A civil lawsuit has been filed in Idaho Federal District Court by plaintiff Darien E. Roseen alleging that several defendant Idaho law enforcement agencies including the Idaho State Police, the Fruitland City Police Department, and the Payette County Sheriff’s Office committed acts under the color of law which deprived Roseen of protected rights, privileges, and immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States.

Specifically, the lawsuit alleges the ISP and other law enforcement agencies target vehicles traveling in Idaho and bearing license plates from states such as Washington and Colorado which have legalized the possession of marijuana.  It implies that when necessary, the ISP and others have used pretexts to stop vehicles and then intimidate vehicle operators to give consent to search vehicles without sufficient probable cause.

The lawsuit was reported in the Denver Post online article dated March 29, 2014, and headlined Colorado man sues Idaho police over “license plate profiling” in marijuana case.  It was also reported on the website weedist.com on March 28, 2014, in a post entitled Troopers ‘License Plate Profiling’ in Idaho for Marijuana.

The 25-page civil complaint supporting the allegation was filed in the Federal District Court of Idaho on March 26, 2014.

Nothing illegal was found during the search of Roseen’s vehicle.

If the allegations in the complaint are proven at trial, then the public should be very, very concerned that the profiling practice was either explicitly or implicitly approved by the Idaho State Police’s command structure and condoned by other Idaho law enforcement agencies.

The detail and wording in the federal civil complaint suggests that Mr. Roseen has engaged legal counsel who knows how to expose and prove questionable if not outright illegal law enforcement practices. Just like former CdAPD LT Dan Dixon, Mr. Roseen and his counsel wisely sought to get this case into federal court and out of the hands of “local control” judges in Idaho’s district courts.

In her comment appended to our March post titled URDs Hurt Community Colleges, Susie Snedaker asked,

“A friend familiar with urban renewal legislation in another state told me that legislation in her state permitted taxing districts to negotiate percentages taken by URAs. Prior to the city’s adoption of urban renewal legislation, I contacted Steve Schenck at NIC to discuss the impact that the legislation would have on NIC and the possibility that NIC could negotiate the percentage taken by the URA. If I remember correctly, he told me something to the effect that the sum wouldn’t amount to much.  Are percentages taken from taxing districts negotiable?”

Does anyone have an authoritative answer, particularly one traceable directly to the wording in Idaho’s urban renewal statutes or precedent case law?

The Thursday, March 20, 2014, Coeur d’Alene Press ran an online unattributed story headlined Matheson seeks county treasurer post.

The Press story included this statement, “He [Steven D. Matheson] is a graduate of Central Washington University with a double major in accounting and finance. He is also a certified public accountant.”

OpenCdA’s search of the Idaho State Board of Accountancy’s online database did not show Steven D. Matheson as being a certified public accountant in Idaho.

We sent an email inquiry to the Idaho State Board of Accountancy asking for confirmation that Steven D. Matheson is a certified public accountant.  A representative of the State Board responded via email and referred us to Matheson’s website which states, “Steve is a CPA (inactive) with undergraduate degrees in Accounting and Finance from Central Washington University.”  The Idaho State Board of Accountancy has no record of Steven D. Matheson ever being a licensed certified public accountant in Idaho.  (more…)

Our local skewspaper, The Coeur d’Alene Press, likes to take cheap shots at local legislators who encourage citizen awareness about the not so altruistic side of some of Idaho’s urban renewal agencies.  So it was a pleasant surprise to see this morning’s skewspaper published a letter to the editor authored by Sharon Culbreth and titled NIC:  Hurt by urban renewal.

Her letter revealed (because the Press hasn’t reported) one particular piece of legislation pending in the Idaho legislature.  Though she didn’t cite the legislation explicitly, it is House Bill 631.  Its Statement of Purpose reads:  “The purpose of the legislation is to protect Idaho’s community colleges from monies being taken away to fund urban renewal districts (URDs).  URDs have the ability to access taxing districts’ budgets.  In the past Idaho Code was amended to protect Idaho school districts from having monies diverted to URDs.  This legislation would do the same to protect Idaho’s three community colleges.”

As Culbreth’s letter to the editor noted, this legislation was authored by Senator Bob Nonini.  She failed to include, however, that its legislative co-sponsors are Representatives Kathy Sims and Ron Mendive.

The Legislature should quickly and unanimously pass this legislation.  Idaho’s community colleges can use the money now.

Mary Souza’s Newsletter

March 17, 2014

Big News x 2!

Dear Newsletter Readers,

It’s time for positive change.  I’ve filed to run for the Idaho State Senate, District 4, because I want to be part of the solution to the outrageous overreach of the Federal government into our lives.  I am a Republican, always have been, and this race will be determined by the Republican Primary vote on May 20th. (more…)

The Idaho Statesman has just published online article headlined Idaho’s ag-gag law challenged in federal court.

Here is a copy of the 52-page complaint filed against the State of Idaho by several organizations and individuals who assert that Idaho’s newly-passed law violates US citizens’ civil rights by criminalizing protected free speech.

What do you think?