City Council Meeting! Wed. Oct. 26th at Noon

Jaime Schroeder, Senior Management Analyst for the Office of the City Manager, has sent out an e-mail to all committees regarding the City Council meeting agenda as well as several other issues. We would like to thank Jaime for her assistance in getting this done as quickly as possible. Will everyone please read the e-mail and all attachments she sent out. For anyone who did not recieve this e-mail and would like to know the details please e-mail me at silent1nolonger@gmail.com .

We would just post the whole thing but it is far too long…..

As a side note we would like to encourage anyone and everyone who would like to attend the City Council Meeting to do so. There is plenty of seating and if we manage to fill up all the seats (please! please! please!), there is additional seating and tv’s displaying live feed in the overflow area…. It will begin at noon on Wed. Oct. 26th. OccupyReno has been officially added to the City Council Agenda minutes and will be heard some time after 12:45 p.m, the purpose of this meeting will be to accomplish 3 main goals; first, we will be requesting an additional occupation site at the old bus station downtown (as was agreed upon by consensus at Thursdays GA), second, we will be making our case to have all fees for occupation waived by The City Council (by explaining our intentions for giving back to The City of Reno and using sustainable energy), and lastly to ensure we have on file a public record of our attempt at working with The City of Reno to occupy by permit. There is a public comment section at the end of the meeting for anyone and everyone to speak but you will be limited to 3 minutes and you will not be able to engage in open dialogue with the City Council (reason for needing to get on the agenda).

We would like to stress that the more people we have at this meeting the more likely we are to be successful. It is important that we show not only strength in numbers, but also strength in diversity. We can show The City Council of Reno that the people of this movement cannot be classified by age, sex, ethnicity, political stance or occupation. We come from all walks of life and we stand united for a brighter future in The Great State of Nevada!

Hope to see EVERYONE there!

>Jared

3 responses to “City Council Meeting! Wed. Oct. 26th at Noon

  1. Robert Tuna Townsend

    If you watch the Naomi (not ‘Natalie’) Wolf clip again, she points out that she was obeying the law and the white shirt cop ordered her to break the law. When she wouldn’t break the law, she was arrested. She was being a ‘model citizen’.

    We must be ‘model citizens’ and let THEIR transgressions illuminate the injustice.

    She seems to be suggesting that ‘mass protests’ are the only way to win.

    No, it’s the only way to begin. We win when we take back the power to force change.

    We must be ‘model citizens’ right up to the point that we aren’t.

    The time to rise up as one will come, but only when we can trust each other not to place each other at risk.

    I understand your outrage. I’ve been feeling it every minute of every day since the corporate coup was initiated in bush v gore, and completed with citizens united.

    As you pointed out so elaborately, we were guaranteed ‘rights’. Those ‘rights’ no longer exist for us. We need the power to take them back.

    This outrage, this feeling is our strength. It is not our power.

    Our power derives from our Solidarity.

    (You might be thinking of Natalie Goldberg – brilliant writer/teacher of writing).

  2. Ok, my mind is Totally changed after watching Natalie Wolf speak. I absolutely do not agree with asking for permits and permission from the mayor so we may peaceably assemble. If it takes us one permit or one fee to Occupy, then we are not Assembling as free Americans. We have lost our 1st Amendment rights and that alone should down right shake us to our knees. If we take permits from the city then we are complicit in giving away our 1st Amendment Rights. This is a much BIGGER deal than some bad bankers. We do not need any Reno officials permission to Assemble and we should absolutely stop this charade. I am extremely upset with Wall Streets practices, Corporate Power, and the massive disparity of wealth in this country. However, in comparison to My personal freedom and the importance of the Constitution. I am here to protect the “Bill of Rights”.

    This movement now has the opportunity to get big, really big.

    1st Amendment:

    “ Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    No government in the U.S. whether it is the city of Reno, Washoe County, The State of Nevada, etc. has any legal right to pass laws requiring U.S. citizens to apply for permits to peaceable assemble. These laws and permits are completely illegal.
    If you do Not understand this statement….. Please read again your 1st Amendment right just above.

