by Ken Toole | Feb 19, 2024 | Elections
Last Friday, the Election Protection Committee delivered the following letter to the Cascade County Commission.
“Commissioners,
We were surprised and disappointed to see that you offered the election administrator position to Terry Thompson. We have already notified you via a letter from Mike Meloy, this selection process is flawed and violates County Ordinance 23-62. Specifically, the ordinance states,
“WHEREAS, appointing an Election Administrator to serve at the direction of the Board of Cascade County Commissioners will eliminate the appearance of impropriety as any single Commissioner whose seat appears on the ballot in a given calendar years shall be required to abstain from all decisions concerning the operation and management of the election office during that calendar year until such time as the election for said office is finalized; and”
Clearly, this language applies to Commissioner Grulkowski. Despite the fact that we notified you and the County Attorney that Grulkowski’s continued involvement in the election decision violates Resolution 23-62, no action has been taken to enforce the above provisions of the resolution.
Though it is disturbing enough that Commissioner Grulkowski seems to believe that the rules and law simply do not apply to her, the fact that the County has allowed her to operate with impunity is highly inappropriate. Frankly, it is hard to understand why the County Attorney’s office has allowed this situation to persist.
Now it seems our greatest fears have been realized. Commissioner Grulkowski has not only participated in numerous discussions, debate, and decisions regarding operation of county elections, she also participated in the interview process and the hiring decision for the administration of elections in Cascade County. Moreover, Commissioner Briggs admitted during yesterday’s recorded Zoom session where the candidates were evaluated, that he and Commissioner Larson both rated Rina Moore as their top candidate. We can only infer from his comment that Commissioner Grulkowski is the only Commissioner who ranked any candidate above Rina Moore.
Those of us who watched the interviews were shocked at the final decision to offer the position to Ms. Thompson. Rina Moore clearly had more experience and answered the interview questions more thoroughly and accurately than any other candidate. We also saw that Commissioner Grulkowski was allowed to leave the interview room carrying all of her notes immediately following Ms. Moore’s interview and before the other applicants were interviewed. This action clearly calls the integrity of the selection process into question. We have encouraged Ms. Moore to seek appropriate remedy through the legal system. We are confident she will prevail in that arena.
Our primary concern is that Cascade County’s elections are run efficiently and effectively. Unfortunately, any legal remedy Ms. Moore, or any other applicant may be entitled to, is likely to occur after Ms.Thompson is instated as election administrator and would preclude an opportunity to offer the position to Ms. Moore.
We are writing to insist you retract your offer of employment to Terry Thompson, subtract Commissioner Grulkowski’s scores from the cumulative totals, and make the offer of employment to the applicant who scores the most points based on the ratings of Commissioners Larson and Briggs. Once Ms. Thompson is offered the position, the county will have crossed a line which is likely to result in significant time and expense. We encourage you to act responsibly and avoid this unnecessary liability.”
Stay tuned for updates on this issue.
by Jasmine Taylor | Feb 14, 2024 | Militia and Hate Groups
An out-of-state NeoNazi named Christoper Pohlhaus finds himself without anywhere to get his pump on. After learning that Pohlhaus has been frequenting a local Bozeman gym, What The Funk reached out to the business. It appears we weren’t the only folks to voice concerns. By the time the business responded, poor Mr. Pohlhaus was no longer a member of the facility.
Some might question if it’s wrong to target Neo-Nazis to limit their access to society’s little pleasures. Short answer- Fuck no. Long answer- Neo-Nazis are violent and they preach violence. They venerate Hitler, and seek the extermination of groups they hate. It is not only okay to exclude them from public life, it is necessary. Actions have consequences. Threatening minority groups is never acceptable, and one way we push back is by creating social and economic consequences for such behavior. This resistance is intended to make it harder for Neo-Nazis to spread their hate and violence.
Further, businesses operate for-profit. It is to their benefit to have policies and procedures that prevent liability. Every business should have measures in place to protect their customers and employees from discrimination. That surely means not allowing in a Neo-Nazi who has a well documented history of threats and harassment, including screaming slurs at people, to use their facility.
In their response, the gym also noted that Pohlhaus has left the area. We can’t confirm this information, but heartily hope it to be true. Montana has no room for Nazis.
