|
|
|
November 1, 2019
 Gwinnett County Commissioner Marlene Fosque. Image Gwinnett County website Gwinnett Daily Post
October 30, 2019
King’s ethics complaint against Fosque to be heard in December
A Gwinnett County ethics board will hand the county an unusual Christmas present in December: a hearing on a complaint about comments a county commissioner made about the leader of a controversial pro-immigration enforcement group.
The ethics board assembled to hear the complaint that Dustin Inman Society founder D.A. King filed against Commissioner Marlene Fosque met for the first time Wednesday. The five-member panel picked its chairman and vice-chairman, underwent ethics training and decided to schedule two hearings for December.
The first hearing will be a preliminary hearing on Dec. 9. The second, and more crucial, one will be an evidenciary hearing — where testimony will be given and evidence presented — held on Dec. 19.
The ethics complaint stems from a 287(g) forum Fosque hosted — which King participated in at the invitation of Sheriff Butch Conway — in late July, as well as critical comments the commissioner made after the fact about King’s participation.
King filed the complaint in response to the comments Fosque made at the Aug. 6 commission meeting, during which she denounced King’s participation in the forum while citing the Southern Poverty Law Center’s assessment of the Dustin Inman Society as a hate group.
Supporters of the organization and King have denounced the Southern Poverty Law Center and called its legitimacy into question over the hate group assessment.
“This individual, as noted by an anti-defamation league director, has ties to the extreme elements of the anti-immigrant movement, spewing hatred and … (intimidating) advocacy groups,” Fosque said in August.
“This man from Cobb County, he should have never been invited by Sheriff Butch Conway to participate in our local Gwinnett discussion.”
In his complaint against Fosque said she violated state laws concerning defamation by “making charges against Plaintiff’s work with his non-profit organization the Dustin Inman Society and by uttering disparaging words causing special damages” to King.
“(The) actions of the Defendant clearly demonstrate an occasion where she did not uphold the laws of the State of Georgia as required by the relevant portion of the Gwinnett Code of Ordinances,” King wrote in the complaint. Read more here.
October 18, 2019
August 26, 2019
Gwinnett Daily Post
August 24, 2019
Isabelle Hughes
Gwinnett County Commissioner Marlene Fosque. Image Gwinnett County website Two weeks after Gwinnett County Commissioner Marlene Fosque publicly accused Dustin Inman Society President D.A. King of “spewing hatred and bigotry and racism,” King has filed an ethics complaint requesting Fosque be verbally reprimanded for her comments.
In the complaint, which was filed Thursday, King asked that Fosque immediately apologize to him during a board meeting, requested that the Board of Commissioners “take out an advertisement in the legal organ of Gwinnett County” apologizing to him, asked that Fosque be fined an undetermined amount and requested that he be granted “any further relief deemed just under the circumstances.”
King has accused Fosque of violating six of the 16 ethical standards listed in the county’s ethics ordinance.
King’s complaint against Fosque is the latest in a series of back-and-forths between them, which began earlier this month after King was invited by the Gwinnett County Sheriff’s Office to speak about the benefits of the jail’s 287(g) immigration program at a July 31 community meeting hosted by Fosque.
While the meeting was intended as an information-sharing forum and an attempt to foster a dialogue between the program’s supporters and opponents, it veered off topic at times as demonstrators protested King and tensions ran high on both the pro- and anti-287(g) sides.
Fosque first addressed the meeting’s “negativity,” as she called it, at an Aug. 6 board of commissioners meeting, where she condemned the sheriff’s office for inviting King to serve as a panelist.
“I rebuke, denounce, deplore, and condemn the participation of Donald A. King, better known as D.A. King, of Cobb County, from being a panelist at my Gwinnett County community engagement discussion,” Fosque said. “This individual, as noted by an anti-defamation league director, has ties to the extreme elements of the anti-immigrant movement, spewing hatred and … (intimidating) advocacy groups. This man from Cobb County, he should have never been invited by Sheriff Butch Conway to participate in our local Gwinnett discussion.”
In her speech, Fosque also “republished defamatory statements about (King) made by politically interested third parties including the Southern Poverty Law Center, including the statement that (King) leads an, ‘anti-immigrant hate group,’” the complaint said, while also saying the Dustin Inman Society “belittles immigrants.”
In his complaint, King said Fosque broke the law by making those comments.
“Defendant has violated the Georgia law regarding defamation … by making charges against Plaintiff’s work with his non-profit organization the Dustin Inman Society and by uttering disparaging words causing special damages to Plaintiff,” the complaint said. “… the actions of the Defendant clearly demonstrate an occasion where she did not uphold the laws of the State of Georgia as required by the relevant portion of the Gwinnett Code of Ordinances.”
