Feb 022010
 

Central Committees generally are expected to support their Republican incumbents –

It should also be noted that the Yolo GOP Treasurer was responsible for the investigation that led to the Democrats getting caught flaunting Campaign finance laws. Maybe John Fronefeld should teach a seminar at the California Republican Party Convention about how to catch the Democrats breaking the law…

YOLO COUNTY REPUBLICAN CENTRAL COMMITTEE VOTES TO ENDORSE CONGRESSMAN WALLY HERGER AND STATE ASSEMBLYMAN JIM NIELSEN.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – Davis California, the Yolo County Republican Central Committee, by super-majority voted to endorse Congressman Wally Herger and State Assemblyman Jim Nielsen.

Herger represents the 2nd Congressional District which includes Colusa, Glenn, Shasta, Siskiyou, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity, Yuba, Butte and Yolo Counties.

Nielsen who represents the 2nd Assembly District; which includes Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Modoc, Shasta, Siskiyou, Sutter, Tehama and Yolo Counties.

“These are just two great elected representatives.  We are very proud to offer them our support “stated Kirby Wells, Executive Vice-Chairman of the Yolo Republican Central Committee.  “We appreciate what they bring in both experience and work ethic.”

The Yolo County Republican Central Committee is the official Republican organization in Yolo County.

For more information about the Committee please visit www.yologop.org  or contact Mark Pruner, Chairman at (916) 204-9097

It should be noted that the Yolo GOP is following the precedent set by the Placer GOP – albeit for two candidates with no significant opposition (as vs. when the Placer GOP endorsed McClintock over Doug Ose in 2008).

  19 Responses to “Yolo County GOP Endorses Nielsen and Herger for Re-Election”

  1. Unlike the Placer County situation in ’08, Yolo County currently has two incumbant Republicans.

    Schaupp lost a resounding primary against Jim Nielsen last election. Charlie has taken time and money from Republican efforts by trying to get Nielsen unseated. Schaupp actually went to the California Secretary of State’s office with the Democratic candidate (Paul Singh) to request that Nielsen not be seated (Schaupp and Paul Singh’s names) are on the sign in one below the other. Of course, Charlie is going to claim he is not working with the Dems…. Wow …. Pretty honorable.

  2. BS Mr. Wells! I never went to the SOS with Mr. Singh. I only met Mr. Singh once when we both ended up at a dinner in Sutter County back in the spring of 08 and he only introduced himself (long hair and all). And I have never worked or associated with the Democratic Party! … And as stated at our last Yolo County Central Committee meeting, Yolo GOP is now in violation of CRP bylaws (but I am not worried about Nielsen’s endorsements…the truth will come out)

    Don’t lie! I have never seen or met Singh in Sacramento. As usual you are clueless. It is almost hilarious that you are trying to paint me as a Democratic operative….just hilarious! I hope ‘you guys’ can come up with something better than lies and innuendo.

    Charlie Schaupp

  3. Hey Charlie,

    You’re probably right…The fact that the Central Committee that knows you – and of which you are a member has voted with a SUPER MAJORITY in support of the existing incumbant – Jim Nielsen. Interesting… Probably nothing.

    I know….I know… A vast conspiracy, the GOP, the Central Committee, the media, the Secretary of State’s office, the Attorney General’s office,the judiciary, and the Sheriff’s Departments are all evil and against you.

    You did nothing wrong… I mean, going to Michael Sweet for legal counsel…. You probably didn’t know better (the fact that it is on his website probably eluded you…Sweet only sits on the California State Democratic Board – belongs to the most liberal of organizations in San Francisco, has Nancy Pelosi and John Burton as clients. Right…you just missed that connection.

    I’m not surprised that most attorney’s didn’t take your case. Conflict of interest?? Probably a polite brush off.

    Now try and tell us that there was not another attorney in California who would not take your case….Only an inside member of the Democratic Party. Now that is HILARIOUS!!

