‘nother argument.

  27. Irv,

    To address your Q regarding what the GOP is up to in regards to their political future, the answer is nothing but lick their wounds, obviously.

    But I may remind you that it is just as easy to win elections by simple differentiation as it is to win with bold ideas.

    Remember that while Obama’s victory was a hybrid of both aspects, he is delivering on neither. His widely lambasted economic policies are hanging on a thread wound by the benefit of the unknown (or the benefit of the doubt). In the greater econ and finance community Obama’s economic advisers are either despised as crony capitalists, or subjugated as ignorant jokers. Larry Summers is Fed Chairman in waiting.

    And there’s always the cold shoulder given to the core leftist agenda as a clear sign that to win support nationally one must move right-center. I eluded to this in a past post, but Obama’s rightward movement is unfortunate, because I believe that now is the exact time in American history where a left of center President is useful.

    So as far as the Dems prospects, at best, they get a centrist Democratic president until 2016. At worst they see defeat in 2012, perhaps before if the trillions wasted on the stimulus don’t stymie unemployment by Q3/2010. I doubt unemployment will subside in CA. The housing market is about to tank even further.

    So, perhaps that is what you mean by politics being “the business of fact” in juxtaposition to “faith”. Once “faith” in Obama’s stimulus, TALF, TARP, PPIP, LMFAO, etc is exhausted and the “facts” are revealed, a defeat to his admin may be dealt.

    But, I wouldn’t sweat it. I can all but guarantee the Republicans will drag out someone even more ridiculous than John Kerry to run against Obama in 2012. In that respect, it would the the Dems to lose.

  28. Hey Irv – Dont jump too quickly when you say “..those “beliefs” are based on faith, on acceptance of that which cannot be seen. Politics is the business of fact..” –

    I personally think that the demise of the Republican party has largely been a result of the mixing of politics AND religion. I think it’s a forgone conclusion – (fact ?) that the Republican party is now very much a faction fighting within itself and which is divided by (largely) religious ideology.

  29. BTW – Marty – thanks for setting me straight – – – I didn’t see that one at all !

    LOL !

  30. You’re right, B. The GOP may not even be a political party anymore in the strictest sense, since the evangelicals moved in. Having become so entrenched in “principle”, they’ve lost broader appeal to moderates and independents.

    IMHO, they have two choices:

    reinvent themselves as a more inclusive party that advocates something other than failed principles and appeasement of special interests (NRA, big oil, big pharma, defense industries, fundamentalist Christian groups), or

    go the way of the Whigs and the dodo.

  31. Bbox said “the Republican party is … divided by (largely) religious ideology.”

    I think the division is between the social conservatives and the fiscal conservatives, who don’t really have much in common, aside from not being Democrats.

  32. It seems as though a few things need to be addressed. I would like to apologize, in advance, for the length of my comment.

    As Acting Chairman of the Alameda County Republican Central Committee, I called a special meeting for the election of our new Chairman to take place at the Fremont Main Library on July 6th. As required by our committee bylaws, seven days notice needs to be provided to all Members of the committee informing them of the date, time, place and reason for the special meeting. I sent out notification on Monday June 29th through the regular mail, e-mail and over the telephone to all Members of the committee.

    In Alameda County, we have a divided Republican Central Committee. Some may view this as a bad thing but, I tend to disagree as I believe that some divisions are needed and may benefit the Party as it attempts to rebuild!

    On one side we have the George Bush type of Republicans. These would be (for the most part) the “War on Terror” supporters that were willing to toss fiscal conservatism to the side in an effort to purchase a little so-called temporary security with the undeclared military police actions, and nation building activities in the Middle East. Most of these Republicans think of themselves as conservatives, totally disregarding the fact that there is nothing “conservative” about war, declared or undeclared. These Republicans are the type that support exclusive Party fundraisers, held at mansions in the hills where only the well to do can afford to attend and get some face time with the latest Republican candidate running for “public” office. These Republicans are the type to support holding closed door meetings for their private little social club while at the same time claiming to “Build Our Republican Party.” These are the establishment Republicans that file lawsuits against badly needed volunteers to maintain the status quo of their do-nothing organization.

    The other side, is the younger, more energetic side that wants to help return the Republican Party to its conservative roots. These are the real limited government conservatives, most of which were all former Ron Paul supporters that were unhappy about the direction of the GOP under the Bush administration. I myself am a part of this side of the committee. I, like all of my friends on the committee are new to politics, this being the first time any of us have decided to put our names on the ballot and run for office. During our short time on the committee, we have seen that politics is indeed a dirty game to play, even at the minor league level. We have learned the hard way how to play hard ball with these people. We won a majority on the 30-Member committee, took a majority on the Executive Committee, fought a lawsuit and won (now were fighting the appeal), installed a presence in the CRP delegation, learned to quorum bust, passed a committee resolution in support of auditing the Federal Reserve, and even got Democrat Congressman Pete Stark to sign on as a co-sponsor of that legislation.