King’s complaint also alleges that Fosque “placed her own, anger, bias and loyalty to her political party above that to the highest moral principles and the county by defaming the Plaintiff with her inflammatory remarks,” thus violating the county’s code of ordinances.
“It is most unbecoming of the Defendant as a member of the Board of Commissioners to verbally assault the reputation of the Plaintiff, someone who merely responded to an invitation to participate in a public forum on a matter of public concern and who was not present or able to respond to false allegations,” King wrote in the complaint.
“Defendant did not contact the Plaintiff before, during, or after the event to engage him to have any personal knowledge of his positions on the attitudes she ascribed to him in her later August speech explicitly condemning Plaintiff without any basis. She merely regurgitated a false narrative spoon-fed to her by some unknown third party. This behavior is disgraceful and most unbecoming of a Gwinnett County Commissioner.”
The specific ethical standards King accused Fosque of violating include her duty to:
♦ “Uphold the Constitution, laws, regulations and ordinances of the United States, the state and the county therein and never be a party to their evasion.”
♦ “Put loyalty to the highest moral principles and to the county above loyalty to persons, party, or a county government department.”
♦ “Possess a commitment to integrity, transparency and full disclosure before undertaking any official action.”
♦ “Give to the performance of his duties, his earnest effort and best thought.”
♦ “Never engage in conduct which is unbecoming to a member or which constitutes a breach of public trust.”
♦ “Uphold these principles, ever conscious that public office is a public trust and is an honor, not a right.”
Fosque told the Daily Post that she would not comment on the complaint, but Gwinnett County Communications Director Joe Sorenson confirmed the county has received it.
He said county attorneys “are taking the initial steps to process it.”
Under the ethics process in Gwinnett, a new ethics panel must be put together each time a complaint is filed against a county commissioner or county employee. Before a panel is assembled, however, a hearing officer must review the complaint to see if it merits sending it to an ethics panel for a hearing.
If it does go to a hearing, commissioners would appoint one person to sit on the panel, as would District Attorney Danny Porter, the Gwinnett Bar Association, the local government chairman of the State Bar of Georgia and Fosque herself.
After a hearing is held, the panel would make a recommendation to the Board of Commissioners, which would make the final decision on whether to sanction Fosque.
The ethics ordinance does not grant the ethics panel or the Board of Commissioners the authority to fine Fosque. The most that could be done to her is the issuing of a reprimand.
This is the second time a Gwinnett County commissioner has faced an ethics complaint since the county’s ethics ordinance was put into place in 2011.
A written reprimand was issued against Commissioner Tommy Hunter on the recommendation of an ethics panel in 2017 after an Atlanta resident filed a complaint against him for calling U.S. Rep. John Lewis a “racist pig” and referred to Democrats as “demonrats” and “libtards” on his personal Facebook page.
Hunter has been challenging his reprimand in local, state and federal courts ever since. His attorneys have argued Gwinnett’s ethics review process is unconstitutional and a $5 million lawsuit he currently has pending in federal court argues that sanctioning him for his comments was an unconstitutional attack on his right to free speech.
That stance carried over somewhat to how Hunter’s attorney, Dwight Thomas, viewed the situation involving Fosque and King.
“I do not agree with the castigation of Mr. King by (Fosque) because he has a different political ideology than the commissioner, but castigating and punishing her free speech is not the way to bridge dialog, debate policy and keep the 1st amendment safe from (government) control,” Thomas said.
“Ultimately this is not about any commissioner but about protecting free speech that does not encourage violence but sparks controversial debate. The ethics appointment process by private citizens still must clear the Georgia Supreme Court ruling in Delay v Sutton, which was handed down after the Tommy Hunter ethics process.” Here.
August 24, 2019
Join our email program to receive exclusive offers and resources
The UPS Store
Your parcel has been delivered
The parcel to MARLENE FOSQUE has been delivered.
Your shipment information
Who sent it…
KING
(Sender’s street address omitted intentionally from this email)
Marietta, GA 30066
Who will receive it…
MARLENE FOSQUE
(Recipient’s street address omitted intentionally from this email)
SUWANEE, GA 30024-2648 US
Sat 24 Aug 2019 11:06 AM
Who is carrying it…
THE UPS STORE #1627
770-424-4102
Carrier detail…
USPS Priority Mail
Tracking details…
Tracking No.: 9405510200881113869298
Shipment ID: MMD93WPXZ764P
Order / Item #: 082219DP
Reference #: —
Ship date
Thursday, August 22, 2019
Delivery date…
Sat 24 Aug 2019 11:06 AM
Tracking your item
To get complete tracking information, click the following link:
https://iship.com/trackit/track.aspx?t=1&Track=MMD93WPXZ764P&src=_e
Have a question?