    Charlie, I think your activities, after the general election and subsequent to your oath as a Central Committee member on March 2nd, 2009 – are in direct violation of your duties as a Central Committee member. Look at the bylaws of the Yolo County Republican Cental Commitee!

    As a private citizen, I support your right to access whatever liberal Democratic Board member attorney you want – but as a Republican Central Committee I think better judgement should be in order.

  4. Mr. Wells…Dig deeper.

    Surely if you go decades back you find something real to use against me. Perhaps the time in Desert Storm when I had to stand firm up to a Battalion Commander who wanted to send my men into combat without gas masks…Perhaps my days and the exuberance of youth at Chico State…Perhaps my High Schools days when I drove a car that was too fast for my wisdom. Hey what about the time that I went to the FBI when Doug Ose and gang tried to do a ‘Quid Pro Quo’ in the 1998 congressional primary?

    But my obtaining professional legal council is nothing…Try Harder!!!

    Schaupp

  5. Nah – don’t have to go any further. You hired the most liberal anti-Republican guy around to take out a sitting Republican for your own self -benefit. You have admitted you did so (in writing), after the election and while you were a sitting member of the Central Committee.

    I appreciate your service to the country, just as I did Jimmy Carter’s and every other American Soldier/Airman and Marine. But you behavior in your own self-interest is something I can’t support.

  6. No Wells, wrong again. We hired counsel to determine and consider what options where available to try to get the election code enforced. Nielsen lives in Woodland in the 8thAD, not Gerber. No one actually believes he lives in Gerber anymore. The law is pretty clear on this issue and what is a legal domicile. However, I doubt you want to understand that as you have your own ‘bone to grind’.

    Schaupp

  7. BTW Mr. Wells, it was reported in Tehama Valley Mirror back on 8/8/2008 that we had retained Mr. Sweet to try to get both the Secretary of State and the Attorney General (both Democrats) to do their jobs to get the election code enforced….That was 18 months ago! You act like this is late breaking news. (?)

    It is clear what you are trying to do…but please do keep trying. We want folks to know the truth in this matter and that Mr. Nielsen must have had and maintained his primary domicile in the 2nd district in order to qualify to run for office. (Election Codes: 349 a b & c, 2024, 2031)

    Schaupp

  8. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ…..

    Sorry Schaupp…You’re boring us……Again

  9. ‘Wake up Wells!’….The ‘hit’ numbers are way up on this blog…check it on Google. Folks want to know what you think and where Nielsen really lives!

    Just think of how things had been had Nielsen run in the district he lives and replaced the liberal Yamada. But nope…He did a ‘Roanoke Park’ again! Just like when he was a State Senator…Funny thing about folks that don’t tell the truth. Sooner or later they can’t remember all their fibs and start to trip up.

    Hey, you ever hear about a guy named Mike Abernathy? Nielsen’s Campaign manager when he was a State Senator…Want to hear the about it? (It will all be out by Election Day)

    Schaupp

  10. ZZZZZ – Oh – Charlie – did you say something??

    Right…Sorry I was napping in the shade of my rock… Yeah the answer is that Paul Singh would be the State Assemblyman from AD2. Then your liberal Dem attorney Michael Sweet would probably tell you… Sorry Charlie.

    ZZZZZZZZZ

  11. Wells…wrong again! Had the Attorney General done his job the election code calls for a special election. Singh would not have gotten or been seated the 2ndAD seat. (In simple terms, The Democrats –the Sec of State and AG- had nothing to gain if they enforced the election code). However once the AG turned a blind eye to the ‘for prosecution’ investigation and let Nielsen be seated only a Quo Warrento could be filed against Nielsen and a Quo Warrento can not remove a setting Assembly member. Only the Assembly itself can remove a sitting member. A Quo Warrento is a civil action and we choose not to follow that legal option. I know it is pointless to explain this to you… It is above your level of understanding.

    Again, check your facts! But then again, most of this stuff is above your level of understanding…isn’t it?

    Schaupp

  12. ZZZZZZ….

    Same ‘ol sad Charlie.