Read about Polhaus’s prior NeoNazi activity here: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/neo-nazis-florida-march-1234817532/
by Guest Writer | Feb 10, 2024 | Elections, Guest Articles
By: James C. Nelson, Montana Supreme Court Justice (Ret).
On February 8th Senator (and lawyer) Steve Fitzpatrick (R-SD 10) published a guest view in the Independent Record chastising the Montana Supreme Court for a “stunning” decision. The Senator’s litany of complaints included that the Court violated the separation of powers, “eviscerated the Legislature’s power to make rules and manage its own affairs” . . . “granted itself the power to punish the Legislature,” invaded the province of the legislature to interpret its own rules, accused the Legislature of bad faith, and [took]the legislature to task for violating its norms, all the while ignoring its own norms and precedents.
The Senator identified neither the case nor what the Court’s decision was actually about. The name of the case is Forward Montana v. State by and through Gianforte, 2024 MT 19. The Court’s decision is well-written and easy to follow; read it at: FORWARD MONTANA v. STATE BY AND THROUGH GIANFORTE (2024) | FindLaw Forward Montana and other plaintiffs are referred to as Appellants.
The case.
During the 2021 session, the Legislature considered SB 319, which dealt with the regulation of joint political fundraising committees. Like most, the bill went back and forth between the Senate and the House and was amended. A free conference committee, appointed to consider amendments, apparently did not. However, two days before the Legislature adjourned, this committee added four new sections to the bill during a 17-minute meeting, closed to the public. Several of these amendments were almost verbatim from a bill that failed to pass during the session. The bill, so amended, passed both houses in the last 24 hours of the session.
Appellants challenged two of the amendments for violating Montana’s Constitution, Article V, sections 11(1) and (3). In pertinent part, these require: (1) [a] law shall be passed by bill which shall not be so altered or amended on its passage through the legislature as to change its original purpose, and (3) [e]ach bill, except 2 general appropriation bills and bills for the codification and general revision of the laws, shall contain only one subject, clearly expressed in its title.
After various proceedings and hearings, the District Court concluded that the amended bill violated both of the foregoing constitutional mandates. The State, represented by the Attorney General, chose not to appeal—resulting in the trial court’s decision becoming the law of that case.
Appellants moved for attorney fees under the “private attorney general doctrine,” and § 25-10-711, MCA–exceptions to the “American Rule” under which litigants generally bear their own fees. The District Court denied the fee request. Appellants appealed that denial. The Supreme Court reversed and applied the doctrine.
The decision.
In reversing the District Court’s decision, the Supreme Court concluded, among other things, that: Appellants were entitled to attorney fees because “[they] alone [vindicated] important constitutional interests. The Legislature disregarded its constitutional limitations, and the Attorney General offered no substantive or constitutional interests in defense of these actions;” because “[t]he Legislature must follow certain rules in enacting legislation to ensure transparency and public participation;” and “because of the process through which the unconstitutional sections of this Bill came to be: an obviously unlawful Bill adopted through willful disregard of constitutional obligations and legislative rules and norms.”
Thus, this case had nothing to do with the parade of horribles described by Senator Fitzpatrick. Rather, this case involved the issue of attorney fees awarded to a litigant pursuant to the private attorney general doctrine.
More to the point, this case involved a challenge to unconstitutional legislation rammed through at the end of the session and the Legislature sucker- punching the public’s Constitutional right to know.
Ironically, Senator Fitzpatrick demonized the Court for doing its job—i.e. holding the Legislature and Executive accountable for not doing theirs.