    It is time to get arrested if they choose to do that. We need to further talk with legal representation. Take video of everything done to us. Get the arresting officers name and badge number ( that is our legal right) let them know We Will be suing them in a court of law for wrongful arrest. Every one of us will sue for false arrest and we will never forget it is Very much our legal right and responsibility to do so. We will stay vigilant in pursuing these lawsuits and we will not rest until proper damages are awarded.

    IMPORTANT for each of us and our Peace officers to understand the following:
    Illegal laws will not protect them.

    “False imprisonment is the unlawful restraint of a person without consent or legal justification. False imprisonment can be committed by words, acts, or by both[i]. The common law tort of false imprisonment is defined as an unlawful restraint of an individual’s personal liberty or freedom of movement[ii]. In order to constitute the wrong it is not necessary that the individual be actually confined or assaulted[iii].

    It is to be noted that, there is no necessity in a false imprisonment case to prove that a person used physical violence or laid hands on another person. It is sufficient to show that at any time or place the person in any manner deprived another person of his/her liberty without sufficient legal authority[iv].

    False arrest is sometimes used interchangeably with false imprisonment. False arrest is the unlawful violation of the personal liberty of another consisting of detention without sufficient legal authority. In order to establish a false arrest claim, the person detained must prove that the arrest is unlawful and such unlawful arrest resulted in injury. An arrest is unlawful when the police officers in question did not have probable cause to make the arrest[v].

    An arresting officer who fails to take the arrested person before a court or magistrate within a reasonable time or without unnecessary delay is guilty of false imprisonment. Similarly, an officer who arrests a person without a warrant is liable for false imprisonment by detaining the prisoner an unreasonable time[vi].

    Generally, false arrest is one of several means of committing false imprisonment. False arrest describes the setting for false imprisonment when it is committed by a peace officer or by one who claims the power to make an arrest. Thus, a tort action for false imprisonment based on false arrest against a person who is not a peace officer implies that the detention or restraint to support the tort was done by one who claims the power of arrest[vii].

    However, false arrest is almost indistinguishable from false imprisonment[viii]. The only distinction lies in the manner in which they arise. False arrest is merely one means of committing a false imprisonment. Whereas, false imprisonment is committed without any thought of attempting arrest[ix].

    The principal element of damages in an action for false imprisonment is the loss of freedom. Sometimes, a court also takes into account the fear and nervousness suffered as a result of the detention[x]. The tort of false imprisonment involves an unlawful restraint on freedom of movement or personal liberty. Therefore, two essential elements to constitute false imprisonment are[xi]:

    Detention or restraint against a person’s will,
    Unlawfulness of the detention or restraint.
    Whereas, after liability is established for false arrest, the person who suffered may recover nominal damages as well as compensation for mental suffering, including fright, shame, and mortification from the indignity and disgrace, consequent upon an illegal detention[xii]. However, in a suit for false arrest and false imprisonment, a person cannot recover attorney’s fees incurred or loss of earnings suffered while defending an underlying criminal action[xiii].

    The elements to be considered by the jury in awarding compensatory damages in a false imprisonment case are physical suffering, mental suffering and humiliation, loss of time and interruption of business, reasonable and necessary expenses incurred, and injury to reputation[xiv]. However, it is to be noted that a mere loss of freedom will not constitute false imprisonment[xv].

    In a suit for false imprisonment, the damages award may include compensation for loss of earnings while imprisoned, for bodily and mental suffering caused by the imprisonment, and for expenses incurred in securing discharge from restraint including a reasonable attorney fee[xvi].

    The measure of damages for false imprisonment is a sum that will fairly and reasonably compensate the injured person for the injuries caused by the wrongful act including any special pecuniary loss which is a direct result of the false imprisonment[xvii]. A jury can award punitive damages in a false arrest or imprisonment case, if the requisite level of malice or other requisite mental state is established.

    All persons who personally participate or cause an unlawful detention are held to be liable. Similarly, persons other than those who actually cause an imprisonment may be held jointly liable with others, as instigators or participants. However, passive knowledge or consent to the acts of another, or acting on a superior’s order, is not sufficient to make a person liable for false imprisonment.

    It is to be noted that the jail officials are also held liable for false imprisonment for holding a person for an unreasonable time. A jail official is liable for false imprisonment if s/he knows that an arrest was illegal and that there is no right to imprison the person so arrested.