    Don’t care how you spin it – you worked with the enemy.

    While you had access to information from the Central Committee.

  13. Wells, you are really out of the loop. Sweet was advising us in the campaign cycle once we realized that the Democratic Secretary of State was stalling the ‘for prosecution investigation’…that was 2008 (not in 2009 or 2010). And Sweet was legal counsel…get it?? (and $450 an hour at that) Legal Counsel!! I rejoined the committee March of 2009. In fact, the Chair, Mark Pruner asked me to join the committee in 2008 and I declined because we did not concede Mr. Nielsen’s election to be lawful (and that is still our view based on the facts and the election code).

    Again… You are clueless and I am beginning to think you’re not very bright. No matter how many times I give you the facts…you keep repeating the same old tangent. There is so much more that you don’t know or are clueless about. But keep talking…folks will hopefully keep reading.

    Ya know…I keep saying “We”…and you even miss that!

    Schaupp

  14. ZZZZZ

    Another rant from the Dem tool… Charlie Schaupp.

    Ablel Jr.

    Talk about a RINO. Only Charlie would admitt to paying $450 an hour to get into the Democratic Club. Nice

  15. Wow Charlie,

    so even when you hire one of their own (and pay $450.00 an hour for them to laugh at you) the Democrats ignore you like the Republicans…and all of the voters…
    Wow I must be as clueless as everyone else who does not want you in office.

    I guess in Charlie’s world, everyone lives under a rock.

  16. Same old ‘tangent’ hey ‘Kirby’?

    You really have no idea what happened in 2008. Where Nielsen really lives/lived and what the election code states in Sections 349, 2024 and 2031…. Do you?

    Just today Nielsen has a letter to the editor of the Redding paper calling myself and Don Bird liars (in none so many words). That’s almost funn…but Nielsen sounded a bit upset in his letter that someone would continue to question him, where he lives and his ethics.

    Here is a quote from Wikipedia on Nielsen….Same old ‘Jim’…hasn’t changed much in 30 years…has he?

    “Nielsen has had residency questions plague him throughout his entire career. One of the reasons that he was defeated in 1990 was due to questions of whether he actually lived in the 4th Senate District. He claimed to live in a condo in Rohnert Park, a Sonoma County city while in fact he was living in Woodland, CA which was located outside his district.[3][4]
    The same questions have plagued Nielsen in his 2008 bid for the State Assembly. However, this time he claims to live in a mobile home in Gerber, CA while his opponents claim that he is living once again at his house in Woodland, CA. This time, Nielsen has been accused of fraud and the Secretary of State’s office has referred the case to the Attorney General for prosecution.”

    This race has just begun!

    Schaupp

  17. Sorry Charlie…..

    This race was over before you woke up this morning…and yesterday morning and every day since the voters made their choice and you lost the election.

    You lost my support once I found out that you hired the liberal Democratic attorney Michael Sweet.

    For those that don’t know, here is a a short list of Schaupp’s attorney’s hobbies:

    Mr. Sweet is the vice chair of the San Francisco Human Rights Commission. He has been an elected member of the California State Democratic Central Committee since 2004 and also serves on the Party’s Resolutions Committee. He is the immediate past-president of the Raoul Wallenberg Jewish Democratic Club of San Francisco and was a candidate for the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 2002. He worked in Jerry Brown’s Presidential campaign. Here’s Sweet’s website (check out the section – “other Activities”) http://www.ml-sf.com/attorneys/msweet.asp

    Schaupp hired him and paid him over $450.00 an hour. Wow, what Republican would hang out with this guy?? Oh, yeah I forgot. Charlie Schaupp.

    For those that aren’t aware – the Yolo County Republican Central Committee endorsed Jim Nielsen. The same committee that Charlie Schaupp sits on.

  18. Here you go Wells…The truth…Hopefully you and everyone else will read it.
    ———–
    Do laws and ethics apply to elected officials supported by California Republican Party, or are they exempt from following our state’s
    codes, rules and laws?