    I have personally scheduled and held meetings at the Fremont Main Library in the past, and I’m fully aware that meetings there must be open to the public. Furthermore, as I explained to the library staff, I would never attempt to hold a meeting at a tax-payer funded public venue that would not be open to the public. I would consider doing so to be a slap in the face to every single tax-payer throughout Alameda County! It would also be important to note that the first thing that I personally did as a newly elected Vice Chairman of the ACRP was to install a “Public Comment Period” on every Central Committee meeting agenda. Certain incumbent Members on the committee that seem to struggle with what it means to “support & defend the U.S. Constitution” tried to discourage me in my attempt to make the ACRP more open and inclusive to the members of the public. Some even irresponsibly suggested that our meetings are not open to the public and pointed out how, in the past, “do-nothing-but-file-lawsuits” former Chairman Paul Cummings would call attendees “out of order” because their comments were not related to agenda topics. I reject this type of elitist attitude and decided to embrace the freedom of speech, regardless if what is said is supportive or negative of the GOP or Republican in general.

    On Tuesday June 30th, Fremont Main Library Manager Sally Pine phoned to inform me that another Member of the committee had suggested that the special meeting scheduled for July 6th was not in accordance with our committee bylaws, which was completely inaccurate of course. This establishment Member was not supportive of the special meeting (for whatever reason) and was willing to do whatever was necessary to get the special meeting canceled. Ms. Pine said that the Member also suggested that our committee meetings are not open to the public, which again is completely false and deliberately misleading as far as I’m concerned. I assured Ms. Pine that the meeting was indeed open to the public and in accordance with our committee bylaws and even pointed her in the direction of the ACRP official website where it specifically says, “This Special Meeting of the Alameda County Republican Central Committee will be open to the public and may be video, or audio tape recorded.” (which is considered a public notice) I also pointed out the section of our bylaws that relates to calling the special meeting (Article 7, Sec 2, (a.)) showing that the meeting was in compliance with our committee bylaws, which should have been of no real concern to the Fremont Main Library. Ms. Pine said that my meeting was still canceled!

    About an hour later, Ms. Pine phoned again to inform me that a mistake had been made and the special meeting had the green light now. I thanked Ms. Pine for her due diligence regarding the issue and was happy to set the record straight regarding the openess of the special meeting.

    Shortly after, I received a another call from Ms. Pine who informed me that the meeting was again canceled because Supervisor Scott Haggerty told the library to cancel the meeting. She said that when a County Supervisor says to do something, they do it! I questioned this rationale and asked to speak with someone in charge. Ms. Pine gave me Ms. Hofacket’s contact information. I left a message with Ms. Hofacket’s secretary who told me that Ms. Hofacket was at the County Board of Supervisor’s meeting in Oakland at that time.

    Then, about an hour after that, County Librarian Ms. Jean Hofacket phoned to inform me that she was canceling the special meeting and it had nothing to do with Haggerty’s call. She said that there had been conflicting information coming into her office about the meeting that suggested it was not open to the public. I assured her that it was and said that we have public comment periods during every meeting, which are even recorded in the meeting minutes. I informed her that members from the public would be welcomed to comment and even engage in the discussion during the meeting if they chose to do so. I pointed out the fact that I would be Chairing the special meeting and would not hesitate to call on those who wished to be recognized. Ms. Hofacket said that she needed to get back with me the next day with the final word.

    She conveniently called while I was in class to inform me that she has decided to disallow our meeting at the library. Later, in her letter, she avoids citing anything directly related to the Library “Rules and Regulations For Use of Facilities” and instead writes, “Given the various issues and differences in information… I have decided to disallow your request for use of the meeting room on July 6, 2009.”

    I phoned Supervisor Haggerty’s office and spoke with his Chief of Staff, who denied Mr. Haggerty’s personal involvement in the matter, however, Chief of Staff Chris Gray did admit that he himself did, in fact, call the Fremont Main Library to (supposedly) ask about the Library’s policy for booking meeting rooms. Nonetheless, after Haggerty’s office made the call, the fact of the matter that the special meeting was indeed open to the public did not get in the way of Ms. Hofacket canceling the meeting.

    Haggerty’s office’s involvement has contributed to my decision not to support the Supervisor in future elections. After all, a Republican that believes that REAL ID is only a federal issue, and feels that it doesn’t concern the states has a poor understanding of the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and reflects his allegiance to the business as usual gang of Republican Party that has all but abandoned states rights’ in favor of an over-stepping big federal government. I won’t even get into his support of the fire place bans.

    Because of Ms. Hofacket’s decision to disallow the special meeting, I have informed the committee that the special meeting has been canceled.

    In post #9, Fremont Lifer says,

    “Does Walter seriously think that not being able to get a room at the library is going to “inhibit (the GOP) from growing the party”? Wow.”