    The liability of a principal for the act of an agent in causing a false arrest or imprisonment depends upon whether the principal previously authorized the act, or subsequently ratified it, or whether the act was within the scope of the employee’s or agent’s employment[xviii]. However, an employer will not be held liable for false imprisonment for the actions of an employee which are outside the scope of employment.

    In order to avoid liability in an action for false imprisonment, a person must establish that s/he did not imprison the other person or s/he must justify the imprisonment. The presence of probable cause for imprisonment is a defense if it constitutes reasonable grounds for acting in defense of property or making an arrest without a warrant. A person is not liable for false imprisonment, if the person restrained is a child under the age of seventeen upon certain conditions. However, contributory negligence is not considered a defense if the wrong is something more than mere negligence[xix].

    A false imprisonment action cannot be maintained if a person is properly arrested by lawful authority without a warrant. In order to justify an arrest without a warrant, the arrestor must proceed as soon as may be to make the arrest. Therefore, a private person can arrest another for a public offense committed or attempted in his/her presence[xx].

    Certain officials and professionals are exempted from civil liability for false imprisonment under certain circumstances. They are:

    Judicial officers;
    Government officials entrusted with judicial functions;
    Attorneys;
    Physicians.
    A judicial officer who has jurisdiction of the person and of the subject matter is exempted from civil liability for false imprisonment so long as the judge acts within that jurisdiction and in a judicial capacity[xxi]. Similarly, officers in other government departments are also exempted from liability for false imprisonment whenever they are entrusted with the judicial exercise of discretionary power. Likewise, an attorney is also protected from personal liability for false imprisonment if s/he acts in good faith on behalf of his/her client. It is to be noted that physicians who give evidence in proceedings to determine sanity are also immune from liability for false imprisonment.

    In the case of false imprisonment, the plaintiff has the burden of proving the false arrest. The plaintiff in a false imprisonment action must prove that the defendant proximately caused the injuries for which the plaintiff seeks damages[xxii].

    [i] Dietz v. Finlay Fine Jewelry Corp., 754 N.E.2d 958 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001).

    [ii] Pechulis v. City of Chicago, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11856 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 7, 1997).

    [iii] Whitman v. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co., 85 Kan. 150 (Kan. 1911).

    [iv] Pechulis v. City of Chicago, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11856 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 7, 1997).

    [v] Landry v. Duncan, 902 So. 2d 1098 (La.App. 5 Cir. Apr. 26, 2005).

    [vi] Dragna v. White, 45 Cal. 2d 469 (Cal. 1955).

    [vii] Rife v. D.T. Corner, Inc., 641 N.W.2d 761 (Iowa 2002).

    [viii] Kraft v. Bettendorf, 359 N.W.2d 466 (Iowa 1984).

    [ix] Harrer v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 124 Mont. 295 (Mont. 1950).

    [x] Pitts v. State, 51 Ill. Ct. Cl. 29 (Ill. Ct. Cl. 1999).

    [xi] Ette v. Linn-Mar Cmty. Sch. Dist., 656 N.W.2d 62 (Iowa 2002).

    [xii] Barnes v. District of Columbia, 452 A.2d 1198 (D.C. 1982).

    [xiii] Id.

    [xiv] Jenkins v. Pic-n-Pay Shoes, Inc., 1985 Tenn. LEXIS 536 (Tenn. July 15, 1985).

    [xv] Gee v. State, 21 Ill. Ct. Cl. 573 (Ill. Ct. Cl. 1954).

    [xvi] Phillips v. District of Columbia, 458 A.2d 722 (D.C. 1983).

    [xvii] Sindle v. New York City Transit Authority, 64 Misc. 2d 995 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1970).

    [xviii] Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Steele, 23 Tenn. App. 275 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1939).

    [xix] Aiken v. Holyoke S. R. Co., 184 Mass. 269, 271 (Mass. 1903).

    [xx] Hill v. Levy, 117 Cal. App. 2d 667 (Cal. App. 1953).

    [xxi] Bahakel v. Tate, 503 So. 2d 837 (Ala. 1987).

    [xxii] Fischer v. Famous-Barr Co., 618 S.W.2d 446 (Mo. Ct. App. 1981).

  3. WAY TO USE THE CITY GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEEEPS. STEADY ON JARED