    By Journalist, Author & Researcher Barry R. Clausen
    Cell (530) 227 4774 unfrend1@charter.net

    Domicile Requirements: (Residence is a totally different issue)
    At the time of filing for office Nielsen met none of these requirements.

    Tax Exemption on Property – $7,000
    Vehicle License Registration
    Address on Drivers License

    You will find that the following tax company is the one that did Nielsen’s income taxes and he used his Woodland address in all of the past years.

    Perry, Bunch, Battaglia and Johnston Inc
    350 Court Street
    Woodland, CA 95695
    Phone 530-662-3251

    On November 3, 2008 Republican Jim Nielsen an Assembly candidate for California’s 2nd Assembly district was on KUBA Talk Radio in Yuba City, CA
    Nielsen apparently, does not understand the magnitude of the charges he is facing as a result of apparent fraud pertaining to his residence/domicile. Those charges stem from two noticeable cases of fraud he committed while running for the office of 2nd Assembly District in Northern California when in fact he resided in the 8th Assembly District. Based on his own words, Nielsen is snubbing his nose at California’s judicial system.
    Debra Bowen the California Secretary of State (SOS) sent a letter relevant to the charges to me on October 21, 2008. One paragraph of the letter states, “Our office has concluded its investigation against the subject referenced above [Jim Nielsen] and referred the case for prosecution to the office of the California Attorney General [AG].
    Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention.” (Letter enclosed)
    (1) While on live radio Nielsen stated that his residency issue was decided in his favor by the courts four (4) times – NOT TRUE
    (2) Nielsen also stated that the letter sent to me by the SOS was a form letter and that it had no credence. Nielsen also stated that his attorneys had talked to the California AG’s staff and that my complaint is a non-issue. NOT TRUE
    Immediately following the radio show I called the Secretary of State’s staff. They appeared surprised at Nielsen’s comments. I was reminded that the letter was not a form letter and that the letter was not sent for the AG’s office to evaluate. It was sent with the intent of prosecution. According to both the AG’s and the SOS’s staff these statements by Nielsen is NOT TRUE.
    When I contacted the AG’s staff they were also surprised. I was reminded that the letter was sent for the purpose of prosecution and it was not a dead issue.

    Republican Jim Nielsen’s Timeline
    CA Assembly Candidate (2nd District)

    Note: it should also be known that according to sources close to Nielsen he also filed his 2008 taxes using his Woodland address as his domicile.

    “Nielsen confirmed during a telephone interview that he currently resides in Woodland, which was his residence when he filed as an Assembly candidate. However he said that in September 2007, he and his wife purchased property in Gerber, which is located in Tehama County, part of the district in which he is running for office.
    “Nielsen filed for the Assembly with the Tehama County clerk’s office. Even though a resident within District 8, he said he meets the legal requirement that a candidate reside within the district he or she is running for.
    “’I checked with my attorney before I even filed,’” Nielsen said. “’He told me that because I own property in the district and plan to make it my home, I meet the legal residency requirement. I have not made it a secret as to where I live.’”
    Source: Mount Shasta Herald, April 9, 2008

