Save Newport Real News in Newport Beach
Several months ago, Diane Dixon interrupted public comment on the institution of the outrageous expense of the public bus system in order to spread lies about me from her position on the dais. But this wasn’t in error, this was an egregious attempt specifically designed to use her position as a councilwoman in order to stifle my free speech on her pet project: The insanely expensive trolley project. Watch her lie and abuse a citizen (me) from the dais after my public comment, here:
Now I know what you’re thinking: How could this possibly be proven that she wanted to instruct city workers to use taxpayer dollars to initiate a city investigation against an activist so that their free speech against the busline was overshadowed and therefore ignored– based on nothing but lies. That’s plainly ridiculous, right?
Well listen to her voicemail, here: https://apps.newportbeachca.gov/quest/attachments/269919_VoiceMessage.wav — and be sure to listen to the very end as to why she wants them so quickly. She literally lays it all out.
Public Document Requests are a constitutional right of ALL citizens to view and receive electronically for FREE or to review in person for FREE. If you request a printed version and you want to remove it from city hall and take it home, there is a charge to pick them up– but that charge only occurs when you pick them up to remove them. If you don’t request them or you don’t pick them up to remove them, there is no charge. Even if I had asked for them to be printed out in physical form (I didn’t), then I could still come in and inspect them in-person for free. The only time you are even ABLE to be charged for a PRAR is if you remove the documents. According to everyone in the city– that never happened. Proclaiming that someone owes money for a PRAR is like saying someone owes money to a soda machine: it’s just logically impossible, because you don’t pay for something unless you receive a product.
Don’t believe me? Here it is in black and white from our city’s own records specialist speaking of the Notice of Determination, which Dixon lied and referred to as “invoices”: “The statement discussing fees for direct costs of duplication are simply to inform the requestor of what the charges would be for a physical copy of the records.”
Not only do I not owe any “bills” to the city– but the “bills” that they claim to exist have no legal basis to even exist under the California Constitution.
Immediately after Dixon’s outburst, I spoke with City Attorney Aaron Harp and demanded a retraction and an apology. He told me she refused. I confirmed this within hours in writing, as well. I then sent a demand letter to the city, demanding she apologize, and signaled that if she didn’t, I would be taking them to court.
While these cases (defamation of character per se with malice) can easily carry a penalty for five or six figures, I am asking for a mere fraction of that: Enough to ensure that she shows up to court, but not to cause significant financial to harm the city. Furthermore, I will be donating 100% of the money to a political action committee designed to protect citizens against big government, including protecting them against precisely this type of behavior, just so that I have no personal gain in this matter. We should be receiving a court date in the next few weeks, and I will definitely keep you updated so you can watch the fireworks.
