A LAP DOG IS NOT A GOOD CHOICE TO PROTECT CITIZENS' MONEY (We again try to straighten out the Daily Pilot and Katrina Foley)Editor Daily Pilot:
Re: "New system for distributing grants pleases most but not all," by Alicia Robinson, Pilot, 5/12/07, front page
In your article about grants to the non-profits, Councilwoman Katrina Foley said "Due to some agendas by some members in the past, the process had been skewed."
Baloney.
Some of the non-profits just didn't want to answer questions about why their non-profit businesses are giving big salaries and benefits to the non-profit leaders, why some of the non-profits appear to be discriminating against White citizens, why they give our money to illegal aliens, why they can't show any results after all the years of receiving our money, and why many of the problems that they're supposed to be solving are just getting worse (gangs, and poor student scores, for example).
And, Ms. Foley, the "agendas" were attempts to stop racial/ethnic discrimination, make sure that citizens' money was being spent in the best ways possible, and to have the non-profits demonstrate that their efforts were working.
Also, Ms. Foley, it should come as no surprise to many readers that some of your liberal non-profit pals who receive money year after year after year joined with you and others in trying to defeat Mr. Mansoor and Ms. Leece in the last election. Talk about agendas!
Here are a few facts:
1. This money that is given to the non-profits belongs to the citizens.
2. The 3R committee that makes recommendations on the dispersal of the funds has a fiduciary responsibility to make sure the money is spent in the proper ways and for the benefit of the citizens of this city. Some (but not all) members of the 3R Committee seem to act more like lap dogs than junk yard dogs in protecting our money.
3. Many of the non-profits just expect a rubber stamp approval of their requests.
4. Some of the non-profit leaders make more than $ 200,000 per year. They have a vested interest in growing their charity businesses by bringing in more and more people to use their services. Illegal aliens often fill the bill very nicely.
5. Many of the non-profits do not look like Costa Mesa but appear, statistically, to racially/ethnically discriminate against White citizens. At least one non-profit shows that 100% of its "clients" are Hispanic, in a city that is only about 30% Hispanic. Several others show that more than 95% of their clients are Hispanic.
John F. Kennedy nailed it when he said "Simple justice requires that public funds, to which all taxpayers of all races [colors, and national origins] contribute, not be spent in any fashion which encourages, entrenches, subsidizes or results in racial [color or national origin] discrimination."
Some of the non-profits violate this principal, so well stated by JFK, and seem to be engaging in practices that do, in fact, encourage, entrench, and subsidize such discrimination, yet the City Council keeps giving these non-profits our money year in and year out.
We have in our files (and we've repeatedly offered copies to the Pilot--but you didn't take us up on our offers), a copy of a Federal Consent Decree against a non-profit in Costa Mesa that actually told a young teen White girl that she was the wrong color to use their services and that they only wanted to serve Latinas [including, presumably, illegal alien Latinas]. They then denied this girl services paid for by taxpaying U.S. citizens.
This particular non-profit apparently thought it was clever in the way it discriminated. It said that everyone of every race/ethnicity could submit applications for their services. The problem was that they wouldn't accept anyone except Latinas. They got caught because they sent an email telling the White girl that she was the wrong color. They apparently thought that would cause her to just go away silently. Big mistake.
A Federal Consent Decree is a very serious document. If an organization receiving public funds is shown to be discriminating (as was the case of the non-profit mentioned above) and refuses to sign the Consent Decree which has a list of steps the organization must take to end the discrimination, the next step is serious legal action and possible Civil Rights law suits.
/s/ CM PRESS
# # #
Those are our opinions. Thanks for reading them.