by Ken Toole | Jan 30, 2024 | Elections
Election Deniers are gathering petition signatures to repeal the resolution which removed Sandra Merchant from election administration. Pictured here is a sign at the local Republican Central Committee office on 10th Avenue South. Before getting to the petition effort of the election denier conspiracists, let’s remind ourselves that Sandra Merchant was failing at her responsibilities administering elections here in Cascade County. The County Commission made its decision to remove those duties from Merchant based on poor job performance. . .nothing more. For a detailed account follow this link https://dailymontanan.com/2024/01/14/election-errors-forced-the-cascade-county-commission-to-act/. Despite the facts, the local election conspiracy crowd, primarily housed in the Republican Pachyderm Club, argued that the decision was a power grab by Commissioners Larson and Briggs. They have ranted and raved, pointed fingers and shaken their fists. Now they are circulating a petition to repeal the county ordinance which removed election duties from Sandra Merchant. In order to place their repeal effort on the ballot the sponsors have 90 days from the date the resolution was effective. That date is December 12, 2023. So they will have to turn in their signatures somewhere around March 10th. They must have signatures from 15% of qualified electors in the county. That’s about 5,500 signatures, but that is the number of valid signatures required. They will need to gather many more than the minimum number to make up for invalid signatures that come into the process. The law also requires “The form of the petition must be approved by the county election administrator.” Does that mean Devereaux Biddick, who is the acting election administrator appointed by the County Commissioners on a temporary basis, reviewed and approved the form of the petition? Biddick is an election denier and close political ally of Sandra Merchant. In fact she was hired by Sandra Merchant to work in the elections office shortly after Merchant took office in January 2023. We wonder if her direct supervisors, Commissioner Joe Briggs and Commission Chair Jim Larson had any idea she was working on approving this petition.
ETA: An earlier version of this post indicated the petitioners has 60 days to gather signature. This has been corrected. The petitioners have 90 days to gather signatures.
by Ken Toole | Jan 23, 2024 | Elections
Responding to Tim Sheehy’s Editorial Rhetoric
U.S. Senate Candidate Tim Sheehy has a semi-autobiographical editorial circulating around the state. Like most puff pieces from politicians, it begins by saying, “I never thought of getting into politics until . . .fill in the blank here.” In Sheehy’s case it’s Afghanistan. It also gives him a chance to highlight his military service while condemning President Biden.
He must have forgotten that Donald Trump had reduced U.S. troops in Afghanistan by 13,100. In November 2020, he ordered that all troops would be evacuated by January 2021. Typical of Trump, he changed his mind and ordered withdrawal of more troops, instead leaving a total U.S. military force of 2,500 facing the Taliban in the strongest military position it had been in since 2001. The truth is U.S. military involvement in Afghanistan was plagued with problems for the 20 years we were there, just like the Russians before us. Pinning it on Joe Biden ignores facts and history. But hey, this is politics.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/US-Withdrawal-from-Afghanistan.pdf
But back to Sheehy’s editorial. He then goes on to frame his decision to run for Senate in a “call to duty” format with a dollop of family values and business experience. You may have noticed that we didn’t say “private sector” experience. That’s because earnings from his company, Bridger Aerospace, which generates about $5 million a year for Sheehy, is mostly working on government contracts fighting forest fires. He also owns luxury houses in Big Sky, Polson, and Bozeman, in addition to a share of a large ranch outside Martinsdale.
And like most rich people, he has lots of investments. He says his net worth is between $74 and $200 million. (A complaint has been filed against Sheehy for the lack of specific information in his disclosure forms by a group called End Citizens United.) While he is condemning China, he’s investing in Chinese companies. While attacking environmental investment strategies, he is investing in “sustainable” software products to manage carbon emissions. He even removed the words “fighting on the front lines of climate change” from the Bridger Aerospace website after announcing he was running for Senate. https://montanafreepress.org/2023/11/03/taking-a-look-at-tim-sheehys-finances/
Like most rich people, Sheehy had considerable advantages provided by his family. He grew up in a multi-million dollar lake house in Shoreview, Minnesota, a wealthy suburb of St. Paul. He attended a private high school before being accepted to the Naval Academy. It’s hard to say when he became a resident of Montana. In 2016 Sheehy reported the Shoreview house as his residence in campaign reports of his donations to Greg Gianforte.
But probably the most disturbing thing about Sheehy’s editorial is his parroting of Trump’s dark conspiratorial view of America. He writes. “. . .the alternative is to leave these Marxists who weaponize cancerous ideologies like DEI and ESG and don’t represent our values in control—and to me, that’s unacceptable.” Most of us have no idea what DEI and ESG means (DEI- Diversity Equity and Inclusion/ ESG- Environmental, Social, Governance). His demonization and use of the term Marxist to describe his political opponents is straight out of Senator Joe McCarthy’s playbook. Ironically, this kind of red-baiting is fundamentally anti-American.