    The above quotes and the following information about Nielsen’s activities show four things. This is all based on California Tax Codes in the section pertaining to “residence” and “domicile.”
    First and foremost is that even though Nielsen owned property in Tehama County, his domicile was not in Tehama County as required by law in order to file for the office of candidate for the 2nd Assembly District. (Document Enclosed)
    Second: He and his wife Marilyn filed as a registered voter in Tehama County when by his own admissions he did not claim his domicile was.
    Third: According to property tax documents, Nielsen took a $7,000 tax exemption on property in Woodland. Nielsen bypassed claiming a tax emption for the property in Tehama County. Instead he claimed his domicile was in the 8th Assembly District in Woodland outside the 2nd Assembly District. (Document enclosed)
    Fourth: Nielsen and his wife registered to vote in a county where by his own admission was not the county of their domicile.
    According to California Elections Code there is a difference between “residence” and “domicile.”
    Page 15 number 349 states,
    “(a) ‘Residency’ for voting purposes means a person’s domicile.”
    “(b) The domicile of a person is that place in which his or her habitation is fixed, wherein the person has the intention of remaining, and to which, whenever he or she is absent, the person has the intention of returning. At a given time, a person may have only one domicile.”
    “(c) The residence of a person is that place in which the persons habitation is fixed for some period of time, but wherein he or she does not have the intention of remaining. At a given time, a person may have more than one residence.”
    Where the question of domicile comes into play with Jim Nielsen is his “property Tax exemption.”
    Page 18 number 2031 of the California Tax Code defines, “Homeowners property tax exemption; tax credit; driver’s license.”
    “If a person has more than one residence and that person maintains a homeowners property tax exemption on the dwelling of one of the residences pursuant to Section 218 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, there shall be a rebuttal presumption that the residence subject to the homeowner’s property tax exemption is that person’s domicile. However, this presumption shall not apply in the event any other residence address on any drivers license, identification card or vehicle registration issued to that person by, and on file with, the Department of Motor Vehicles. (Documents enclosed)
    “If a person has more than one residence and that person claims a renters tax credit for one of the residences pursuant to Section 17053.5 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, there shall be a rebuttal presumption that the residence subject to the renter’s tax credit is that person’s domicile. However the presumption shall not apply in the event any other residence is listed as the person’s current residence address on any drivers license, identification card, or vehicle registration issued to that person by, and on file with, the Department of Motor Vehicles.”
    In the Chico Enterprise Record on November 2, 2008, “Nielsen said if he’s elected, he’d still live in his Woodland home when the legislature was in session, since it’s closer to the Capitol than Gerber. But the Gerber residence will be useful when the Legislature is not in session and he’s traveling the district.”
    By his own words, this makes Nielsen’s “domicile” in Woodland and it makes him ineligible to even run for the 2nd Assembly seat let alone be seated to represent people outside of his 8th Assembly District
    As Nielsen refused the tax exemption in Tehama County when offered the opportunity, this code comes into play. Instead Nielsen took the property tax exemption on his “domicile” in Woodland. This makes Code 2031 applicable.
    As Nielsen did not transfer his drivers license and vehicle registrations to the Gerber address this also makes Code 2031 applicable.
    April 14 2007 In a statement fled with the Tehama County Superior Court on April 14 2007 in response to a petition, he said he first signed a residential lease agreement for his Gerber residence at 22475 Pomona Ave., a year earlier, on April 16, 2007. The purchase was finalized five months later, on September 13, he said.”
    ‘Since the time I occupied the residence in April 2007, I have intended it as my permanent domicile at which I always intended to return whenever I left on a temporary basis,’ he wrote, adding that the Gerber address now appears on his state drivers license and he has placed the property utilities under his name.
    “… As for his woodland home he admits to spending time there, but calls it ‘a residency at which I stay from time to time on a temporary basis in order to spend time with my children who are in school in that area.’”(Source: Woodland Daily Democrat)
    September 13, 2007 Nielsen and his wife Marilyn purchased property from relatives in Gerber, CA (Tehama County). According to Tehama County documents he paid $275,000 for the property.
    October 1, 2007 Nielsen and his wife Marilyn gave up their registration to vote in Yolo County and registered in Tehama County as county residents. They have listed their Tehama County address as 22475 Pomona, Gerber, CA. This address is not the “domicile” they claim on their property tax exemption.
    January 1, 2008 The Nielsen’s continued to receive a $7,000 tax exemption on their home at 717 Edgewood Ct in Woodland. Documents show that the exemption for the years 2005 to 2008 were at their Woodland address. The $7,000 exemption can only be taken at a home that is listed as the principle place of residency or that is your legal residency/domicile. The papers for the exemption state, “IF YOU DO NOT OCCUPY THIS PARCEL AS YOUR PRINCIPLE RESIDENCE, PLEASE DISCARD THIS FORM.” An exemption by the Nielsen’s’ for the Gerber address in 2008 where they claim to reside was not requested for the trailer in Gerber. (Documents included)
    February 25, 2008. Questionable addresses – on his Declaration of Candidacy Nielsen lists his address as 22475 Pomona in Gerber. As there is no mailbox at that address, he claims to receive his mail at a PO Box at the Gerber Post office. During the months of March and April when attempting to mail an envelope addressed to Nielsen at that post office the Postmaster claims there is no PO Box listed to a James (Jim) Nielsen. On his Declaration of Candidacy he also shows an address of 1282 Stabler Ln. Ste 6300-164 in Yuba City. His postal carrier in Woodland has also been seen delivering mail to 717 Edgewood Ct in Woodland.
    February 29, 2008 Nielsen signs Oath Of Office in Tehama County and states that he resides in Tehama County. According to California Elections Code (Page 195) Section 8001 states: Declaration of candidacy for partisan office; requirements; certification by county elections official. This section is unclear as to what requirements are expected of county officials. However, there is a question as to who certifies that any candidate resides in the address listed as his/her domicile.
    Beverly Ross the Tehama County Clerk & Recorder has told the press that it is not her responsibility to verify residency of any candidate. Ross also stated to press that it is the responsibility of the California Secretary of State (SOS) Deborah Bowen to verify residency.
    The SOS’s staff did an investigation and has told the Pioneer Press staff that their story “was right on.” An interpretation of that comment would indicate that their investigation showed that Nielsen did not reside at the Gerber address but the SOS staff has not release the investigation report to public officials that have requested it. That includes Siskiyou County Prosecutor Kirk Andres and Senior Assistant Attorney General, Christopher E. Kruger.
    March 27, 2008 1600 hrs – After numerous attempts to find Jim Nielsen at the home he listed with the Tehama County elections office I once again went to the door of the double wide trailer with no response. County documents list the trailer at the 22475 Pomona address as belonging to “Nielsen, James & Marilyn.”
    It was difficult to believe that a two term State Senator would be residing in a doublewide trailer on a road littered with squallier. Chickens and junk were dominant at many of the residents.
    There were two vehicles in the driveway, a truck with a flatbed trailer and a SUV. There is a pile of old tires stacked on the property next to the home along with a dilapidated travel trailer.
    March 29, 2008 Notes from Doug LaMalfa When contacted Doug LaMalfa was noticeably upset with our investigation of Jim Nielsen. In a telephone interview La Malfa stated, “What’s the big deal with this anyway, I don’t get why people are impugning me and my staff just because he [Nielsen] lives in Woodland.” He went on to say, “Tom McClintock is going through the same thing because he has different residences. Go ahead and play it, it won’t stick. At the end of the day it won’t work.”
    April 2, 2008 Nielsen stated to the Enterprise Record that he has lived in Woodland since 1969 and that his present home in that city is outside the 2nd District by only 100 yards. He went on to say, “As far as I am concerned we’re living there now [Gerber],” He claims that he’s in Tehama County four days a week, there are beds in the house where we could sleep, if we wanted to, and he gets his mail at the post office there. (Source: Chico Enterprise Record April 2, 2008
    April 3, 2008 Red Bluff Daily News runs a story about Nielsen where his residency once again comes into question. “Nielsen said he has lived in Woodland since 1969 and that his present home in that city is outside the 2nd District by only about 100 yards…. He said his relatives continue to live in the modular home while another house is being built for them on the other parcel. When that home is finished, Nielsen said he and his wife will move into the modular home. They expect to keep their home in Woodland and use it when the Legislature is in session, if he is elected, he said….”As far as I am concerned, we’re living there now,” he told the E-R. He said he’s in Tehama County four days a week, there are beds in the house where he could sleep, if he wanted to, and he gets his mail at a post office there.” (Source: Red Bluff Daily News)

