Town Square

Post a New Topic

Frost's residence

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.

Comments (24)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Outside Observer
a resident of another community
on Aug 1, 2009 at 6:20 pm

Walter,

What makes you think that's not what they are doing now?

Just wish I got the 25 million dollar fortune cookie from Enron.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Sharon
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 1, 2009 at 6:31 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


 +   Like this comment
Posted by VoxPop
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Aug 1, 2009 at 8:07 pm

InnVision, non-profit that runs the Opportunity Center, among other things, pays for Frost's housing in RWC. Palo Alto doesn't.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jerry
a resident of Monroe Park
on Aug 1, 2009 at 8:50 pm

The Ciy of Palo Alto funds InnVision.

Web Link


 +   Like this comment
Posted by SteveU
a resident of Barron Park
on Aug 2, 2009 at 10:47 am

SteveU is a registered user.

City hall has a "Legitimate" address. Does that give someone the right to use that address to justify residency?
Does "residency" require a Residential unit zoned address?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 2, 2009 at 12:45 pm

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

With the exception of squirrels and birds, utility poles are not residences. But wait - that might be the loophole.
The California Housing Code lists minimum requirements for a residential unit. The City Attorney, by abetting Frost's claim, may be committing a misprision of a felony. Ask any competent lawyer to define that to you. Check Wiki for their definitions.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Paul
a resident of Downtown North
on Aug 3, 2009 at 1:42 pm

"Our City Attorney said the address on the envelope shown is a legitimate address - the USPS disagrees.'

Talk about Big Government intrusion! Why do you think the federal government should be dictating Palo Alto's internal affairs?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 3, 2009 at 4:48 pm

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

The last time I looked I was not Big Government. I am however an affected citizen who believes words have generally accepted, often clearly defined meanings. When someone says a boy is a dog is a rat or war is peace and love is hate I will hand the offender a yellow or red card.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Paul
a resident of Downtown North
on Aug 4, 2009 at 12:02 pm

What we have here is the apparent failure to of our lead poster to comprehend his own posting. The USPS is a long-standing branch of the US Government - the quintessential Big Government, whose opinion you claimed should trump our local government's judgement when you started this thread on Aug 1, 2009 at 5:59 pm.

I repeat: Why do you think the federal government should be dictating Palo Alto's internal affairs?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jerry
a resident of Monroe Park
on Aug 4, 2009 at 4:42 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 6, 2009 at 3:57 am

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

Palo Alto exists as a subordinate unit of the United States, not as an independent kingdom. See Appomattox Courthouse. See also any dictionary and the California Housing Code. Give it up, Paul, you are out of your league, as is the City Attorney.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Paul
a resident of Downtown North
on Aug 6, 2009 at 6:11 pm

"Give it up, Paul, you are out of your league"

Give it up? Whatever happened to "don't tread on me" and "live free or die" and "give me liberty or give me death"?

I remember when "States' Rights" was a cornerstone of the American democracy, and not a code phrase for "let Jim Crow be." Do you remember "local control"?

Continue your love affair with big government as you like, and I'll respectfully and enthusiastically be your principled opponent.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by sharon
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 6, 2009 at 6:32 pm



If Palo Altans just stopped giving Frost money, orinstead gave him vouchers that could only be exchanged for food products then he would stop his activities.
If he is, in fact, a resident of RWC how can he run for political office in Palo Alto?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 6, 2009 at 8:21 pm

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

Paul, you cite three slogans from the fight against non-representative government, a fight we won. I believe government should be big enough to perform those duties inherently or constitutionally within their scope. I speak only for myself, and I cannot recall having denounced "Big Government", but if you define Big Government as govern that exceeds its franchise then yes, I'm agin it. The constitution, as you know, authorizes the postal service.


 +   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.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jerry
a resident of Monroe Park
on Aug 12, 2009 at 3:12 pm


Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) are a general grant given to cities by the Federal Government, with the aim of helping low and moderate income citizens of a given city.

Eligible Activities
CDBG funds may be used for activities which include, but are not limited to:

acquisition of real property;
relocation and demolition;
rehabilitation of residential and non-residential structures;
construction of public facilities and improvements, such as water and sewer facilities, streets, neighborhood centers, and the conversion of school buildings for eligible purposes;
public services, within certain limits;
activities relating to energy conservation and renewable energy resources; and
provision of assistance to profit-motivated businesses to carry out economic development and job creation/retention activities.

Web Link

Palo Alto is not required to help fund InnVision.

We could, as easily, decide to use those funds for paving a street, or redeveloping a derelict shopping center.

If InnVision is going to pay for local bums to live in Redwood City, then I suggest that Palo Alto refuse to fund InnVision. Maybe we can get the "Opportunity Center" shut down. That would remove a magnet for even more bums. The best thing that CPA can do for all of us, including our low and moderate income citizens would be to clean up Downtown, which is losing business, becasue InnVision is providing the magnet that attracts those who diminish it.