For any queries about this shipment, please contact USPS directly at 1-800-ASK-USPS (1-800-275-8777), and have your tracking number ready.
August 22, 2019
The below cover sheet and amended/corrected complaint was delivered/served today in the Gwinnett County Justice and Admin Center
Copy to county attorney delivered to Julie Mims at 1:30 PM
Copy to Marlene Fosque delivered to Exec Assistant, Vicki Harrod at 1:50 PM
Copy also sent with tracking to Fosque’s address on her campaign site. All copies notarized.
August 21, 2019
Exhibit B here.
Click on the page below to see all pages of complaint. Typo (Defendant/Plaintiff) in 29 (c) being corrected.
Gwinnett County Commissioner Marlene Fosque. Image Gwinnett County website 
May 14, 2019
An open letter to Georgia’s Immigration Enforcement Review Board
D.A. King
Special to The Telegraph June 22, 2017
 D.A. King “And Deal spokesman Brian Robinson said Deal intended his appointees to the board to take a hard line on immigration.”
“Gov. Deal signed this piece of legislation (HB 87) into law not so that it could be neutered and used as window dressing,” Robinson said.
“This immigration law is meant to have teeth. We want it to be enforced.” — 2011
Dear members of the Immigration Enforcement Review Board:
After no little trouble on my part, nearly a year ago, I filed a valid complaint against the city of Atlanta because it refused to protect public benefits according to state law which received much national news coverage when it was created in 2006 and international media attention the last time it was modified (2011).
OCGA 50-36-1 clearly requires all agencies that administer public benefits — including business licenses/occupational tax certificates — to follow simple and standardized procedures to help insure that applicants are eligible and are not illegal aliens. The city of Atlanta acknowledged their Business License Office was not following the state law, but defiantly defended themselves by saying they were in compliance with their own city ordinance on the process.
The IERB made a unanimous decision that my complaint is accurate and that city of Atlanta was in violation and sent me this letter to that effect. The IERB “requested” that Atlanta take remedial action to correct the estimated 6,000 violations that occurred over the course of five years.
While I awaited a meaningful sanction from the board on which you serve, apparently a procedural error was discovered which caused the entire hearing process on my complaint to be repeated from the beginning.
The original finding of violation had zero effect on the defense from the city of Atlanta in the second version of your proceedings. Their lawyer brought in the same witness to make the same “Ground Hog Day” claim: “We are in compliance with city law…and since state law doesn’t mention non-profit businesses, we think the law is ambiguous and difficult to obey or understand…”
I have received a second letter from the IERB with the same finding of violation and the same “request” that Atlanta obey the law. We should all be so lucky in our own business and daily responsibilities under the law.
Window dressing indeed.
I write today to make it clear that it is my assumption that the current delay in further IERB action and a meaningful punishment is intended to allow the city of Atlanta time to now begin compliance and escape any sanctions by simply stating they have stopped their violations. State law allows the IERB to impose punishments that will deter other agencies from future violations.
Having had similar experience with the IERB since its inception, I offer the request that if there is no intention of real use of authority in investigation of further violations or any real sanctions for clear violations of the law over which you have authority, the board members admit there is no reason for it to exist and to explain that premise to the General Assembly and the people of Georgia.
The pervasive official attitude across the state is that 2011’s HB 87 and all laws aimed at the crime of illegal immigration can easily be treated as optional in Georgia. The IERB and so far, the Attorney General’s office have done nothing to change that perception. I am aware that state law allows the AG’s office to prosecute violations of the three laws over which the IERB has preview totally separately and in addition to whatever action the board takes — or does not take.
As you know, I have more than 10 additional complaints pending with the board. I have little confidence in fair resolution. I am now beginning the process of seeking assistance for a remedy in the court system, where adjudication of violations of state law have a better chance of seeing real, wholehearted attention and justice. I am not going to ignore the board’s inaction despite the fact that the governor, the Legislature and Atlanta’s media does exactly that.
While I am aware some board members sincerely strive for an equal application of the law, I hope that you will all make recommendations to the General Assembly to disband the IERB and allow a workable, enthusiastic justice system that actually uses investigative authority to take over.
I also note here that I have a great deal of trouble recalling more than one meeting or hearing since the board’s creation in 2011 that saw attendance by the entire board membership.
Including in the “watch-dog media,” to my experienced knowledge, I am the only person in Georgia who pays attention to compliance on the illegal immigration legislation passed by the General Assembly and signed into law by Gov. Deal or investigates obvious violations.
January 13, 2019
 Photo: Bensbiltong.com
Decaturish blog
January 8, 2019
Decaturish: State Immigration Board Settles Casey Cagle’s Complaint against Decatur
Here.
January 1, 2019
Photo: Bensbiltong.com Also sent for Whitfield schools, Bibb County Schools, Hall County Schools, Glynn County Schools, DeKalb County Schools and Bulloch County Schools.