    April 2, 2008 Another visit to the doublewide trailer ended with a female answering the door. She would not give her name but in a recorded conversation she claimed that Nielsen did not reside in the trailer he claimed as his residence in official documents filed in Tehama County.
    As the neighbors had told me the people residing in the trailer were named Van Dyke I asked her if she was Ms. Van Dyke. Her cold reception and answer was no.
    I asked if the residents were named Van Dyke and her response was “no, the property belongs to the Nielsen’s.”
    I asked if the Nielsen’s were home, once again a “no” answer.
    I asked if the Nielsen’s resided there, another “no.’
    She further stated, “I can probably reach Jim on his cell phone. He is hardly ever here.”
    I gave her my card and asked her to please contact Jim and have him call me. She said she would try to reach him. There has not been a response to that request. (Source: Pioneer Press)
    April 9, 2008 Nielsen stated for public record in the Mount Shasta Herald on April 9 that he did not reside in Gerber. He also stated for the record in the same April 9 article that because he was going to give up his $1 million home in Woodland and move into the trailer in Gerber it was acceptable for him to file for office in a district where he does not reside. (Source: Mount Shasta Herald)
    April 12, 2008 An article in the Chico Enterprise Record states, “He [Nielsen] plans to move into the district, to Gerber, when a home there is available for him and his wife to move into.” An editorial in the Redding Record Searchlight defended Nielsen’s right to run in the 2nd District. In part it read, “Nielsen is certainly a carpetbagger. He moved to the district to run for office, and if elected he’ll rest his head most nights back at home in Woodland, an easy commute from the Capitol.” (Source Chico Enterprise Record)
    April 17, 2008 “I checked with my attorney before I even filed… He told me that because I own property in the district and plan to make it my home I meet the legal residency requirements.”
    Note: “I checked with my attorney before I even filed… He told me that because I own property in the district and plan to make it my home I meet the legal residency requirements.” However, per Nielsen’s statement he ‘planned to make it my home’, Election code 2024 states: “The mere intention to acquire a new domicile, without the fact of removal avails nothing, neither does the fact of removal without the intention.” This section of the code clearly explains that the intention to move to a property in the future, means nothing, therefore Nielsen did not establish a domicile at Gerber and lawfully could not register to voter or run for office from that address. (Source: Chico News & Review)”