    -Yes I do Fremont Lifer. Our Assembly District Caucus Committees enable the Party to focus on specific regions in the county. Holding meetings in a variety of areas allows us to reach out to voters in different cities. Excluding Fremont from our efforts doesn’t help us grow the Party because we must have a presence to be effective.

    Fremont Lifer also says, “And Walter, give my best to Mark and Sarah. Perhaps you or NBW an provide us with the link to your e-mail account as well?”


    Finally Fremont Lifer says, “On a more serious note, however, I do believe that the rules about who can use public buildings must be applied fairly and equally…And I say this in full recognition of the fact that no Republican would ever make the same argument if it was the Dems who couldn’t get a room…”

    -Thank you for the support Lifer, coming from you it does mean something to me. And rest assured that I would also speak up for another individual, Party or organization that was being discriminated upon.

    Don’t hesitate to use the email contact listed above as I would enjoy hearing from you… Republican, Democrat or third Party. And feel free to join us at our regularly scheduled monthly meetings on every third Tuesday of each month. Meetings are open to the public!

    In Liberty Always,
    Walter Stanley III
    Acting Chairman ACRP

  33. Walter: do you mean the special meeting got cancelled, but you are still allowed to have the regular meetings at the library? Not clear if this was a one time issue.

  34. County Supervisor Scott Haggerty used his influence for whatever reason to get the library staff to cancel the meeting. This is obvious to me, and should be to you too. Why would Haggerty’s office even get involved in this? Unless it was to tell the library that they were violating their own policy for holding meetings. Maybe one of the George Bush Republicans called in a political favor with Haggerty? We all know how it works. The “establishment” as Walter puts it, has their own agenda, which has nothing to do with standng up for what is right. These claim to be “public servants” only serve to advance their own special interests, and personal situations as they make their climb up the political ladder.

    This is the type of scum within the GOP that has no principle at all, and has all but ruined the party.

  35. Scott Haggerty = snake

    Fremont Main Library = Doesn’t like Republicans

    Jean Hofacket = should be fired

  36. Back in January, I attended a meeting at the Fremont main library that was held by Walter for the Alameda Republican Party. I was not a member of the actual group but I was still welcomed into the meeting room to sit in, which I did. Actually, I expected some resistance since I was a registered Libertarian but that wasn’t the case. I was listened to when I asked questions, and treated as a person, not as a party member.

    During the meeting, the group discussed grass roots activities inside of Fremont making reference to the importance of the voters in the city, and even said that they would schedule future meetings in the larger conference room to make room for more attendees from the public since the January meeting was nearly beyond capacity.

    I think that it would be safe to say that the meeting was open to the public based on the track record.

    Maybe someone should have offered Hofacket & Hagerty a front row seat at the meeting. Then it would have been really “special”.

  37. Bruce says, “Walter: do you mean the special meeting got cancelled, but you are still allowed to have the regular meetings at the library? Not clear if this was a one time issue.”

    The special meeting was canceled by Ms. Hofacket. Although we have held meetings at the library in the past (no problems then), we normally hold our regular monthly meetings in San Leandro at our Headquarters.

    In her letter, Ms. Hofacket writes, “This decision (disallowing the meeting) is specifically applicable to the July 6, 2009 meeting.”

    I’m assuming that her violation of the library policy will only be a one time action. Needless to say, she hasn’t made us feel very welcome at the Fremont Main Library after all of this. Going from yes to no, no to yes, and back again because of second hand baseless accusations about the meeting not being open to the public, suggests that the staff is not very professional, or at the very least not very reasonable.

    Being the Acting Chairman, I speak for the Party. If I’m the one who completed the application with the library, shouldn’t the fact that I say the meeting is open to the public be enough? What about the public notice on the official ACRP website that says the meeting is open to the public? I guess somebody, anybody can just call in at any time and say, “their meeting is not open to the public!” and good ‘ol Jean Hofacket will just take their word for it and cancel the meeting… forget letting the facts get in the way.

    Very disappointing I have to say!

  38. Walter:

    Can you please post the names, emails, and phone numbers of these people at the Library (and relevant politicians that were involved)? It is time we all called them directly and let them know what we think.

    I am tired of these people deciding what is “right”.

    Look at Obama:
    1. Didn’t do anything for human rights in Iran
    2. Gitmo prison still open
    3. Troops will remain in Afghanistan much, much longer
    4. Spent money like a drunken sailor — and to save the bonuses and jobs of rich bankers
    5. He bowed down to the Saudis (read the article about how Obama doesn’t drink coffee but had his first cup with the Saudis)

    So tell me….is this what the Library staff is defending?

    I don’t get it.

    Please circulate names and numbers. We also need to personally address these people in the Library.

    We should have a TEAR YOUR LIBRARY CARD tea party!

  39. I would like to congratulate Fremont resident Jerry Salcido who was recently elected as the new Alameda County GOP Chairman! We know he’ll do a great job!

  40. Just get enough guns and a cabin in the wilderness, when, in fact, as the talk points out neighbors are crucial to survival and not just any neighbors. ,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *