CRA Update: Add Ed Rowen to the List of the Duplicitous As He Shreds Kirk Uhler in an Email

 California Republican Assembly, CRA, Placer County Republican Assembly  Comments Off on CRA Update: Add Ed Rowen to the List of the Duplicitous As He Shreds Kirk Uhler in an Email
Jun 152015
 

Dennis Revell was right. He was right for the wrong reason. He had roundly criticized Ed Rowen over a year ago when he ran for a vacancy on the Placer GOP Central Committee. Revell had cited Ed’s Anger Management issues – I think Revell was on to something and may not have fully understood that Ed’s real issue is a complete lack of integrity (which is where his unstable behavior comes from).

I knew it did not sit well with Ed Rowen when Kirk Uhler stepped up to run for Placer CRA President.

10 days before the CRA Convention in March – Ed came in to our office nearly panic stricken because he had been a part of a plot to invalidate our officer elections because of a snafu with the location of the meeting. (because Bayside gave Uhler the wrong address for the room we had reserved)

The detail with which Alice Khosravy knew about the events of the Placer CRA officer elections meeting in January told me she an Ed had discussed it in depth. Tom Hudson was the only other person that had complained about the PCRA officer elections. George called him shortly after Ed was in our office. Hudson sounded shocked when George talked to him – like he had been caught.

For at least the last year of Ed’s term as PCRA President, he spoke to Alice frequently. Alice, in her manipulative way made sure to tell us that Ed Rowen never had anything good to say about George or I behind our back – as it has been her pattern to play people off against each other.

We got Ed to send us an email detailing the plot he was a part of. We forwarded the email to the credentials committee in order to stop the attempt that Alice, Ed and (likely Tom) were going to make to de-credential Placer’s delegates. (while Alice and company were credentialing 5 ineligible delegates from SCVRA, and the delegates of the three other fraudulent units)

Ultimately – Jim Shoemaker and the CRA Weed-Eater Tim Thiesen cited the revelation of this plot as one of their reasons for asking for our expulsion as most of the CRA Complaints against George and I were designed to cover up the malfeasance at our expense.

Ed Rowen was promised that once George was knocked off the board and Alice had run against John Briscoe successfully from the floor, he would be made President of the Placer CRA again.

When Ed lived in Santa Clara County – he had a reputation for double-dealing. It is his demonstrated pattern of this that causes people to doubt him when he does tell the truth. (Such as when he told us about this plot to de-credential the Placer RA)

Ed Rowen has also been quite clear that much of his identity was and is tied up in his titles with CRA.

Ed was present at the 5/30 Placer CRA Board Meeting. At that meeting, he was fiercely critical of Tom Hudson. In the last two months, on the phone or in person with either George or I, he has railed on Tom Hudson and others within CRA.

So, why would it be no surprise that Ed would turn on Kirk Uhler, George and I?

Here is an email Ed typed in response to Mark Gardner’s logical gymnastics that I posted a bit ago:

I wanted to note to the Board they also have the PCRA Banner and the Mike System that was bought with club funds…I have been a CRA Member since 1981, my Mother and Father were both members and so was my Grandfather who attended his fist Convention in 1938 and was a Sicilian Immigrant who came to this country in 1915.  I was a Club President for four terms in Santa Clara County and was President of the PCRA for three terms.  Never in my life I have ever met three people who have been more of a disgrace to the organization then these three. It will take a while for the PCRA to be back where we were, but I am glad to rid of myself and the group of those three.  All I can say to  all of you is thank you….

ED ROWEN

Note – Ed piles on accusing us of stealing more stuff.

Then he lays out how part of his identity is being a part of CRA.

Then he lays in to Kirk, George and I.

Then he thanks the CRA’s board for giving him the club back so his life is complete again.

The logical conclusion from this exercise? If you let Ed Rowen be a part of your campaign for office – he will do the same to you.

CRA Update: Mark Gardner Reveals More CRA Fraud While Trying to be Right

 California Republican Assembly, CRA  Comments Off on CRA Update: Mark Gardner Reveals More CRA Fraud While Trying to be Right
Jun 142015
 

This is Mark Gardner, so you know what he looks like at the next CRP Convention.

Mark Gardner responded to this blog by sending the new CRA Board (15 of whom were appointed by Tom Hudson before George and I were lynched) an email re asserting his authoritah.

In the email – he asserts that the PCRA elected Ed Rowen Temporary President of the “Unit” in a board meeting of the remaining board members.

The PCRA has no right to be upset by the fact that two of their members were expelled for life from the CRA.

That the unit still has 103 members.

And – that the unit had no right to prepare checks in advance of the 5/30 board meeting where the money was spent.

There is a reason why I call Mark Gardner the CRA Rhodes Scholar – he has to be right and show everyone so, plus he has to make sure everyone sees his authoritah. (Like Cartman in South Park)

Ok – in the process of being so right, he says that Tracy Mendonsa is still on PCRA Board and says that Kirk Uhler is still on PCRA Board. This means then that Tracy and Kirk would have had to participate in electing Ed Rowen the temporary President of PCRA. Unless, of course they were not notified of said meeting and it was a jam-down by an embarrassed and freaked out Tom Hudson.

You see – if Kirk actually resigned as PCRA President, he’d be the immediate past president and still on the board! DOH! This means that Tom Hudson and Ed Rowen committed more fraud within CRA by holding a “board meeting” for the Placer RA without two of the remaining three board members being notified. With Mark Gardner certifying a PCRA board election in writing – he has effectively outed Tom Hudson and Ed Rowen.

It gets better – there is no provision within PCRA By-Laws to elect a new President other than a general meeting of the unit. Either Tracy Mendonsa or Kirk Uhler are the President of the Unit right now, the club board can not replace the President in the case of a resignation. The only outcome is the Vice President taking over.

Being right has it’s consequences. Perhaps this is why the CRA is down to 1,000 members statewide?

What kind of message does it send to the political world when the state board tells a unit that surrenders its’ charter – nope, you are all still members, like it or not. Let me take a stab at it – the 50 or so “members” of the SCVRA whose dues have been paid for them for 2-4 years depending on the case is the paradigm of the CRA’s new board. (fraud)

Update: It just occurred to me that in the course of telling us how wrong we were that Mark Gardner legitimized the 5/30 PCRA Board Meeting. There is no way the resignations that he cites could have occurred otherwise, Kirk did not resign as PCRA President, he signed the email in the context of the club resigning. Since Mark is citing Kirk’s email and challenging the results of the PCRA’s board meeting – he has recognized the board meeting. Thank you Mark for undermining Tom Hudson. This rocks. If the 900 club are stupid enough to file a court case, they were just royally screwed over by Mark Gardner. BTW – the 5/30 board meeting was legitimate and Tom Hudson knows it.

If I had not been expelled for life from the CRA – I would bet that my dues would be paid in 2016 for me. I will also bet that many of the 95-100 people that bailed out of the CRA will have their dues paid for them by the PCRA in future years. (with what money?) That’s just awesome.

But – the most laughable of all charges is HOW DARE GEORGE PREPARE CHECKS IN ADVANCE. Let me get this straight – with 3 of 5 board members on board with refunding dues and mailing checks to local charities (which actually got Ed Rowen’s support as well) – the Treasurer prepared them in advance so they could be mailed out on 5/30. (BTW – the first I heard of the advanced planning was in one of Tom Hudson’s near hysterical email rants)

The nerve of people to be prepared in advance.  The CRA’s State Board thinks it is a big deal – this is what being right does to people. I guess in their mind, every political group that ever spent money in advance of a board vote with a known outcome should be sued, investigated by the FBI, hauled to the Hague, and/or prosecuted.

There is a reason why Tom Hudson has gone berzerk. He knows that 3 of 5 make a majority and under PCRA By-Laws (which he is trying to ignore whilst installing Ed Rowen as the puppet PCRA President) give a majority of the club’s board the right to spend money. The only way he can get what he needs to exact revenge is by turning one of the three board members with threats and intimidation. Whoops.

Hey! Bet it makes you want to join CRA, huh? Isn’t how right they are impressive? Below is the text of Gardner’s brilliance.

Fellow Board Members, please see the attached letter sent to Mr. Kirk Uhler yesterday in my role as Parliamentarian of the CRA. In it you should find several notable points,

1) The actions and complaints filed regarding the behavior of George and Aaron Park as board members were strictly directed at them, no unit or other members were involved or implicated and to my knowledge no units or other members of CRA are or have been charged with any complaints at this time.

2) The Placer County RA is currently a functioning unit of CRA consisting of currently 103 members including current CRA board members President Tom Hudson, Corresponding Secretary Christy Park, and Deputy Senate District Director Ed Rowen who the remaining members of the PCRA board have appointed interim President of the unit until their reorganization/election meeting on July 14th. PCRA member Tracy Mendonsa has resigned as a CRA board member. The status and title of Kirk Uhler,  who also remains a member, is provided for in the PCRA by-laws.

3) In accordance with CRA by-laws it would now require 69 members to be in attendance and voting in the affirmative at a duly called meeting of the PCRA to resign their charter after which acceptance of same is required of our bod at our next called meeting which is currently scheduled for September 19th in conjunction with the CRP convention.

4) The withdrawal of funds from the several accounts of the PCRA was not done in accordance with the CRA by-laws and appears to have been done in advance of the so called resignation meeting of the PCRA board of directors by then treasurer George Park. These funds need to be returned to the new PCRA Treasurer for redeposit into the appropriate accounts immediately.

Should you have any questions regarding this please feel free to contact me or President Tom Hudson,

Sincerely,

Mark Gardner

Jun 132015
 

Enter CRA Rhodes Scholar Mark Gardner in to the fray. He is one of the 46 CRP delegates that the CRA has out of over 1600 CRP delegates.

Mark is the genius that “found” sections in the CRA By-Laws including the place where it says that the CRA gets copies of all of the President’s emails, the spot where the CRA’s membership records get sent via unsecured electronic format, wrote the complaint asking for us to be tossed over spamming one of his emails and of course Mr. Gardner threatened his friend of over 30 years John Briscoe over his use of the evil ATM card that drew off the CRA’s operations account.

As I have written before – Gardner is about three IQ points removed from the sidewalk – but since he has his talking points is able to sound articulate.

Problem – once again, he shows the unequal and selective enforcement of CRA By-Laws in his reply to Kirk Uhler. BTW – ask yourself – would you want to join an organization like this? Perhaps this is why the CRA is down to 1,000 members statewide??? The Nerds have to be right at all costs.

Mr. Uhler, while I have been copied on the numerous emails between yourself and other members of the CRA Board of Directors I have been reluctant to weigh in on the issues prior to now to hopefully allow the members of the Placer County Republican Assembly to sort this unfortunate matter out for themselves, however, since you repeatedly quote bylaws sections of the CRA I feel it is necessary as Parliamentarian of same to become involved.

Your letter to the board of directors dated May 30th, 2015 at 9:34 am was most disappointing in that I can attest that none of the actions or complaints regarding either of the Park’s was directed at the PCRA or other members.

It is easy to point out that when any unit is granted a charter by the CRA they must first ratify their acceptance of the CRA bylaws. George and Aaron Park were very much aware of this provision.

As such our by-laws are very clear regarding the procedure for resignation and surrender of a charter in that it must first be approved by two-thirds of its TOTAL membership, in this case, 70 of the 105 members at the time this particular board meeting took place. Once that process takes place it must then be accepted by the CRA board of directors at its next meeting which is not currently scheduled until September 19th in conjunction with the CRP convention. George Park is well versed in our bylaws and I’m surprised that he would therefore be a party to this type of action.

We have had a number of units surrender their charter over the years and George Park, as the then membership secretary, was very aggressive in the pursuit of any residual funds held by those units in the interest of CRA in compliance of our bylaws regarding same in section 5.07. That being said it is once again very surprising that George would vote to divide the funds held by the Placer County Republican Assembly to the three named charities in your letter dated on May 30th. What is even more troubling than that is the fact that it appears that these funds were actually withdrawn from the various accounts at Umpqua Bank well in advance of the date of this meeting on May 30th.

(Please note – in the 17 years I had been a CRA Member, no existing unit that was meeting and had officers has ever surrendered its’ charter under the 2/3 provision. Even the CRA units that bolted to form the CRC did not use the 5.06 procedure. They all used 5.07. Mark would have known this if he was a member longer than 2+ years. Yet, he is smarter than everyone. Secondly, note the comments about the money – which is what they really care about. They can’t enforce the demands and they know it. The 900 club hate us so bad, they would have filed a lawsuit in small claims court already if they had anything.)

In addition, while you may have voted to refund all of your 2015 member’s dues there is no provision within the CRA bylaws for such a refund so all members of PCRA before and after the action of May 30th remain paid members of CRA until their dues expire on December 31, 2015 regardless of whether or not the Placer County Republican Assembly remains a unit or takes proper actions to resign as a CRA unit.

(Kind of like joining the communist party, huh. This is a volunteer organization and they are literally trying to force people to stay members!)

All of that being said, the action I do find legitimate is your resignation as President of PCRA in that you signed your letter on May 30th as Immediate Past President which would appear to be a written resignation. What the remaining board members did in appointing Ed Rowan as interim President until the next elections is certainly within their rights and I’m confident that my fellow CRA board members will confirm that feeling.

(Please Note: Mr. Gardner has indicated that the same CRA Board that expelled us for life is going to impose its’ will on the Placer CRA after whitewashing the fraud in four other units. Cozy.)

Sincerely,

Mark Gardner, Parliamentarian

California Republican Assembly

 

CRA Update – Kirk Uhler Torches the CRA

 California Republican Assembly, CRA  Comments Off on CRA Update – Kirk Uhler Torches the CRA
Jun 132015
 

Remember the post about Political Nerds? This weekend will be an illustration about the Nerds running the asylum of CRA.

BTW – ask yourself – would you want to join an organization like this? Perhaps this is why the CRA is down to 1,000 members statewide???

Kirk Uhler, President of the Placer CRA just lit in to the CRA’s Board of Directors and Tom Hudson. It appears that Mr. Hudson has melted down and has determined he must win the argument at all costs…

Tom,

This entire exchange, though illuminating, has grown extremely tiresome.  Your tortured logic and circular reasoning are completely emblematic of what compelled the PCRA to separate from the CRA by surrendering our charter in the first place.

However, I feel compelled to recap the salient points one last time.

First, after refunding our members their dues and voting unanimously (Past President and Deputy District 1 Director, Ed Rowan voting aye) to make three contributions to local charities, a majority of our Board voted to surrender our charter, consistent with section 5.07 of the CRA by-laws.  You assert that the surrender of the charter is invalid, because we didn’t follow the procedure for resignation from the CRA, as outlined in section 5.06.

In order for your assertion to stand, there must be some directive that any action in the by-laws is conditioned precedent by the application of the previous section of the by-laws.  Is that logical?  Is there any reference in 5.07 to the action in 5.06?  By your logic, in order to terminate or discipline a member of the CRA, (section 5.08) then the conditions of section 5.07 must first have been met.  Or, more importantly for this example, by your logic in order for section 5.06 to bind our actions, wouldn’t section 5.05 have to have been invoked?

Or, perhaps, isn’t it more logical to assume that each subsection of the by-laws was written to deal with specific and unique events?  When one looks at both section 5.06 and section 5.08 and sees that each specifies a vote requirement (two-thirds vote), and then looks at section 5.07 and sees that no such vote requirement exists, how does one make the stretch that the vote requirement, where not specifically detailed, should be applied in any regard?

More to the point, section 5.06 (Resignation) gives the authority to the CRA Board to either accept or reject the resignation.  Section 5.07 (Surrender of Charter) has no such provision.  In fact, section 5.07 almost seems to anticipate the abuse of local discretion that you have exhibited when it reads, “Any chartered Republican Assembly that has ceased to be part of the CRA for any reason, or that is seeking to leave the CRA, (emphasis added) shall relinquish the name…”.  Section 5.07 allows a local chapter to leave the CRA without any review, as specified in other sections.  Any other interpretation of the section is logically flawed or intentionally misconstrued.

Your next assertion is that the actions of the PCRA Board were not valid due to a failure of notification since the D1 Senate Director was not notified, even though the D1 assistant was notified and attended the meeting.  I’m assuming that this assertion follows a long-standing practice of the CRA Board invalidating meetings of local chapters based upon notification failures?  If so, please provide all minutes of disciplinary actions taken by the CRA Board against local chapters for failing to notify the district representatives of local Board meetings.

Next, you assert that even though the PCRA charter surrender was invalid, I am somehow no longer president of the Placer unit, insisting that I took an action to resign.  In spite of numerous requests for you to provide evidence of my resignation (a letter, an email, a verbal communication of my resignation), you have been unable to provide any evidence, because no such evidence exists.

However, for the sake of discussion, by the by-laws of the PCRA, had I resigned, the Vice President, Tracy Mendonsa, would be the president of the PCRA.  You acknowledged this on the morning of Friday, June 5, when you called Tracy and threatened him, as President due to my “resignation” with prosecution for “embezzlement” should he not cooperate with you.

How then, after threatening Tracy, by virtue of your assertion that he was president, do you unilaterally decide that past-president, Ed Rowan, is now the president of the PCRA?

Which is it, Tom?  Is the PCRA still a chartered unit of the CRA, in spite of our utilization of section 5.07 in “seeking to leave the CRA”?  If we are, is there any evidence that I took an action to resign my post as president?  If so, is there a reason and authority for you to ignore the local by-laws that elevate our elected vice-president to president by selecting the past-president to be the new president?

Finally, let me thank you for so clearly demonstrating in your written and spoken words precisely the reasons why the PCRA sought to leave the CRA.  Nothing that I could have done or said could have been more illustrative.

Kirk

 

CRA Update: When You Can’t Win a Debate, Break Out the Old Reliable

 California Republican Assembly, CRA  Comments Off on CRA Update: When You Can’t Win a Debate, Break Out the Old Reliable
Jun 122015
 

Prologue: George and I were expelled from the CRA for life by a 30-13 vote. I have learned that 15 people were appointed to the CRA’s board by Tom Hudson before that vote occurred. All of those from that group that voted, voted to expel us. The expulsion vote would have failed on a 25-13 vote. Think that through when you read anything else about the CRA.

What is happening with CRA??? Did you hear about…???

There is a phenomena called the “Political Nerd”. A Political Nerd is someone who is generally viewed as strange, maladjusted or a freak whose primary interest is politics. Political Nerds by their very nature do not play well with others or fit in well in society. But, the worst trait of a political nerd is that when you get in an argument with them, they will destroy themselves to be right and their conscience ceases to function at that point.

Being right is the only thing that seems to give most political nerds meaning in life.

Why else would the CRA’s Board of Directors be acting so bombastically stupid?

Tom Hudson, the interim President of the CRA, has gone berzerk. Mr. Hudson makes over $130k a year as a government lawyer for the Board of Equalization – so you’d think he’d be better at making arguments than he has been.

But – it appears that Mr. Hudson has forgotten recent history. In an attempt to gain political advantage, he appears to have been making allegations of (drumroll) THEY STOLE MONEY! This has followed after the standard selective enforcement of the state by-laws, legal threat letters and allegations of FBI investigations that have fallen flat.

#facepalm. Tom Hudson is truly on tilt. It appears that Mr. Hudson has a really short memory – He may have forgotten what it was like to be smeared on the front page of the Sacramento Bee in 2011. This was the crescendo of the infamous Headquarters Partnership Debacle on the Placer GOP Cent Com. (note, the link is to a Modesto Bee article as the Sacramento Bee broke the link to the story a couple years ago)

4 FPPC Complaints later – including allegations of an FBI Investigation in 2010 – all that resulted was a $200 fine because Mr. Hudson, a government employee did not put the Headquarters Partnership on his form 700. George Park provided the FPPC with everything they asked for and that was the end of it for him he got fined nothing, charged with nothing and has heard nothing since.

You’d think that Hudson would not want to remind the world about the Headquarter’s Partnership. Perhaps I should start posting the documents from it on this blog? Hudson’s rampage is truly what political nerds do when they become obsessed with being right, nothing else matters, not even their own similar issues.

The current batch of garbage being alleged by Mr. Hudson and/or his friends on the CRA is not unique – but here is a handy list:

1. The Placer CRA was shut down to cover up the Park Brother’s embezzlement. This is why Tom Hudson is going psycho at the expense of his own credibility to win an argument.

2. Congressman Steve Knight bought a CRA endorsement.

3. The Anaheim RA was illicitly paid off by the State CRA after getting reorganized.

4. George and Aaron stole money from the State CRA.

5. Former CRA President John Briscoe stole money from the CRA with the ATM card he had.

6. The FBI is investigating the Park Brothers.

There is a reason why it is nearly impossible to recruit a Treasurer for an organization. At the first sign of trouble, or in this case as a last resort to win at all costs – guess who gets accused of committing a felony? the treasurer or anyone with access to the accounts.

This is what happens when political nerds take over the asylum.

Allow me to lay out some handy facts that show how half-baked the latest batch of BS is:

1. Aaron has not been a signer on any PCRA account since 2012. Aaron has never been a signer on any CRA account, ever. Yet, he is alleged to have embezzled money – showing the half-baked nature of the charges (aka get the Park Brothers).

2. Steve Knight donated $4,000 to CRA to pre-pay dues for the Antelope Valley Unit! Now he is getting messed over for it!!!

3. The Anaheim RA had money held in trust by the State CRA while being reorganized and now they are getting attacked by the new CRA board for it!

4. I have been called by people telling me things they have heard, but no one has had the guts to step up with anything specific or real.

5. Yup. John Briscoe has been attacked as well showing you that the psychosis that has beset the nerd colony is not just about us.

6. Why not? Why not roll out the FBI? It just sounds really bad. Too bad for the nerds that Karen England ruined the shock value of that bs over four years ago.

I bet all of you want to run out and Join the CRA now, don’t you? Just remember, if you disagree with them… you, too can be smeared by a bunch of nerds on a rampage.