 +   Like this comment
Posted by Norm
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 12, 2009 at 3:30 pm

Jerry -
As I said about InnVision and HUD grants - "(But, that, again, is a different argument.)." If you believe in pursuing that as a worth thread, get your fact stgaight and post something on that subject.

Back to the original -
Any disagreement regarding the USPS deciding voter eligibility?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jerry
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 12, 2009 at 3:55 pm

Norm.

My post stands on its own merits. I have not been arguing about official addresses, USPS or not. I have been arguing that CPA funds, including those that we get from the Federal government, are being wasted on bums. It is even worse than that, because the funds that we do spend are making things worse for our low and moderate income citizens. The best thing we can do is to prevent a futher deterioartion of Downtown. We can also use CDBG grants to redevelop our derelict shopping centers, of which we now have two. Actually, there are a variety of things we could do with CDBG funds, if we cut out InnVision. InnVision is not a good thing for Palo Alto. It just serves as a magent to dig us deeper into the pit of desolation.

I think we should have a public vote on several items on one ballot, in Palo Alto:

1. Do you support CPA spending money on InnVision?

2. Do you support ABAG housing demands, that require our city to rezone to build over 2000 units of high density housing?

3. Do you support below market rate housing, if essential city workers will not buy them?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 12, 2009 at 4:57 pm

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

Frost is what he is, a scallywag; My comment was aimed at the city attorney's endorsing a utility pole as an address. Someone can live at a place without mail service or a designated address, my friend Seldom Seen Slim did that for years, but it stretches credibility to define what someone does at a utility pole as living. Frost was not registering to vote, a precious right to be defended, he was running for public office against a clear question of eligibility. Why, next thing you know, let Frost get away with this mockery and we might see residents of Massachusetts or Illinois running for a Senate seat in New York.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Norm
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 13, 2009 at 4:02 pm

Norm is a registered user.

So I guess the city attorney's office is being asked to take of voter registration duties because the registrar doesn't agree with public opinion.
BTW- Frost must be registered legally - as determined by the county registrar - to run. As as been mentioned before, if you have a problem with the decision, go to the decision-maker.

Jerry-

Personally, I think it's a bit rude to hijack a topic to satisfy you own agenda, however, such behavior doesn't necessarily tell us anything about you. But that is also another topic.

I look forward to your post of a focused argument on any of the issues which are a burr in your britches (InnVision, Opportunity Center, ABAG numbers v. density, affordable housing & BMR's, CDBG allocation, redevelopment using public funds & authority [eminent domain?], how no/low-income residents impact the community, etc.); some stated, some implied.

I await your cogent, fact backed presentation.

{Query – does all the development near/pending the Monroe Park neighborhood have anything to do with your feeling on density?}


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jerry
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 13, 2009 at 4:16 pm

Norm,

I responded on this thread when it was claimed that InnVision paid for Mr. Frost, in RWC, not the city of Paly Alto. I think I have made my arguments against that claim.

I don't think most Palo Alto citizens want a huge ABAG imperialist command. Add BMR and density and InnVision to the above.

Put it to a vote of the people. Do you have a problem with that, Norm?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 14, 2009 at 3:08 am

Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.

The city attorney is being chided for having rendered an opinion that seems inconsistent with the law. There is a difference between a dedicated right of way and an outright gift.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Norm
a resident of Midtown
on Aug 19, 2009 at 3:42 pm

Walter-
City Attorney opinion somewhat moot seeing that if statement is false, it was to the COUNTY registrar, not the city clerk or attorney. The conuty DA is the appropriate investigative authority for the alleged crime (I believe it has been commited, but the Constitution demands due process - hence government/judicial involvement in determining guilt).

Jerry-
I don't quite follow your last...

"I responded on this thread when it was claimed that InnVision paid for Mr. Frost, in RWC, not the city of Paly Alto. I think I have made my arguments against that claim."

You confirmed InnVision got CDBG funds, but NOT that those funds paid for any housing anywhere.

Should CDBG funding be put up for vote?

Well, point in the process do you propose that?.........Or do you even know that there is a process for the dozen or so reciepients, or the hopps they all must jump.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Lady Mom
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Aug 21, 2009 at 11:21 am

Whoa!
While here & there have been some actual dialogue, & exchange of points of view, I agree with the previous post that Mr. Frost is certainly enjoying the attention.

Divide & conquer?

My personal opinion is that the man is a slimy con artist & a public nuisance.

He should not be allowed to run for any position/office in the city. Whether or not it is worth any city dollars to investigate further - at this point in time - is obviously debatable.
Primarily, I am more concerned that the local court will prevail on enforcement of the sit-lie ordinance. I'd rather see our city dollars go there.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Early Decision Blues
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 0 comments | 2,213 views

One night only: ‘Occupy the Farm’ screening in Palo Alto
By Elena Kadvany | 1 comment | 2,107 views

First Interview
By Sally Torbey | 10 comments | 1,379 views

Death with Dignity
By Chandrama Anderson | 2 comments | 1,316 views

Guest Post #2 from HSSV: Labradoodle Back on His Feet
By Cathy Kirkman | 2 comments | 398 views