January 1, 2018
To: Immigration Enforcement Review Board
Re; Appeal of board’s final decision on complaint 2017-01 (Gwinnett County School District) made on December 5, 2018
I am filing this appeal to the board’s decision despite the Chairman’s statement that no appeal would be allowed in the letter I received on December 22, 2018 memorializing the board’s action.
Chairman Balli claims the decision was made by the full board and as such is exempt from the appeal process under the IERB’s rules. I dispute that claim. By law, the IERB consists of seven members.
The official Meeting Summary (marked “A”) posted on the Audits and Accounts website for this meeting shows lists only six members and shows that three members were present at the meeting and one member called in via telephone.
I also note that the Meeting Agenda (marked “B”) posted on the Audits and Accounts website for the December 5, 2018 meeting excluded any notice of any planned consideration of the many complaints I had pending. For this reason, I did not attend. When Balli convened the meeting and saw I was not in attendance and could not present evidence or address the partial board, Balli offered a motion to amend his agenda, got it passed by members who know nothing of the issue surrounding the complaints and then was successful in convincing the members who were in attendance to dismiss the complaints based on far-fetched and easily proven false concepts of immigration law, both state and federal.
I have documentation that clearly disproves Balli’s argument that was the basis for dismissal and have sent those points to the board at least twice in the past. I am appealing for an opportunity to present the facts that prove Balli’s reasoning presented to the other members to be inaccurate.
I note that by law (OCGA 50-36-3), IERB members are permitted to serve two terms of two years per term. Member Terry Clark, was originally appointed to the board in July, 2011. I contend that Clark has served and voted on the IERB without authority and in violation of state law since July, 2015. I further contend that this alone is grounds for invalidation of all decisions Clark voted on since July 2015.
I also note that originally being appointed to the IERB by the Speaker of the House in 2014 with specific language that Balli was to serve until “July 2015 or until successor is duly appointed” that Balli is serving as a IERB member and Chairman without authority and in violation of state law (OCGA 50-36-3). I also note that having used Georgia open records law to request a copy of any document that show any reappointment of Chairman Balli, no such document has been produced. Indeed, if such document exists, it could not lawfully reappoint Balli to serve beyond July, 2017. I contend that any decisions made by the board in which Balli voted or Chaired after that date are invalid and unlawful.
I also note that as of this writing, on December 31, 2018, Balli has called for a special meeting of the IERB for January 8, 2019 but not divulged any agenda saying in the announcement that the agenda (marked “C”) is to be determined.
Along with noting the board has dismissed valid complaints in the past without allowing me to present evidence or even speak when I did attend the hearing, I note the January 8, 2019 special meeting to illustrate the unprofessional and illegal habits of the board.
D.A. King
Note: Here is a timeline of most IERB members appointments.
May 16, 2018
Mr. King, I have been asked to help get you a prompt response to your valid requests. To that end, unless Mr. Willard tells us by Friday at 5 pm that the Board is prohibited by law, Carol, please email (and copy me and the Chairman) Mr. King all written responses to Mr. King’s complaints which were dismissed or continued last meeting. I believe that it was the respondents’ duty to copy Mr. King and, if they did not, we should (again Mr. Willard may overrule us). Also, unless instructed differently by Mr. Willard, provide Mr. King with a written copy of the Stipulations of Dismissal entered at last meeting. All of the aforementioned documents should be provided to Mr. King free of charge. However, Mr. King’s request for a “transcript” of the entire Board sitting as the Review Panel is not free. As set forth in Rule 291-2-.03(2), unless a respondent agreed to share the cost [in which case divide it pro rata accordingly], please request the Court reporter to generate an invoice to Mr. King for the entire cost of appearing and transcribing the hearing. As noted in that rule, any appeal of any decision must be accompanied by a true and correct copy of the transcript of the hearing or the appeal will be invalid and immediately dismissed. That said, I would direct Mr. King to Rule 291-2-.05(2) as I believe the entire Board was sitting as the Review Panel. Last, we do not provide legal advice nor answer questions and any requests for other documents such as minutes will be timely processed as Open Records Act requests. Any legal questions please direct to Mr. Willard. Thank you.
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 7, 2018, at 8:09 PM, D.A. King wrote:
Please send me the written response from the entities that I filed complaints against that were considered in the last meeting.
Please tell me the name and position/title of the man who had organized your process of dismissals and verbalized the responses from the various entities.
Please send me the court reporter’s transcripts of the entire “hearing”.
Please send any available audio or video recording of the last “hearing.”
Please send me date and minutes of meeting in which Shawn Hanley was elected Chairman.
More to follow.
D.A. King
Sent from my iPad
« Previous Page — Next Page »
|
|