    April 17, 2008 For the second time Nielsen is using a fictitious address for his political and financial gains. A story in the Chico News & Review by Robert Speer exposes Nielsen’s unethical past. The story titled, “Is Nielsen fudging again? The Republican establishment backs the candidate, but his opponents charge he doesn’t live in the district. It’s not the first time.”
    It’s déjà vu all over again for Jim Nielsen. Once more, the former state senator finds his credibility being challenged as he runs for statewide office. It happened 18 years ago, and it’s happening again now. The issue is the same: his residency.
    It last surfaced during his re-election campaign in 1990. He’d been in the Senate for 12 years, since 1978, representing District 4 while living in Woodland and rising to become Senate Republican leader. The problem was that, from 1983 on, following reapportionment, his home was no longer in his district, as required by state law.
    In January 1986, Nielsen bought a condo in Rohnert Park, which was in the district. In July 1989, he sold the condo and rented another. When the San Francisco Chronicle questioned him about the new digs, he gave the wrong address. And when the weekly Napa Sentinel sent a reporter to the correct address, the resident next door said she thought the condo was empty and that she had never seen Nielsen.
    Nielsen lost that 1990 election, but Republican Gov. Pete Wilson soon appointed him to the Board of Prison Terms.
    April 19, 2009 “Nielsen confirmed during a telephone interview Friday that he currently resides in Woodland, which was his residence when he filed as an Assembly candidate. However, he said that in September 2007, he and his wife purchased property in Gerber, which is located in Tehama County, part of the district in which he is running for office… Nielsen said he feels that if he was not qualified to run for the Assembly, that he would not have received the backing he has.” (Source: Mt Shasta Herald)

  19. Could you guys (Wells and Schaupp) put forth the same energy to destroy proggressives rather than destroy yourselves. Please call me if you need guidance. 530-304-4277. David

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.