Post a New Topic
Original post made
by Walter_E_Wallis, Midtown,
on Aug 1, 2009
Our City Attorney said the address on the envelope shown is a legitimate address - the USPS disagrees. Palo Alto could save money, instead of an attorney just buy a fortune cookie whenever a legal opinion is needed.
Like this comment
Posted by Norm
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 12, 2009 at 2:37 pm
<I missed this last week -my bad.>
I am no friend of Victor Frost, but, for the sake of others and the right to vote, I can't watch this go on and on and on. Several folks seem to be "out of their league" on this topic.
If Victor is reading any of this, he has to roaring with amusement!!! He has folks P & M-ing at each other with bad arguments over erroneous points. His ego must be really stoked by the attention.
Please----think this all the way through before responding and stepping on yourself……………..
Have any of you read a Voter Registration Form in the past decade or two??? With some of the tracks of the argument I'm going to guess it was NOT read, only filled out and signed.
Will the USPS deliver mail to all residences? Never has happened and never will.
If you register to vote, who does the verification (if any) that the information is "true and correct" under penalty of perjury?
When you register to vote, you register with "medium government" - the County. Not with the City, who accepts the determination of the County as to validity, or the State, who directs the Counties to handle such matter on their behalf, or the Federal folks, who (and it's a different fight) have little to do with the actual voter. Nothing in the Constitution, the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970, or postal regulations grant any authority to the USPS to determine voting eligibility or what decides residency, or constitutes a residency.
You do NOT need a USPS deliverable address for where you claim residency, but you must have a mailing address. I know this is true without having to consult a lawyer I read the form!
Line #3 says "IF NO STREET ADDRESS, describe where you live: (Cross Streets, Route, Section, Range, N, S, E, W)" Line #4 asks for a mailing address.
You don't have to get you mail where you live the USPS determination of where you get your mail has nothing to do with voting residence. People who live in the swamps, bayous and boonies scattered across this country, or an unhoused person sleeping where they can (or can't, but do), are allowed their right to vote even lacking a paved street, a number by the door, or lack of a door.
Neither the City Attorney NOR the USPS have much to say about whether Victor is allowed to vote They are both 'out of their league" if they try to over rule the county registrar.
If you have a problem with the legitimacy of Victor's voting residence, take it to the county registrar, it's legal as long as they hold it as true.
If he actually does run and you have an issue, it's best to take it to the Fair Political Practices Commission (fppc.ca.gov or 1-866-ASK-FPPC).
BTW the housing InnVision provides in RWC, and other places, serves dozens and is funded through a federal HUD grant, which cannot be spent on anything else, only getting people off the street that the public says they want off the street. (But, that, again, is a different argument.) And the funds Jerry cite another HUD, not a penny of general fund monies, just allocated by the city to meet public demands to do something without spending city money.